A three-dimensional model of innovation within Flemish non-profit sports organisations

ABSTRACT

Research question

This study aims to address the limitations of current typologies and determinants of innovation by proposing a three-dimensional (3D) conceptual innovation model, in which three dimensions (i.e. ‘form’, ‘nature’ and ‘goal’) are related to each other, resulting in eight innovation types. Based on this model, this study first examines the extent to which voluntary sports clubs (VSCs), sports federations (SFs) and local sports authorities (LSAs) implement the innovation types differently. Second, the effects of managerial, organisational and environmental determinants on the eight innovation types are investigated.

Research methods

Online questionnaires were distributed to VSCs, SFs and LSAs. Key representatives were asked to describe and categorise each innovation that their organisation had implemented in the previous four years. In addition, they were asked for their opinion on management, structural organisational characteristics and environmental influences.

Results and Findings

Findings show that there are significant differences in the extent to which the eight innovation types are implemented by SFs, LSAs and VSCs. Also, the assumption that different innovation types relate to one or more managerial, organisational and environmental determinants is confirmed by logistic regression analyses.

Implications

As such, this study's model can serve as an extensive framework to identify innovation types in and outside a sporting context. Furthermore, the findings provide (sports) policymakers with insights into the innovativeness of (sports) organisations and how they can support it.

KEYWORDS:

• Innovation determinants
• innovation types
• local sports authorities
• voluntary sports clubs
• sports federations

Acknowledgment

We thank the anonymous reviewers for their constructive feedback during the review process and Marjolijn Dirix for proofreading this article.

Disclosure statement

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

Notes

1 Even though all three NPSO types pertain to the non-profit side of the model, according to Scheerder (2007), VSCs are more likely to create an offer focused at social goals (e.g. social integration), LSAs at public goals (e.g. public prosperity) and SFs at common goals (combining aforementioned goals).

2 Contrary to profit maximisation, the principle of revenue maximisation is pursued by NPSOs through additional (innovative) commercial activities intended to generate (extra) income, which is spent on the non-profit purpose for which the association was founded.

3 Probably due to the question's complexity, there was a drop-out from 78% before this question to 62% respondents afterwards. However, as for the entire sample, the SFs were measured representative of the population by decree and size. The same applies to LSAs and VSCs by geographical location, socio-economic profile and size (only for LSAs). Concerning the socio-economic profile, LSAs and VSCs are classified into a (i) residential, (ii) rural, (iii) industrial, (iv) semi-urban, (v) urban, or (vi) touristic areas, based on the demographic, cultural and financial characteristics of their environment.