The sport industry has become an enormous cultural and economic force across the globe. Yet it is one that is largely understudied in regards to public relations. In the United States, intercollegiate athletics—particularly football and men’s and women’s basketball—garners a tremendous amount of attention from media, the government, sports fan communities, merchandisers and scholars. However, there is scant research on public relations within intercollegiate athletics departments. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to learn how intercollegiate athletics directors (ADs) from National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division I institutions with major basketball programs understand public relations, overall and in the context of men’s and women’s basketball coaches. For this study, a phenomenological approach was used. Twelve ADs were interviewed, and their transcripts were analyzed using comparative analysis procedures. The findings show that the overall understanding of public relations to the participants is integrated impression management: a combination of image, message, and action/interaction. The ADs associated public relations with marketing, branding, communication, media relations, community/university relations, fundraising and crisis management. They expressed a range of responsibility within their organizations for public relations, as well as related issues and challenges. They also associated some specific responsibilities and challenges regarding public relations to the context of men’s and women’s basketball coaching. The results of this study imply that despite some scholars’ insistence that public relations is a distinct discipline from marketing, executives do not necessarily separate the two. The findings of this study aid in understanding how public relations might be evolving within intercollegiate athletics. Learning how those with power and influence in this industry understand public relations can help intercollegiate athletics departments with the root and ramifications of some major challenges. For scholars, this presents an opportunity to test and develop theory, as well as to identify trends, changes and solutions for public relations in an industry with cultural power and influence.

Athletic directors (ADs) in institutions of higher education are the chief administrators of their respective athletic departments. The purpose of this study is to describe the current demographic, educational, and professional characteristics of National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division II and III ADs. Forty-five Division II ADs and 105 Division III ADs responded to a survey of 725 institutions, returning response rates of 15.5% and 24.1% respectively. Findings for social and educational demographics mirror those of previous studies. Subjects in both divisions studied athletic administration in post-graduate work, but studies in education were also common. Experiences in coaching and athletic administration were most frequent for both samples. Division II ADs were notably experienced in compliance, while teaching experiences were common with Division III ADs. Both sets were heavily involved in finance and internal policy, but Division II responses emphasized community relations while Division III responses emphasized campus relations. Limited resources challenged ADs in both groups. In conclusion, NCAA institutions, especially those with athletic administration departments and significant minority populations, should promote NCAA diversity initiatives campus-wide. Students and professionals preparing for a career as a Division II or Division III AD should pursue post-graduate education in an administrative field, preferably in concentrations of sport or education. They should choose a career path involving teaching, coaching, or an administrative specialization within athletics, and they should be familiar with finance and NCAA regulations. Recommendations for future research include detailed analysis of AD job design and investigating whether ADs can be clustered based on their involvement in various tasks.

The position of director of intercollegiate athletics represents the highest administrative position in athletics in colleges and universities. During the days of the Association for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women (AIAW), 90% of the women's programs were coached and administered by women. Shortly after the implementation of Title IX in 1972, this trend began to change and most women's programs began to fall under the leadership of male coaches and administrators. During the summer of 1982, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) took control of the AIAW forcing women administrators to take a backseat to their male colleagues. This lack of administrative and coaching representation has also resulted in fewer role models for female athletes.This study was designed to compare the qualifications of men and women directors of intercollegiate athletics to determine if the women must be more qualified than theirmale counterparts to hold the same position. This study may also serve as a blueprint for women in athletics as to the qualifications and experiences necessary in their attaining a position of director of intercollegiate athletics.The results of a survey questionnaire to 200 male directors of NCAA Division I, II, III, and NAIA colleges, with a return rate of 52.3%, were compared to an early study conducted on female directors to determine if the qualifications between the two genders were different. The educational results were very similar between the two genders, with both maintaining that a master's degree was extremely important in attaining their positions. Both genders also confirmed that at least one year of experience in athletic administration was crucial to their appointment as director of athletics.In examining the qualifications of both men and women who hold athletic administrative positions, it was not conclusive that educationally or professionally, the women were more qualified than their male colleagues. The responses to the survey by both men and women were very similar in their beliefs of what was important in attaining their current positions. / School of Physical Education

This study examined gender differences in the leadership styles of Division I athletic directors. Perceptions of coaches and the athletic directors, themselves, regarding these styles were assessed. Ten Division I athletic directors (five male, five female) and six coaches (three male, three female) from each of the 10 schools completed a demographic questionnaire and a revised form of the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire - Form XII.Six separate independent groups t-test indicated no significant differences between the self-perceptions of male and female athletic directors on any of the six factors of leadership. A 2 x'2 x 3 (AD Gender x Coach Gender x Coach) ANOVA with repeated measures on the final two factors showed no significant difference in the perceptions of all coaches of male athletic directors versus all coaches of female athletic directors. The results did demonstrated that the perceptions of male coaches were significantly different from female coaches on the leadership factors of structure, production emphasis, and integration, regardless of the gender of the athletic director. / School of Physical Education

Thesis (M.S.)--Springfield College, 2005. / Includes bibliographical references. Also available online (PDF file) by a subscription to the set or by purchasing the individual file.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 2004. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 82-83). Also available online (PDF file) by a subscription to the set or by purchasing the individual file.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 2004. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 95-96). Also available online (PDF file) by a subscription to the set or by purchasing the individual file.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 2004. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 95-96).

Thesis (M.A.)--University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 2004. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 82-83).

Thesis (M.S.)--Springfield College, 2005. / Includes bibliographical references.