Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, 15(2), 2013, 692-702

ANALYZING ROMANIAN SPORTS ORGANIZATIONS MANAGEMENT

USING ECONOMETRIC FRONTIER

Alin Molcu1

ABSTRACT: Sport is an institution interesting to study, being similar, but also different from
traditional business organizations. Significant segments of sport have copied practices and the
values of the business world, and as a result have been designed strategic plans, and players and
administrators have become paid employees.
The purposes of this paper are to highlight main models used in sports performance management as
well as to test the relation between football organizations and economic growth for Romania for
period 1992-2011. The results from the study performed suggest there is a non-linear relation
between football organizations and economic growth that record a quadratic U-shape and a
minimum level of GDPPC around 2457.5 RON.

Keywords: sports performance, input-output, Balanced Score Card, football organizations, economic growth

JEL Codes: M 12, L 83

Introduction
From the point of view managerial one, sport is an institution interesting to study, being
similar, but also different from traditional business organizations (Smith and Stewart, 1999).
Similarities occurred from progress or steadily in the past 30 years, becoming structured and
managed in a manner more and more professional. Significant segments of sport have copied
practices and the values of the business world, and as a result have been designed strategic plans,
and players and administrators have become paid employees. In addition, games and activities are
becoming branded products, fans become customers to be satisfied with and monitor and make
alliances with partners-corporate enterprises (Slack, 1997).
At the same time, sports differ from the business (Smith and Stewart, 1999). Firstly, sport
has a symbolic significance and emotional intensity rarely encountered in an insurance company,
bank or house bets. Business organizations aimed at attachment submission and employees, care
essential aimed at efficiency, productivity, and responses to changing market conditions. Sporting
events, on the other hand, is characterized by strong emotional attachments, related to the past
through nostalgia and tradition. Romantic visions, emotions and passions may not exceed
commercial logic and achieving economic (Smith and Stewart, 1999).
Secondly, predictability and certainty, the objectives pursued in the world trade, especially
in connection with product quality, are not always esteemed in the world sport. Fans are attracted to
final games with uncertain and chaos poised around the corner (Sandy et al., 2004). Thirdly, sports
do not operate on the basis of the need to optimize profits, also large commercial business. In
practice, sports organizations may choose between two types of antagonistic organizational
behavior, when you decide to the mission and objectives. The first is the model that maximizes your
profits, who sees the club that a firm in a competitive market, while the profit is the only
motivational force. The second model is the one for maximizing the usefulness, which emphasizes
enmity between the clubs and desire to win as many matches against (Downward and Dawson,

1
West University of Timioara, Romania, e-mail: molcutalin@yahoo.com.
692
 Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, 15(2), 2013, 692-702

2000). Utility perspective in sports means that businesses are by their nature competitive and the
only performance indicator is competitive success.
In many ways sport is always subject to an intense assessment. For instance, in the elite
competitive sport, players and teams are noted and ranked in continuous mode. What's more, each
has an opinion about the performance of his different sports leagues, this ranging from the report
victories-defeats at the manner in which the game strategies have an impact on goals scored or the
movements of the players. At the same time, many sports clubs does not allocate time necessary to
achieve a comprehensive analysis of the performance outside the field. And, even if this happens,
the analysis is restricted to a few issues, such as the distribution of the profit or the number of
members.
A systematic approach to performance management is a useful tool for identifying strengths
and weaknesses, but also the ways to improve overall organizational performance. Also, this
approach is important in the case of decisions on the allocation of resources, with a view to
obtaining the best possible outcome. It also can show how an organization, club or league layer
relates to other organizations, clubs or leagues. In short, the use of a model for management of
performance is essential for long-term success of the organization.
The paper is organized as follows. After a brief introduction, second section comprises main
theoretical models developed for sports performance management. Section three outlines an
overview of Romanian football organizations with an econometric model used to test the relation
between football organizations and economic growth. The results are reported in section three,
while section four concludes.

Sports performance management models

A system of management of performance should be linked to the vision, aims and objectives
organization (Robbins and Barnwell, 2002). These objectives can be used to identify areas that can
improve organization performance. At this point in time, the purposes of the organization's basic
sports differ significantly from those of the business organizations. Thus, some sports organizations
(in particular professional sports teams in the United States) aim to maximize profits, while others
are anxious to gain as many matches and meet the needs of members. Table no. 1 offers a selection
of financial indicators which can be used for assessing financial performance sports organizations.

Table no. 1
Financial performance indicators for sports organizations
Indicator Name Definition Contents
Operating profit Operating income minus operating Indicator of sustainability in the
expenses long term
Rate of profit Weight of profit income Indicator of capacity to cover
total expenditure
Wages - turnover Wages and salaries that share of Management indicator wages or
turnover or income salaries or associated costs
Working Capital The difference between current Indicator of its ability to cover
assets and current liabilities the debts in the short term
Debt/equity capital Short-term debt that share of the Indicator of dependence on debt
capital stock to finance operations/activities
Net Assets The difference between total assets Indicator of real wealth of the
and liabilities total Organization
Source: Hoye et al., 2006, p. 185.

693
 Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, 15(2), 2013, 692-702

In conclusion, any management system performance must take into account, as well as
reflecting main purpose of the club, the team, the event, or the league.

A model in the view of the parties involved (stakeholders)

Performance management should also deal with key stakeholder of the
organization (Atkinson et al., 1997). If they are satisfied with the organization's performance, when
they indeed this works best. A business sports listed on the stock exchange, a high profit and
dividend policy will be suitable for both management and stakeholders. In a sports club based on
members success is linked to more than performance on the field and the quality of services. On
the other hand, for the bodies governing sporting events, they have a zero priority players' interests.
In other words, the different types of sports organizations will have its own unique purposes and
priorities, which will reflect how they rank equally the stakeholders (Friedman et al., 2004).
Stakeholders may have adverse interests. Sponsors may wish maximum media exposure and
access to players, but it is in their interest clubs input to enhance the performance of the players,
which means their involvement in the activities of sponsors. Sports organizations must therefore
balance often conflicting needs and conflicting interests of the various stakeholders (Chappelet
and Bayle, 2005). Main stakeholders of a sports organization and their expectations are summarized
in table no. 2. Conclusion is that an organization will have several stakeholders, so that it will have
to integrate their interests in the evaluation process.
Table no. 2
Stakeholder expectations from sports organizations
Type of stakeholder Expectations from the organization sports
On-the-spot Success
Players Appropriate benefits and wages
Few personal injury
Appropriate benefits and wages
Employees Workplace Safety
Career Development
Controls Safety
Equipment Suppliers Brand awareness
Players' approval
Services and benefits
Members
General Satisfaction
Rewarding investments
Owner/shareholders Public acknowledgment of club/
association
The club's positive reputation
Sponsors Furthering awareness and brand
awareness
High moral standing of the players
Players' agents
Payments to market average
Quality of the game and excitement
Fans
Statistical victories-positive tide
Civic Pride
Community/society
Provision of models for young people
High level of public interest
Media
Earths market
Source: Hoye et al., 2006, p. 186.
694
 Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, 15(2), 2013, 692-702

An approach to "input-output"
When it is developed a model for the evaluation of the performance of a sports
organizations, it should be used a number of principles. A second approach affects inputs and
outputs. This involves following up on things as well as quality, quantity, efficiency, cost-benefit
ratio and employee productivity (Bouckaert, 1995). A summary of how the analysis of the "input-
output" can be applied sports organizations is illustrated in table no. 3.

Table no. 3
An approach "input-output" of management performance in sport
Size So far as
Output: quantity Reward
Attendance at
Sign up as a member
Participation
Output: quality The standard clearance
Stadium Features
Service Standards
Overall experience with customers
Output: cost-benefit Operating profit
ratio Operations Costs
Net economic benefit
Social benefit
Entry: efficiency The cost of providing services
Administrative costs
Waiting Time
Entry: staff The level of satisfaction of the customers/members /fans
performance Staff experience and skills
Staff achievements
Source: Hoye et al., 2006, p. 187.

A balanced approach and multi-dimensional model

A third approach designed to prevent emphasis obsessively put on financial indicators to the
satisfaction of shareholders, by balancing benefits accumulated by customers, suppliers and
employees (Harvard Business Review, 1998). This approach is explained in the model "Balanced
scorecard" (BSC) developed by Kaplan and Norton (Kaplan and Norton, 1992, 1996).
Balanced scorecard (BSC) is a concept that allows balanced objectivization at strategic level
an entire organization or of a unit component. Initiated by almost 20 years ago by Robert Kaplan
and David Norton (and further developed by their teams their palladium Group), and balanced
scorecard is adopted by thousands of companies all over the world who use it successfully to
accelerate operational optimization of their work, reaching the what Kaplan and Norton called:
"benefit execution" ( "The Execution Premium" ). The most which extend between implementations
BSC add year-over-year in the Hall of Fame", together with those carried out to Hilton, Infosys,
Ingersoll row, Kraft food, Merck, attend Martin, Marriott Hotel, Motorola, Ricoh, Saatchi &
Saatchi, Siemens, Cisco, Skandia, StatOil, UPS, US Department of Commerce, US troops, the FBI,
Royal Air Force and many others (Wikipedia)

695
 Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, 15(2), 2013, 692-702

The BSC model has four dimensions which will be highlighted below. A first aspect
revealed by Kaplan and Norton is the fact that a good tool to measure the performance should not
be a "control system" obsessed with the observance of a predetermined plan of individuals and
organizational units. On the contrary, it must be a system of learning, concerned about the
communication and information. Up to this point, Kaplan and Norton have tried to design a system
for measuring performance indicators to balance external and easily quantifiable factors (such as the
market share and profit rate) with domestic factors that administrative processes and development
of staff. His first dimension of Kaplan and Norton is "financial perspective". Although they claim
they were given too much importance financial results, they remain a point of departure for
fundamental economic sustainability assessment of an organization. These indicators are
represented by total sales, operational revenues and cash-flow-net, the ratio debt-capital and profit.
This size answer the question: "How does he look at the shareholders?"
Second dimension is represented by "The Perspective customers". In this case, the emphasis
is on identification of the customer and market shares on which the company will compete, as well
as on developing indicators to reflect how well the company competes on segments identified.
These indicators will comprise total sales on each segment, market share, attract customers, keeping
customers and their satisfaction. Kaplan and Norton suggest that, for this size of performance,
attention should be given to certain factors such as delivery on time, factors underlying the basis of
the level of satisfaction of the customers. This size answer the question: "How do they see us
customers?"
The third dimension is "the Perspective internal business process". This perspective requires
management to identify critical internal processes in which the organization must excel, in order to
ensure a competitive advantage. Kaplan and Norton shows that it's not just a matter of ensuring that
processes that add value are effective, but also to improve and redesign processes and existing
products. This dimension is launching the question: "In what respect should we do not excel in?"
The fourth dimension is "the perspective of learning and growth". The two authors consider
this dimension as essential for long-term success of the organization. In a turbulent business
environment, there is a likelihood of more than the technology and processes required to support
competitive advantage to exceed technical and managerial skills of the staff to be responsible for
these aspects. To eliminate this potential distance, organizations will need to invest in retraining
employees, in developing systems and technologies of information and in alignment with
organizational procedures and schemes. This dimension addressed to the question: "Can we
innovating and creating value still?"
Finally, Kaplan and Norton suggest that each of the above prospects must be linked to a
general objective which ensures that there is consistency and conduct mutually enhanced. In other
words, the BSC is more than just an "Instrument panel" with indicators critics and factors key
success. To be effective, it should reflect organization's mission and objectives.

Costs and benefits of a system to measure the performance

Planning and implementing a system of performance management can be expensive, it's also
numerous analyzes of processes and activities of the organization, analyzes which consume much
time. You can also turn into a bureaucratic nightmare, as it may generate hundreds of documents
relating to microscopic scroll mode of the activities and to measure them. It should be recalled that
the idea of performance management has resulted from studies of Frederick Winslow Taylor, in the
first part of the 20th century XX. According to Taylor, the key to increase productivity was
systematic analysis of the work practices, in order to identify the most efficient process, which then
could become a model of good practice (Stewart, 1989).
The Taylorism has been the basis for the development of management by objectives and of
total Quality Management, which were subsequently refined in a pattern wider performance
management (Bouckaert and van Doren, 2003). As a result, a system of management of
696
 Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, 15(2), 2013, 692-702

performance structured in rigid mode can suppressed creativity and initiative, through the
establishment of narrow labor standards defined and strict standards of behavior at the place of
work.
At the same time, a system of management of performance well thought may generate a
series of benefits in the long term (Williams, 1998). Firstly, it ensures that the activities of the
organization are directly linked to the purposes and its major objectives. Secondly, it can motivate
employees by the establishment of targets, that once touched generates rewards. Thirdly, such a
system provides clarity, not only by identifying what must be done, but also by indicating persons
responsible for this. Fourthly, it completes cycle of management, by monitoring processes, and
measurement of results. Fifthly, it forces managers to develop indicators for the outcome
quantifiable factors key to eliminate ambiguous aims objectives and unclear.

Designing a model of appropriate performance management sport

The BSC model has several strengths, but requires significant adjustments to meet the needs
sports organizations. An approach is to maintain the four dimensions and their use to project a
particular model of performance management, which reflects specific features of sports
organizations. In this respect, has been designed following model management of performance in
the "9 points" (Hoye et al., 2006).
The first dimension of performance focuses on victories, awards and successes. This
dimension recognizes that most sports clubs and associations will be seen as well producing teams
and players winners. In other words, placed in front of the choice of between championship winning
and increase profits, most clubs will prefer medal winner.
However, as with all organizations, clubs, associations and sports contract need funds to
ensure the long-term viability, in order to pay their debts and to cover operational costs year-over-
year. Thus, second dimension is concerned about financial sustainability. In this respect, the
indicators relating to an increase in income will not be enough of them, being required indicators
related to profit, liquidity, long-term debts, the return on investment and increase in net assets.
Distribution market is the third dimension. This refers to the degree to which a sports
league, a club or an association sports is able to facilitate its consumption practice sports. Provided
that the primary objective is linked to the participation in sport, then it must be concerned about the
number sport bases, their location and quality of experience on offer. If the lens affects the
audience, then you will need to be considered in view of the number of seats in the stadium,
exposure to the radio and TV broadcasts coverage
The fourth dimension is the size of the market and the market share. The fifth dimension
is customer satisfaction, expressing how powerful approve viewers, fans and the members
performance league, club or association. As a general rule, sports organizations generates
connections extremely chocolate sauce with customers, fans and the members, but there are
situations where they may rarely attends matches and involves less. Investigating participants,
members and fans can reveal early signs of their discontent or, on the contrary, may indicate factors
that claim the relationship.
The sixth dimension is represented by the procedures and internal processes. For sports
organizations, this begins with the mode of recruitment of players and general quality. Recruitment
and retention of members is another important issue, as it is about their ability to contribute with
time, expertise, and money. Players' capacity to improve skills is a function of the system support,
here entering and skills personnel involved in drive. This leads to organization's ability to ensure a
safe environment, in which risk management is taken seriously, and incidence of disputes is
reduced. Many of the above factors are difficult to quantify, but requires special attention.
Product improvement is the seventh dimension. In this regard, sports do not differ more than
the business itself, in the sense that it operates on a highly competitive market, and ongoing
innovation and improving the products are essential in order to attract new customers and keep old
697
 Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, 15(2), 2013, 692-702

ones. Some sports have been extremely successful to change the game to satisfy needs of special
groups, while others may not have not have parted with traditional practices. In the case of spectator
sports took place few improvements on stadiums, while in other cases there has been a real
revolution with regard to the form and the comfort stadiums galleries. Changes in the design sports
equipment have also improved quality of the product (for example, in tennis - the use of fiber in
missiles from carbon).
The eighth dimension is the development and the learning process relating to staff. Sport is
an activity centered on person, time-consuming, requiring staff with social skills refined and ability
to create an organizational culture, to keep players and members. Innovation sports specific
technical skills are inadequate administrative and traditional drive. Thus, it becomes necessary to
retraining and education staff, in order to ensure consistency between staff skills and new
technologies and infrastructures underlying contemporary sports.
Last and the new dimension refer to economic, social and environmental impacts on which
it has a sports league, a club or a sport association upon the Community. From this point of view,
support from the part of the government will depend on the positive side of this impact (Norman
and MacDonald, 2004). Sports organizations have responsibility for setting up organizational
cultures who cherishes things like: diversity, equal opportunities and non-discriminatory treatment
of gays, homosexuals and religious minorities (Atkinson et al., 1997; Robbins and Barnwell, 2002;
Williams, 1998).

An overview of Romanian football organizations activity

Institutional setting
In Romania there are four types of sports organizations: public sports club, private sports
club, county sports association and sports association without legal personality. In terms of sport
practiced are predominating football organizations. For this reason, I have collect data from
National Institute of Statistics for period 1992-2011 to highlight the evolution of football
organizations and registered players registered at Romanian Soccer Federation (figure no. 1).

Figure no. 1 - The evolution of football organizations and registered players 1992-2011
Source: author calculation, data collected from www.insse.ro
698
 Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, 15(2), 2013, 692-702

The results for the period tested suggest there is no high volatility in both football
organizations and registered players. For football organizations, standard deviation is equal to 466
(lower than mean 2621), while for registered players standard deviation is equal to 17528 (lower
than mean 103400). However, in terms of registered players, one can observe a first peak in 1995
followed by a major decrease and then an increasing evolution with a new peak in 2007. This
random walking evolution highlights the weakness of sport activities in Romania.

Parametric approach
There are two contemporary approaches to the measurement of efficiency, i.e. the
parametric approach (econometric frontier) and nonparametric approach (Data Envelopment
Analysis-DEA). The main advantage of the econometric frontier is related to several well-
developed statistical tests, which could be used in order to investigate the validity of the model
specification. However, the assumption of normality of errors influences the accuracy of these
hypotheses (Barros, C. and Leach, S., 2006). Unlike the econometric approach, DEA allows the use
of multiple inputs and outputs but does not require any functional form on the data, neither does it
make distributional assumptions for the inefficiency term (Mirfakhr-al-Dini, S., Aghda, A., 2011).
In this paper, I adopt the econometric frontier approach and the data for this study were
gathered from National Institute of Statistics for period 1992-2011 and were analyzed by software
Eviews 7. Given that the main source of financing football sports organization is sponsorships
provided by companies the main aim of the study is to test the relation between football
organizations and economic growth. To do so, I use log of football organizations (OS) as a proxy
for dependent variable and log of Gross Domestic Product Per Capita (GDPPC) as a proxy for
independent variable. I hypothesize that if there is economic growth, firms record higher
performance and are willing to support sports activities due to tax advantages, i.e. a positive
association between football organizations and economic growth is expected.
A useful tool in the analysis at begin is a graphical inspection between independent variable
and dependent variable (Booc, C., 2013). The scatter diagram between OS and GDPPC is reported
in figure no. 2.
8.2
8
os2
7.8
7.6

4 6 8 10
gdppc2
knots 5; R-sq. 0.6959; RMSE .1084

Figure no. 2 - The relation between football organizations and economic growth 1992-2011
Source: author calculation

The scatter plot suggests that the association between variables, OS and GDPPC is not
linear, and record a quadratic U-shape. As the chart illustrates, the highest number of football
organizations is associated with either lowest or highest GDPPC. This preliminary result is tested in
699
 Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, 15(2), 2013, 692-702

depth using OLS econometric technique. Based on the methodology aforementioned, the specific
empirical model is:
OS t 1 * GDPPC 2 * GDPPC 2 t (1)
where OS represent the number of football organization, GDPPC represent log of Gross
Domestic Product Per Capita, and t is the idiosyncratic error component. The regression results are
reported in table no. 5.
Table no. 5
Regression analysis
Dependent Variable: Football organizations
Method: Least Squares
Sample: 1992 2011
Included observations: 20
HAC standard errors & covariance (Bartlett kernel,
Newey-West fixed bandwidth = 3.0000)

Variable Coefficient Std. Error t-Statistic Prob.

GDPPC -0.805970 0.081499 -9.889304 0.0000

GDPPC 0.052333 0.005276 9.918394 0.0000
CONSTANT 10.77703 0.305052 35.32851 0.0000

R-squared 0.660395 Mean dependent var 7.856602

Adjusted R-squared 0.620442 S.D. dependent var 0.174633
S.E. of regression 0.107588 Akaike info criterion -1.483531
Sum squared resid 0.196779 Schwarz criterion -1.334171
Log likelihood 17.83531 Hannan-Quinn criter. -1.454374
F-statistic 16.52911 Durbin-Watson stat 2.069660
Prob(F-statistic) 0.000103
Source: author calculation

Thus, the regression results do not reject the preliminary result suggested by scatter plot.
There is a non-linear association between football organizations and economic growth since both
GDPPC and square of GDPPC are significant. Surprisingly, GDPPC is negatively correlated with
OS while square of GDPPC is positively correlated. This highlight there is a minimum level of
GDPPC (around 2457.5 RON) from where business environment could support sport activities.
In terms of significance, the model is statistically significant with F-statistic equal to 16.529
and p-value 0.000 and does not exhibit autocorrelation of errors since Durbin-Watson equal to 2.07.
Furthermore, around 66% of variations in football organizations could be explained by GDPPC.
This mean there are other financing sources than companies sponsorships.

Conclusions
Sport has a range of unique features, such as: the development of irrational passions of
humans; differences in the way we judged performance; interdependent nature of the relationship
between sports organizations; anti-competitive behavior; The product sports (a game or a contest)
has a variable quality; enjoys a high degree of loyalty; fans proved to have less optimism high;
sports organizations are reluctant in adoption of new technologies; often, sports is characterized by
limited time offer. A number of environmental factors influence the operating mode of sports
organizations, namely: globalization, government policy, professionalism and technological
developments. Sports industry can be defined as consisting of three distinct components, but

700
 Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, 15(2), 2013, 692-702

interdependent: public sector, voluntary sector or non-profit-making and commercial sector or

professional. These sectors will not operate in isolation, but also to launch often in joint projects.
Some aspects related to sports management are unique, being linked to: strategic
management, human resources management, leadership, organizational culture, a governess and
management performance. Effective management of human resources within sports organizations is
based on implementation of a set of processes interdependent. Human resources management
strategies are essential for the success of organizations, namely: planning, recruitment, selection,
orientation, and training, performance evaluation, rewarding and keeping. Management of human
resources effectively allows them sports organizations to cope with specific and unique challenges,
such as place athletes in professional sports organizations and the large number of individuals
volunteers required for major events. On the other hand, a human resources management weak may
generate a low level of satisfaction for employees, who will lose their devotion to the organization.
In short, efficiently and systematically human resources management should be seen as an
important tool in management for any organization, regardless of size or type.
With respect to performance management, it might be asserted that can bring substantial
benefits sports organizations, despite the costs involved. There is no system of performance
management perfectly. It depends on the organization's special features sporting events, strategic
objectives and of the environment in which they operate. A good starting point is represented by the
model of Kaplan and Norton, which can be customized to specific needs of the organization. The
model with 9 dimensions offers a range of possibilities, but the indicators are quantifiable factors, to
be linked to the objectives of the organization's primary and in accordance with the stakeholders
expectations.
The results from the study performed suggest there is a non-linear relation between football
organizations and economic growth, with a minimum level around 2457.5 RON and also 66% of
variations could be explained by GDPPC.

References

1. Atkinson A., Waterhouse J.H., Wells R.B., 1997. A stakeholder approach to

strategic performance measurement, Sloan Management Review, Spring, 2537.
2. Barros C., Leach S., 2006. Analyzing the Performance of the English F.A. Premier
League With an Econometric Frontier Model, Journal of Sports Economics, Vol. 7
No. 4, 391407.
3. Booc C., 2013. The effect of working capital on profitability: evidence from Romania,
"Ovidiu" University Annals, Economic Sciences Series, Volume XIII, Issue 1, 1114-
1118.
4. Bouckaert G., 1995. Improving performance management, In The Enduring
Challenges in Public Management (Halachmi, A. & Bouckaert, G., eds). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
5. Bouckaert G., van Doren W., 2003. Performance measurement and management in
public sector organisations, In Public Management and Governance, (Bovaird, T. &
Lofler, E., eds). London: Routledge.
6. Chappelet J., Bayle E., 2005. Strategic and Performance Management of Olympic
Sport Organisations, Champaign: Human Kinetics.
7. Downward P., Dawson A., 2000. The Economics of Professional Team Sports.
London: Routledge.
8. Friedman M., Parent M., Mason D., 2004, Building a framework for issues
management in sport through stakeholder theory, European Sport Management
Quarterly, 3, 170190.

701
 Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, 15(2), 2013, 692-702

9. Hoye R., Smith A., Westerbeek H., Stewart B., Nicholson M., 2006. Sport
Management. Principles and Applications, Elsevier Linacre House, Jordan Hill,
Oxford OX2 8DP.
10. Kaplan R., Norton D., 1996. The balanced scorecard, Boston: Harvard University
Press.
11. Mirfakhr-al-Dini S., Aghda A., 2011. Measuring the Performance of Sport
Associations in Attracting Individuals to Sports Using Data Envelopment Analysis. A
Case Study in the Yazd City (Iran) in 2008, Australian Journal of Basic and Applied
Sciences, 5(10): 829-837.
12. Norman W., MacDonald C., 2004. Getting to the bottom of triple bottomline
accounting , Business Ethics Quarterly, 14 (2), 243262.
13. Robbins S., Barnwell N., 2002. Organisation theory. Frenchs Forest: Pearson
Education Australia.
14. Sandy R., Sloane P.J., Rosentraub M., 2004. The Economics of Sport: an international
perspective, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
15. Slack T., 1997. Understanding sport organizations: The application of organization
theory. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics
16. Smith A., Stewart B., 1999. Sports Management: A Guide to Professional Practice,
Sydney: Allen and Unwin.
17. Stewart R., 1989. The nature of sport under capitalism and its relationship to the
capitalist labour process, Sporting Traditions, 6 (1), 4361.
18. Williams R., 1998. Performance Management: perspectives on employee
performance, London: Thomson Business Press.

702