The Role of Sports Economics in the Sport Management Curriculum

The Role of Sports Economics in the Sport Management Curriculum

The Role of Sports Economics in the Sport Management Curriculum


Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>The</strong> <strong>Role</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong><strong>Sport</strong>s</strong> <strong>Economics</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong><br />

<strong>Curriculum</strong><br />

Brad R. Humphreys ∗<br />

University <strong>of</strong> Ill<strong>in</strong>ois at Urbana-Champaign<br />

Department <strong>of</strong> Recreation, <strong>Sport</strong> and Tourism<br />

June 2005<br />

Abstract<br />

<strong><strong>Sport</strong>s</strong> economics has emerged as a clearly def<strong>in</strong>ed field <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> past five years,<br />

and sports economists have recently begun tak<strong>in</strong>g positions <strong>in</strong> sport management pro-<br />

grams. Here, I explore <strong>the</strong> sports economics-sport management nexus. A survey <strong>of</strong><br />

sport management programs and <strong>the</strong>ir curricula reveals that sports economics is not<br />

widely required by sport management programs, despite <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>clusion <strong>of</strong> “economics <strong>in</strong><br />

sport” <strong>in</strong> widely accepted sport management curricular guidel<strong>in</strong>es. <strong>Sport</strong> management<br />

programs have recently experienced trouble fill<strong>in</strong>g vacant positions, and new Ph.D.s<br />

<strong>in</strong> sport management do not have adequate research preparation. Taken toge<strong>the</strong>r,<br />

<strong>the</strong>se factors suggest that <strong>the</strong> trend <strong>of</strong> sports economists work<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> sport management<br />

programs may <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> future.<br />

∗ Paper presented at <strong>the</strong> 80th Annual western Economic Association Conference session on “<strong><strong>Sport</strong>s</strong> Man-<br />

agement: <strong>The</strong>ory.” Address: Department <strong>of</strong> Recreation, <strong>Sport</strong> and Tourism, 104 Huff Hall, 1206 South<br />

Fourth Street, Champaign, IL 61820; phone: (217) 333-4410; fax: (217) 244-1935; Internet: brh@uiuc.edu.<br />

Maya Skowron provided valuable research assistance on this project.<br />


Introduction<br />

<strong><strong>Sport</strong>s</strong> economics is a new and rapidly develop<strong>in</strong>g field <strong>in</strong> economics. S<strong>in</strong>ce <strong>the</strong> found<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

Journal <strong>of</strong> <strong><strong>Sport</strong>s</strong> <strong>Economics</strong> <strong>in</strong> 2000, sports economics has developed from an unconnected<br />

set <strong>of</strong> research questions pursued by economists work<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> labor economics, urban economics,<br />

<strong>in</strong>dustrial organization, and o<strong>the</strong>r areas to a clearly identifiable field <strong>of</strong> study <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> discipl<strong>in</strong>e<br />

<strong>of</strong> economics. <strong>The</strong> next five years saw <strong>the</strong> publication <strong>of</strong> three sports economics textbooks<br />

and a correspond<strong>in</strong>g growth <strong>in</strong> sports economic courses <strong>of</strong>fered by economics departments and<br />

o<strong>the</strong>r academic units. Beg<strong>in</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> early 2006 <strong>the</strong> International Journal <strong>of</strong> <strong>Sport</strong> F<strong>in</strong>ance<br />

will beg<strong>in</strong> publication, represent<strong>in</strong>g a second field journal <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> area. <strong>The</strong> last two job<br />

markets have featured advertisements for sports economists <strong>in</strong> Job Open<strong>in</strong>gs for Economists<br />

and <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> such advertisements appear to be <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g. Some observers have noted<br />

a similarity between <strong>the</strong> current state <strong>of</strong> sports economics and <strong>the</strong> state <strong>of</strong> health economics<br />

<strong>in</strong> 1982, when <strong>the</strong> Journal <strong>of</strong> Health <strong>Economics</strong> began publication.<br />

Over <strong>the</strong> last five years, ano<strong>the</strong>r clear trend has emerged. <strong><strong>Sport</strong>s</strong> economists have begun<br />

to migrate from positions <strong>in</strong> economics departments to sport management programs <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>-<br />

creas<strong>in</strong>g numbers. <strong>Sport</strong> management programs appear to be a natural academic home for<br />

sports economists. Economists br<strong>in</strong>g a discipl<strong>in</strong>e based l<strong>in</strong>e <strong>of</strong> research to sport management<br />

programs. Central issues <strong>in</strong> sports economics like <strong>the</strong> determ<strong>in</strong>ation <strong>of</strong> wages <strong>in</strong> sports labor<br />

markets, <strong>the</strong> effect <strong>of</strong> regulations like Title IX on <strong>in</strong>tercollegiate athletic departments, and<br />

labor relations issues <strong>in</strong> unionized <strong>in</strong>dustries, and o<strong>the</strong>rs, are important to sport manage-<br />

ment researchers and practitioners. Articles written by economists regularly appear <strong>in</strong> sport<br />

management journals like <strong>the</strong> Journal <strong>of</strong> <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong>, <strong>Sport</strong> Market<strong>in</strong>g Quarterly, and<br />

<strong>the</strong> Journal <strong>of</strong> <strong>Sport</strong> and Social Issues, among o<strong>the</strong>rs.<br />

In this paper, I <strong>in</strong>vestigate <strong>the</strong> implications <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> grow<strong>in</strong>g presence <strong>of</strong> sports economists<br />

<strong>in</strong> sport management programs, <strong>the</strong> extent to which sports economics has been <strong>in</strong>tegrated<br />

<strong>in</strong>to <strong>the</strong> sport management curriculum, and what this might mean for <strong>the</strong> future <strong>of</strong> both<br />

fields. One important factor that I believe will play an important role <strong>in</strong> shap<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> future<br />


elationship between sports economics and sport management is <strong>the</strong> lack <strong>of</strong> qualified sport<br />

management Ph.D.s be<strong>in</strong>g produced, documented by Mahoney et al (2004). <strong>The</strong> mismatch<br />

between growth <strong>in</strong> undergraduate and graduate enrollment <strong>in</strong> sport management programs<br />

and <strong>the</strong> low level <strong>of</strong> production <strong>of</strong> new sport management Ph.D.s may lead to even more<br />

sports economists work<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> sport management departments <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> future. I also <strong>of</strong>fer some<br />

thoughts on <strong>the</strong> dist<strong>in</strong>ction between sports economics and sports f<strong>in</strong>ance, as my survey <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> current state <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> sport management curriculum suggests that <strong>the</strong>se two descriptors<br />

appear to be substitutes <strong>in</strong> many sport management programs.<br />

<strong>The</strong> State <strong>of</strong> US <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong> Programs<br />

In order to understand <strong>the</strong> role <strong>of</strong> sports economics <strong>in</strong> sport management programs, I first<br />

wanted to know someth<strong>in</strong>g about <strong>the</strong> current state <strong>of</strong> sport management programs. How<br />

many sport management programs currently exist? What are <strong>the</strong> characteristics <strong>of</strong> colleges<br />

and universities that <strong>of</strong>fer sport management as a degree program? Where are <strong>the</strong>se programs<br />

located with<strong>in</strong> colleges and universities? In order to answer <strong>the</strong>se questions, I collected some<br />

data on sport management undergraduate and graduate programs <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> United States.<br />

An <strong>in</strong>itial source <strong>of</strong> data on sport management programs is <strong>the</strong> Integrated Postsecondary<br />

Education System Data (IPEDS). <strong>The</strong>se data are drawn from annual surveys conducted by<br />

<strong>the</strong> U.S. Department <strong>of</strong> Education’s National Center for Educational Statistics. IPEDS is an<br />

annual census <strong>of</strong> enrollment, f<strong>in</strong>ances, staff<strong>in</strong>g, and o<strong>the</strong>r factors at US <strong>in</strong>stitutions <strong>of</strong> higher<br />

education. IPEDS conta<strong>in</strong>s data on <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> degrees awarded, called completions <strong>in</strong><br />

this data, by major and gender <strong>of</strong> student, so IPEDS is an important source <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation on<br />

sport management programs. Because <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g number <strong>of</strong> years that undergraduate<br />

and graduate students take to complete degrees, data on <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> majors might be a<br />

better <strong>in</strong>dicator <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>structional activity than degrees awarded, but IPEDS does not conta<strong>in</strong><br />

enrollment data at a detailed enough level to estimate <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> sport management<br />

majors.<br />


<strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong> Degree Production<br />

<strong>The</strong> IPEDS data identifies degrees awarded by major us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Classification <strong>of</strong> Instructional<br />

Program (CIP) taxonomy for program specialties <strong>in</strong> higher education. CIP codes are six digit<br />

identifiers for majors; sport management falls <strong>in</strong> CIP code 31.0504 (“<strong>Sport</strong> and Fitness Ad-<br />

m<strong>in</strong>istration/<strong>Management</strong>”). This category first appeared <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> CIP taxonomy <strong>in</strong> 1991,<br />

suggest<strong>in</strong>g that sport management has only recently become an identifiable academic disci-<br />

pl<strong>in</strong>e. <strong>The</strong> most recent completions data available are from academic year 2002-2003. Table<br />

1 summarizes <strong>the</strong> available data on <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> colleges and universities that reported<br />

grant<strong>in</strong>g degrees <strong>in</strong> sport management s<strong>in</strong>ce 1992.<br />

Table 1: Universities Award<strong>in</strong>g <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong> Degrees<br />

Year Level <strong>of</strong> Degree Number <strong>of</strong> Institutions<br />

1992 Bachelors Degree 65<br />

1997 Bachelors Degree 139<br />

2002 Bachelors Degree 216<br />

1992 Masters Degree 9<br />

1997 Masters Degree 16<br />

2002 Masters Degree 43<br />

Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Stier (2001) <strong>the</strong> first sport management program was founded <strong>in</strong> 1966<br />

at Ohio University and by 1988 <strong>the</strong>re were 75 undergraduate programs and 58 graduate<br />

programs. Stier (2001) also states that <strong>the</strong>re were 193 sport management programs <strong>in</strong> 1993,<br />

but <strong>the</strong> IPEDS completions data suggest that only 65 colleges and universities granted<br />

undergraduate degrees, and only 9 granted masters degrees, <strong>in</strong> 1992. <strong>The</strong> reason for this<br />

discrepancy may be that many <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> sport management programs reported by Stier (2001)<br />

actually granted degrees that carried some o<strong>the</strong>r designation, like Parks and Recreation or<br />

<strong>Sport</strong> Studies. Degrees with a designation o<strong>the</strong>r than sport management would be counted<br />


<strong>in</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r CIP codes <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> IPEDS data.<br />

From Table 1, <strong>the</strong> IPEDS completions data show that <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> colleges and univer-<br />

sities grant<strong>in</strong>g undergraduate degrees <strong>in</strong> sport management more than doubled from 1992 to<br />

1997 and almost doubled aga<strong>in</strong> from 1997 to 2002; <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> colleges and universities<br />

grant<strong>in</strong>g masters degrees <strong>in</strong>creased by similarly high rates over this period. <strong>The</strong>re has been<br />

a great deal <strong>of</strong> growth <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> sport management bachelors and masters degrees<br />

awarded <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> recent past.<br />

<strong>The</strong> IPEDS completions survey identifies <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> degrees granted by level <strong>of</strong> degree<br />

and by <strong>the</strong> gender <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> recipient. Table 2 summarizes <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> degrees granted by<br />

level <strong>of</strong> degree and by gender <strong>of</strong> recipient over <strong>the</strong> 1992-2002 period. Table 2 <strong>in</strong>dicates<br />

that <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> sport management degrees awarded over <strong>the</strong> 1992-2002 period also grew<br />

rapidly, consistent with <strong>the</strong> rapid <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> programs shown on Table 1. This<br />

<strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> degrees awarded suggests an underly<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> undergraduate<br />

and graduate sport management majors. If <strong>the</strong> recent general trend <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g time to<br />

completion <strong>of</strong> undergraduate and graduate degrees holds <strong>in</strong> sport management, <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong><br />

underly<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> enrollment was probably even more rapid than <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> degrees<br />

awarded over this period. <strong>The</strong> <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> completions also suggests an extraord<strong>in</strong>ary <strong>in</strong>crease<br />

<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>structional activity <strong>in</strong> sport management programs over <strong>the</strong> period. Anecdotal evidence<br />

suggests that this growth <strong>in</strong> enrollment has cont<strong>in</strong>ued s<strong>in</strong>ce 2002.<br />

Note that <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> degrees awarded did not differ by gender. <strong>The</strong>re were basically<br />

two sport management degrees awarded to males for every female awarded an undergraduate<br />

degree <strong>in</strong> 1992 and <strong>in</strong> 2002, so growth <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> majors by gender was similar over<br />

<strong>the</strong> period. In terms <strong>of</strong> masters degrees, <strong>the</strong> fraction <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se degrees awarded to females<br />

<strong>in</strong>creased from 21.5% <strong>in</strong> 2002 to 34.4% <strong>in</strong> 2002, <strong>in</strong>dicat<strong>in</strong>g a significant <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> female<br />

enrollment <strong>in</strong> sport management masters programs over <strong>the</strong> period.<br />

Consistent with <strong>the</strong> conclusions <strong>of</strong> Mahoney et al (2004), very few doctorate degrees<br />

<strong>in</strong> sport management were reported <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> IPEDS completions data. Only one doctorate<br />

degree <strong>in</strong> sport management was awarded <strong>in</strong> 1997, and only n<strong>in</strong>eteen were awarded at three<br />


Table 2: Trends <strong>in</strong> <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong> Degrees Awarded<br />

Year Level Men Women Total<br />

1992 Bachelors 451 218 669<br />

1997 Bachelors 1,032 484 1,516<br />

2002 Bachelors 1,885 966 2,851<br />

1992 Masters 124 34 158<br />

1997 Masters 184 81 275<br />

2002 Masters 431 226 657<br />

universities <strong>in</strong> 2002. <strong>The</strong>re appears to be a clear mismatch between growth <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> number<br />

<strong>of</strong> students enrolled <strong>in</strong> bachelors and masters degree programs <strong>in</strong> sport management and <strong>the</strong><br />

number <strong>of</strong> new doctorates granted <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> field. To <strong>the</strong> extent that economists are attractive<br />

to sport management programs, this mismatch suggests that sport management programs<br />

may be <strong>in</strong>terested <strong>in</strong> hir<strong>in</strong>g mroe sports economists <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> future.<br />

<strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong> Programs<br />

Us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> most recent list<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> programs listed on <strong>the</strong> North American Society for <strong>Sport</strong><br />

<strong>Management</strong> (NASSM) web site, a recent survey <strong>of</strong> programs by <strong>the</strong> National Recreation and<br />

Parks Association that also identified some sport management programs located <strong>in</strong> parks and<br />

recreation departments, and standard <strong>in</strong>ternet search eng<strong>in</strong>es, I identified 151 undergraduate<br />

programs, 98 masters degree programs, and 16 doctoral programs <strong>in</strong> sport management at US<br />

colleges and universities. 1 <strong>The</strong> majority <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se programs were called “sport management”<br />

programs but a few were called “sport adm<strong>in</strong>istration,” “sport studies,” “sport and leisure,”<br />

or similar variations. Stier (2001) identified 137 undergraduate programs and 99 masters<br />

programs <strong>in</strong> 2000, so while <strong>the</strong> rapid growth <strong>in</strong> undergraduate sport management programs<br />

1 13 European <strong>in</strong>stitutions, eight Australian <strong>in</strong>stitutions, and ten Canadian <strong>in</strong>stitutions also grant sport<br />

management degrees, but <strong>the</strong>se <strong>in</strong>stitutions are outside <strong>the</strong> scope <strong>of</strong> this paper.<br />


has cont<strong>in</strong>ued over <strong>the</strong> past five years <strong>the</strong> growth <strong>in</strong> masters programs appears to have leveled<br />

<strong>of</strong>f. I discuss <strong>the</strong> characteristics <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> departments that <strong>of</strong>fer sport management degrees <strong>in</strong><br />

detail below.<br />

This list <strong>of</strong> 151 programs <strong>in</strong>cludes markedly fewer undergraduate programs than <strong>the</strong><br />

216 universities that reported award<strong>in</strong>g sport management degrees <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> 2002 IPEDS com-<br />

pletions survey. However, about one third <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> sport management degrees awarded were<br />

awarded by <strong>in</strong>stitutions that granted less than five degrees <strong>in</strong> 2002. <strong>The</strong>se <strong>in</strong>stitutions proba-<br />

bly awarded sport management degrees as part <strong>of</strong> “<strong>in</strong>dependent studies” or “<strong>in</strong>terdiscipl<strong>in</strong>ary<br />

studies” programs and probably do not have a sport management program. About 70% <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutions that awarded undergraduate sport management degrees awarded 5 or more<br />

more degrees <strong>in</strong> 2002. 216 colleges and universities granted undergraduate sport manage-<br />

ment degrees <strong>in</strong> 2002, 70% <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se programs - about 150 <strong>in</strong>stitutions - granted five or more<br />

degrees, which is consistent with <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> undergraduate sport management degree<br />

programs listed on <strong>the</strong> NASSM web site.<br />

<strong>The</strong> NASSM web site <strong>in</strong>cludes 90 sport management masters degree programs, but <strong>the</strong><br />

IPEDS data shows only 43 colleges and universities grant<strong>in</strong>g sport management masters de-<br />

grees <strong>in</strong> 2002. Ei<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> average sport management masters degree program is so small that<br />

it does not graduate a student every year, or some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se masters degrees actually carry a<br />

designation o<strong>the</strong>r than sport management. For example, masters degrees <strong>in</strong> sport manage-<br />

ment awarded by my department carry <strong>the</strong> designation “recreation, sport and tourism” not<br />

sport management. <strong>The</strong> NASSM list <strong>of</strong> departments also conta<strong>in</strong>s thirteen programs that<br />

award doctorate degrees <strong>in</strong> sport management, but I have not <strong>in</strong>cluded <strong>the</strong>se programs <strong>in</strong><br />

this survey. Those <strong>in</strong>terested <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> current state <strong>of</strong> doctoral education <strong>in</strong> sport management<br />

should see <strong>the</strong> paper by Mahoney et al (2004).<br />

After identify<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> programs currently <strong>of</strong>fer<strong>in</strong>g sport management degrees, I collected<br />

detailed data on <strong>the</strong>se programs and <strong>the</strong>ir curricula, based on <strong>in</strong>formation available on each<br />

department’s web page. <strong>The</strong>se data <strong>in</strong>clude <strong>the</strong> department and school where <strong>the</strong> program<br />

is located and selected <strong>in</strong>formation about course <strong>of</strong>fer<strong>in</strong>gs.<br />


Table 3 summarizes <strong>the</strong> data on <strong>the</strong> departments that are host to sport management<br />

programs. <strong>The</strong> categories <strong>of</strong> department titles shown on Table 3 have been summarized<br />

to some extent. For example, <strong>the</strong> category Health/PhysEd/Human Performance <strong>in</strong>cludes<br />

departments with names conta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g two or more <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> listed terms. Based on <strong>the</strong>ir names,<br />

<strong>the</strong>se apepar to by hybrid departments that are composed <strong>of</strong> faculty from two or more<br />

discipl<strong>in</strong>es. Examples <strong>in</strong>clude Department <strong>of</strong> Health and Physical Education, Department <strong>of</strong><br />

Human Performance and Health Promotion, and Department <strong>of</strong> Health, Physical Education,<br />

Recreation and Dance. <strong>The</strong> category <strong>Sport</strong>/Exercise Science <strong>in</strong>cludes departments wi<strong>the</strong>r<br />

ei<strong>the</strong>r “<strong>Sport</strong> Science” or “Exercise Science” <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir names. <strong>The</strong> category K<strong>in</strong>esiology<br />

<strong>in</strong>cludes all departments with “K<strong>in</strong>esiology” <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir name. <strong>The</strong>se departments may be<br />

very similar, but without a detailed exam<strong>in</strong>ation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> faculty I was unable to determ<strong>in</strong>e<br />

how similar <strong>the</strong>y might be. <strong>The</strong> category No Departmental Affiliation <strong>in</strong>cludes all sport<br />

management degree programs that were not directly affiliated with an academic department.<br />

less than 10% <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> sport management undergraduate degrees <strong>in</strong> this sample are <strong>of</strong>-<br />

fered by departments <strong>of</strong> sport management or sport adm<strong>in</strong>istration, so it appears that most<br />

sport management degrees are <strong>of</strong>fered by some o<strong>the</strong>r department. Instead, many sport<br />

management degrees are <strong>of</strong>fered by departments related to health, physical education, and<br />

human performance. <strong>The</strong> total degree <strong>of</strong>fer<strong>in</strong>gs from five similar categories <strong>of</strong> departments<br />

– Health/PhysEd/Human Performance K<strong>in</strong>esiology, <strong>Sport</strong>/Exercise Science, PhysEd and<br />

Health/<strong>Sport</strong> categories – accounts for over 46% <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> departments award<strong>in</strong>g undergradu-<br />

ate sport management degrees. I found it somewhat surpris<strong>in</strong>g that such a large fraction <strong>of</strong><br />

sport management degrees – almost 20% – are <strong>of</strong>fered <strong>in</strong> departments <strong>of</strong> bus<strong>in</strong>ess or manage-<br />

ment because I do not personally know <strong>of</strong> very many sport management programs located<br />

<strong>in</strong> bus<strong>in</strong>ess schools.<br />

A similar picture emerges <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> distribution <strong>of</strong> departments grant<strong>in</strong>g masters degrees <strong>in</strong><br />

sport management, shown on Table 4. Like undergraduate degrees, a m<strong>in</strong>ority <strong>of</strong> masters<br />

degrees are awarded by departments <strong>of</strong> sport management or sport adm<strong>in</strong>istration. Over<br />

50% <strong>of</strong> masters degrees <strong>in</strong> sport management are awarded by departments that, based on<br />


Table 3: Departments Offer<strong>in</strong>g Undergraduate <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong> Degrees<br />

Department Name Number Percent <strong>of</strong> Total<br />

Health/PhysEd/Human Performance 23 16.08<br />

No Departmental Affiliation 22 15.38<br />

Bus<strong>in</strong>ess/<strong>Management</strong> 19 13.29<br />

<strong>Sport</strong>/Exercise Science 19 13.29<br />

<strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong>/Adm<strong>in</strong>istration 13 9.09<br />

K<strong>in</strong>esiology 10 6.99<br />

Parks, Recreation 10 6.99<br />

Leisure/<strong>Sport</strong> Studies 8 5.59<br />

PhysEd 8 5.59<br />

Health/<strong>Sport</strong> 5 3.50<br />

Education 4 2.80<br />

Hospitality/Tourism 2 1.40<br />

<strong>the</strong>ir name, specialize <strong>in</strong> lab sciences like K<strong>in</strong>esiology, Health and Human Performance, and<br />

Exercise Science.<br />

Note that, unlike <strong>the</strong> case <strong>in</strong> undergraduate degrees, very few masters degrees <strong>in</strong> sport<br />

management are awarded by departments <strong>of</strong> bus<strong>in</strong>ess or management. This probably re-<br />

flects <strong>the</strong> dom<strong>in</strong>ance <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> masters <strong>in</strong> bus<strong>in</strong>ess adm<strong>in</strong>istration degree <strong>in</strong> bus<strong>in</strong>ess school<br />

departments.<br />

Ano<strong>the</strong>r way to understand <strong>the</strong> production <strong>of</strong> sport management degrees is to look at <strong>the</strong><br />

colleges and schools that are home to <strong>the</strong> departments that award sport management degrees.<br />

Table 5 summarizes this <strong>in</strong>formation for <strong>the</strong> undergraduate degree grant<strong>in</strong>g departments <strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> sample. On Table 5, NA refers to departments that are not affiliated with a larger<br />

college or school. <strong>The</strong>se departments are generally at smaller <strong>in</strong>stitutions, like liberal arts<br />

colleges, that consist <strong>of</strong> a s<strong>in</strong>gle college and make up a large fraction <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> undergraduate<br />


Table 4: Departments Offer<strong>in</strong>g <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong> Masters<br />

Department Name Number Percent <strong>of</strong> Total<br />

Health/PhysEd/Human Performance 18 20.00<br />

K<strong>in</strong>esiology 17 18.89<br />

No Departmental Affiliation 17 18.89<br />

<strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong>/Adm<strong>in</strong>istration 8 8.89<br />

<strong>Sport</strong>/Exercise Science 8 8.89<br />

Parks, Recreation 6 6.67<br />

PhysEd 3 3.33<br />

Bus<strong>in</strong>ess/<strong>Management</strong> 3 3.33<br />

Education 3 3.33<br />

Leisure/<strong>Sport</strong> Studies 3 3.33<br />

Health/<strong>Sport</strong> 2 2.22<br />

Hospitality/Tourism 2 2.22<br />

degree grant<strong>in</strong>g departments. <strong>The</strong> Miscellaneous category <strong>in</strong>cludes schools like my College<br />

<strong>of</strong> Applied Life Studies, colleges <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>tegrated science and technology, schools <strong>of</strong> hotel man-<br />

agement, and a schools <strong>of</strong> humanities, among o<strong>the</strong>r unclassifiable units. Interest<strong>in</strong>gly, almost<br />

28% <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> undergraduate degree grant<strong>in</strong>g departments are housed <strong>in</strong> schools <strong>of</strong> education.<br />

This probably reflects sport management’s roots <strong>in</strong> physical education. Clearly, many <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

k<strong>in</strong>esiology and exercise science programs on Table 3 must reside <strong>in</strong> education schools.<br />

Case (2003) discusses <strong>the</strong> relationship between <strong>the</strong> department and division that are home<br />

to sport management programs and <strong>the</strong> long term success <strong>of</strong> sport management programs.<br />

Case (2003) makes several important po<strong>in</strong>ts about <strong>the</strong> relationship between <strong>the</strong> location <strong>of</strong><br />

sport management programs and <strong>the</strong> curriculum <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>se programs. First, because sport<br />

management programs are <strong>of</strong>ten part <strong>of</strong> an unrelated department or division like k<strong>in</strong>esiology<br />

or health, <strong>the</strong> core sport management faculty <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>se programs may have limited control over<br />


Table 5: Colleges/Schools Offer<strong>in</strong>g Undergraduate <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong> Degrees<br />

College Name Number Percent <strong>of</strong> Total<br />

Education 39 27.66<br />

NA 31 21.99<br />

Bus<strong>in</strong>ess 20 14.18<br />

Health Related 20 14.18<br />

Arts and Sciences 9 6.38<br />

Miscellaneous 8 5.67<br />

Human Performance/K<strong>in</strong>esiology/Exercise 7 4.96<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essional/Graduate 7 4.96<br />

<strong>the</strong> curriculum and students may be required to take a number <strong>of</strong> courses not directly related<br />

to sport management as part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> curriculum. Second, many sport management programs<br />

grew out <strong>of</strong> physical education and still operate as part <strong>of</strong> physical education departments.<br />

This relationship can have an important effect on <strong>the</strong> curriculum and <strong>the</strong> perception <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

sport management program <strong>in</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r departments, because it is not uncommon to f<strong>in</strong>d sport<br />

management courses taught by “former physical education faculty who were ‘self taught’ <strong>in</strong><br />

sport management” <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>se programs (page 225). Third, he notes that a small but grow<strong>in</strong>g<br />

number <strong>of</strong> sport management programs are stand-alone academic departments. This also<br />

has an important effect on <strong>the</strong> curricula because <strong>the</strong>se departments tend to be small and not<br />

provided with sufficient resources to adequately serve <strong>the</strong>ir students. Fourth, he highlights<br />

<strong>the</strong> importance <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> relationship between sport management programs and bus<strong>in</strong>ess schools,<br />

because <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> close relationship between sport management and bus<strong>in</strong>ess school research<br />

and curricula. Many sport management undergraduate and graduate students benefit from<br />

access to courses <strong>of</strong>fered <strong>in</strong> bus<strong>in</strong>ess schools, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g economics courses when <strong>the</strong> economics<br />

department is <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> bus<strong>in</strong>ess school, market<strong>in</strong>g, management and account<strong>in</strong>g. When sport<br />

management students can enroll <strong>in</strong> bus<strong>in</strong>ess school courses, <strong>the</strong> sport management faculty<br />


can <strong>of</strong>fer more specialized, sports-related courses to both sport management and bus<strong>in</strong>ess<br />

majors. Many sport management faculty will have research <strong>in</strong>terests similar to bus<strong>in</strong>ess<br />

school faculty. Case concludes that <strong>the</strong> long term success <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> sport management programs<br />

at <strong>in</strong>stitutions with bus<strong>in</strong>ess schools depends critically on <strong>the</strong> existence <strong>of</strong> a good relationship.<br />

My survey <strong>of</strong> sport management programs <strong>in</strong>dicates that many <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> issues raised by<br />

Case (2003) may still affect <strong>the</strong> curricula <strong>in</strong> sport management programs. Very few <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

programs surveyed are housed <strong>in</strong> stand alone sport management departments; most are part<br />

<strong>of</strong> departments that focus on laboratory or experimental discipl<strong>in</strong>es like exercise and health<br />

sciences or k<strong>in</strong>esiology; a sizable number are part <strong>of</strong> physical education departments. Surpris-<br />

<strong>in</strong>gly, over 13% <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> undergraduate programs are housed <strong>in</strong> a department <strong>of</strong> management<br />

or bus<strong>in</strong>ess, although few <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> masters programs are <strong>in</strong> such departments.<br />

F<strong>in</strong>ally, <strong>the</strong> recent survey <strong>of</strong> conditions <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> market for sport management faculty by<br />

Mahoney et al (2004) plays an important part <strong>in</strong> any assessment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> current state <strong>of</strong> sport<br />

management programs. This survey found that annual demand for faculty positions <strong>in</strong> sport<br />

management programs exceeds <strong>the</strong> supply <strong>of</strong> new PhDs produced <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> field by over 400%.<br />

While some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se positions are filled by exist<strong>in</strong>g sport management faculty, <strong>the</strong>re must<br />

still be significant excess demand for faculty <strong>in</strong> sport management programs. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore,<br />

Mahoney et al (2004) conclude that most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> new PhDs <strong>in</strong> sport management lack sufficient<br />

research tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g for <strong>the</strong> open faculty positions.<br />

<strong>The</strong> <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong> <strong>Curriculum</strong><br />

Perhaps because <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>terdiscipl<strong>in</strong>ary nature <strong>of</strong> sport management programs, and <strong>the</strong> wide<br />

variety <strong>of</strong> departments and colleges that are home to <strong>the</strong>se programs, a great deal <strong>of</strong> atten-<br />

tion has been paid to <strong>the</strong> development <strong>of</strong> a benchmark curriculum for sport management<br />

programs at both <strong>the</strong> undergraduate and masters levels. Just 20 years after <strong>the</strong> establish-<br />

ment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> first sport management program, <strong>the</strong> National Association <strong>of</strong> <strong>Sport</strong> and Physical<br />

Education (NASPE) created a task force to develop curricular guidel<strong>in</strong>es for sport manage-<br />


ment programs. <strong>The</strong>se guidel<strong>in</strong>es were used by many nascent sport management programs <strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> 1980s to guide <strong>the</strong>ir development and staff<strong>in</strong>g. By <strong>the</strong> early 1990s <strong>the</strong> NASPE task force<br />

had been jo<strong>in</strong>ed by <strong>the</strong> North American Society for <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong> (NASSM), and <strong>the</strong><br />

curricular guidel<strong>in</strong>es became part <strong>of</strong> a formal accreditation process for sport management<br />

programs overseen by <strong>the</strong> <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong> Program Review Council (SMPRC).<br />

Stier and Schneider (2000) recently reviewed <strong>the</strong> state <strong>of</strong> sport management undergradu-<br />

ate curricular guidel<strong>in</strong>es. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Stier and Schneider (2000), <strong>the</strong> SMPRC undergrad-<br />

uate curricular guidel<strong>in</strong>es currently identify eleven content areas<br />

1. Socio-Cultural Dimensions <strong>in</strong> <strong>Sport</strong><br />

2. <strong>Management</strong> and Leadership <strong>in</strong> <strong>Sport</strong><br />

3. Ethics <strong>in</strong> <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong><br />

4. Market<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> <strong>Sport</strong><br />

5. Communications <strong>in</strong> <strong>Sport</strong><br />

6. Budget and F<strong>in</strong>ance <strong>in</strong> <strong>Sport</strong><br />

7. Legal Aspects <strong>of</strong> <strong>Sport</strong><br />

8. <strong>Economics</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Sport</strong><br />

9. Venue and Event <strong>Management</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Sport</strong><br />

10. Governance <strong>in</strong> <strong>Sport</strong><br />

11. Field Experience <strong>in</strong> <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong><br />

Note that economics appears as a separate content area. Unlike communication and some<br />

o<strong>the</strong>r content areas, a number <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se eleven content areas conta<strong>in</strong> a significant amount <strong>of</strong><br />

economics. For example, antitrust law and <strong>in</strong>dustrial organization constitute a significant<br />


portion <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> legal aspects <strong>of</strong> sport, economic models <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> behavior <strong>of</strong> for-pr<strong>of</strong>it and non-<br />

pr<strong>of</strong>it organizations and organization <strong>the</strong>ory play an important role <strong>in</strong> governance <strong>in</strong> sport,<br />

f<strong>in</strong>ance <strong>in</strong> sport has a significant amount <strong>of</strong> overlap with economics.<br />

Stier and Schneider (2000) assessed <strong>the</strong> utility <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se guidel<strong>in</strong>es by survey<strong>in</strong>g 91 sport<br />

management program directors and 202 pr<strong>of</strong>essionals <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> sports <strong>in</strong>dustry about <strong>the</strong>ir op<strong>in</strong>-<br />

ion <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> suitability <strong>of</strong> each <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se content areas. <strong>The</strong> 202 <strong>in</strong>dustry pr<strong>of</strong>essionals were classi-<br />

fied <strong>in</strong>to ten different segments, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g sport broadcast<strong>in</strong>g, event market<strong>in</strong>g/management,<br />

sports facilities, and o<strong>the</strong>rs. <strong>The</strong> program directors “agreed” – average score <strong>of</strong> 1.8 on a seven<br />

po<strong>in</strong>t Likert scale variable anchored by “strongly agree (1)” and “strongly disagree (7)” –<br />

that economics <strong>in</strong> sport was a suitable subject area. <strong>The</strong> pr<strong>of</strong>essionals were “neutral” – av-<br />

erage score <strong>of</strong> 2.5 on <strong>the</strong> seven po<strong>in</strong>t Likert scale – on <strong>the</strong> suitability <strong>of</strong> economics <strong>in</strong> sport as<br />

a content area, but <strong>the</strong>re was statistically significant disagreement across <strong>in</strong>dustry segments<br />

regard<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> suitability <strong>of</strong> economics <strong>in</strong> sport.<br />

<strong>The</strong> <strong>in</strong>dustry pr<strong>of</strong>essionals surveyed were not opposed to economics <strong>in</strong> sports as a content<br />

area <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> sport management curriculum, <strong>the</strong>y were “neutral” to its <strong>in</strong>clusion. Stier and<br />

Schneider (2000) do not discuss <strong>the</strong> reasons beh<strong>in</strong>d this mild disagreement between program<br />

directors and <strong>in</strong>dustry pr<strong>of</strong>essionals. However, <strong>the</strong> difference may be due <strong>in</strong> part to <strong>the</strong><br />

overlap between economics and o<strong>the</strong>r content areas. For example, lawyers and law firms –<br />

one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>dustry segments surveyed – may consider economics <strong>in</strong> sport to be a key part<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> legal aspects <strong>of</strong> sport ra<strong>the</strong>r than a separate content area. <strong>The</strong> difference may also<br />

stem from <strong>the</strong> fact that, unlike sport market<strong>in</strong>g, sports economics was not a clearly def<strong>in</strong>ed<br />

specialization with<strong>in</strong> economics <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> late 1990s when this survey took place, lead<strong>in</strong>g to<br />

a lack <strong>of</strong> understand<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> mean<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> economics <strong>in</strong> sport <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>dustry. F<strong>in</strong>ally, <strong>the</strong><br />

disagreement may come from <strong>the</strong> sometimes antagonistic relationship between economists<br />

and segments <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> sports <strong>in</strong>dustry. Unlike, say, scholars who study sport communication,<br />

economists have been quite critical <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> sports <strong>in</strong>dustry, <strong>in</strong> particular <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> debate on <strong>the</strong><br />

economic development effects <strong>of</strong> sports facilities. This might lead some <strong>in</strong>dustry <strong>of</strong>ficials to<br />

view economics <strong>in</strong> sport as a less than desirable content area.<br />


Schneider and Stier (2000) undertook a similar assessment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> graduate curricular<br />

guidel<strong>in</strong>es for sport management programs. <strong>The</strong> SMPRC graduate curricular guidel<strong>in</strong>es<br />

conta<strong>in</strong> ten content areas. Miss<strong>in</strong>g from <strong>the</strong> undergraduate content areas listed above are<br />

economics <strong>in</strong> sport and governance <strong>in</strong> sport; research <strong>in</strong> sport is added as a separate content<br />

area. Also budget<strong>in</strong>g and f<strong>in</strong>ance <strong>in</strong> sport becomes “f<strong>in</strong>ancial management <strong>in</strong> sport” <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

graduate content areas. <strong>The</strong> reason that economics <strong>in</strong> sport has been excluded from <strong>the</strong><br />

graduate content areas is not clear. However, like <strong>the</strong> case <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> undergraduate guidel<strong>in</strong>es,<br />

<strong>the</strong>re is clearly a significant amount <strong>of</strong> economic content <strong>in</strong> a number <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> graduate content<br />

areas.<br />

Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Stier and Schneider (2000) and Schneider and Stier (2000), <strong>the</strong> SMPRC is<br />

currently <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> revis<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ir curricular guidel<strong>in</strong>es for <strong>the</strong> 21st century. Part <strong>of</strong> this<br />

revision appears to be <strong>in</strong> response to <strong>the</strong> divergent perceptions between sport management<br />

program directors and sport management pr<strong>of</strong>essionals.<br />

Who Offers <strong><strong>Sport</strong>s</strong> <strong>Economics</strong>?<br />

As part <strong>of</strong> my survey <strong>of</strong> programs, I exam<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>the</strong> course requirements <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> undergradu-<br />

ate and masters programs <strong>in</strong> sport management <strong>in</strong> order to determ<strong>in</strong>e how many <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se<br />

programs required students to take sports economics. While exam<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>se requirements,<br />

it became apparent that sports f<strong>in</strong>ance courses were also an important component <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

curriculum <strong>in</strong> many departments, so I tabulated <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> programs that required a<br />

sports f<strong>in</strong>ance course. Based on <strong>the</strong> course titles, I also tabulated <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> programs<br />

that required a hybrid sports economics-sports f<strong>in</strong>ance course and not separate sports f<strong>in</strong>ance<br />

and economics courses. <strong>The</strong>se hybrid courses had titles like “<strong>Sport</strong> F<strong>in</strong>ance and <strong>Economics</strong>,”<br />

“<strong><strong>Sport</strong>s</strong> <strong>Economics</strong> and F<strong>in</strong>ance,” and “Budget<strong>in</strong>g, F<strong>in</strong>ance and <strong>Economics</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Sport</strong> Man-<br />

agement.” Without a detailed exam<strong>in</strong>ation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> syllabi, I could not tell if <strong>the</strong>se courses<br />

were, <strong>in</strong> fact, one or <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r with a mislead<strong>in</strong>g title, so I treated <strong>the</strong>m as hybrid courses.<br />

Table 6 summarizes <strong>the</strong> data on sports economics and sports f<strong>in</strong>ance course requirements <strong>in</strong><br />


sport management degree programs.<br />

Table 6: <strong><strong>Sport</strong>s</strong> <strong>Economics</strong> and F<strong>in</strong>ance <strong>in</strong> <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong> Curricula<br />

Course Required % Undergrad Programs % Masters Programs<br />

<strong><strong>Sport</strong>s</strong> <strong>Economics</strong> 16 4<br />

<strong><strong>Sport</strong>s</strong> F<strong>in</strong>ance 33 32<br />

Pr<strong>in</strong>ciples <strong>of</strong> <strong>Economics</strong> 48 9<br />

Hybrid <strong><strong>Sport</strong>s</strong> F<strong>in</strong>ance-Econ 6 4<br />

Clearly, sports economics is not currently an important part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> sport management<br />

curriculum, despite <strong>the</strong> SMPRC curricular guidel<strong>in</strong>es. From Table 6, very few undergradu-<br />

ate sport management programs require a sports economics course, and almost no masters<br />

programs require <strong>the</strong> course. Even generously count<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> hybrid sports economics-sports<br />

f<strong>in</strong>ance courses as sports economics implies that only one undergraduate program <strong>in</strong> five, and<br />

one masters program <strong>in</strong> ten, requires <strong>the</strong>ir students to take a sports economics class. Mike<br />

Leeds, Peter von Allmen and Rod Fort - call your publishers! I also checked requirements to<br />

see how many programs required some sort <strong>of</strong> economics elective course like pr<strong>in</strong>ciples. 48%<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> undergraduate sport management programs required students to take an economics<br />

course. However, I question home much “economics <strong>in</strong> sports” is covered <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>se pr<strong>in</strong>ciples<br />

level courses.<br />

About a third <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> sport management programs at <strong>the</strong> undergraduate and masters level<br />

require courses <strong>in</strong> sports f<strong>in</strong>ance. While more sports f<strong>in</strong>ance courses are <strong>of</strong>fered, 30% is not<br />

as large as one might expect, given <strong>the</strong> SMPRC curricular guidel<strong>in</strong>es. <strong>The</strong>se sports f<strong>in</strong>ance<br />

courses may conta<strong>in</strong> some material that falls under <strong>the</strong> head<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> economics, and operate<br />

roughly as substitutes <strong>in</strong> many sport management programs. I discuss this possibility below.<br />

Still, this apparent lack <strong>of</strong> economics – and f<strong>in</strong>ance – content <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> sport management<br />

curriculum is <strong>in</strong>terest<strong>in</strong>g. <strong><strong>Sport</strong>s</strong> <strong>in</strong> economics is one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> eleven content areas <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

SMPRC undergraduate guidel<strong>in</strong>es. <strong>The</strong> Journal <strong>of</strong> <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong> publishes quite a<br />


few sports economics articles, as do an <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g number <strong>of</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r sport management and<br />

market<strong>in</strong>g journals. And many <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> undergraduate and masters degree recipients go on to<br />

work <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>dustry <strong>in</strong> positions that likely require bus<strong>in</strong>ess related skills. Yet my exam<strong>in</strong>ation<br />

<strong>of</strong> course requirements does not reveal much <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> way <strong>of</strong> sports economics and f<strong>in</strong>ance<br />

<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> curriculum. This raises questions about <strong>the</strong> relationship between <strong>the</strong> actual sport<br />

management curricula and <strong>the</strong> SMPRC guidel<strong>in</strong>es, as well as what courses a large number<br />

<strong>of</strong> sport management majors actually take.<br />

<strong>The</strong> Relationship Between <strong><strong>Sport</strong>s</strong> F<strong>in</strong>ance and <strong><strong>Sport</strong>s</strong> <strong>Economics</strong><br />

<strong>The</strong> presence <strong>of</strong> a significant number <strong>of</strong> “hybrid” sports economics/sports f<strong>in</strong>ance courses<br />

on Table 6 suggests that sports economics and sports f<strong>in</strong>ance might be substitutes <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

curriculum <strong>in</strong> many sport management programs. To fur<strong>the</strong>r assess this idea, I exam<strong>in</strong>ed<br />

several lead<strong>in</strong>g undergraduate sports economics and sports f<strong>in</strong>ance textbooks. <strong>The</strong> two lead-<br />

<strong>in</strong>g sports f<strong>in</strong>ance texts are Howard and Crompton (2004) and Fried, Shapiro and DeSchriver<br />

(2003). <strong>The</strong> two lead<strong>in</strong>g sports economics texts are Fort (2004) and Leeds and von Allmen<br />

(2005).<br />

It is impossible to summarize <strong>the</strong> contents <strong>of</strong> a textbook. In leu <strong>of</strong> a summary, Table 7<br />

shows <strong>the</strong> chapter titles from <strong>the</strong> two lead<strong>in</strong>g sports f<strong>in</strong>ance textbooks. Based on <strong>the</strong> chapter<br />

titles, and my read<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se textbooks, it appears that <strong>the</strong>se two texts have very little<br />

<strong>in</strong> common. A student a university x who completed a sport f<strong>in</strong>ance course based on <strong>the</strong><br />

Howard and Crompton text would be exposed to a different set <strong>of</strong> concepts and material<br />

than a student at university y who completed a sport f<strong>in</strong>ance course based on <strong>the</strong> Fried et<br />

al text. Howard and Crompton cover <strong>the</strong> stadium issue and revenue sources for both public<br />

and private sports enterprizes thoroughly; Fried et al say little about stadiums and noth<strong>in</strong>g<br />

about <strong>the</strong> f<strong>in</strong>ances <strong>of</strong> nonpr<strong>of</strong>its, but appear to cover a lot <strong>of</strong> bus<strong>in</strong>ess school f<strong>in</strong>ance.<br />

Second, nei<strong>the</strong>r text would form <strong>the</strong> basis <strong>of</strong> a course that could be considered a substitute<br />

for a sports economics course. Nei<strong>the</strong>r book covers such staples <strong>of</strong> sports economics as la-<br />

bor markets and discrim<strong>in</strong>ation, IO, competitive balance, labor relations, or <strong>the</strong> relationship<br />


Table 7: <strong><strong>Sport</strong>s</strong> F<strong>in</strong>ance Textbook Chapter Titles<br />

Howard and Crompton Fried et al<br />

<strong>Sport</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> New Millenium F<strong>in</strong>ancial Issues <strong>in</strong> <strong>Sport</strong><br />

<strong>The</strong> Challenges Fac<strong>in</strong>g College and Pr<strong>of</strong>essional <strong>Sport</strong> Basic F<strong>in</strong>ancial Concepts<br />

Trends <strong>in</strong> Stadium Facility Investment F<strong>in</strong>ancial Systems and How <strong>The</strong>y Operate<br />

<strong>The</strong> Pr<strong>in</strong>ciples <strong>of</strong> Economic Impact Analysis Bus<strong>in</strong>ess Structure<br />

Alternative Justifications for Public Subsidy F<strong>in</strong>ancial Statements, Forecasts, and Plann<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Sources <strong>of</strong> Public Sector Fund<strong>in</strong>g Time Value <strong>of</strong> Money<br />

<strong><strong>Sport</strong>s</strong> Enterprizes’ Sources <strong>of</strong> Revenues Approaches to F<strong>in</strong>ancial Plann<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Implementation <strong>of</strong> Public-Private Partnerships Obta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g Fund<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Ticket Sales and Operations Capital Stocks<br />

Sale <strong>of</strong> Broadcast Rights Bonds<br />

Sales <strong>of</strong> Foodservice and Souvenir Concessions Capital Budget<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Nature <strong>of</strong> Sponsorship Exchange Short-Term F<strong>in</strong>ancial <strong>Management</strong><br />

Corporate Concerns <strong>in</strong> Sponsorship Partnerships Inventory and Production <strong>Management</strong><br />

Solicit<strong>in</strong>g Sponsorships from Bus<strong>in</strong>ess Organizations Taxation and Legal Issues<br />

Measur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Impact <strong>of</strong> Sponsorship Spend<strong>in</strong>g Earn<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

Fundrais<strong>in</strong>g Audit<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Exit Strategy<br />

between on-field success and f<strong>in</strong>ancial success <strong>in</strong> sports organizations. Howard and Cromp-<br />

ton cover <strong>the</strong> public policy debate on stadium subsidies and <strong>the</strong> economic impact study<br />

literature thoroughly. Broadcast rights revenue and ticket pric<strong>in</strong>g are discussed from many<br />

perspectives, but not from <strong>the</strong> perspective <strong>of</strong> price-quantity decisions made by monopolists<br />

– <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> case <strong>of</strong> ticket pric<strong>in</strong>g – or transfer pric<strong>in</strong>g by vertically <strong>in</strong>tegrated monopolists. <strong>The</strong><br />

Fried et al text overlaps even less with sports economics. This text conta<strong>in</strong>s a lot <strong>of</strong> material<br />

that might be found <strong>in</strong> a managerial economics or f<strong>in</strong>ancial economics textbook, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>the</strong> time value <strong>of</strong> money, capital budget<strong>in</strong>g, bond and equity markets, and forecast<strong>in</strong>g. It<br />

also conta<strong>in</strong>s a significant amount <strong>of</strong> account<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Thus, it appears that sports economics currently plays a very limited role <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> sport<br />


management curriculum. One explanation for this may be a lack <strong>of</strong> sports economics courses<br />

<strong>of</strong>fered <strong>in</strong> economics departments around <strong>the</strong> country. Ano<strong>the</strong>r explanation is that, given <strong>the</strong><br />

relatively small size <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> average sport management program, <strong>the</strong>se programs lack faculty<br />

members who are qualified, or <strong>in</strong>terested, <strong>in</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g a sports economics course. However, it<br />

is unclear why this would not also apply to sports f<strong>in</strong>ance, and sports f<strong>in</strong>ance courses clearly<br />

play a larger role <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> sport management curriculum than does sports economics.<br />

Discussion<br />

Several important po<strong>in</strong>ts about <strong>the</strong> role <strong>of</strong> sports economics <strong>in</strong> sport management emerge<br />

from <strong>the</strong> previous sections. First, enrollment <strong>in</strong> undergraduate and masters level sport man-<br />

agement programs have grown significantly <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> past ten years. This <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> enrollment<br />

appears to have led to an <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> demand for faculty <strong>in</strong> sport management programs<br />

that has not been met by PhD production by graduate sport management programs. Fur-<br />

<strong>the</strong>rmore, new PhDs <strong>in</strong> sport management do not have adequate research preparation for<br />

academic jobs with a significant research expectation.<br />

Second, clear standards for both undergraduate and masters level sport management<br />

curriculum have emerged. <strong>The</strong>se guidel<strong>in</strong>es represent an attempt to def<strong>in</strong>e sport management<br />

as an academic discipl<strong>in</strong>e and provide employers with a signal about <strong>the</strong> academic preparation<br />

<strong>of</strong> students with sport management degrees. <strong>The</strong>se guidel<strong>in</strong>es explicitly <strong>in</strong>clude economics<br />

<strong>in</strong> sport at <strong>the</strong> undergraduate level and implicitly <strong>in</strong>clude a significant amount <strong>of</strong> economics<br />

<strong>in</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r content areas like sport law and f<strong>in</strong>ancial management <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> graduate guidel<strong>in</strong>es.<br />

<strong>The</strong> SMRC curricular guidel<strong>in</strong>es may create several problems for sport management pro-<br />

grams. First, <strong>the</strong>re is a disconnect between <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> subject areas def<strong>in</strong>ed by <strong>the</strong><br />

guidel<strong>in</strong>es and <strong>the</strong> recommended staff<strong>in</strong>g for sport management programs. <strong>The</strong> guidel<strong>in</strong>es<br />

recommend at least two full time sport management faculty for undergraduate programs<br />

and at least three full time faculty for graduate programs. This recommendation implies<br />

that, <strong>in</strong> order to cover all eleven undergraduate content areas, <strong>the</strong> two full time faculty <strong>in</strong><br />


an undergraduate program would have to each cover five subject areas, assum<strong>in</strong>g no adjunct<br />

faculty <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> sport management program. 2 <strong>The</strong> graduate curricular guidel<strong>in</strong>es conta<strong>in</strong> two<br />

subject areas not <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> undergraduate guidel<strong>in</strong>es, so <strong>the</strong> three full time faculty <strong>in</strong> a sport<br />

management program <strong>of</strong>fer<strong>in</strong>g both an undergraduate and masters degree would each have to<br />

cover four subject areas. <strong>The</strong> guidel<strong>in</strong>es require sport management faculty to be generalists<br />

who have <strong>the</strong> ability to teach graduate and undergraduate classes <strong>in</strong> a wide variety <strong>of</strong> subject<br />

areas. This goes aga<strong>in</strong>st <strong>the</strong> gra<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong> higher education, where a trend toward specialization<br />

<strong>in</strong> academic expertise has been go<strong>in</strong>g on for decades.<br />

Second, <strong>the</strong> course requirements survey <strong>in</strong>dicates that <strong>the</strong> curricular guidel<strong>in</strong>es are not<br />

be<strong>in</strong>g followed very closely, at least <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> two <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> subject areas: budget<strong>in</strong>g/f<strong>in</strong>ance<br />

and economics <strong>in</strong> sport. About a third <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> undergraduate programs surveyed <strong>of</strong>fer sports<br />

f<strong>in</strong>ance courses, and only 16% <strong>of</strong>fer sports economics. While almost half <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> undergraduate<br />

programs require students to take pr<strong>in</strong>ciples <strong>of</strong> economics, it is doubtful that this course<br />

exposes students to much <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> way <strong>of</strong> “economics <strong>in</strong> sports.”<br />

<strong>The</strong> tension created by <strong>the</strong> sport management curricular guidel<strong>in</strong>es and <strong>the</strong> shortage <strong>of</strong><br />

qualified research faculty have been noticed <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> literature. Danylchuk and Boucher (2003)<br />

and Costa (2005) both recently addressed <strong>the</strong> issue <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> future <strong>of</strong> sport management as<br />

an academic discipl<strong>in</strong>e. Both <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se studies surveyed a small number <strong>of</strong> prom<strong>in</strong>ent sport<br />

management faculty <strong>in</strong> order to get some guidance on how sport management might evolve<br />

to meet <strong>the</strong>se and o<strong>the</strong>r challenges. Danylchuk and Boucher (2003) conclude that academic<br />

programs need to <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>the</strong>ir specialization, work more closely with bus<strong>in</strong>ess schools, and<br />

emphasize <strong>in</strong>ternational aspects <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> future. This study also concludes that <strong>the</strong> sport<br />

management curriculum needs to emphasize several areas, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g “core bus<strong>in</strong>ess courses”<br />

<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> future. Costa (2005) concludes that future sport management research should make<br />

more use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ory from parent discipl<strong>in</strong>es and adopt more rigor <strong>in</strong> research design and<br />

methodology, among o<strong>the</strong>r factors. <strong><strong>Sport</strong>s</strong> economics research would appear to fit <strong>the</strong> bill <strong>in</strong><br />

2 This also assumes that <strong>the</strong> required pr<strong>in</strong>ciples <strong>of</strong> economics courses do not fulfill <strong>the</strong> economics <strong>in</strong> sport<br />

content area.<br />


all <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se cases.<br />

<strong>The</strong> Future <strong>of</strong> <strong><strong>Sport</strong>s</strong> <strong>Economics</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong><br />

<strong>The</strong> conditions for a significant expansion <strong>of</strong> sports economics, and sports economists, <strong>in</strong>to<br />

sport management appear to be quite favorable. Enrollments <strong>in</strong> sport management under-<br />

graduate and masters programs rose rapidly <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> past decade and <strong>the</strong> trend appears to<br />

be cont<strong>in</strong>u<strong>in</strong>g. <strong>Sport</strong> management programs have had trouble attract<strong>in</strong>g qualified faculty.<br />

Recent surveys suggest that experts <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> field predict that sport management research will<br />

move <strong>in</strong> a direction that favors economic-based research <strong>in</strong>to sports.<br />

<strong><strong>Sport</strong>s</strong> economics is a grow<strong>in</strong>g field. <strong>The</strong> found<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Journal <strong>of</strong> <strong><strong>Sport</strong>s</strong> <strong>Economics</strong><br />

and <strong>the</strong> cont<strong>in</strong>ued growth <strong>of</strong> sports economics sessions at conferences have <strong>in</strong>duced many<br />

economists to develop sports-related research agendas. <strong>The</strong> research skills required to do<br />

sports economics research – applied microeconomics and econometrics – are relatively com-<br />

mon <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> discipl<strong>in</strong>e, so additional growth <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> active researchers <strong>in</strong> sports<br />

economics is possible. Thus <strong>the</strong>re will probably not be a shortage <strong>of</strong> sports economists <strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> future.<br />

Also, an <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> sports economists work<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> sport management<br />

programs will help move sport management <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> directions identified by Danylchuk and<br />

Boucher (2003) and Costa (2005). Research <strong>in</strong> sports economics is <strong>in</strong>formed by economic<br />

<strong>the</strong>ory, meet<strong>in</strong>g Costa’s (2005) goal <strong>of</strong> adopt<strong>in</strong>g more <strong>the</strong>ory from parent discipl<strong>in</strong>es, and also<br />

br<strong>in</strong>gs rigor to sport management research. <strong>Economics</strong> can also be considered part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

“core bus<strong>in</strong>ess courses,” and many economics departments are located <strong>in</strong> bus<strong>in</strong>ess schools.<br />

Includ<strong>in</strong>g more sports economists on <strong>the</strong> faculty <strong>of</strong> sport management programs will move<br />

sport management closer to achiev<strong>in</strong>g both <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se goals.<br />

<strong>The</strong>re are several factors that might limit <strong>the</strong> growth <strong>of</strong> sports economics <strong>in</strong>to sport<br />

management. Clearly, one factor limit<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> full-time economics positions <strong>in</strong><br />

sport management programs is <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> courses that an economist could <strong>of</strong>fer <strong>in</strong> a<br />

department <strong>of</strong> sport management or a related <strong>in</strong>terdiscipl<strong>in</strong>ary department that <strong>of</strong>fered a<br />


degree <strong>in</strong> sport management. Many departments would be unwill<strong>in</strong>g to hire a full time<br />

tenure track faculty member who could only teach one or two courses <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> department.<br />

However, my perusal <strong>of</strong> sports f<strong>in</strong>ance texts suggests that it would not be difficult for an<br />

economist to develop and teach a course <strong>in</strong> sports f<strong>in</strong>ance at <strong>the</strong> undergraduate and graduate<br />

level. And a statistics based “research methods” course would be similar to an econometrics<br />

or economic statistics course.<br />

A second limit<strong>in</strong>g factor might be <strong>the</strong> home <strong>of</strong> many sport management programs. From<br />

Table 3, many sport management programs are housed <strong>in</strong> departments <strong>of</strong> physical education,<br />

k<strong>in</strong>esiology, movement science, or health. <strong>The</strong>se departments may be composed <strong>of</strong> lab sci-<br />

entists that have little knowledge <strong>of</strong> economics, or <strong>the</strong> role economics plays <strong>in</strong> bus<strong>in</strong>ess and<br />

public policy schools. Such faculty may be unwill<strong>in</strong>g to consider economists when mak<strong>in</strong>g<br />

decisions about job candidates, especially s<strong>in</strong>ce many sport management searches do not<br />

conduct prelim<strong>in</strong>ary <strong>of</strong>f-campus <strong>in</strong>terviews. This may also be true <strong>in</strong> sport management<br />

programs housed <strong>in</strong> departments <strong>of</strong> physical education.<br />

F<strong>in</strong>ally, economics <strong>in</strong> sport might be revised out <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> SMPRC sport management cur-<br />

ricular guidel<strong>in</strong>es. <strong>Economics</strong> <strong>in</strong> sport is already not listed as a core content area <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

SMPRC graduate curricular guidel<strong>in</strong>es. Stier and Schneider (2000) found that sport man-<br />

agement pr<strong>of</strong>essionals were less enthusiastic about <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>clusion <strong>of</strong> economics <strong>in</strong> sport <strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> undergraduate curriculum. If sport management programs take this result seriously and<br />

respond to <strong>in</strong>dustry preferences, sport <strong>in</strong> economics could be elim<strong>in</strong>ated from <strong>the</strong> under-<br />

graduate guidel<strong>in</strong>es as well. This would limit fur<strong>the</strong>r growth <strong>of</strong> sports economics <strong>in</strong>to sport<br />

management.<br />

References<br />

Case, R, (2003) “<strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong> <strong>Curriculum</strong> Development: Issues and Concerns,” In-<br />

ternational Journal <strong>of</strong> <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong> 4(4): 224-239.<br />

Danylchuk, K. and R. Boucher, (2003) “<strong>The</strong> Future <strong>of</strong> <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong> as an Academic<br />


Discipl<strong>in</strong>e,” International Journal <strong>of</strong> <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong> 4(4): 281-300.<br />

Fried, G., S. Shapiro, S. and T. DeSchriver, (2003), <strong>Sport</strong> F<strong>in</strong>ance, Champaign, IL: Human<br />

K<strong>in</strong>etics.<br />

Howard, D. and J. Crompton, (2004), F<strong>in</strong>anc<strong>in</strong>g <strong>Sport</strong>, second ed., Morgantown, WV: Fit-<br />

ness Information Technology, Inc.<br />

Mahoney, D., M. Mondello, M. Hums and M. Judd, (2004) “Are <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong> Doctoral<br />

Programs Meet<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Needs <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Faculty Job Market? Observations for Today and <strong>the</strong><br />

Future,” Journal <strong>of</strong> <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong>, 18(2): 91-110.<br />

Schneider, R. and W. Stier, (2000) “<strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong> Curricular Standards 2000 Study -<br />

Graduate Level,” International Journal <strong>of</strong> <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong> 1(3): 137-149.<br />

Stier, W., (2001) “<strong>The</strong> current status <strong>of</strong> sport management and athletic (sport) adm<strong>in</strong>istra-<br />

tion programs <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> 21st century at <strong>the</strong> undergraduate and graduate levels,” International<br />

Journal <strong>of</strong> <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong> 2(1): 60-97.<br />

Stier, W., and R. Schneider, (2000) “<strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong> Curricular Standards 2000 Study -<br />

Undergraduate Level,” International Journal <strong>of</strong> <strong>Sport</strong> <strong>Management</strong> 1(1): 56-69.<br />


Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!