Don’t Deny Us Lunch: Addressing Gender Imbalance in Sports Organizations

text by Sara Gross

I once heard a story about a woman who was one of the first members of the International Olympic Committee (IOC). It was not uncommon for her to be the lone female in a room of male delegates. When it came to making change for women in sport, it was tough going as male delegates from many countries simply did not take women’s sport seriously.

Instead of spending hours trying to convince those around her of the benefits of gender equality, this woman took another approach. If a motion regarding women’s sport was on the agenda, she would simply address the topic right before lunch knowing that the delegates were more open to suggestion if agreement meant they got to break for food.

“It is sometimes challenging to work with sports leaders and federations in cultures that don’t necessarily value equal rights for women.”

As is often the case, arguments for gender equality for its own sake fall on deaf ears, especially if those ears belong to people who have to sacrifice power and privilege in order to make space for the underrepresented group.

Marisol Casado, IOC member and head of the International Triathlon Union reflects on her 25 years of leadership in sport:

“There were very few women in sports organization and management positions [25 years ago], and I recognized quickly that as a female that spoke Spanish and English, I had to use that as an advantage to put myself in situations where I could learn as much as possible. Female participation at the sport level has increased significantly, but we still have a lot of work to do there, as well as in getting women in coaching and leadership positions.”

The press and public celebrated loudly when Jen Welter was said to be the first female coach in the NFL for the Arizona Cardinals, only to find out five weeks later that she was only ever an intern and her internship was over. Male Power and Privilege – 1, Gender Equality – 0.

The Sydney Scoreboard is a website that was formed to highlight women’s representation, and lack thereof, on sport’s boards globally. The site tracks information about the gender of the Board of Executives for every International Sporting Federation since 2010.

The best-ranking sport is, by no coincidence, Casado’s own sport of triathlon with 40% of its executives being women, plus a female CEO and Chair of the Board. (The only exception is Netball whose federation only recognizes women’s teams.) In fact 19 out of 90 Sports Federations actually had zero women in leadership positions- as of February 2014. These include boxing, aikido, baseball, shooting and most surprisingly, tennis.

The Scoreboard is the legacy of the 5th International Working Group (IWG) World Conference on Women and Sport, a group that held its first meeting in Brighton, England in 1994. The IWG is an independent coordinating body consisting of representatives of key government and non- government organizations from different regions of the world.

The first meeting of the IWG gave rise to “ The Brighton Declaration”, the overriding aim of which is to develop a sporting culture that enables and values the full involvement of women in every aspect of sport.

Despite large-scale global efforts such as these, change has been slow on the level of administration, leadership and coaching. Why?

The answer may lie in understanding how the social construction of gender leads to a power structure that make the association between “male” characteristics and leadership feel obvious in our culture.

Sport operates as a space that defines and reproduces a particular form of masculinity that is heterosexual and physically dominant, while suppressing other forms of masculinity and femininity entirely. (R.W Connell, Masculinities, 1995) So long as this category remains intact and unchallenged, change will be slow and sport will continue to be the domain of those men who fit the limited, normative definition of what makes a man a man.

When we consider organizations and how they operate, scholars have recognized that “gender” (meaning the pre-determined cultural assumptions of what it means to be a man or a woman) can influence organizational practice. This happens through images, interaction and gender-based behavioural expectations. It is often the case that behaviours, actions and characteristics deemed “masculine” are perceived to be superior to those deemed “feminine”. (Satore & Cunningham, 2007).

This organizational power structure is not about particular women being marginalized by particular men. Instead it is about the fact that preconceived ideas about masculinity and femininity shape both personal and organizational identities and the power structure in which it is assumed that “masculine” is better than “feminine.” This works to exclude not just women, but men who don’t fit the mould.

“It is sometimes challenging to work with sports leaders and federations in cultures that don’t necessarily value equal rights for women.”

If our goal is to make change and create equity at the level of sports leadership and organizations, then we need to focus our energy on both the macro level of culture and social norms and the micro level of achieving a wider range of diversity in individual federations and organizations.

Take Title IX for example. Since its passage, more money and prestige was injected into coaching women’s varsity sports and, not surprisingly, less women now hold coaching and other leadership positions at U.S. Universities. Add power and privilege and suddenly more men are deemed appropriate for leadership roles. This is no coincidence.

Gender equality statistics at the highest level of business don’t look much better than sport, according to a Millennium Challenge Corporation Report (MCC). Women make up 16.6 percent of board members and 4.2 percent of CEOs of Fortune 500 corporations. In the United States, the pay gap may cost women as much as $380,000 over a lifetime.

This is despite the fact that numerous studies have shown that gender inequality in the workforce hurts economic growth. There is a strong correlation around the world between gender inequality and poverty, and also a strong correlation between a country’s competitiveness and how it makes use of its female talent.

In the business world, better employment opportunities for women contribute to increased profitability and productivity in the private sector. Companies that invest in women’s employment find it benefits their bottom line by improving staff retention, innovation and access to talent and new markets. Both men and women are more likely to remain employed with a business they view as being “fair.”

It has also been shown that female athletes make great leaders. For example, Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff was a volleyball player. Hillary Clinton played several sports including basketball, soccer and softball, and Condoleezza Rice was a competitive figure skater and tennis player. PepsiCo CEO Indra Nooyi played cricket in India and baseball in the US. In fact, a survey by the The Women Athletes Business Network of executive women found that 80% played sports growing up and 69% said sports helped them develop leadership skills that contributed to their professional success. Therefore, logic follows that sports organizations should have their pick of women leaders.

In triathlon, the International Triathlon Union offered equal opportunities for female athletes from the gun. Their original mandate stated that the athletes had to have equality on all levels, including sponsorship, media opportunities, prize money and access to races. Additionally, ITU founder Les McDonald, insisted on gender equality within leadership. Triathlon federations could send more than two delegates to congress as long as the additional delegates were women. This protocol helped get around the usual dilemmas of “affirmative action.” If a federation had two men at the helm who were already doing a great job, there was no need for either to step down. A third female delegate could simply be added.

This kind of outside-the-box thinking has reaped many rewards for the sport of triathlon, at least at the Olympic distance. The sport, which first appeared in 1978, had their first federation meeting in 1989 and ‘presto chango’ made its first appearance at the Olympic Games in 2000, a growth rate unknown in the world of sport. Casado attributes this rapid rise in part to gender diversity:

Achieving gender balance as an International Federation made us more complete in the eyes of the IOC.

The advantages to creating gender equality at the level of sports leadership are multitude. Since gender equality has been linked to economic development globally, and increased profitability in the private sector, these benefits will surely apply to sports organizations as well. The perception of fairness and equity within companies has led to greater staff retention – moreover in sport where equity is at the heart of our value system. Triathlon saw massive growth due to its inclusion in the Olympic program, which came about in part due to the ITU’s early policies of gender equality.

We can not ignore the obvious trickle down effect from leadership opportunities to opportunities on the field of play. Women in positions of power will simply be more in tune with the needs of women and girls. More diversity is required, not just on gender lines, but in terms of age, class, ability, ethnicity, marital status, occupation and sexual orientation.

We need to evaluate and be conscience of the ways in which gender, and specifically hegemonic forms of masculinity leave us with the seemingly natural assumption that male characteristics are preferable for leadership. “What makes a good leader?” is a question to be re-evaluated.

We need to think outside the box. Les MacDonald created space for female leaders in triathlon simply by adding women in leadership positions alongside the men. Smart.

Affirmative action did not work in the 70’s and 80’s. Women themselves did not want to take jobs just because they were female. While straight up replacing male leaders with women may not be the answer, a sprinkle of affirmative action could go a long way. So if a man and a woman are both deemed equally capable for a certain position, its time to start choosing the women.

Not least of all, change will take a bit of cunning. Women who are already in leadership roles need to plant and water the seeds of equal opportunity within their organizations. Those in power can be convinced… we just might have to threaten their lunch to get there.

References

Acosta, R.V. & Carpenter, L.J. Women in intercollegiate sport. A longitudinal, national study, thirty five year update 1977–2012 (2012) Retrieved from http://www.acostacarpenter.org/
Anderson, E.D. The maintenance of masculinity among the stakeholders of sport; Sport Management Review, 12 (1) (2009), pp. 3–14
Burton, L.J. Underrepresentation of women in sport leadership: A review of research; Sport Management Review Volume 18, Issue 2, May 2015, Pages 155–165
Connell, R.W. Masculinities. Polity Press, Cambridge, UK (1995)
Sartore, M.L & Cunningham, G.B. Explaining the under-representation of women in leadership positions of sport organizations: A symbolic interactionist perspective Quest, 59 (2) (2007), pp. 244–2656
http://www.sydneyscoreboard.com