Future of sport management research: A Delphi study

Several scholars have expressed their concerns regarding both the quality and the quantity of research done in the field of sport management (Boucher, 1998; Olafson, 1990, 1995; Mahony & Pitts, 1998; Slack, 1991, 1996; and Zeigler, 1987). Although there are different perspectives on its present status, there is agreement on the need to set specific directions to foster the strong and systematic growth of the body of knowledge in sport management (e.g., Olafson, 1995; Paton, 1987). Following this line of reasoning, this study employed the Delphi technique with selected experts to assess the extent to which they agreed on specific general directions and strategies to promote the field's research.;A purposive sample of 17 experts (senior and junior professors of sport management) participated in the three-stage Delphi process. In the first stage, the investigator posed seven open-ended questions, derived from a strategic management perspective. These questions were: (a) what successes in sport management should be sustained? (b) what are the current events and trends impacting research in sport management? (c) what qualities would you use to describe a best case scenario for sport management research in five to seven years? (d) what qualities would you use to describe a realistic scenario for sport management research in five to seven years? (e) what general directions should sport management field emphasize to move its research towards an ideal future? (f) what specific actions and/or strategies will move sport management research in those general directions? and (g) what challenges can be managed now to move sport management research towards those general directions? The responses of the experts to these questions and follow-up questionnaires were content analyzed and synthesized by a Content Analysis Panel. The comments made by the experts were the source of items for the questionnaire administered in the second stage. The experts were asked to rate each of the items under each question in terms of importance and probability of occurrence. The process was repeated in the third stage with a revised questionnaire.;The Delphi Panel reached a consensus on the need to (1) enhance the quality of doctoral programs (emphasis on research); (2) increase standards for research publications and the quality of research outlets; (3) recognize the field as a context for both theory testing and theory building; (4) increase quality in research designs; (5) increase faculty development, time and funding for research and (6) increase collaboration in research. The paper discussed the implications of this research in terms of planning for the academic field, scholars' awareness and sensitivity to the field's present and future developments, and future challenges in sport management research and practice.