Scandals in sports are occurring at an alarming frequency. A quick google news quiery reveals there are no shortage of stories: in the NFL, women staff and executives were promised an improved work-place culture that has fallen short; the Washington Commanders were fined $10 million dollars for having a culture that is “highly unprofessional” including bullying, intimidation, and multiple allegations of sexual harassment of women; and in the NHL it was found the Chicago Blackhawks ignorned a 2010 sexual assault accusation. While these cases are not dissimilar, each instance of malfeasance required each organization to retroactively take actions to correct illicit behavior, pay restitution, and adopt new policies. The question that must be asked is, “how do we shift sports organizations’ from being reactive to proactive?”The allure of winning at all costs sometimes motivates actors within sports organizations to violate industry rules and practices. Dismantling this behavior requires sports organizations and teams to prioritiz

At IntelliSport Analytics, a significant part of what we do involves building surveys. Not the kind you fire off in a Google Form and hope for the best, but bespoke research instruments designed around a client's specific culture, context, and strategic goals. That process involves understanding what a client actually needs to know, identifying validated instruments, accounting for industry-specific norms, and, most importantly, thinking carefully about how the data will be used once it's collected.The Economist published a piece this week on the secrets to a good employee survey, and it caught our attention. It articulated, clearly and concisely, why so many surveys fail and why the ones that work tend to do so for very specific reasons. Three Conditions for Effective SurveysThe Economist explained surveys are really useful only if three conditions are met:They are properly designed They are used in conjunction with other toolsThey lead somewhere. That's a deceptively simple framework, but many organizations don't actually meet these standards. Organizations will build surveys (writing questions, deploying a platform, collecting responses) without giving equal attention to w
At IntelliSport, we seek inspiration from those who share our perspective on how sports leaders should think and act. Today, we draw from researchers of college athletics, a philosopher who studies how social structures shape what we value, and arguably the greatest coach in college football history.A core belief that kick-started the founding of IntelliSport: there is too often a misalignment between purpose and values within sport. But for the sake of level setting the conversation, let’s first explore a few definitions, and the convergence and divergence of these ideas. Values in Sport: Values are the qualities, standards, and goods that athletes, coaches, and organizations hold as worthy of pursuit—both within the practice of sport itself and in the broader life context that surrounds it.Purpose in Sport: Purpose is the overarching reason or aim that gives meaning to one's engagement with sport—the answer to why an individual or organization participates at all.Purpose, then, is the meta-level orientation that determines how one relates to sport's values. Two athletes can share identical values (excellence, discipline, teamwork) while holding radically different purposes; one using sport primarily for external reward, while another finds intrinsic meaning in the practice itself.What we find worrisome at IntelliSport are leaders unaware of th