Event Report: The origins and evolution of professional football clubs

On 22nd and 23rd June 2023, the Soccer Mad Boffins were in London to attend a British Academy of Management (BAM) sponsored event at Birkbeck, in University of London's City campus.

The two day event featured eight academic papers as well as a key note by Richard McDermott, company secretary at the Football Association (and Birkbeck graduate).

Our own paper was on the early years of the FA, but others focussed on football clubs in England, Scotland and Brazil, sustainability, regulation, and more. The common approach was to examine the way that club football has evolved, using historical or longitudinal studies.

Special thanks to the BAM Business & Management History Special Interest Group, and to our friends at Birkbeck especially Sean Hamil and Professor Geoff Walters who helped to organise the event with us, and to everyone who chaired sessions.

Here are some photos of our presentation:

York Festival of Ideas 2023

On Saturday 10th June 2023, The Soccer Mad Boffins chaired two author discussions at the University of York Festival of Ideas. Or at least we were supposed to, but due to ill health Kevin had to withdraw his involvement at the last minute. So, Alex stepped up to chair both talks on his own, although Kevin had contributed equally to the proposals, planning, and preparing lists of questions.

The first talk extended the Soccer Mad Boffins into cricket. Dr Duncan Stone discussed his recent book 'Different Class: The Untold Story of English Cricket' (Repeater Books, paperback ISBN: 9781913462802) which explores the governance of cricket and impact of social class rigidity.  It also raises questions about outreach, public relations, and 'marketing' of the game to participants and to fans, and Duncan suggested ways to re-imagine the cricket sport 'product' that he believes would help it to become a 'people's game'.

The second talk was with Dr Alexander Jackson of the National Football Museum. He discussed his latest book 'Football's Great War: Association Football on the English Home Front, 1914 1918' (Pen and Sword, Hardback, ISBN 1399002201). Discussion then turned to the National Football museum, and curating sensitive content such as war, as well as the less sensitive topic of current and upcoming exhibitions at the museum, which is definitely worth visiting. An interesting point was how football was used to recruit players and fans to the war effort, how finances were managed to keep clubs in business, the ethics of sustaining sport during war, and how football managed its public relations and its communications/messaging during this difficult time, to it supporters, with examples of advertising from the museum's collection.

Both talks were well attended with lots of great questions from the audience in addition to those asked by Alex.

Afterwards both authors signed many copies of their books for eager attendees.

Thank you to all involved with organising and operating the Festival and for making it the amazing annual fixture that it is.

You can watch the videos of both talks free of charge using the below links;

Duncan Stone - 'different class'

Alex Jackson of National Football Museum - 'Curating the world's game - football's Great War'

Call for Papers: The origins and evolution of professional football clubs from a business, management, and organizational history perspective

 Your Presence is Requested

22 – 23 June 2023

Birkbeck CollegeSchool of Business, Economics and Infomatics

BAM Management and Business History Special Interest Group invites you to attend an exciting workshop.

Facilitators

Professor Geoff Walters, Birkbeck, University of London

Sean Hamil, Birkbeck, University of London

Dr Kevin Tennent, University of York

Dr Alex Gillett, University of York

Professional football provides fertile ground for historians interested in exploring continuity and change. It has undergone considerable change and evolution in terms of its identification as an industry – historically football identified as a representative competition between locales, and in many countries profit or even turnover were not considered significant in the purpose of clubs. The entry of broadcasting and the opportunities for related entrepreneurship and licensing in the context of the game have created the opportunity for much of the change that the game has undergone, with a considerable increase the problem of “appropriability” (Buchanan, 1965; Demsetz, 1970; Coase, 1988), in which club owners have struggled to capture the benefits of these innovations, although they have often pushed to exploit them. Many of the benefits have flowed to players, who have seen increased status through the “economics of superstars” (Rosen, 1981) where highly talented played have seen their bargaining powers increase.

We invite papers looking at club football from a management and business history perspective, especially those drawing on archival or oral history research.  Papers should seek to contribute to a developing stream of research including Dizin et al (2004), Walters and Hamil (2013), Gillett and Tennent (2017) and Fernández-de-Sevilla (2021). Secondly, following Gillett and Tennent (2020) we aim to broaden the realm of business and management history by providing opportunities to look at theoretical and empirical themes related to the professional football industry such as project-based enterprise, hybridity, or the role of not-for-profit organisations in business.

Benefits of Attending:

• Receive critical feedback on and review of in-progress academic work
• Network with academics and practitioners in the field with the potential to encourage impact collaboration
• Understand the current state of academic work on management and business in the football industry

This is an ideal opportunity for academics with an interest in the business, management or organisation of football, and/or its history, as well as practitioners with an interest in taking a historical perspective to present challenges within football.

For further details on price, location, terms and conditions, and to book your place to attend:

Please follow this link 

Note that Registrations close on the 8th June 2023 at 23:59 UK time

To submit your research ideas for inclusion: 

Short abstracts (c. 300 words only) before deadline of April 30th 2023

Please send your proposals to:

alex.gillett@york.ac.uk 

and

kevin.tennent@york.ac.uk

The event speaks to sections A1, A2, A3 and C1, C2 and C3, as detailed in the BAM Framework.

Public Management and Global Sporting Mega-Events: A call for papers for a special issue of Public Management Review

 

Public Management and Global Sporting Mega-Events

A call for papers for a special issue of Public Management Review

 

 

Guest Editors: 

 

Alex G. Gillett, Senior Lecturer/Associate Professor in Marketing – School for Business & Society, University of York, United Kingdom.

Alex.gillett@york.ac.uk

 

 

Kevin D. Tennent, Reader in Management - School for Business & Society, University of York, United Kingdom.

Kevin.tennent@york.ac.uk

 

 

Michael Macaulay, Professor, School of Government, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand.

Michael.macaulay@vuw.ac.nz

 

 

This Special Issue proposes to explore public management in the empirical context of global sporting mega-events, such as the Olympic Games and the FIFA World Cup.  Overall, the size of these events has grown about 60-fold over the past 50 years, thirteen times faster than world GDP (Müller et al, 2023).  Papers may address any aspect of such events, so long as the underlying focus remains on public management and its related theories.

There has been a recent upsurge in concern around the management and governance of large-scale sport tournaments, not least of which are the innumerable controversies around the 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar.  These events, often termed megaprojects (Flyvbjerg & Stewart, 2012; Grün, 2004) usually require the formation and finance of a temporary project organization to plan and execute the large-scale and complex fixed-duration event, and increasingly this also involves overseeing its ‘legacy’ for a broad range of stakeholders in the post-event period although evidence suggests that despite increased rhetoric the sustainability has gradually decreased since the 1990s (Müller et al, 2021). These temporary organizations require the application of knowledge and capabilities from the past as well as anticipating the future (Grabher and Thiel, 2015).

The motives of decision-makers for undertaking megaprojects, including global sporting mega-events, are summarized by Flyvbjerg’s (2012; 2014a) “four sublimes”, which influence their objectives: Technological, Political, Economic and Aesthetic.  The emphasis or detail of each can change over the duration of the project from initial conceptualization to delivery and legacy management (Gillett and Tennent, 2017).  Of these the Political and Economic arguments are often used to justify hosting events in terms of using public money and resources, for example projections of generating immediate income for businesses through visiting attendees and resulting local multiplier effects. These can be longitudinal in the form of raising awareness amongst would be tourists and investors, in the form of lasting legacy of the infrastructure developed from the event (Molloy and Chetty, 2015), or from managing the profits as a legacy fund for social investment (Gillett and Tennent, 2022). 

Such temporary project organizations are therefore complex to manage and might require the creation and dissolution of specific not-for-profit organizations for different project stage. They involve relationships of fluctuating intensity and duration with diverse stakeholders including national, regional and local government, development agencies and emergency services (Gillett and Tennent, 2022). 

Motives focus on long- and short-term potential benefits and legacies, which can be tangible/ measurable, or intangible/difficult to measure (Preuss, 2007). Projected benefits are not guaranteed to materialize, and as a result, global sporting mega-events carry risks, yet they continue to receive public subsidy.  Indeed, critics of global sporting mega-events have questioned the actualization of proposed benefits identifying reasons why Games might not justify political support and public investment as their advocates claim. The literature points to the rationale for continued investment as partly being the intangible, and therefore difficult to quantify, nature of legacy (i.e., that megaprojects become in some way symbolic) as well as the more tangible outcomes from economic “boosterism” that might not be immediately measurable and may be difficult to untangle from other variables (Baade & Matheson, 2004; Kuper & Syzmanski, 2012; Zimbalist, 2015). Global sporting mega-events thus offer rich potential for debates around the ethics of public sector involvement, beyond the essentials required to fulfil statutory duties, such safety.

Running through these issues is that of long-term governance, not only of megaprojects but of sporting organisations themselves.  Sports governance establishes the procedures by which sporting organisations can run major tournaments (Chappelet, 2018); collaborate and negotiate with multiple stakeholders (Henry and Lee, 2004); and abide (or not) by specific governance principles (Thompson et al, 2022).  Governance speaks to all four of Flyberg’s sublimes, and has a particular impact on building legacy. The 2012 London Olympics continues to be accused of reneging on legacy promises of turning accommodation into affordable housing (Foster, 2022).  Megaprojects such as the 2022 FIFA World Cup, as well as long-running competitions such as the English premier League, are continually mired in accusations of ‘sports-washing’. 

This is nothing new.  Historically, mega-projects have served propagandistic purposes —for example, to legitimize political ideologies, such as the fascism of Italy and Germany in the 1930s (Archetti, 2006; Gordon & London, 2006; Guttmann, 2006),  or Russia who have hosted or participated in events while breaking the Olympic Truce for peace (Gillett and Tennent, 2021) or to showcase and catalyze economic and societal development (e.g., Molloy & Chetty, 2015; Zimbalist, 2015).  Sports organisations continue to be challenged through extreme governance failure; from the bribery and corruption in world rugby union leaderships, to the long-term cover up of abuse in US gymnastics.

 

 Call for Papers

 This call encourages submissions from papers exploring public management issues in the empirical context of global sporting mega-events (such as the Olympic Games, the FIFA World Cup, or Commonwealth Games). Papers may address any aspect of such events, so long as the underlying focus remains on public management and its related theories. The SI thus appeals to the core readership of PMR as well offering novelty to attract a broader audience.

 This SI will provide new and important theoretical perspectives and empirical evidence regarding public managers’ involvement in the hosting of sporting mega-events.  By doing so, the proposed SI will provide new and important insights with implications for practice and an important context for testing and developing public management theory both traditional (e.g. Public Value) and new (Service Innovation; Human Learning Systems).

 Thus, papers need to adopt a public management perspective and whether the objective is for theory developing, challenging, testing or elaborating, we expect papers to make a strong contribution to the public management field.  As such, not considered in scope with this call are purely descriptive reviews of past articles, purely mathematical papers, or purely legal and regulatory focused pieces.

 We welcome papers focused on one or more of the following, although this list has been produced as indicative (rather than exhaustive) of the types of research questions we hope that this special issue can address.

 

 

1. Do global sporting mega-events create immediate or ‘legacy’ value for the societies or localities in which they are situated? How is this achieved and how could this be measured? In particular:
• What types of strategic leadership can (or could be) effective in successfully bidding and hosting global sporting mega-events (and where applicable, their legacy)?
• Under the strategic level, what are the public management organizing approaches, process or practices, that have a positive impact on societal outcomes? (see Gillett and Tennent, 2022 as an example).
• What types of evaluation can (or could be) effective?

 

 

2. With reference to the mega-project ‘sublimes’ (Flyvberg, 2014; Gillett and Tennent, 2017) what specific political and economic motives are given for hosting global sporting mega-events? Which public management theories can be used to hone and improve the explanatory power of the sublimes in a public management context?

 

 

3. Managing stakeholder relationships: How can the public sector ensure that a societal dividend (including immediate and/or legacy) be implemented successfully by global sporting mega-event organizers situated outside the public sector?

 

 

4. Risks and ethics:
• What are the risks of using public funds to subsidize global sporting mega-events? Who bares those risks? How can public administrators mitigate or manage these risks?
• What are the ethical choices or dilemmas that public managers may have to navigate relating to global sporting mega-events? On what basis can the use of public resources (time, money, skills, and the use or development of related infrastructure) be justified?

 

5. What are the most appropriate governance principles and processes for sporting mega-projects?  How often are they breached?  What are the impacts of governance failures on sporting organisations?  On competitors? On the perception of the sport itself? 

 

We aim to include six to eight articles, including a geographic spread of authors and issues.  Theoretical and empirical papers are encouraged that embrace a range of methodological approaches - though longitudinal studies would be of especial interest given their dearth in the public management literature (Wond and Macaulay, 2011).

To submit a proposal for this edited collection, please email a 1500 word abstract outlining the manuscript’s contents, including its application of theory, empirical context, methodology (including sources of data) and fit within this special issue, alongside a 50-word per author biographical statement, to the editors.

 

Timeline: (exact dates to be confirmed with journal editor)

 

30th September, 2023             Deadline for proposals: A summary of 1500 words maximum (plus references list) including research question/aim, key literature, proposed methods, and expected or indicative findings.

 

31st October, 2023                  Feedback from editors and invitation to authors with successful proposals to submit a full paper.

 

30 April, 2024                         Full paper submitted for review via PMR submission system

 

As per the above timeline, all submissions selected by the editors will be invited to submit a full article through the Public Management Review submission system, which will then be subject to the journal's usual peer review procedures. We emphasise that an invitation to submit a full article does not guarantee publication, and all decisions are ultimately those of the journal editors.

 

If you have any further questions, please contact the special issue editors:

 

Alex G. Gillett

Alex.gillett@york.ac.uk

Kevin D. Tennent

Kevin.tennent@york.ac.uk

 

Michael Macaulay

Michael.macaulay@vuw.ac.nz

 

 

References

Archetti, E. P. 2006. “Military nationalism, football essentialism, and moral ambivalence.” In A. Tomlinson & C. Young (Eds.), National identity and global sports events: Culture, politics, and spectacle in the Olympics and the football World Cup (pp. 133–148). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

Baade, R. A., & Matheson, V. A. 2004.  “The quest for the cup: Assessing the economic impact of the World Cup.” Regional Studies 38 (4): 343–354. https://doi.org/10.1080/03434002000213888

Chappelet, J.-L. 2018. “Beyond governance: The need to improve the regulation of international sport.” Sport in Society 21(5): 724 734.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17430437.2018.1401355

Flyvbjerg, B. 2012. “Why mass media matter, and how to work with them: Phronesis and megaprojects.” In B. Flyvbjerg, T. Landman, & S. Schram (Eds.), Real social science: Applied phronesis (pp. 95–121). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Flyvbjerg, B. 2014. “What you should know about megaprojects and why: An overview.” Project Management Journal 45 (2): 6–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmj.2140

Flyvbjerg, B., & Stewart, A. 2012. “Olympic proportions: Cost and cost overrun at the Olympics 1960–2012.” Said Business School working papers. Oxford, England: University of Oxford.

Gillett, A.G. and Tennent, K.D. 2017. “Dynamic sublimes, changing plans, and the legacy of a megaproject: The case of the 1966 Soccer World Cup.” Project Management Journal 48 (6): 93-116. https://doi.org/10.1177/87569728170480060

 

Gillett, A.G. and Tennent, K.D. 2021. “Populism and political motives for hosting the FIFA World Cup: Comparing England 1966 and Russia 2018.” In B. Clift and A. Tomlinson. Populism in Sport, Leisure and Popular Culture. New York: Routledge.

Gillett, A.G. and Tennent, K.D. 2022. “Hybrid goals: institutional complexity and ‘legacy’ in a global sporting mega-event.” Public Management Review 24 (3): 372-397. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2020.1833609

Gordon R. S. C., & London, J. 2006. “Italy 1934 football and fascism.” In A. Tomlinson & C. Young (Eds.), National identity and global sports events: Culture, politics, and spectacle in the Olympics and the football World Cup (pp. 41–64). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

Grabher, G., & Thiel, J. 2015. “Projects, people, professions: Trajectories of learning through a mega-event (the London 2012 case).” Geoforum 65: 328–337

Grün, O. 2004. “Taming giant projects.” Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.

The Guardian. 2016. “Tokyo will cut building costs of 2020 Olympics rather than move venues—reports.” The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian .com/sport/2016/nov/24/tokyo-will-cut- building-costs-of-2020-olympics-rather- than-move-venues-reports

Guttman, A. 2006. “Berlin 1936: The most controversial Olympics.” In A. Tomlinson & C. Young (Eds.), National identity and global sports events (pp. 65–82). Albany, NY: SUNY.

Henry, I., & Lee, P. C. 2004. “Governance and ethics in sport.” In J. Beech, & S. Chadwick (Eds.), The business of sport management (pp. 1–21). Prentice-Hall.

Kuper, S., & Syzmanski, S. 2012. “Soccernomics—why transfers fail, why Spain rules the world and other curious football phenomena explained.” (3rd ed.). London, England: HarperSport/ HarperCollins.

Molloy, E., & Chetty, T. 2015. “The rocky road to legacy: Lessons from the 2010 FIFA World Cup South Africa stadium program.” Project Management Journal 46 (3): 88–107. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmj.215

Müller, M., Wolfe, S.D., Gaffney, C., Gogishvili, D., Hug, M. and Leick, A. 2021. “An evaluation of the sustainability of the Olympic Games.” Nature sustainability 4 (4): 340-348.  https://ssrn.com/abstract=3873972 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3873972

Müller, M., Gogishvili, D., Wolfe, S.D., Gaffney, C., Hug, M. and Leick, A. 2023 (in press). “Peak event: the rise, crisis and potential decline of the Olympic Games and the World Cup.” Tourism Management, 95 (April). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2022.104657

Preuss, H. (2007). “The conceptualization and measurement of mega sport event legacies.” Journal of Sport & Tourism 12 (3–4): 207–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/14775080701736957

Thompson, A., Lachance,E. L., Parent, M. M., & Hoye, R. 2022. “A systematic review of governance principles in sport, European Sport Management Quarterly.” https://doi.org/10.1080/16184742.2022.2077795 

Wond, T. and Macaulay, M. 2011. “Extending Time–Extended benefits: using longitudinal research in public management evaluation.” Public Management Review 13 (2): 309-320. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2010.536059

Zimbalist, A. 2015. “Circus maximus: The economic gamble behind hosting the Olympics and the football world cup.” Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

 

 

 

Boro Memories

Alex was the subject of the 'Boro Memories' three page interview in the match programme for the game between Middlesbrough and Blackpool, on February 4th 2023.

The game, in the Championship level of the English Football League, was attended by a crowd of 26,299 people.

The article, included below, included Alex's memories of being a fan from childhood and attending his first games in the 1980s, up to more recent times, via Boros cup run in 1990 which took them to a Wembley Final for the first time, and an 8-1 win again Manchester City in 2008.  Also included are never before shared photographs from Alex's personal collection taken with former manager (and current coach) Jonathan Woodgate and the legendary Bruce Rioch. Also mentioned was his recent with Dr Kevin D Tennent on the operations of the club in the 1980s and of the 1966 FIFA World Cup.

The interview for 'Boro Memories' was conducted by Dr Tosh Warwick, of Heritage Unlocked. Tosh says:

 "Boro Memories and collaborating with Middlesbrough FC offers a unique way to discover and showcase the often very personal history and heritage of football on Teesside in a variety of ways. Alex's contribution not only helped shed light on his own club memories but also helped share his valuable research on the 1966 World Cup and the operations of a football club with new audiences reading the matchday programme in the stands at the Riverside Stadium."

 

Introductory Video (ten minutes)

 

FIFA World Cup 2022 - Who will win? What are the chances for England and Wales?

 

With the FIFA World Cup 2022 in Qatar just two days away the big question dominating conversations in the pubs, staff rooms, canteens and internet forums is 'who do you think will win it?'

It's a great question and opinions are split. Most football fans will have their opinions.

The BBC has reported that statistical experts at Opta/Stats Perform have crunched the numbers and run the algorithms to predict that Brazil has the best chance to win (15.8% chance), followed closely by Argentina (12.6), France (12.2), Spain (9.1), and England (8.7).  

You don't really need a PhD in computer science to come to those conclusions, a simple glance at the FIFA World Rankings places its top 5 as being Brazil, Belgium, Argentina, France, and England. So the only real surprise is their altogether omission of Belgium and maybe also the insertion of Spain as 4th favourite (FIFA rank them in 7th place). 

A glance around the likes of BBC and Sky Sports pundit teams suggests that the ex-footballer's and TV presenters choices also show a trend towards Brazil, Argentina and France. 

As usual we here at SoccerMadBoffins have also made our own predictions and to show if we're more accurate that random chance we have also rolled the dice to see what the fickle finger of fate points at.

Also as usual, we'll produce a more detailed summary of all our working out in due course, but for the sake of brevity here are our predictions compared to those of the maths wizards at Opta/Stats Perform, once again begging the question: Algorithm, human brain, or random chance? 

Alex's predictions are boringly similar to Opta but re-ordered. Has he been too slavish to FIFA rankings?

Kevin favours Germany and also predicts a good run for England. Is he a visionary or way off?

As usual, most interestingly are the dice, which favour British minnows Wales to win the final 6-0 against USA, and for Germany to win third-place playoff against Portugal 6-1.

This leads to our next question, what are the chances for our 'Home Nation' sides England and Wales, both in Group B?

England

Opta predicts England have a 63% chance to top the Group, 17% chance of reaching the final and 8.7% chance to win it, as we mentioned above this makes them the fifth most likely team to win.

Alex also predicts that England will top Group B, before losing to Netherlands on penalties in the Round of 16 (sound familiar?)

Kevin sees England as finishing in third place, losing to Germany on penalties in the semi-final (sound even more familiar?). He also thinks that the Three Lions will top Group B

The Dice however predict England to finish bottom of Group B suffering defeat to IR Iran, and scraping draws with USA and Wales.

Wales

Opta predicts Wales has a 13.9% chance to win Group B, 1.8% chance to reach the final and 0.6% chance to win the tournament.

Alex thinks that Wales will finish Group B as runners-up, before losing to Senegal in the Round of 16.

Kevin believes Wales could finish Group B in second place, before losing to Netherlands in the Round of 16.

The dice meanwhile will win Group B, beat Senegal in the Round of 16 (winning on penalties after a thrilling 6-6 draw), beat Saudi Arabia 4-3 in the Quarter Finals, Germany 3-2 in the Semi-Finals, and win the Cup by beating USA by 6-0 in the Final. Ultimately this hinges on Wales having world beating fire-power to overcome defensive deficiency. The big question is: Do they have a new Ian Rush?

As usual, all predictions are personal opinions and are just for fun.  We make no claims or suggestions for any betting purposes. Please do not allow our ideas to inform any betting decisions.