Comparing federal and unitary models of sport governance: a case study investigation

This study explores how the unitary model of sport governance acts as an alternative system to the traditional federal model synonymous within many sport governance networks. A case study investigation was undertaken to identify and examine key issues that contrast federal and unitary models of governance in a non-profit sporting network. The case study involved one sporting network in Australia, touch football, where 21 participants from both national and state level organisations took part in semi-structured interviews. Interviews were analysed using a pattern matching process involving open and axial coding to extract a thematic structure that detailed the issues inherent in federal and unitary sport governance models. Challenges and complexities of the federal model, benefits of the unitary model of governance, role ambiguity of advisory councils, and leadership in the unitary model emerged as the dominant themes in the study. The member based nature of non-profit sporting networks was implicit in each of these themes and emerged as a significant challenge requiring attention for networks attempting to adopt a unitary governance model. A number of implications for sport governance research and practice based on these findings conclude the paper.