Sustainable Management of High School Athletics: A Comparative Study of the U.S. and South Korea

Abstract

Positive and strong relationships among various stakeholders are essential for the sustainable management of an organization. Despite growing interest in how various sport organizations manage stakeholders to promote social sustainability, there remains a gap in stakeholder and sustainability research in high school athletics. The purpose of this study was to examine how the social sustainability of sport organizations (i.e., high school athletics) were maintained during decision-making processes. Specifically, this study used a qualitative case study framed by stakeholder theory to investigate how the relevant decision-makers in high school athletics (i.e., principals and athletic directors) manage other stakeholders in their departmental decision-making processes to promote the sustainability of their athletic department. Two high schools from the US and South Korea, one from each country, were selected as the cases for the current study. Semi-structured interviews regarding stakeholder management in departmental decision-making processes were conducted with four individual interviewees, including the principals and athletic directors of each high school. The results of this study illustrated that both the US and the South Korean high school athletic departments utilized stakeholder engagement strategy in their departmental decision-making processes. The principals and athletic directors recognized the importance of communicating with other stakeholders and engaging them in athletic department decisions. Specifically, the organizational decisions of both high school athletic departments were made in consultation with the main internal stakeholders of the athletic department (i.e., the principal and athletic director) as well as other various stakeholders (e.g., parents, coaches, alumni association).

1. Introduction

Social sustainability can be defined as “a dynamic and complex way of organizing, that is to be reached according to the specific stakeholders involved, incorporating their unique concerns and needs and attending peculiar tensions faced when making strategic decisions or solving specific problems” [1] (p. 690). In other words, maintaining the social sustainability of one’s organization means managing various stakeholders in its organizational decision-making processes. In this regard, sustainable management is an essential strategy for building and maintaining the social sustainability of an organization, as it emphasizes establishing and maintaining a good relationship with various stakeholders within the organization [2]. Sustainable management incorporates the meaning of management into that of sustainable development [3]. Today, sustainable management is one of the most important factors in an organization’s success, as it significantly influences the overall performance of the organization via management of its stakeholders [3]. According to these perspectives, it is important to note that social sustainability and sustainable management are interwoven within stakeholder theory [1,2,3].

Stakeholder theory originally emerged from the business management field, and can be viewed as one of the most prominent theories used to understand managerial decision-making. It has been widely used in various fields over time [4,5,6]. Stakeholders can be defined as “any group of individuals who can affect or is affected by the achievement of the organization’s objectives” [7] (p. 46). Different classes of stakeholders can be identified based on their possession of the attributes of power, legitimacy, and urgency [8].

As the initial main aim of stakeholder theory was to offer pragmatic strategies for organizations to manage their stakeholders in order to achieve superior organizational performance [7], previous research has utilized stakeholder theory to examine the relationship between organizational performance and stakeholder management. For example, Kivits [6] found that incorporating stakeholders’ opinions was important for improving an organization’s decision-making process. In addition, Alexander et al. [9] argued that forming and maintaining strong positive relationships between organizations and their stakeholders is crucial for an organization’s success. In other words, stakeholder management can be viewed as an inevitable factor in organizational decision-making processes and successes [6,9,10,11].

There is a growing interest in stakeholder theorizing in the field of sport, examining the ways in which various sports organizations manage their stakeholders within the organizational decision-making processes [7]. Examples include intercollegiate athletics [12,13,14], professional baseball teams [15], and professional soccer teams [16]. However, research examining the influence of stakeholder management in the context of high school athletic departments is limited. In the following section, an extensive review of the literature on the two main concepts and issues (i.e., sustainable management of sports organizations and the integration of stakeholder theory and sports management) that guide the present study will be provided.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Sustainable Management of Sports Organizations

Many sport scholars have investigated the relationship between sustainability and management in various sport organizations. Barbu et al. [2] examined the role of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and sustainability on sustainable management in Romanian sports leagues, including basketball, football, handball, volleyball. Specifically, Barbu et al. [2] developed an instrument, which could measure sports organizations’ social responsibility and sustainability. With using the instrument, Barbu et al. [2] found that both CSR and sustainability are crucial for the sustainable management of Romanian sports organizations, and significantly affect overall organizational performance. In their study, Robertson et al. [17] examined sustainable management of community sports clubs. Robertson et al. [17] illustrated that community sports clubs have a social responsibility to engage in sustainable management. This responsibility includes supporting community members’ participation sports, providing a safe and inclusive sports environment, and securing the club economically and legally. Walzel et al. [18] analyzed the literature on CSR in professional team sports organizations (PTSOs), seeking a comprehensive understanding of current research trends. They found that researchers mainly applied qualitative research methods in European and North American contexts, and that CSR in PTSOs mainly involved community programs [18]. Moyo et al. [3] examined the factors and stakeholders influencing the sustainability of South African professional sports organizations’ CSR initiatives. In particular, factors such as people, funds, economics, and available resources affected the sustainability of sports organizations’ CSR activities [3]. Additionally, stakeholder engagement was viewed as one of the most important factors in the sustainability of CSR initiatives [3]. Based on previous research, it is important to note that stakeholders can be viewed as a crucial factor for the sustainable management of sport organizations.

2.2. Stakeholder Theory

Freeman’s original definition of a stakeholder is “any group of individuals who can affect or is affected by the achievement of the organization’s objectives” [7] (p. 46). Kivits [6] and Laplume et al. [10] suggested that a wide range of entities, such as people, groups, organizations, neighborhoods, institutions, societies, and even natural environments, can be considered as stakeholders. It is important to classify various stakeholders based on their characteristics, as each different stakeholder will affect and be affected by the organization differently.

Mitchell et al. [8] stated that different classes of stakeholders can be identified based on their possession of one, two, or all three of the attributes of power, legitimacy, and urgency. Power is defined as “a relationship among social actors in which one social actor, A, can get another social actor, B, to do something that B would not otherwise have done” [19] (p. 3). Stakeholders impose their principles through their relationship with power. In addition, power tends to be gained, and over time [6]. Legitimacy is defined as “a generalized perception or assumption that the actions of an entity are desirable, proper, or appropriate within some socially constructed system of norms, values, beliefs, and definitions” [20] (p. 574). Urgency is defined as “the immediacy with which the organization feels it has to act to resolve the stakeholder’s issue, and operates as a multiplier effect on the influence of the stakeholder’s claim” [4] (p. 250). Urgency determines the level of importance that stakeholders attach to issues, and all stakeholders have different levels of perceived importance. It is important to note the features of these three attributes. First, each attribute is not a steady state, meaning that it can be altered. Second, the attributes are socially constructed realities, and as such, they are not objective. Third, each stakeholder may not be aware that they possess a given attribute [8].

In order to achieve successful stakeholder management, managers must perform two important assessments for each stakeholder: (1) the stakeholder’s potential to threaten the organization; and (2) the stakeholder’s potential to cooperate with the organization [21]. In addition, for corporate success it is important to both understand and strategically manage stakeholders.

According to Savage et al. [21], threat is a crucial factor for organizations to manage, and potential threats from stakeholders can be considered a “worst case” scenario. In this aspect, a stakeholder’s relative power and their relevance to opposing the organization on a particular issue determines that stakeholder’s capacity for threat. Power can be viewed as the organization’s dependence on a stakeholder. Commonly, the more dependent the organization, the more powerful the stakeholders. Cooperation is another important factor, because it can enhance corporations’ success through cooperation with other stakeholders. Contrary to threat, assessing the potential for cooperation is considered as a “best case” scenario. Generally, the more dependent the stakeholder is on the organization, the greater the possibility of cooperation.

Alexander et al. [9] argued that creating and maintaining strong relationships between organizations and their stakeholders is crucial to an organization’s success. Based on previous research about stakeholder theory, organizations explicitly manage their relationships with various stakeholder groups [7,22].

2.3. Sports Management and Stakeholder Theory

Many sports management scholars have utilized stakeholder theory in intercollegiate athletics and professional sports studies. Trail and Chelladurai [13] examined the goals and/or priorities of important stakeholders (i.e., faculty and students) in intercollegiate athletics based on stakeholder theory by developing a new instrument. The purpose of Trail and Chelladurai’s [13] instrument was to assess perceptions of two stakeholder groups (faculty and students) in intercollegiate athletics with regard to intercollegiate athletics’ primary goals. Trail and Chelladurai’s Scale of Athletic Department Goals (SADG) uses ten subscales and 41 items in total to assess the primary goals of intercollegiate athletics. Specifically, the ten subscales were conceptually comprised and distinguished into performance goals (e.g., financial security, winning, national sport development, etc.) and development goals (e.g., student-athlete academic achievement, student-athlete health/fitness, student-athlete careers).

Putler and Wolfe [14] examined intercollegiate athletic priorities and tradeoffs by assessing the perceptions of various stakeholders (i.e., faculty, student-athletes, potential students, university students, athletic department employees, and alumni) towards various factors of intercollegiate athletics such as win–loss record, graduation rate, number of teams, and NCAA violations. Putler and Wolfe [14] found that finances were the most important priority for the stakeholders, followed by graduation rate, win–loss record, and violations. The least important priorities were attendance, followed by gender equity and number of teams. Specifically, ethics and winning can be viewed as competing athletic program priorities, as can education and revenue.

Babiak and Kihl [15] examined stakeholder perceptions towards the role of professional baseball teams’ corporate social responsibility (CSR) using semi-structured interviews with 42 various stakeholders from a professional baseball team. Babiak and Kihl [15] revealed what the stakeholders expected of their team’s community engagement, social benefits, and value creation. In addition, stakeholders believed that their team’s CSR activities played an important role in its business practices and provided valuable social benefits that aligned with community expectations.

Huml et al. [12] investigated how stakeholders would respond in terms of various attributes of stakeholder salience regarding change to their organization’s governing structure in intercollegiate contexts. Specifically, Huml et al. [12] revealed that equity can be viewed as one of the most important attributes of stakeholder salience in terms of the three traditional attributes (i.e., power, legitimacy, and urgency). Walters and Tacon [16] examined how CSR can be implemented by sports organizations (UK football) through stakeholder management strategies.

Lastly, Friedman et al. [11] employed stakeholder theory to examine how sports organizations include their stakeholders in their decision-making process. Friedman et al. [11] suggests that managers can achieve their organizational objectives by applying stakeholder engagement strategies. For example, by using stakeholder analysis, managers can identify stakeholders, stakeholder claims, and their relative importance based on the stakeholders’ attributes (i.e., power, legitimacy, and urgency) toward various issues [8,11]. This allows managers to balance various stakeholders’ interests by distributing the organization’s resources, which leads to satisfaction of stakeholders’ need to maintain good relationships with the organization [8]. This is applicable to both large (e.g., the International Olympic Committee and National Collegiate Athletic Association) and small (e.g., local recreational sports teams and interest-based volunteer clubs) sports organizations.

2.4. Stakeholders in High School Athletics

In high school athletics, the various stakeholders include parents, teachers, student-athletes, alumni associations, coaches, and the community [23]. Among these stakeholders principals and athletic directors are two of the key stakeholders/decision makers, and through their possession of the three attributes can affect the achievement of their athletic department’s objectives [7,8].

Principals, for example, possess the three attributes through their formal role. Specifically, power is illustrated by their authority over school staffing decisions such as hiring and evaluating staff [24]. In terms of urgency, the principal sets the school’s priorities through mechanisms such as facilitating school board meetings [25]. The legitimacy of principals within their schools is represented by roles such as administering the school budget [25]. In addition, the principal is regarded by other educational stakeholders such as teachers, parents, students, and the community as the leader of the school [26]. Most importantly, principals play critical roles in creating and maintaining the culture of secondary schools through their authority and responsibilities [27,28].

Athletic directors possess attributes of stakeholder salience relative to their high school athletic department. For example, athletic directors have power over staffing (e.g., overseeing coaches), legitimacy through management of the budget and development of both practice and competition schedules, and urgency through their arrangement of departmental meetings [29,30,31]. As with principals athletic directors are essential in shaping the culture of high school athletics through their significant and various roles [32]. Furthermore, as gatekeepers of high school athletics, athletic directors are responsible for the well-being of their student-athletes and affect the overall success of their athletic department [32]. Therefore, this study investigates how decision-makers (i.e., principals and athletic directors) account for other stakeholders in the athletic department in their departmental decision-making process for the sustainable management of their athletic department. By doing this, this study investigates how social sustainability can be maintained in high school athletics. The research questions examined in this study are as follows,

RQ1: For the sustainable management of high school athletics, how do a South Korean principal and AD manage other stakeholders in their high school athletics department’s decision-making process?

RQ2. For the sustainable management of high school athletics, how do a U.S. principal and AD manage other stakeholders in their high school athletics department’s decision-making process?

Understanding stakeholder management in the decision-making process of each country’s high school athletics department will provide a better understanding of how social sustainability in high school athletics can be maintained within the decision-making processes.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Comparative Case Study Design

Even though there has been on-going discussion regarding the limitations of case study design, the case study design is consistently used by many qualitative researchers [33]. A case study can be defined as exploring “a real-life, contemporary bounded system (a case) or multiple bounded systems (cases) over time, through detailed, in-depth data collection involving multiple sources of information… and reports a case description and case themes” [34] (p. 97).

A comparative case study will be needed if a study includes more than one single case [35]. Comparative case study design seeks to examine organizational aspects of each case to make contrasts between selected terms [36]. By doing this, each case can be compared in order to identify similarities and differences that cause either divergent or convergent results [35,37]. Comparative case study design requires similar phenomena in two different contexts [36].

Comparative study design is appropriate in this study because this study examines similar phenomena (i.e., stakeholder management in high school athletic departments) in two different contexts (i.e., a South Korean and a U.S. high school athletic department). By examining two cases, this study is able to identify similarities and differences in the two cases [35]. In addition, using a comparative case study design allows the researchers to elaborate on direct comparisons between high school athletics departments in different countries.

3.2. Case Context

The high schools in this study were located in urban areas. There is a substantial difference between urban high schools and rural high schools. For example, compared to athletes at rural schools, athletes at urban schools are more likely to be highly specialized in sports, participate in more competitions, and play in leagues outside of school [36]. In other words, urban high school athletics can be viewed as more professional and organized than rural high school athletics. Therefore, high schools with/without sport teams or located in rural areas were excluded from this study in order to ensure a proper understanding of the organizational culture of each country’s high school athletics. In this study, urban areas were defined as a continuously built-up areas with a population of 50,000 or more [38].

Two high schools, one from each country, were selected as the sites for the current study. There were two primary inclusion criteria for the sites of this study: (1) high schools had to have their own athletic departments; and (2) high schools had to be located in urban areas. After receiving approval from the university’s institutional review board (IRB), a researcher contacted the participants who were available and interested in engaging in this study.

Crescent High School is located in a large province in South Korea with a population of approximately 300,000 people. This public high school was founded in 1997, and has an average enrollment of about 700 students. There are a total of 38 teachers and staff members. The student–teacher ratio is 10:1; the graduation rate in 2019 was 99%, of which 69% of students enrolled in college in the 2019 fiscal year. Crescent High School athletics operates a total of four sports, track and field, boxing, golf, and taekwondo, and the track and field team has previously won the national championship. The athletic department utilizes three athletic facilities, a soccer field, indoor arena, and weight room. The current athletic director of Crescent High School is a physical education (PE) teacher.

Longwood High School is a public high school located in the southeastern United States in an area with a population of approximately 610,000 people. The school opened in 1957 and currently has an average enrollment of approximately 1200 students. The school is one of fifteen academies in the county public school system. There are a total of 110 teachers and staff members. The student–teacher ratio is 13:1, and the graduation rate in 2019 was 84%. Longwood High School athletics offers a total of seventeen sports (archery, baseball, basketball, bowling, cheerleading, cross-country, dance, field hockey, football, golf, soccer, softball, swimming, tennis, track and field, volleyball, and wrestling). There are 24 athletics administrators including a principal, an athletic director, an athletic trainer, and the respective coaches. The school has a rich history of athletic success; for example, the basketball team has won the state championship two times, and the football team previously won the state championship as well.

In high school athletics, the various stakeholders include parents, teachers, student-athletes, alumni associations, coaches, and the community [23]. Among these stakeholders, as stated above, the principals and athletic directors are two of the key stakeholders/decision makers who can affect the achievement of their athletic department’s objectives through their possession of the three attributes [7,8]. Principals, for example, possess those attributes through their formal roles, such as hiring and evaluating staff. In terms of urgency principals facilitate school board meetings [25]. The legitimacy of principals within their schools is represented through roles such as administering the school budget [25]. The principal is regarded by other educational stakeholders, such as teachers, parents, students, and the community, as the leader of their school [26]. Most importantly, principals play critical roles in creating and maintaining the culture of secondary schools through their authority and various responsibilities [27,28].

Athletic directors have attributes of stakeholder salience relative to their high school athletic department as well. For example, athletic directors have power over staffing (e.g., overseeing coaches), legitimacy through management of the budget and development of practice and competition schedules, and urgency through their arrangement of departmental meetings [29,30,31]. As principals do, through their significant and various roles, athletic directors are essential in shaping the culture of high school athletics [32]. Furthermore, as gatekeepers of high school athletics, athletic directors are responsible for the well-being of their student-athletes and affect the success of their athletic department [32]. Therefore, the cases in this study specifically focus on how principals and athletic directors account for other stakeholders in their departmental decision-making processes to achieve sustainable management in their athletics departments.

3.3. Data Collection Protocol

Audio-recorded semi-structured interviews were conducted for the data collection method in this study. Specifically, a researcher interviewed the participants via Zoom. Telephone and online virtual interviews were utilized, as in-person access to the population of participants was very limited due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Recent studies suggest that there are no significant differences or advantages between telephone interviews and face-to-face interview methods [32]. Therefore, the use of telephone and virtual online interviews did not suggest perceptible differences in the quality of the data collected.

Because having good relationships with various stakeholders is a vital role of both principals and athletic directors [23,30,39,40], a semi-structured interview guide and questionnaires drawing on stakeholder management in the specific context of high school athletics was modified for this study [23,41]. Specifically, interview questions regarding stakeholders’ roles in managing their relationship with other stakeholders were included: e.g., “What are some of the major decisions you make in your role as principal/athletic director?”; “Which stakeholders did you work with when making that decision?”; “What tactics did you use with each stakeholder?”. Examples of specific interview questions include:

• What are some of the major decisions you make in your role as principal/athletic director?

  a.

  Choose one major decision that you want to talk more for following questions

  b.

  What led you to make this decision?

  c.

  Reflecting on the decision (use example given), what were your goals at the time?

  d.

  Which stakeholders did you work with when making that decision? (Internal/External)

  e.

  What were the key pressures (internal/external)?

For audio recording of the interviews, the researcher utilized a digital recorder. The researcher ensured that the subjects were made fully aware that audio recording was conducted, including issuing the statement, “This study involves the use of audio recordings to hear your experiences and perspectives as a main stakeholder of a South Korean or US high school athletic department. Only the researcher will have access your recorded data. Neither your name nor any other identifying information will be associated with the audio recording or the transcript”. It took around 45 to 60 minutes to complete each interview.

3.4. Participants

As stated above, based on previous research in education and sport management using stakeholder theory, principals and athletic directors can be viewed as two of the most important stakeholders able to affect the culture of high school athletics. Therefore, the specific inclusion criteria for the sample of this study were:

• Current principals of South Korean and US high schools
• Current athletic directors of South Korean and US high schools

A researcher contacted principals and athletic directors of a South Korean and a U.S. high school who were available and interested in engaging in this study. A total of four individual interviewees (n = 4), namely, the principals (n = 2, one from f each country) and athletic directors (n = 2, one from each country) from a South Korean and a U.S. high school.

3.5. Data Analysis

Following the data collection process, the researcher specified the data analysis approach for developing case descriptions [42]. Because the COVID-19 pandemic significantly affected data collection during this study, two high school athletic departments, one from each country, were selected as the study cases, and the researcher used the holistic analysis approach [42] to apply stakeholder analysis to both schools.

For transcript analysis, all interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. In order to ensure confidentiality throughout the analysis, pseudonyms were applied to each participant. Braun and Clarke’s [43] thematic analysis was employed to analyze the data from the interviews. Thematic analysis is a method for systematically organizing, identifying, and determining patterns of meaning and themes across a dataset [43]. There are a total of six steps in thematic analysis: (1) familiarizing yourself with your data; (2) generating initial codes; (3) searching for themes; (4) reviewing themes; (5) defining and naming themes; and (6) producing the report.

Specifically, after the researcher familiarized themselves with the data by reading and re-reading the transcript, they applied descriptive coding to the initial codes. During this process, the author coded the full transcripts for each case and compared the results by identifying the similarities and differences between the cases. A code book was developed based on the initial codes. After the researcher completed the first round of the coding process, they employed axial coding to generate categories. By doing this, comparisons could be made between the two cases.

3.6. Translation Strategy

Because all interviews and manuscripts with the South Korean participants were in the Korean language, systematic translation strategies were used to minimize errors [44]. First, two bilingual translators translated the manuscripts from Korean to English. Second, for back-translation, two bilingual translators who had not been exposed to the manuscript were asked to translate the English transcripts to Korean. Lastly, final fine-tuning of the manuscript was conducted through extensive discussions with all translators to ensure whether any potential discrepancies had been addressed during back-translation.

4. Results

4.1. Case 1: Crescent High School Athletic Department

4.1.1. Theme: Stakeholder Engagement

For the sustainable management of their athletic department, the principal and athletic director of Crescent High School used a stakeholder engagement strategy in their departmental decision-making processes. By doing this, multiple stakeholders in Crescent High School athletics were able to be involved in the departmental decision-making processes, which helped the athletic department to grow as a socially sustainable organization [1,45].

4.1.2. Subtheme: Communicating with Other Stakeholders

Specifically, the principal and athletic directors involved other stakeholders (e.g., parents and coaches) in departmental decision-making through transparent internal communications [1]. The athletic director of Crescent High school described his recent experience with COVID-19 and the departmental decision-making process regarding student-athletes’ practices, noting:

“Our sport teams used to practice with other school teams before to enhance both school’s sport performance… and it was really helpful. However, after COVID-19 pandemic outbreak, group practices with other school were banned according to CDC rules that includes social distancing and capacity limits. Thus, I had to make a decision on how I adjust way of our sports teams’ practice in COVID-19 pandemic. The first thing I did was communicating with parents to ask their opinion. After I communicated with them, and I realized that they still want their kids practice for athletic performance. Thus, I tried to make a best decision for the kids without breaking the rules from CDC. What I did was I’ve discussed with our coaches as well and we’ve decided to have individual practices for our student-athletes so some of the coaches even visited student-athletes’ houses to train them individually”.

This statement describes how athletic directors managed their stakeholders during departmental decision-making processes. The athletic director of Crescent High School received input from other stakeholders, including parents and coaches. By incorporating other stakeholders’ opinions, the athletic director of Crescent High School was able to arrive at a decision that satisfied the other stakeholders. In this case, specifically in a situation where student-athletes were not able to have group practices due to COVID-19, the athletic director asked for parents’ opinions on the issue. The parents wanted student-athletes to practice even during the COVID-19 pandemic, as students’ athletic successes can have a direct impact on their college admission situation. Thus, the athletic director, as a decision-maker, discussed this with other stakeholders, such as the coaches, and they provided private/individual practices for their student-athletes. In addition, based on discussions with senior student-athletes’ parents, Crescent High School allowed their senior student-athletes to participate in tournaments in order to maintain their athletic achievement, even though most other schools prohibited their student-athletes from tournament participation due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The principal commented: “[through] the discussion with the parents of senior student-athletes, we’ve realized that parents want to see their kids participate in tournaments, even with the COVID-19 pandemic”. The athletic director added, “[we] also allowed our senior student-athletes to compete in the tournaments since this year is critical to their college admission chances”. It is important to note that the principal of Crescent High School communicated with other stakeholders and considered their opinions when making departmental decisions for the sustainable management of the athletic department. For example, the Crescent High School principal said: “Among those responsibilities, communicating with parents can be viewed as my most important task…so I always discuss with parents if I need to make a departmental level decision”. This statement describes how the principal recognized the importance of communicating with other stakeholders and engaging them in athletic department decisions. The next section will discuss how Longwood High School’s principal and athletic director managed their various stakeholders in the departmental decision-making process.

4.2. Case 2: Longwood High School Athletic Department

4.2.1. Theme: Stakeholder Engagement

The principal and athletic director of Longwood High School utilized a stakeholder engagement strategy for sustainable management of their athletic department as well. At Longwood High School, the stakeholders include the alumni association, parents, and people in the upper organization.

4.2.2. Subtheme: Communicating with Other Stakeholders

As decision-makers within the athletic department, the athletic director and the principal always communicated with other stakeholders to engage them in departmental decision-making processes. In addition, the athletic director and the principal continuously asked for the opinions and thoughts of other stakeholders and incorporated them in departmental decisions.

The athletic director of Longwood High School described his recent experience with the departmental decision-making process regarding the construction of their new softball field, noting:

“We’re trying to upgrade our softball complex. Honestly, the softball field was the first thing that you drove by when you came into the school building. So, we were trying to upgrade the softball facility in the front of the entrance, it’s an eyesore. I wanted to dump a bunch of resources into this facility. And that’s the big thing… we want to make sure that we can get this complex, so we can actually post events and stuff like that to make sure that like it’s something that our alumni want to see… It’s been a six-month process… like I told you it’s an eyesore, I don’t want to look at… we put a lot of money into it, and everything else, and I’m hoping in two or three years that you look at and you’re like oh man that looks really good, because that’s the goal”.

As described above, there is an ongoing departmental decision-making process when constructing a new softball field. As a leader of the athletics department, the athletic director of Longwood High School wants to upgrade the school’s old softball complex. However, constructing a new complex is a long and huge project, and the athletic director wanted to engage other stakeholders in the process. For example, the AD shared the following:

“What I need to make sure that we did here was we need to make sure that what the stakeholders involved that everybody was on the same page, so I had a lot of district people meet out here as high up as the assistant superintendents, our principals involved. Obviously, the softball parents are involved; my alumni is involved. It’s a big project here. With my alumni, I just tried to keep them updated and kind of give them a heads up of what’s going on. I wanted them to know what was going on and that kind of stuff. Expectations of all of us were the same, which was good with that we got to clean up this eyesore. You have to make sure that this is, you know, it doesn’t look like this. And obviously it takes time and money. And like I said, that’s the biggest thing there and I’m trying to do is to make sure that our expectations are met”.

This statement shows how the athletic director of Longwood High School accounts for the insights provided by other stakeholders during their departmental decision-making process. In this case, the alumni association, parents, principal, and people from the upper organization were identified as the stakeholders of Longwood High School. In terms of their attributes related to the athletic department, the alumni association has power through their role in providing financial support for the school [46,47]. Parents have power as well; they can significantly affect student-athletes’ behaviors, as they are the people most familiar with their children and their educational needs [48]. People from the upper organization (i.e., the state high school athletic association) have power as the formal organizing body of the Longwood High School athletic department [49]. In terms of legitimacy and urgency, their attributes can be illustrated by the following statement: “Authority to govern interscholastic athletics within in state is granted to the state association by the state legislature of by judicial decision. Each state’s high school athletic association is responsible for implementing and enforcing regulations governing interscholastic athletics participation of the member high schools” [50] (p. 324). The athletic director continuously updated them on the process of construction in order to ensure that they were on the same page. In addition, it is important to note that while the athletic director updated other stakeholders (e.g., the alumni association, softball parents) regarding departmental decisions (i.e., constructing a new softball complex), he made an effort to reflect their opinions in the decision-making process as well. For example, the athletic director stated: “I always [listened to] their opinions when it [came] to the new complex, you know, color of the fence, lightning, scoreboard…I try to make sure that their opinions and thoughts [are] reflected in the construction process”. This statement suggests that the athletic director valued the opinions and thoughts of other stakeholders during their departmental decision-making process. The principal of Longwood High School communicated with other stakeholders (i.e., parents) during the departmental decision-making process regarding tournament participation during the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, the principal determined that their student-athletes could participate in competitions during the COVID-19 pandemic, then communicated that to parents: “So as long as you know, we minimize that pressure for the parents and talk through the reasons why we’re doing things”. It is important to note that even though the principal of Longwood High School was considered the final decision maker in light of their authority and responsibilities, the principal tried to communicate with other stakeholders (particularly parents) to gather their thoughts and opinions on department-level decisions.

5. Discussion

This study aimed to examine the social sustainability of sports organizations in the high school athletics setting. Specifically, this study investigated how the major decision-makers in high school athletics (i.e., principals and athletic directors) manage other stakeholders in their departmental decision-making processes in terms of the social sustainability of their athletic department. This study uncovered information about the sustainable management of high school athletic departments by investigating their departmental decision-making processes. Specifically, the results of this study illustrate that decisions were made in consultation with the main internal stakeholders of the athletic department (the principal and athletic director) as well external stakeholders (i.e., parents).

Previous literature regarding social sustainability is in line with the results of this study on the importance of the internal communication between various stakeholders in organizational decision-making processes [1,51]. Ehnert and Harry [52] suggested that building the social sustainability of an organization requires the involvement of a variety of stakeholders in organizational decisions. The results of the present study corroborate the findings of earlier studies that examined stakeholder engagement. For example, Kivits [6] argued that stakeholder engagement can be viewed as an important strategy for improving external stakeholder relations in both public and private organizations. In addition, Laplume et al. [10] and Yaro et al. [48] suggested that incorporating various stakeholders’ opinions is essential for improving an organization’s decision-making process.

In terms of theoretical implications, this study contributes in a unique way to the educational literature by applying stakeholder theory in the high school athletics setting [48,53]. Although there has been much research that employed stakeholder theory in the education field, such as investigating stakeholder perceptions of secondary education quality [5], assessing the perspectives of various stakeholders on the transition to high school [54], examining the perceptions of various stakeholders on new school policies [55], and investigating key stakeholders’ perceptions of effective school leadership [56], only limited research has been carried out applying stakeholder theory in the setting of high school athletics. In this respect, the results of this study contribute to the literature on stakeholder theory in the context of education by examining decision-making processes in high school athletics departments. Specifically, the findings of this study illustrate how, in a high school athletics setting, various stakeholders are directly engaged and involved in decision-making processes. In this respect, the results of this study align with previous educational research regarding the importance of parents as major stakeholder in schools. For example, Yaro et al. [48] identified parents as key educational stakeholders by examining their roles and objectives (e.g., that children receive a better education from school). This study reiterated that parents can be viewed as one of the main educational stakeholders in high school athletics, with a key role in departmental decision-making process. The Longwood High School athletic department utilized a stakeholder engagement strategy in their departmental decision-making process. For example, the athletic director of Longwood High School accounts for the insights provided by other stakeholders (i.e., the alumni association, parents, the principal, and people from the upper organization) during their departmental decision-making process (i.e., constructing a new softball complex). Specifically, in this case, the athletic director always updated the stakeholders on the process of construction in order to ensure that all stakeholders were on the same page.

There were similarities in stakeholder management in the departmental decision-making processes of both the Crescent and Longwood High School athletics departments. For example, in both cases the decision-makers (i.e., the principals and athletic directors) incorporated other stakeholders’ opinions during their departmental decision-making processes. This shows that stakeholders in an educational setting are different from stakeholders in traditional (i.e., corporate, management, business) settings. For example, in traditional settings, most organizational decisions are eventually made by individuals who have more attributes (i.e., power, legitimacy, and urgency) relative to their organization [8].

Based on this traditional business perspective, only internal managerial figures such as managers, executives, and entrepreneurs play a significant role in the decision-making process of their organization [7]. Even though principals and athletic directors can be viewed as internal managerial figures for their athletic departments thanks to their attributes (i.e., power, legitimacy, and urgency), various other external stakeholders with lower levels of those attributes can affect the decision-making process.

One main difference between the two cases was that the Longwood High School athletics department indicated the alumni association as one of their main stakeholders, whereas Crescent High School did not consider the alumni association as a major stakeholder of their athletic department. This difference in stakeholder identification might be due to the differences in resource management between the two cases. In U.S. high schools, for example, schools usually engage with other stakeholders to increase funding for their athletics departments. Because high school sport teams bring a sense of pride to school communities [57,58], schools have long been bridging and building good relationships with other stakeholders such as parents, alumni associations, or local businesses in order to obtain financial support (e.g., donations, booster club money, and fundraising) [46,47]. By doing this, U.S. high schools can manage their athletic department more self-sufficiently with regards to equipment purchases, travel money, facility maintenance, and staff salaries [59]. Among these stakeholders, the alumni association can be viewed as one of the most important stakeholders in terms of providing financial support for schools [47]. Therefore, in this example involving U.S. high school athletics, the importance of having a good relationship with the alumni association is due to their ability to help obtain financial resources for the athletics department.

Unlike U.S. high schools, South Korean high school athletics do not represent the areas/communities where they are located. Instead of high school sports, professional sports teams serve as a symbol of their communities, and people in South Korea feel pride/attachment with their professional sports teams [60]. This different environment might affect the difference in main stakeholder identification between the high school athletics departments. In other words, unlike the U.S., the alumni association of a South Korean High school is not involved in funding their school’s athletic department, and cannot be considered a main stakeholder in athletic department decision-making processes within their school.

6. Practical Implications

The findings of this study can help practitioners in both South Korean and U.S. high school athletics. As decision makers in high school athletics, principals and athletic directors need to understand the importance of stakeholder management in the social sustainability of their athletic departments. Specific questions might help with respect to stakeholder management, such as: “Who are the most relevant stakeholders in your athletic department?”; “What are the interests of those different stakeholders?”; “What is the relationship between your athletic department and those stakeholders and between the stakeholders themselves?”; “What duties does your athletic department owe to its various stakeholders?”; “How should your athletic department’s important decision making be oriented to balance the interests of department’s various stakeholders?”; and “What strategies would be used by the stakeholders to influence your athletic department?” [16].

Schools in both countries need to foster and maintain good relationships with various school stakeholders (e.g., parents, student-athletes, teachers, and alumni associations) as maintaining strong relationships between organizations and their stakeholders is crucial to an organization’s social sustainability [1,2,3]. This might include regularly scheduled meetings with parents, as well as informal activities such as outdoor camps for students [28,48].

7. Limitations and Future Research

Because this study examined only two unique cases, it may be difficult to generalize the results of this study to a wider population. Additionally, the sample population was limited to specific regions in South Korea and the U.S. Thus, future research will need to be conducted with more high schools from various regions in the US. and South Korea. Even though principals and athletic directors are often viewed as decision-makers in high school athletics, it would be worthwhile to investigate the perspectives of other stakeholders (e.g., student-athletes, parents, alumni associations). Doing this will provide a holistic understanding of stakeholder management in the decision-making process of high school athletics in the U.S. and South Korea. Lastly, future researchers would be wise to examine stakeholder management in other countries’ high school athletics; as the overall system and environment of high school athletics varies widely by countries, future research could examine and compare stakeholder management in high school athletics among various countries.

8. Conclusions

An organization’s social sustainability is built by managing various stakeholders in the process of organizational decision-making. From this perspective, sustainable management is an essential strategy for building a socially sustainable organization, as developing good relationships among various stakeholders is the basis of sustainable management.

This study aimed to investigate how decision-makers in high school athletics (i.e., principals and athletic directors) promote the sustainable management of their athletic department by accounting for other stakeholders in the departmental decision-making process of their athletics departments. The results of this study illustrate that there are various internal and external stakeholders in high school athletics departments, including parents, alumni associations, and the organizing body of the high school athletics department. Both U.S. and South Korean high school athletics used sustainable management in their departmental decision-making processes. Specifically, the principals and athletics directors from both countries involved other stakeholders in their decision-making processes by communicating with them. Both the principals and athletic directors from the US and South Korean high schools listened to the opinions and thoughts of other stakeholders and tried to incorporate them into their departmental decision-making.

It is important to note that even though those other stakeholders have lower levels of the relevant attributes compared to principals and athletic directors, they can nevertheless affect the decision-making process of the athletics departments. Therefore, the principals and athletic directors recognize the importance of communicating with other stakeholders and engaging them in athletics department decisions in order to maintain the social sustainability of their athletics departments.