Expanding sport management toward management through sport: the promise of company sport in organizations

ABSTRACT

In an attempt to broaden the scope of sport management, this research provides a conceptual model of management through company sport. This comprehensive model is designed to illustrate why employees engage in company sport and how such participation can enhance employees’ well-being, reinforce positive work-related behaviors, and improve group dynamics and organizational performance. The model also incorporates moderating factors that offer deeper descriptions of the antecedents and outcomes of company sport participation. As an initial step, four types of company sport (i.e. intramural leagues, company sport clubs, company team sport leagues, and casual sport activities) were identified. We call for sport management researchers to pay greater attention to possible applications of company sport, empirically examine the proposed relationships in the management through company sport model and test the suggested moderators for company sport participation and its outcomes at the individual, group, and organizational levels.

KEYWORDS:

• Employee well-being
• organizational performance
• human resource management
• sport organizational behavior

Introduction

Social entities are ubiquitously involved in sports, whether in a spectator or participant capacity, with such activities driving people to gather and share their emotions – and the workplace is no exception (Eichberg, 2009). Leveraging sport involvement seems to be a timely phenomenon occurring in contemporary organizational contexts. At work, we often see employees identify with their favorite sports teams, watch sport events (e.g., the Olympic Games), and engage in bracket challenges during the World Cup or March Madness with their colleagues (Gregory, 2009; Oja et al., 2018). Engagement with sports can also take the form of physical activity and sports participation, including membership with employee sports clubs, going to a gym and/or outdoor facilities provided by companies, and involvement in community-based sporting events with coworkers.

Indeed, organizations have recognized the benefits of retaining healthy employees and have taken concrete steps to support the health of their workforce. These benefits have the potential to counteract human relation problems that plague organizations (e.g., burnout). Many organizations have provided opportunities to pursue sport and physical activity during and outside of work (Malik et al., 2014). Several studies have shown how physical activity (Conn et al., 2009) and health promotion programs (Aldana & Pronk, 2001), as interventions, can effect employees’ sedentary lifestyles, physical health, and work-related outcomes. Key research questions on company fitness and sports in work contexts have been confined to the areas of health science, health psychology, public health, and business management (e.g., Brinkley et al., 2017; Joubert & De Beer, 2014). However, the benefits, and potential exclusionary effects, of sport participation in business settings have not been fully conceptualized beyond health-related outcomes and specifically lack a linkage with group dynamics and organizational performance.

As employee health and social interaction have become increasingly important to retain a healthy and productive workforce, organizations (in business settings) have used sports as an avenue for practicing a proactive human resource management strategy (Brown et al., 2011). In particular, flexible working arrangements and blurred work-life boundaries in contemporary work environments allow employees to engage with colleagues in sports during non-working hours (Pedersen & Lewis, 2012). Joubert and De Beer (2011) described organizational team sports as “a vehicle” that can be positively associated with employees’ attitudes and behaviors. The term “company sport” refers to organized sport events whereby employees partake in physical, competition-focused and participatory-focused activities with their colleagues.

Company sport has afforded many business professionals opportunities to participate in organizationally sponsored intramural leagues and company sport clubs. Many companies have offered various forms of sport activities to bring employees together (Scherrer et al., 2010). Under the guidance of national and international level organizations such as the Hellenic Organization for Company Sport & Health, the European Federation for Company Sport (EFCS), the World Federation for Company Sport, a wide range of company sporting events have been held at the ultimate level (e.g., the World Company Sport Games). Despite the growing popularity and the potential contribution to employee and organizational outcomes of company sport, the types and roles of these activities have not been thoroughly explored nor explained. Moreover, the possible constraints of company sport participation (e.g., work-life balance) have gone unexplored. This gap in the literature represents a significant opportunity to explore how company sport participation can be operationalized within the business setting to enhance employee well-being and organizational social dynamics and performance, while examining potential confounding factors concerning company sport involvement and outcomes.

In light of the recent call by Gammelsaeter and Anagnostopoulos (2022), we have elected to engage the company sport space as means to both expand the boundaries of the discipline of sport management and broaden understandings of the impact of sport participation on individuals within work settings. We argue a more generative mode of understanding “sport management” is needed to push the sport management scholarly community toward “raising profound questions on how we could (re-)frame sport management so we understand its mission and meaning” (Gammelsaeter & Anagnostopoulos, 2022, p. 2). Thus, we propose the approach of management through sport as an extension of the sport management discipline wherein organizations attempt to leverage the distinctive features of sports toward improving management practices. That is, we posit that organizations who inclusively implement involvement with company sport as part of their management strategies may experience a competitive advantage. In this regard, we move beyond focusing merely on sport as distinct research setting and propose an overarching research question: How can sport as a social institution be integrated within workplaces to improve the effectiveness and well-being of individuals and organizations?

Our general thesis is that of the functionalist view of sport whereby sport is a positive social institution providing numerous benefits for participants, organizations, and society. Certainly, sport provides positive health, social, and developmental outcomes (Chalip, 2006). Whereas our work is built upon this perspective, we also acknowledge that sport can produce negative outcomes, which could alienate employees. For instance, Elling and Knoppers (2005) detailed how sport can be site of exclusion and discrimination. This may be particularly true for groups that have historically been marginalized (Denison et al., 2021). Others have shown that sport can be space where abuse is prevalent and even facilitated through organizational processes (Kavanagh et al., 2020). As such, our model incorporates the potential negative ramifications of company sport and describes the dangers posed by adding an additional layer of social interaction in an already complex environment. We recognize that sport is just one of many extracurricular activities that could be supported by organizations. Organizations can implement and/or support other endeavors such as book clubs, religious clubs, or volunteerism as ways to build cohesion and positively impact employee well-being. Our conceptual model provides a perspective of how sport can be used to positively impact organizations while guarding against potential exclusionary consequences of company sport’s implementation.

To illustrate the management through sport approach, we have chosen company sport as an explanatory mechanism. Providing an integrated model of how company sport can be used to achieve a competitive advantage can be a means of broadening the scope of sport management, especially with respect to organizational behavior and human resource management in sport. Overall, the current study is designed to (a) classify company sport by considering sport types and formats; (b) develop a conceptual model of company sport for management practice improvement, considering motivations, constraints (i.e., moderators), and facilitators to participating in company sport as well as expected individual, group, and organizational outcomes from these activities; and (c) suggest empirical applications and future research directions for sport management scholars.

Theoretical background and literature review

Toward conceptualizing a management through sport approach

Most human resource management studies in sport management have involved sport administrative employees, coaches, interns, volunteers, and student-athletes (Cuskelly et al., 2006; DeSensi et al., 1990). In other words, scholars have paid attention to people who manage, and contribute to sports to achieve organizational goals and success. To broaden the sport management discipline, the current work focused on applying the management through sport approach. We argue the development of management through company sport model represents a critical first step in expanding the scope of sport management by considering the role of organized sports in business settings to create increased opportunities for human resource management and organizational development. In particular, we conceptualize company sport as a means to delineate sport as a mechanism to promote individual growth, group dynamics, and organizational performance.

In sport management, paradigms for research on organizational behavior and human resource management have been used, prominently, to predict and explain the attitudes and behaviors of individuals and groups in sport organizations (Doherty, 1998). To maximize employee job satisfaction and handle organizational issues in the practice of sport management, researchers have proposed and empirically tested numerous theoretical frameworks (e.g., Cunningham et al., 2005; Dixon & Bruening, 2005; M. Kim et al., 2017). These efforts have been helpful in defining the scope of sport organizations and highlighting the role of the unique features of sport in work settings. However, using these frameworks individually would make it difficult to describe the value of managing through sport and its contributions to employees and organizations. The literature lacks a broad framework that amply depicts the entirety of the interrelated elements of company sport’s impact on employees and organizations.

Positioning this line of research within the broader sport management literature is apt because sport organizations represent a model platform for the development and integration of company sport features. Scholars have demonstrated how sport employees identify with the athletic nature of their enterprises (Oja et al., 2015; Swanson & Kent, 2015). This identification has been further elucidated as an affinity for sport and represents sport employees’ motivation to enter the profession. Given sport employees penchant for sport, it is probable that the opportunity to further immerse themselves in sport would be a welcomed occasion. Providing employees with the opportunity to engross themselves further in an aspect of their work that they enjoy (i.e., sport; Swanson & Kent, 2015) would seemingly alleviate the growing employee burnout concern in sport organizations (e.g., Taylor et al., 2019).

One area that offers possible solutions to these challenges is occupational health and public health, which has demonstrated that physically active employees are less likely to indulge in absenteeism and more likely to exhibit high productivity (Amlani & Munir, 2014). The benefits of physical activity in the workplace have given rise to recommendations to pursue athletics both during and beyond standard work hours (Malik et al., 2014). Those involved in sports with colleagues are expected to bring a wide range of benefits considering the social and organizational aspects of company sport. Several socio-psychological theories (e.g., intergroup contact theory Pettigrew, 1998; social exchange theory; Blau, 1968; and social well-being theory; Keyes, 1998) can be used to describe the various motivations, facilitators, and anticipated results of company sport participation, but relying on such theories does not fully describe the mechanisms and functions of company sport. Providing a new perspective from a sport-focused approach is necessary to better understand the value offered by company sport and contribute to the broader sport management field.

Company sport

Company sport has been developed and expanded in diverse formats across cultures. In Asian countries, such as Korea and Japan, company sport was initially operated as a means of promoting social welfare and relieving labor tensions (Kobayashi & Ebishima, 2020). By supporting and encouraging employees’ company sport involvement, organizations expected to cultivate a “company-as-a-family” culture (Kobayashi & Ebishima, 2020). In Europe, company sport has gained popularity since the early 2000s, encompassing not only traditional team sports (e.g., soccer, rugby) but also non-traditional sports (e.g., canoeing) depending on the geographic environment (Brinkley et al., 2017). To date, the EFCS consists of over 17 million members and includes 41 thousand companies across 22 countries (EFCS, 2022). In the United States, led by large tech companies (e.g., Apple, Google, and Microsoft), many companies have demonstrated their commitment to employees’ well-being by supporting participation in internal sport clubs and external leagues (Walls, 2016). Furthermore, employees have organized their own sports teams with colleagues and joined external leagues and tournaments hosted by municipalities or local parks and recreation agencies. An excellent illustration of this is the city of Richardson, Texas, where a 10-week Olympic-style competition involving 25 sports has been established (Richardson Corporate Challenge, 2023). In this annual competition, more than 600 employees from 40 different companies compete in five divisions.

Despite this popularity of company sport, limited efforts have been directed toward critically exploring and categorizing the types of company sport. In practice and academia, the terms “workplace sport”, “organization sport”, “employee sport”, “corporate sport”, and “company sport” have been frequently used interchangeably (Brinkley et al., 2017; Joubert & De Beer, 2010, Mackintosh et al., 2013; Pichot et al., 2009). Given that this concept has relatively recently been described and categorized in sport management, it is imperative to use these terms concisely and consistently. “Employee sport” can serve as an overarching and broader term for any type of employee sport participation in business settings (Figure 1). The terms “workplace sport” and “organization sport” have primarily been used in exercise science and public health literature to refer to team-based exercise classes and sports (Brinkley et al., 2017; Joubert & De Beer, 2010). Notably, “corporate sport” has been prevalent in a substantial portion of sport marketing research, encompassing areas such as corporate sport responsibility and corporate sport sponsorship. Within the broader context of “employee sport”, the term “company sport” has been more commonly utilized. To provide a clearer understanding of this phenomenon and to prevent any confusion in sport management, we propose defining company sport as organized sport involvement in which employees participate in physical, competition-focused, and participatory-focused activities with their colleagues.

Figure 1. Company sport categorizations.

We have identified four archetypes of company sport: intramural leagues, company sport clubs, company team sport leagues, and casual sport activities. The model depicted in Figure 1 provides a taxonomy of the various organizations that are integrated within the management through sport approach. Within our typology, there are three criteria that determine which forms of company sport are best applied within the management through company sport model: regular participation, involvement with colleagues, and support from the organization. First, regular involvement with company sport is needed for organizations to incorporate the benefits of company sport with their management practices. Second, a fundamental distinction of company sport is the presence of work colleagues, as this represents the continuation of workplace dynamics in sport venues. While some activities with no involvement among work colleagues may involve both sport and work, they are not the focus of our model. Third, the next distinction is support from the organization as organizations would need to be involved to some degree in order to integrate company sport within their management practices. There are two forms of support, internal and external company sport.

The internal and external categories each encompass two aspects of company sport. The competitive-focused settings denote company sport involvement in formally organized sporting events such as leagues, tournaments, and championships. On the other hand, participation-focused settings are those where participants focus on the social and learning aspects of participation rather than the pursuit of winning. Within the internal category, the competitive form of company sport is represented by intramural leagues (e.g., a flag football league consisting only of teams composed of employees from the sponsoring company). The participatory form, on the other hand, is exemplified by company sport clubs (e.g., a company bowling club where employees gather to participate in less competitive settings). In the external category, the competitive section consists of company team sport leagues (e.g., a company soccer team competing against other company soccer teams in formal tournaments). The last element of the participatory section is casual sport activities (e.g., playing pickleball with coworkers in a community sport league). These four archetypes of company sport represent how sport can be experienced in the workplace through competitive and participatory mechanisms, as well as within and outside of the boundaries of the workplace.

Intramural leagues

When we refer to competitive internal sports activities that involve colleagues and are endorsed by the organization, we largely mean intramural sport. In the workplace setting, numerous organizations have offered and operated intramural sports leagues to enhance employee well-being and build positive organizational cultures. For example, Nike’s headquarter employees can sign up for lunchtime leagues (e.g., kickball competitions) and/or weekend leagues (e.g., soccer championships) and compete with similarly skilled players (i.e., other employees) against each other on Nike’s campus that includes a 60,000-square-foot training center (Newcomb, 2015).

Company sport clubs

Company sport clubs offer an internal opportunity for employees to engage in sports activities, yet participants approach this engagement with a less competitive appetite, as the emphasis is placed on general fitness, education, and the enjoyment of the activities. Sports clubs in the workplace are typically operated and managed by the participants themselves. For safety reasons, companies may ask representatives of each sport club to submit club regulations for approval, and they help register clubs by reserving areas in which to play and purchasing sport equipment. Employees can affiliate themselves with the sport clubs in which they are interested, and this sports involvement is expected to provide club members with opportunities to learn new abilities, develop their skill levels, and socialize on a regular basis.

Company team sport leagues

For competitive-focused external company sport, employees are involved with physical activities with their colleagues and participate in organized competitive sports outside of work settings but with support from the organization (e.g., branding, uniforms, transportation). In a community setting, employees may enhance their social cohesion and create new social connections outside the workplace by competing against other company sport teams. Within more organized environments, company sport teams can also compete at the regional, national, and international levels. For example, under the International Federation of Corporate Football (FIFCO), more than 2.7 million participants from 56 countries across six continents have registered and attended qualifying tournaments, continental tournaments, and, at the highest level, the World Corporate Champions Cup (FIFCO, 2023).

Casual sport activities

This type of company sport offers more flexibility for employees to regularly participate in casual sport activities with other coworkers. In less-competitive settings, employees can easily participate in these sport activities with their colleagues. For instance, organizations that offer time away from work or equipment for teams of employees to participate in city-run pickleball leagues. Although this involvement has characteristics similar to those of company club sports, this is still classified under the final category because it is geared more toward socializing and spending leisure time with colleagues outside of work. With increasing adaptability in work-time arrangements and the blurring of work-life boundaries in contemporary professional environments (Pedersen & Lewis, 2012), this type of company sport involvement may enable employees to pursue healthier lifestyles and work arrangements with colleagues.

Other forms

Other forms of company sport could exist aside from these four categories. As shown in Figure 1, the key criteria for company sport are participation in sports with colleagues on a regular basis and support from the organization. However, some company sport club teams represent their companies and join external sport competitions and tournaments. Companies frequently support these teams by ordering uniforms that display their company logo, sponsoring team participation fees, and regarding the time devoted to these engagements as workdays. In this case, company sport involvement can be positioned at the intersection of company sport clubs and company team sport leagues.

Management through company sport model

Considering the potential of company sport in a multitude of business settings, we developed the management through company sport model (Figure 2). The proposed model details (1) the motivations and facilitators of participation in company sport at the individual, group, and organizational levels, (2) the expected outcomes that can be realized from participation in company sport participation, and (3) the possible factors that may moderate the relationships among company sport participation’s antecedents and outcomes. In terms of theoretical integration and extension, we reviewed relevant theories and existing studies of company sport across multiple disciplines, such as health promotion, organizational behaviors, and sports medicine.

Figure 2. Management through company sport model.

Individual antecedents

According to self-determination theory, individuals regularly participate in activities (e.g., physical activity) to fulfil basic psychological needs (i.e., autonomy, competence, and relatedness; Ryan & Deci, 2000). Autonomous actions are derived from one’s own desire, and competence is the belief that one is proficient in a given activity or action, which often results in a craving for greater challenges. Additionally, relatedness is a matter of connection and community in that all humans have an innate desire to connect with and be accepted by others (Ryan & Deci, 2000). These three elements of self-determination theory constitute intrinsic motivation, as humans who take an action to improve their autonomy, competence, and relatedness do so to fulfill their basic psychological and social needs. Specific to sport employees, sport is considered a critical feature of their self-view and is a motivating factor for working in sport (Oja et al., 2015; Swanson & Kent, 2015).

In the current research setting, employees can expect various positive aspects of regular participation in company sport. Foremost, enjoyment of sport participation is a crucial feature of enhanced sport commitment and feelings of mastery. When employees autonomously decide to participate in company sport, and gain competence in their sports skills or ability to form relationships with co-workers, they will likely be motivated to continue participating in company sport. T. Kim et al. (2010) indicated that employees who voluntarily participated in team sports with their colleagues showed lower levels of occupational fatigue. Other personal motivations may include a desire for physical fitness, as participating in company sport would enable employees to pursue a physically active lifestyle and gain an excellent physical condition, thereby improving their overall life satisfaction. Employees seeking to maintain their physical condition are likely to continue their participation in company sport.

Individual goal-oriented behaviors are related to experiencing desirable consequences and accomplishing extrinsic goals. Employees may participate in competitive company team sport leagues to compete with other company sport teams to seek external rewards (e.g., winning, recognition). In more organized company sport settings, employees tend to consider company sport a serious leisure activity and want to be a winning team member in leagues and tournaments. Finally, we recognize that harmonious passion is integral to many sports and physical activity aspects. Vallerand (2008) defined it as “a strong inclination toward an activity that a person enjoys, finds important, and in which they invest time and effort” (p. 1). A harmonious passion is characterized by more adaptive outcomes, while an obsessive passion is maladaptive (Vallerand, 2008). Scholars in sport management have recently started exploring passion in the workplace (Anagnostopoulos et al., 2016). Dedicated sports enthusiasts are often referred to as being passionate toward their sport. We, therefore, suggest that employees who are harmoniously passionate about sport may participate in company sport.

Group antecedents

We have purposefully taken a broad approach to conceptualize the group level to be inclusive of the likely heterogenous relationships that are present within organizations. Restated, the group level distinction requires interaction among multiple employees, but is not determined by a specific number of participants and does not include organizational endeavors. A prominent reason for engaging in company sport is the opportunity to engender community and trust among groups. That is, the opportunity to foster stronger connections among groups of employees is likely to persuade employees to participate in company sport. The power of community has been previously established in the sport setting using the sense of community construct (Warner & Dixon, 2011). While the construct is valuable for sport volunteers and employees (Kerwin et al., 2015; Oja et al., 2018), there remains the potential for further application of the construct by demonstrating how groups of employees may be attracted to participate in company sport.

Sport offers opportunities for individuals to come together and form a team, united by trust and cohesion. The model offers a conceptualization of how formal (e.g., the marketing department) and informal (e.g., a group of employees from the same company but different departments) workplace groups can initiate or expand existing group dynamics by participating in company sport. Employees who seek a stronger sense of belonging as espoused by a sense of community (Warner & Dixon, 2011) may turn to participation in company sport as workplace comradery could either be built or expanded upon through the interpersonal dynamics involved in sport activities.

There is also the possibility that groups marred by politics may avoid participation in company sport. Politics are not inherently negative or detrimental but instead are strategically placed behaviors that are intended to support self-interests irrespective of their positive or negative consequences, provided they advance one’s interests (Ferris et al., 1989). Engaging in workplace politics can strain intergroup dynamics as group members participating in politics may isolate others or damage existing relationships (Baum, 1989). Politically engaged employees may leverage company sport as an avenue to further their self-interests by, for example, engaging in “company ball” and passing the ball to their boss more than coworkers to support their own careers but simultaneously alienating others. Politics could also harm corporate sports participation in a more covert manner. For example, some employees may prefer not to associate with individuals who engage in politics outside of the workplace for fear of being labeled as “playing politics”. Such occurrences would disincentivize employees from interacting with those who are known to participate in workplace politics.

Politics has the potential for the perpetuation of toxic group norms, especially among previously established, formal workgroups (Ferris et al., 1989). Within workplace groups, roles can be adopted on account of personal interests in that some roles are more advantageous to career goals than others. Company sport represents a potential continuation of group dynamics as the group moves from the workplace setting to a sport playing surface. For example, the leader of the work group may assume a leadership role on the company sport team. As such, some group members may loathe the thought of having to further engage with objectionable roles or individuals outside of the workplace. The potential perpetuation of workplace dynamics from the office to the field or vice versa could have significant implications for our model.

Organizational antecedents

Engagement in company sport is likely influenced by different organizational factors. Particularly, perceived organizational support and institutionalized work orientations. Perceived organizational support suggests that employees develop beliefs regarding the extent to which their workplaces care about their overall well-being, which in turn influences factors such as job satisfaction, moods, and stress (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002). Organizations with higher levels of perceived organizational support tend to have employees with higher levels of job satisfaction, lower levels of stress, and more positive moods when at work (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002). Organizations with higher levels of perceived organizational support would be more likely to support employee participation in company sport because sport participation would contribute to the overall well-being of employees. Contrarily, perceived organizational support could also be seen as a barrier to company sport participation. If employees do not believe that their organizations value their well-being, it seems likely that they would be less likely to participate in company sport. This may largely be connected to institutionalized work orientations.

Institutionalization refers to the situation wherein “social processes, obligations, or actualities come to take rule-like status in social thought and action” (Meyer & Rowan, 1977, p. 341). Work routines and perceptions of proper behavior tend to become taken for granted and influence how people make sense of the world (Greenwood et al., 2008). In the current model, we consider institutionalization within work settings as both barriers and antecedents to participation in company sport. On one hand, leisure activities such as sport may not be considered as appropriate work behavior. Particularly, organizations wherein logics of accounting (i.e., “how resources are used, activities controlled, and purposes achieved”; Meyer, 1983, p. 265) are salient, it seems unlikely that company sport participation would be a valued activity as it does not inherently add value to an organization’s “bottom line”. On the other hand, organizations that adopt a more holistic mindset toward employee well-being, might consider company sport participation valuable because it provides broader outcomes such as increased team orientations, better health outcomes, and stronger work culture.

Moderators between antecedents and company sport participation

To gain deeper insights into the factors that may accentuate or attenuate company sport participation, potential moderators are considered in the relationships between antecedents and company sport participation. First, depending on gender, some employees may experience stronger barriers to participation in company sport. For example, women can experience difficulty in participating in company sport because of their additional invisible labor in sport organizations (Sveinson et al., 2022) and the pervasive institutional logics that shape their experiences (Flaherty, in press). With additional labor demands and existing unfavorable norms, women may not have the time nor energy to participate in company sport. Consequently, the relationships between antecedents and company sport participation are likely to be stronger among men compared to women. Second, company sport participation may be subject to varying degrees of hindrance based on employees’ relationship status. Kislev (2023) argued that singles are more inclined to engage in a variety of social activities than those in more committed relationship statuses (i.e., marriage). Because different relationship statuses carry different social patterns (Kislev, 2023), one’s relationship status could potentially serve as a barrier to their company sport participation. Hence, we anticipate stronger relationships between antecedents and company sports participation among single employees than among married employees.

Third, we anticipate that work-family conflict will negatively interact with antecedents, impacting employees’ involvement in company sport activities. The concept of work-family conflict has been examined as one of the main factors influencing work-related variables and quality of life (Taylor et al., 2019). As company sport is designed and organized to provide opportunities for employees to play with colleagues during non-working hours, employees may consider participation in company sport as an extension of work. Despite a company’s strong support, individuals facing high levels of work-life conflict may encounter challenges in joining company sport clubs and scheduling games for the respective leagues.

Fourth, occupational physical activity level is another element that may negatively impact company sport participation. Scholars have noted differences where physical activity occurs; that is, physical activity that takes place during one’s leisure time is viewed as a valuable component to one’s health, but physical activity that is a result of working conditions is viewed as detrimental when the load and/or duration is elevated because of the lack of opportunity to rest (Holtermann et al., 2018). Individuals who work in occupations that require high physical activity (e.g., nurses, coaches, construction workers) are unlikely to have an equal opportunity to participate in company sport because of excessive hour demands and physical demands (i.e., exhaustion from work demands). Whereas employees who have low occupational physical activity demands will have more energy and time to participate in company sport.

Lastly, the willingness of employees to participate in company sports can vary depending on the physical environment quality. The perceived quality of environmental factors plays a vital role in optimizing the experience of sport consumption and directly impacts the level of sport involvement (Alexandris et al., 2004). In participatory sports, facilities, equipment, and conditions are essential aspects that influence psychological involvement (Alexandris et al., 2004). As an example, when a company provides all the necessary conditions for employees’ company sport participation (e.g., adequate space, well-maintained equipment, and structured programs), employees working for that company are more likely to participate in company sport.

Individual outcomes

Evidence from cross-sectional and qualitative studies have supported the concept that company sport participation can bring additional benefits to employees and organizations beyond just providing opportunities for physical activity (Brinkley et al., 2017). Like sport engagement in other environments, company sport participation is generally expected to improve individual physical well-being. For example, Barene, Krustrup, Brekke, et al (2014, 2014). conducted a series of studies with a sample of employees who participated in intramural indoor soccer leagues outside working hours. Participants showed better cardiorespiratory fitness and lower total body fat in those studies than those who did not participate. Previous studies have indicated that employee workplace team sport participation is related to improved health in pre-post studies (Brinkley et al., 2017; Joubert & De Beer, 2010, 2011, 2014). Thus, regular company sport participation can contribute to improvements in the physical health of participating employees.

Employees’ job satisfaction levels are influenced by factors such as salary, sustained growth, leadership, organizational climate, and employee welfare (Spector, 1997). Among four types of company sport, intramural leagues and company sport clubs are directly supported and sponsored by companies, meaning that employees can utilize on-site facilities and expect additional support for their activities. This support for company sport attracts participants and increases their satisfaction with their job. Joubert and De Beer (2011) also reported that company sport participation positively impacts job performance, physical health, and the quality of peer communication. By playing sports with colleagues and representing their employer in company team sport leagues, employees can experience enhanced positive attitudes towards colleagues and employers, ultimately enhancing employee job satisfaction and performance.

Company sport participation may also alleviate the negative organizational behavior outcomes at the workplace, such as job stress and turnover. While unhealthy lifestyle behaviors lead to occupational fatigue, regular physical activity is essential in reducing workplace pressure and stress. Through individual interviews and ethnographic research involving company sport participants, Pichot et al. (2009) concluded that active sport participation improved employee motivation, relieved stress, and an enhanced sense of belonging. In addition, if company sport participants have a good experience in participating in organized company sport activities with colleagues, they are likely to experience emotional attachments to their team, which may strengthen their commitment to their organizations. These positive consequences related to company sport can ultimately reduce employee turnover. However, there remains the potential for job stress and turnover to be amplified as the aforementioned politics (e.g., company ball) could lead to destructive interpersonal dynamics that induce stress and lead to turnover.

Psychological well-being refers to the overall effectiveness of individuals’ psychological functioning, and the following sub-constructs have described it; self-acceptance, positive relationships with others, autonomy, environmental mastery, purpose in life, and personal growth (Ryff & Keyes, 1995). Employee psychological well-being has been one of the most popular topics in contemporary business and sport management research (Inoue et al., 2020; M. Kim et al., 2019; Swanson et al., 2022). Cultivating employee psychological well-being will not only improve organizational performance but will also enhance engagement with more existential life challenges (M. Kim et al., 2019). Providing a positive and healthy work environment is vital in efforts that seek to augment employee psychological well-being. Supporting company sport can be an effective mechanism to enhance employee psychological functioning and life satisfaction.

Group outcomes

There are likely to be significant improvements for employee groups because of participating in company sport. One previously established group outcome of participation in company sport is improved cohesiveness and teamwork (Scherrer et al., 2010). Specifically, employees have had enhanced social interactions, improved social interactions and teamwork dynamics (Davey et al., 2009), and noticed that established hierarchical barriers had been diminished (Joubert & De Beer, 2014) after participating in company sport. Notably, the finding that participation in company sport had the potential to remove existing hierarchical barriers between employees is relevant to the negative effects of the politics antecedent and marginalized community membership and work-family conflict moderators. Engagement in company sport may enable a workplace environment that propagates a unified workplace that is not hindered by divisions within the organization.

The potential improvements to group/team cohesion and dynamics from participating in company sport offer an opportunity to examine the phenomenon within the scope of social well-being. It is defined as “the appraisal of one’s circumstance and functioning in society” (p. 122) and is comprised of five elements: social integration, social acceptance, social contribution, social actualization, and social coherence (Keyes, 1998). We propose that company sport engagement will enrich employees’ group/team dynamics as structural barriers will deteriorate and the bonds among employees will be strengthened by increased interaction and communication (Scherrer et al., 2010). Company sport has the potential to enhance social well-being by enabling employees to socialize in settings inside and outside of the workplace as they can facilitate social integration, acceptance, contribution, actualization, and coherence.

It is important to acknowledge that participation in company sport could also lead to the further inclusion/exclusion of participants by perpetuating existing or generating new in- and out-group dynamics. The concept of inclusion/exclusion can be defined as a spectrum measuring the extent to which individuals perceive their involvement in critical organizational processes (Mor-Barak & Cherin, 1998). The social psychology and organizational behavior literature offer insights into the role of inclusion-exclusion in various contexts, including the work environment (Shore et al., 2011). Employees highly involved in company sports can be treated as insiders, experiencing a sense of belonging within the organization. Building inclusive social connections among colleagues through company sports serves as an opportunity to curtail the challenges of workplace inclusion efforts by promoting interaction. On the other end of the spectrum, participants may experience passive discrimination in the form of “not being passed the ball” or other unfavorable team dynamics. Women have described sport organizations as replications of dominant institutional norms that limit the acceptance of women (Flaherty, in press), and racial minorities have enhanced employment and advancement barriers in sport organizations (Steward & Cunningham, 2015). If such norms are perpetuated during company sport games, the net positive effect of company sport is likely to be diminished.

Although group/team cohesion is a known outcome of participation in company sport (e.g., Davey et al., 2009; Joubert & De Beer, 2014; Scherrer et al., 2010), one outcome that has not received significant consideration is communication effectiveness within workplace teams. Communication effectiveness indicates the degree to which horizontal and vertical communication for work-related matters is shared meaningfully and in a timely manner among employees (Jorfi et al., 2014). The strengthened interpersonal relationships formed while competing together can be instrumental in building positive team dynamics. Consequently, we propose that company sport participants are likely to experience improvements in communication effectiveness within the workplace.

Moderators between company sport participation and outcomes

We identified potential moderators between company sport participation and related outcomes at the individual and group levels. First, depending on the company sport type, we can expect different attitudinal and behavioral changes at individual and group levels alike. For example, when employees represent their companies and compete with other teams, the competitive nature of team sport can lead participants to bond over shared challenges with their teammates and mutually respect one another (Warner & Dixon, 2011). This enhanced sense of teamwork, in turn, may translate into improvements in communication in the workplace. In contrast, members of individual-based company sport clubs (e.g., jogging club) may not encompass these benefits. Second, the frequency/intensity of company sport participation can be a relevant moderator that amplifies individual well-being. For instance, similar to any other kind of engagement in sports, frequent and intense participation benefits employees in terms of enhanced physical condition. Therefore, the frequency and intensity of company sport participation may positively impact individual and group outcomes.

Third, we expect athletic performance to positively influence individual outcomes as company sport participation is connected to employee satisfaction and well-being. One’s subjective performance in sports is associated with pleasant emotions and the perception of challenges. Du et al. (2015) concluded that sport participants’ physical-based performance moderates the relationship between perceived service quality and overall satisfaction at a sporting event. Successful team performance can augment daily life satisfaction and psychological functioning, which enhances participants’ psychological well-being. In contrast, participants who endure unsuccessful team performance may experience heightened stress and communication problems, which can contribute to a decline in psychological well-being. Lastly, the effects of company sport participation can differ contingent on organizational culture, defined as “a series of attitudes and behaviors adopted by employees of a certain organization, which affect its function and total well-being” (Belias & Koustelios, 2014, p. 132). Between eastern- and western-type organizations, organizational structures, power distance values, and internal climates differentially influence employees’ company sport participation and job satisfaction. A case in point is a top-down organization (i.e., an eastern-oriented perspective), where employees can be compelled to consider company sport participation out of obligation, which may be the main driver of high levels of job stress.

Organizational outcomes

Finally, we propose that company sport may offer improved outcomes for organizations. Organizations that offer and support employees’ participation in sport would have higher levels of engagement and well-being. Prior research has offered evidence that increasing employee well-being may positively affect overall organizational performance (Taris & Schreurs, 2009). Others have shown that increased levels of job satisfaction correspond with higher levels of organizational performance. Our model is consistent with prior research showing the relationship between individual performance and organizational performance. Thus, we maintain that successful implementation of company sport would benefit organizational performance.

Our model also suggests that most group-level outcomes from company sport would be positively related to organizational performance outcomes. It is reasonable to suggest that employees who engage in sport activities as part of their workplace engagement would be more cohesive. To this point, organizational scholars have shown that cohesive work groups tend to perform better than those with low levels of cohesion. Thus, our model aligns with classical understandings that show effective work teams are related to more effective organizations.

Discussion

We developed a conceptual model for describing the mechanisms that clear the way for company sport participation, encompassing issues ranging from motivations to expected outcomes at different levels. Company sport is the focal interest of the proposed conceptual model, which embraces four main categories: intramural leagues, company sport clubs, company team sport leagues, and casual sport activities. To better describe the process of how company sport participation can mold flourishing employees and cultivate a healthy company culture that facilitates beneficial group dynamics and organizational performance, we proposed the approach of management through sport, to expand the scope of sport management.

Theoretical advancement

We have put forth a model that demonstrates the utility of sport as a management strategy to improve managerial practices. This model represents an advancement to the wider organizational behavior literature by applying specific knowledge from the sport management discipline to the broader business environment. Our model describes innovative managerial strategies whose implications extend beyond sport organizations to general business firms, thus expanding the scope and reach of the sport management discipline. The model offers a unique philosophy for organizations in that sporting events and activities, both competition-focused and participation-focused, can be used to engender positive outcomes for organizations that both support and merely enable such activities to occur. Moreso, this approach highlights the distinctive knowledgebase within the sport management discipline (Chalip, 2006) by utilizing the specialized knowledge of how sport is managed to provide an alternative to traditional management practices in non-sport organizations.

Additionally, the model offers a distinctive perspective of an increasingly relevant topic in sport management: well-being (Inoue et al., 2020). Sport management scholars have tried identifying different components that can enhance the well-being of sport employees (M. Kim et al., 2019; Swanson et al., 2022). For instance, Swanson et al. (2022) emphasized the significance of servant leadership in promoting life satisfaction and physical health among sport employees by fostering teamwork. In essence, the present conceptual model contributes to existing research in sport management by illustrating how organizations can simultaneously leverage company sport participation to enhance employees’ physical, psychological, and social well-being.

Practical implications

The proposed model presents some practical implications for human resource managers and employees alike who may seek sustained organizational performance. First, companies can reevaluate their company structure and decide whether there is an appetite for embracing company sport. Human resource managers can use the model to strategically decide which archetype(s) in what we refer to here as “company sport” best fit the company’s goals. Despite the reported positive outcomes, companies may need to realize that ad-hoc embracement of company sport may not maximize these outcomes. What human resource managers might attempt is to develop and collect soft and hard metrics of employees’ participation and analyze them in light of an integrated strategic model that explicitly features company sport. Both the four archetypes and the outcomes seen in the model offer an applicable roadmap.

Moreover, developing and designing policies to support company sport and wider workforce development activities have largely been seen as one important element of internal corporate social responsibility (CSR) agendas (Anagnostopoulos et al., 2021). This is due to the increasing efforts by companies to provide a culture and environment that help employees be more engaged in their work and organization. In the management through company sport model, the antecedents and outcomes at different levels offer a better understanding of and a systemic approach to enhancing a company’s internal CSR capability. The practical point is that the institutionalization of company sport that can be realized through institutional entrepreneurs (be it HR managers or sport enthusiasts-influential employees) who, through various types of institutional work (Nite & Edwards, 2021), create the archetype relevant to each company’s size and configurational design.

Company sport has strong potential within sport organizations because it offers employees the opportunity to further engage with a concept (i.e., sport) that reflects their self-held beliefs (Oja et al., 2015; Swanson & Kent, 2015). Successful implementation could result in independent leagues consisting of teams of employees rather than professional or semi-professional athletes. This is not unlike what has been coined “manager games” where student managers of basketball teams play opposing student managers before the varsity teams compete. Successful implementation of company sport teams could broaden the sport industry by enabling sport employees to take on different roles in a given sport organization, with some employees serving as coaches and support staff. This would enable sport organizations to be adaptive and multifaceted as their employees would develop intricate, complementary skillsets.

Empirical application in future research

Amid this new approach within sport management, we call upon researchers to explore possible empirical applications of the management through company sport model to gain a deeper understanding of the dynamics of company sport. There is a lack of valid and reliable questionnaires available to researchers that can be used to gather data from company sport activity participants. Representative work in this regard is that of Davey et al. (2009), who identified and developed the motivations that spur engagement in a team-based physical activity program in the workplace. Another is the research of Brinkley et al. (2017), who pinpointed five sub-level facilitators of company sport (i.e., intrapersonal, interpersonal, organizational, community, and societal influences) through in-depth interviews. More work needs to be carried out to measure the factors incentivizing company sport participation, to ascertain which motives prominently stimulate participation in the different types of company sport.

To empirically test the paths proposed in the management through company sport model, the next steps are for researchers to apply and modify existing instruments for each construct. Many of the constructs in the model have been measured in terms of traditional organizational behavioral outcomes. However, survey items designed specifically to gather data about sport-specific behaviors and physical activity levels should be developed to characterize company sport involvement at the participant level. Surveys designed to gather data about different types of well-being need to be included to examine how employee well-being has been affected through participation in company sport. Additionally, the model has the potential to be used to investigate company sport participants in both sport and non-sport organizations. Organized company sport in business can serve as avenues for creating positive group and organizational cultures and enhancing employee well-being. Because the model includes both antecedents and outcomes at the different levels, it is feasible to use it to assess the effects of company sport at multiple or cross-level analyses.

A critical area to examine the role of company sport in the workplace is how group dynamics are perpetuated and diminished within company sport settings. One strategy to do so is by utilizing focus groups to explore how participating in company sport influences employees’ lived experiences within workgroup settings. Focus groups would provide future scholars with an opportunity to identify how group dynamics are operationalized in company sport settings by exploring the group dynamics that take place during the focus group interviews. Moreso, observational research methods would provide unique descriptions of group dynamics before, during, and after company sporting events.

Conclusion

We have conceptualized how organizations can utilize sport to enhance their own organizational performance as well as improve the experiences of their employees. In sum, we offered a typology of company sport for use in management through sport approach and constructed a model that describes how organizations can incorporate company sport into their organizational practices. We have described antecedents and outcomes of company sport at three distinct levels: individual, group, and organization. We have hypothesized how relevant moderators could change how proposed antecedents accentuate or attenuate company sport participation and how such participation impacts proposed outcomes. In conclusion, the proposed model represents an advancement in the sport management discipline by conceptualizing how sports can be used to help manage organizations.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).