Female Leaders in Sports: The Glass Ceiling in Intercollegiate Athletics

1. Female Leaders in Sports: The Glass Ceiling in Intercollegiate Athletics Angela Lumpkin, Regan Dodd, and Lacole Hook University of Kansas

2. What Is a Glass Ceiling? • An unwritten, attitudinal, or organizational bias toward or barrier to females that prevents them from advancement or progression into leadership positions. • A barrier based on prejudice and discrimination that excludes females from leadership positions at the highest level.1 1Eagly & Karau, 2002

3. Does a Glass Ceiling Exist in Intercollegiate Athletics? • About 1/3 of the athletic administrators in NCAA-member institutions are females. • Less than 1/5 of the athletic directors in NCAA-member institutions are females.

4. Does a Glass Ceiling Exist in Intercollegiate Athletics? • Are males believed to be more qualified to run the business of sports? • Do females possess the strategic and financial decision-making skills needed to be successful in sports? • Are females too emotional and nurturing to be athletic administrators?

5. Overview of Presentation • Statement of the problem • Research questions • Review of the literature • Data collection methodology • Findings • Discussion of findings • Conclusions

6. Statement of the Problem • Is there statistical evidence, based on the number and type of positions held in intercollegiate athletic administration, that females continue to be limited by a glass ceiling?

7. Research Questions • Are there statistically significant differences in the percentages of males and females who are athletic directors in institutions in each NCAA division? • Are there statistically significant differences in the percentages of males and females who hold the positions of deputy or executive athletic director, senior associate athletic director, associate athletic director, and assistant athletic director in institutions in each NCAA division?

8. Research Questions • Are there statistically significant differences in the percentages of males and females who are athletic directors, associate athletic directors, and assistant athletic directors in each NCAA division depending on whether each institution sponsors a football team? • Are there statistically significant differences in the percentages of males and females who are responsible for academic services, financial services, compliance, facility/event management, fund raising or development, licensing, marketing and promotions, media and communications (SID), and ticket operations, and who serve as head athletic trainers in each NCAA division?

9. Review of the Literature

10. Two Role Theories • Social role theory suggests that prejudicial hiring decisions may occur because of incongruity between the expectations about females and males as leaders in intercollegiate athletics.1 • A role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders suggests an incompatibility between the female gender role and a leadership role by viewing females less favorably who are potential occupants of or currently occupy leadership roles.2 1Burton, Grappendorf, & Henderson, 2011; 2Eagly & Karau, 2002

11. Gender Stereotypes • Gender stereotypes limit females because they are judged versus the higher perceived status and normative position of males.1 • Stereotypical gender roles may result in the hiring of males as athletic directors because of the perception that sports as a historical masculine domain and athletic directors are believed to need more masculine characteristics for success.2 1Eagly & Karau, 2002; 2Burton, Grappendorf, & Henderson, 2011

12. Hegemonic Masculinity1 • A theory that posits that male behavior is the culturally normative ideal. • Perception of the superiority of masculine over feminine characteristics. • Associated with physical strength, aggressiveness, bravado, emotional detachment, and competitiveness in sports. 1Whisenant, Pedersen, & Obenour, 2002

13. Homogenous Reproduction1 • Occurs when athletic directors hire and promote individuals who are similar to themselves in attitudes, beliefs, and values. • One illustration is the networking effectiveness of the “old boys’ club” that systematically minimizes the intrusion of females into the decision-making inner sanctum of intercollegiate athletics. 1Whisenant, Pedersen, & Obenour, 2002

14. Agentic and Communal Qualities1 Agentic or Masculine Qualities Communal or Feminine Qualities Considerate Helpful Kind Sensitive Supportive Sympathetic • Ambitious • Assertive • Competent • Confident • Decisive • Dominant 1Atwater, Brett, Waldman, DiMare, & Hayden, 2004

15. Masculine and Feminine Qualities1 • Over 75% of the male and female respondents state: • Delegating, disciplining, strategic decision-making, problem solving, and punishing are masculine qualities. • Recognizing and rewarding, communicating and informing, and supporting are feminine qualities. 1Atwater, Brett, Waldman, DiMare, & Hayden, 2004

16. Agentic and Communal Qualities1 • Whenever a leadership role is defined with more agentic or masculine attributes, females in this leadership role are judged more negatively because their behaviors deviate from the female gender role expectation of being more communal or feminine. 1Eagly & Karau, 2002

17. Barriers to Career Advancement1 • Failure of females to apply for jobs • Family combined with work responsibilities • Gender bias and discrimination in hiring • Gender bias preventing advancement • Gender stereotypes • Homologous reproduction • Inequitable salaries (wage discrimination) • Isolation • Job burnout • Lack of female mentors • Old boys’ club • Perceptions that females cannot manage budgets and lead 1Grappendorf, Lough, & Griffin, 2004; National Collegiate Athletic Association, 1989; Schein, 2006; Schneider, Stier, Henry, & Wilding, 2010; Smith, 2005; Weaver & Chelladurai, 2002; Young, 1990

18. Support from Athletic Director1 • Creates a positive working environment. • Serves as the key factor in the retention of female athletic administrators. 1Inglis, Danylchuk, & Pastore, 2000; Pastore, Goldfine, & Riemer, 1996; Priest, 1990; Sagas & Cunningham, 2004b

19. Importance of Having Mentors1 • Contributes to the success of female athletic administrators. • Benefits • Advice • Direction • Encouragement • Guidance • Increased knowledge • Inside information • Networking contacts • Professional advancement • Recommendations • Self-confidence • Support 1Lehoullier, 2007; Smith, 2005; Weaver & Chelladurai, 2002; Young, 1990

20. Networking1 • Athletic administrators (73.7%) agreed that networking contacts were more important in career advancement than a candidate’s experience. • Benefits • Career advice • Encouragement • Information about job openings • Inside information • Professional acceptance • Professional advancement • Support 1Young, 1990

21. Networking1 • One way that males continue to control intercollegiate athletics is through external networking. • Females would benefit from having mentors with extensive external networks. 1Whisenant & Pedersen, 2004

22. Career Advancement • Successful athletic administrators need management competencies in personnel, business/finance, communication, and personal development with planning and administering the budget viewed as the most important competencies.1 • Advancing from an assistant athletic director, associate athletic director, or senior associate athletic director is an almost essential career progression.2 1Judd, 1995; 2Grappendorf, Lough, & Griffin, 2004

23. Senior Woman Administrator • “The Senior Woman Administrator (SWA) is the highest ranking female in each NCAA athletic department or member conference. The designation of SWA is intended to encourage and promote the involvement of female administrators in meaningful ways in the decision-making process in intercollegiate athletics. The designation is intended to enhance representation of female experience and perspective at the institutional, conference and national levels and support women’s interests. Her daily responsibilities can include any department tasks and must include senior management team responsibilities.”1 1National Collegiate Athletic Association, 2010b

24. How a SWA Is Viewed? • Token woman.1 • Token with little power and prestige.2 • SWA in name only because they are not decision-makers (59% of SWAs in Division III).3 • Title of SWA is “tacked on” (only 2.9% had responsibilities only as SWA).4 1Hoffman, 2010; 2Sagas & Cunningham, 2004b; 3Grappendorf, Pent, Burton, & Henderson, 2008; 4Smith, 2005

25. What SWAs Do? • Supporting roles in compliance, academic advising, life skills, and sports information.1 • Advocating for women’s athletics, working to achieve gender equity, and serving as a role model.2 • Serving in internal, communal roles such as athlete welfare or serving as role models.3 1Grappendorf, Pent, Burton, & Henderson, 2008; 2Hatfield, Hatfield, & Drummond, 2009; 3Tiell & Dixon, 2008

26. What SWAs Do?1 • The primary responsibility of SWAs in Division I is compliance (32%); it is coaching in Division II (35%) and Division III (56%). • In Division I, females are 51.8% of the academic advisors and 49.3% of the compliance officers but only 26.8% of those responsible for marketing/promotions and 10.6% for those directing sports information or media relations. 1Claussen & Lehr, 2002

27. What SWAs Do?1 • SWAs in Division I are more likely to perform agentic roles than those in Divisions II and III institutions, who are usually coaches. • SWAs (93%) in Division I institutions are more likely to serve as an assistant athletic director, associate athletic director, or senior associate athletic director. • SWAs in Divisions II (44%) and III (53%) are less likely to hold any other administrative title. 1Tiell & Dixon, 2008

28. What SWAs Do?1 • SWAs had the least decision-making authority in marketing, development, promotions, and sponsorships.1 • The lack of involvement by SWAs in financial decision-making may be due to a glass ceiling that prevents them from being involved in these key areas.2 • Males’ control over these external areas dealing with financial resources preserved the status quo of hegemonic masculinity.1 1Claussen & Lehr, 2002; 2Pent, Grappendorf, & Henderson, 2007

29. Female Athletic Directors and Associate Athletic Directors in NCAA-Member Institutions 1Acosta & Carpenter, 2010; 2Lapchick, Hoff, & Kaiser, 2011; 3National Collegiate Athletic Association, 2010a

30. Number and Gender of Athletic Administrators in NCAA-Member Institutions1 1Acosta & Carpenter, 2010

31. Job Titles for Females in Athletic Administration in NCAA-Member Institutions 1Smith, 2005; 2Grappendorf, Pent, Burton, & Henderson, 2008

32. Females in Athletic Administration1 • Only 19.3% (down from 21.3% in 2008) of athletic departments are headed by a female. • The average number of female administrators by NCAA division in 2010: • 1.71 in Division I • 1.08 in Division II • 1.20 in Division III 1Acosta & Carpenter, 2010

33. Females in Athletic Administration1 • Between 2008 and 2010, males were hired into 541 more jobs in athletic administration resulting in females now holding 536 fewer jobs. • In 13.2% of the athletic departments, there are no females in the administrative structure. 1Acosta & Carpenter, 2010

34. Most Frequently Held Positions by Females in Athletic Administration in 20101 • Academic advisor/counselor • Business manager • Associate or assistant athletic trainer • Compliance coordinator or officer • Life skills coordinator 1National Collegiate Athletic Association, 2010a

35. Methodology

36. Data were collected from the websites of each NCAA-member institution. • The genders of the individual holding the positions of athletic director, senior woman administrator, deputy or executive athletic director, senior associate athletic director, associate athletic director, and assistant athletic director, and responsible for academic services, financial services, compliance, facility/event management, fund raising or development, licensing, marketing and promotions, media and communications (SID), ticket operations, and head athletic trainer were identified.

37. Data Analyses • Frequencies were calculated to find the percentage of males and females holding each position. • Chi Square test of proportions and paired sample T-tests were used to test for significance at the p <. 05 level.

38. Results

39. Table 1 Percentages of Females in Top Athletic Administrator Positions *p <. 05

40. Answering the Research Questions • There is a statistically significant difference between the percentage of males and females who are athletic directors in each institution in each NCAA division suggesting the perpetuation of hegemonic masculinity, homogenous reproduction, and possible gender bias and discrimination in hiring and preventing advancement.

41. Statistically Significant Differences by Gender • Deputy/executive athletic director in Division I • Senior associate athletic director in Divisions I and III • Associate athletic director in Divisions I and II • Assistant athletic director in all three divisions • Males remain the primary decision makers in intercollegiate athletics.

42. Table 2 Female Administrators at Institutions with and without Football Teams *p <. 05

43. Statistically Significant Differences by Gender • There are statistically significant differences between the percentages of males and females who are athletic directors, associate athletic directors, and assistant athletic directors in each NCAA subdivision regardless of the existence of a football team. • There are greater percentages of female athletic directors in institutions in all three NCAA subdivisions that do not sponsor football teams than in those with football teams.

44. Table 3 Percentage of Females in Athletic Administration Positions *p <. 05

45. Table 3 Percentage of Females in Athletic Administration Positions *p <. 05

46. Statistically Significant Differences • Academic services: Divisions I and II • Financial services: Divisions I and II • Compliance: Division I • Facility/event mgmt.: Divisions I, II, and III • Fund raising or development: Divisions I, II, and III • Licensing: Division I • Marketing and promotions: Divisions I, II, and III • Media and communications (SID): Divisions I, II, and III • Ticket operations: Division I • Head athletic trainers: Divisions I, II, and III

47. Conclusions

48. Are Women Cracking the Glass Ceiling? • There are a higher percentage of female athletic directors, senior associate athletic directors, and assistant athletic directors in Division II and Division III, and especially if the institution does not sponsor a football team. • Although the average number of females in athletic administration in Division I is higher than in the other two divisions, the domination by males persists in each position by division.

49. Are Females Still Tokens? • The data suggest that more females in Division II and Division III are often the only female athletic administrator. • SWAs are more likely to be coaches and less likely to be key decision-makers in Division II and Division III. • These findings confirm those of other studies including Acosta and Carpenter.

50. Does Gender Bias Remain? • Females are much more likely to be responsible for academics and compliance in all three divisions. • This finding supports the results of several other studies that those responsible for academics and compliance are stereotypically females.