Worldwide it its estimated that sport is a $212 billion dollar industry. The Olympics alone bring in an estimated $3 billion and the most recent World Cup held in Korea and Japan was both an entertainment and financial success. In fact, SportsBusiness Journal reported in its January 20-26, 2003 issue that the Japan World Cup Organizing Committee reported a profit of $112 million. Yet many Americans - including those who aspire to work in the sport industry - would have difficulty recalling the names of the President of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) or the President of Federation Internationale de Football Association (FIFA). [*Note: Included at the conclusion of this article is a quiz so readers can determine their International Sport I.Q. This is the shortened version of a quiz routinely given to the undergraduate sport management students in an International Sport Management course at the University of Dayton.]

Many undergraduate sport management students in the U.S. have never seen or heard of the people, places, and sports on the list. They seem blissfully unaware of the global transformation that is occurring in the business world at large as well as the sport industry. While they are aware of the fact that multi-national sport companies do exist much of their knowledge of such companies seems limited to Nike and other sporting goods manufacturers. In addition, they are strikingly unaware of the success and widespread global popularity of non-traditional U.S. sports such as soccer, cycling, rugby, cricket, or a whole host of other sports.

Thus, the purposes of this article are: 1) to highlight recent research that depicts the lack of and need for internationalization of sport management curricula; and, 2) to discuss approaches to internationalizing sport management programs as discussed in the sport management literature.
 

Research on Internationalizing Sport Management Curricula

Our discussion begins with a review of two recent articles in sport management journals that have highlighted the importance of internationalizing sport management curricula. The first article examines this topic from the perspective of sport management practitioners and the second from a sport management faculty perspective. The results of both studies demonstrate that there is congruence between the perspectives of practitioners and faculty toward internationalizing sport management curricula.

The first article focuses on the qualifications needed by international sport managers to be successful in the global marketplace with a particular emphasis on the educational background, language skills, and cultural training of sport managers. As Masteralexis and McDonald (1997) argue "competing in a global market will require sport managers to overcome language and cultural differences which often hinder the development of transnational business relationships (p. 97)." According to the results of their study there are significant differences between U.S. and non-U.S. based sport managers as to the perceived usefulness of educational background, second language proficiency, and cross-cultural experiences to professional sport manager preparation. In general, both U.S. and non-U.S. based sport managers in the study appeared to value a sport management curriculum that incorporates broad based educational objectives and travel/study abroad programs for students planning to work in the global sport marketplace (Masteralexis & McDonald, 1997).

A second research study conducted by Li, Ammon, Jr., and Kanters (2002) examined the perspectives of faculty to internationalization of the sport management curricula. The authors argue that there is a growing awareness that globalization is impacting the sport industry and that "…sport management students must be prepared to function in a sport marketplace that has no geographical or intellectual barriers (p. 180)." Their study focused primarily on two issues, namely: 1) the ways in which faculty have attempted to internationalize sport management curricula; and, 2) the perceived personal and institutional barriers faced by faculty when attempting to internationalize sport management programs.

According to the results of the study, the most common approach to internationalization of sport management curriculum by faculty has been to integrate an international perspective into existing courses. Eighty percent of survey respondents used international examples in lectures when attempting to internationalize their courses, while only 14.7% utilized overseas visitations (Li, Ammon, Jr., & Kanters, 2002). Additionally, Li, Ammon, Jr., and Kanters (2002) found that an overwhelming majority (81.2%) of their respondents felt they received "none or minimal" training in international sport management education while pursuing their own degrees (p. 184).

The results of this study are significant for several reasons. First, the subjects selected for this study were drawn from the membership of the North American Society for Sport Management (NASSM). The members of NASSM and the National Association for Sport and Physical Education (NASPE) are responsible for jointly developing Sport Management program standards. Currently the standards do not emphasize international sport management education. Secondly, although the survey respondents agreed that there is a need to internationalize sport management curriculum, a majority of the respondents were concerned about their lack of training and education in the area of international sport management (Li, Ammon, Jr., & Kanters, 2002).

Approaches to Internationalizing Sport Management Programs

What then are feasible methods to internationalizing sport management programs? Business schools' efforts to internationalize offer a workable framework for sport management programs and include one or more of the following components: 1) infuse all sport management courses in a particular program with an international perspective; 2) offer a separate international sport management course; 3) develop new international sport management courses that address specific content areas; 4) provide students with the option of completing a minor in international sport management; 5) include opportunities for students to participate in study abroad programs; 6) recruit international students to diversify sport management programs; or, 7) encourage faculty members to participate in international research and teaching activities (Masteralexis & McDonald, 1997; Li, Ammon, Jr. & Kanters, 2002).

Sport management faculty and administrators may choose one or several of the options described above to internationalize their curriculum. Yet, they must also plan strategically for the internationalization process because each of the options listed above provides practical challenges to faculty and administrators. Several of the options are based on the willingness and commitment of existing sport management faculty to the internationalization process. This is an important consideration because as Li, Ammon, Jr., and Kanters (2002) found many sport management faculty feel they do not have the adequate training to lead such efforts.
 

Conclusion

At present, while it appears that there is a need to internationalize sport management curriculum in the U.S., attempts to do so will continue to be based largely on the efforts of individual faculty members who have an interest and expertise in international sport management. Comprehensive change will not occur until current and future faculty members become more engaged in international research and teaching opportunities. In addition, to reflect the increasing importance of the global sport marketplace to sport organizations and thus, sport management students, the NASSM-NASPE Sport Management Program standards must be revised to include international sport management coursework.

References

Li, M., Ammon, Jr., R., & Kanters, M. (2002). Internationalization of sport management curricula in the United States: A national faculty survey. International Sports Journal,178-191.

Masteralexis, L.P., & McDonald, M.A. (1997). Enhancing sport management education with international dimensions including language and cultural training. Journal of Sport Management, 11, 97-110.

1. Is there a need to internationalize sport management curricula both in the U.S. and worldwide?

2. Should the NASSM/NASPE Sport Management Program Standards be changed to reflect a greater emphasis on international sport?

3. Should there be different levels of emphasis placed on internationalizing the sport management curriculum at the undergraduate versus graduate levels?

4. What do sport management students think of the internationalization of the sport management curriculum?

5. Will faculty and students be more or less likely to view internationalization as an important process in light of recent world events?

6. Are faculty and students more or less likely to pursue study abroad opportunities in light of recent world events?

Please send your reaction/questions/comments to Guy Van Damme: guy.vandamme@skynet.be

Guy will collect your replies and then forward it to the author.

The author will read your comments/reactions/feedback and when appropriate will provide additional remarks.

That's all folks - your comments/reactions/feedback will be then added to the discussion list.

April 2003 - Dr. Mike Perko will start with a new article.

Have a good discussion, 

co-ordinator 

Guy Van Damme