Question 1: Discuss how social, political, and economic conditions have affected the emergence, growth, and/or current state of what the textbook authors refer to as “corporate sports” in the United States. Your response should take power into account-who makes the meaningful decisions and whose interests are being served and whose interests are being ignored?
Social, economic, and political conditions have not only aided the emergence of “corporate sports” but have also vastly contributed to the growth and are responsible for the current state of corporate sports activities in the United States. Chaitrali Sardesai and Shruti Bhiwandiwala, on their post on The Economic Times, cited the desire by corporations to improve employee morale and their inclination to enhance employee productivity as two of the main reasons that have led to the emergence of sporting activities in several organizations. In addition, the duo narrated that the aspiration to sustain and better employee morale and productivity within the workstation has greatly contributed to the promotion of corporate sports. Low employee productivity and poor work attitudes according to Masaru Sasaki are some of the obstacles to achievement of strategic objectives in most firms. Masaru Sasaki added that these two hindrances to realization of economic goals are prevalent in quite a number of institutions, and therefore, creating an urgent need for intervention strategies. Several approaches have been used to address low employee morale (and that is mainly caused by boredom, heavy workload, and working long shifts), and diminishing productivity. However, use corporate sports activities remains the most frequently used to date (Sardesai & Bhiwandiwala, n.d.). Consequently, many corporations in America today, have added sports activities to their list of services offered to employees. Some even have teams competing in amateur leagues and this is considered as a strategy to cut monotony and foster the development of a crop of workers who don not just work to earn pay, but who also consider their workplace and work station assignments as fun.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Apart from striving to improve and sustain employee morale and productivity, employers also consider corporate sports as a way of nurturing team spirit and also a strategy of employee retention. Cultivation of team spirit, a social factor, and retention of top talent, an economic condition, have both played significant roles in the emergence and growth of corporate sports (Sardesai &Bhiwandiwala, and “Eight reasons you should create a company sports team.”). Several operations within firms require the combined efforts of all employees to complete; hence making the urge to nurture the spirit of teamwork understandable. Regarding reduction of employee turnover (especially as a result of losing top talent to rival firms), Agrawal asserted that if an employee was given the freedom of choosing between working in an institution where they are not always happy even though with a bigger salary, and a firm where pay is way less but their happiness is guaranteed, most workers would willingly take a pay cut and choose the latter. Employers too seem to be aware of this fact. Many employers in America today are striving to make their workplaces both favorable and conducive to their employees. And one of the most used approaches to ensuring workplaces become homelier and more welcoming is promotion of outdoor activities at the work station.
Another social factor that has significantly contributed to the emergence and growth of corporate sports is the need to maintain a healthy employee population. Lack of exercise has been established to be a major cause of chronic conditions (Booth, Roberts & Laye). In this case then, office workers are highly vulnerable to developing chronic conditions. Managements therefore view corporate sports as a way of keeping their staff exercised and healthy. A healthy employee is more productive. An institution that also keeps its workers healthy is also less likely to lose its employees to medication and sick leaves, or through resignations due to inability to work. This way, the organizations in question do not have to worry about fresh recruitments and loss of employees in a way that would disrupt their operational strategies.
Advancing the argument above, Michael Serazio and Emily Thorson on their 2017 post on The Washington Post argued that for a long time now, sports have been politicized, and so is has the fairly modern corporate sports. Company managements are promoting sports activities and apparently trying to use the initiative as a way of acquiring the advantage over rival groups. It is not just a matter of which corporation has the best team anymore as having the best corporate team, and best sports facilities is today used to attract top talent within the job market. Corporate sports are also today used as a measure of organizational success. A firm boasting of the best corporate team is arguably the most successful and employees are likely to find such an employer more appealing.
An overview of the conditions (social, economic and political) that have contributed to the emergence and growth of corporate sports discussed above reveals several facts. The first is that corporate managements make the meaningful decisions. Top officials within a firm have the final say on the assortment of sports activities to stage within their institutions. Even though sometimes this decision is determined by the survey results of employee interests, not all employees can agree to the same thing; therefore, at the end of the day, the authorities decide what is best for their organizations. The second fact is that corporate sports best serve the interests of the employer (firms) both directly and indirectly. The third fact is that in a number of incidences, these sports programs are not best-informed; hence, not the interest of all employees is always addressed.
Question 2: Briefly discuss the relationship between socialization, culture, ideology, and values in youth sports in contemporary society
There exists a close relationship between socialization, ideology, culture, and values in youth sports in the present day society. In the United States for example, parents are encouraged to enroll their children in sports activities from an early age. Studies express that participation in sports is of invaluable significance not only to shaping of character (reduces delinquent behavior), and also leads to increased social and academic performance (Sadlik & Kim). Antonio José Müller endorsed the viewpoint of Sadlik and Kim. He expressed that physical education and sports create avenues to fostering development in the cognitive, physical, as well as social domains and particularly so the juveniles. He particularly focused on social domains, describing it as entailing character development and moral reasoning. Children are therefore best placed to learn important skills and values that go way past the health benefits of participation in athletics, thanks to indulgence in sports and physical education. These sentiments are echoed in Nurture’s YouTube the video, “Little Big Dreams.” In the YouTube clip, parents believe that by registering their young children in gymnastic schools like Li Xiaoshuang, they are not only helping the juveniles create a bright future for themselves, but also equipping them with important life skills that they would need as adult members of the society- the Chinese believe that a child must face hardship to mature fully. Children who stay with their parents are pampered and often turn out as irresponsible adults. It is expressed in the video that the gymnastics schools help instill discipline and independence in the juveniles.
A section of modern-day sociologists have come out to challenge the philosophies of their counterparts who have questioned the contributions of sports to the social institution (the latter who subscribe to a hierarchical model of culture where sport is often interpreted as its antithesis: a bodily practice that is of minimal cultural significance). The sociologists as opposed to the views of their opponents hold that sport is a leading social institution in most societies. That sport combines the characteristics found in an institution, and in addition to possessing an inimitable appeal that can only be likened to religion (Frey & Eitzen). These research findings invalidate the ideas of the critics of the contribution of sports; sports indeed are aspects of culture. A culturalist approach to the analysis of sports reveals that sport is a cause and an indicator of the sociocultural shift evidenced in the contemporary society. The YouTube video, “Little Big Dreams,” qualifies the opinions of Frey and Eitzen. The video also reveals the role of the media in expressing how significant to culture sports is (sports contribute to the forging of regional or national identity). In addition, the video is also a revelation of how culture spreads. Initially localized cultural sports practices and which for a long time had been fixed to minor towns and villages have been dispersed to other regions within and even past national border lines, thanks to media outlets. In the video, the juveniles are sent to gymnastic schools so as to sharpen their skills in gymnastics with the hope of emerging as potential and successful Olympic gymnastics participants of the future. Chinese love for gymnastics is one of the main themes aired throughout the video and anyone watching the video would be able to notice this, and even begin relating gymnastics to the Chinese culture.
Question 3: Briefly discuss the claims of the “injustice of amateurism” and the limited rights of college athletes. Do these injustices necessitate some form of pay for college athletes, why or why not?
Collegiate amateurism refers to the fact that college athletes are not entitled to pay for the athletic services they offer on behalf of their institutions. According to the National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA), the body manning college athletes, these groups of athletes are referred to as student athletes. NCAA asserts these athletes are students, and not employees of their respective institutions, and therefore are not monetarily rewarded for their participation in college sports. Additionally, NCAA claims that student athletes’ participation in college sports is nothing but part of their education. It is not the primary reason the students attend college. The Division I (football and basketball) student athletes on full scholarship are instead limited to receiving fees, tuition, board, rooms and books and not any other form of appreciation for their good play or talents from sports agents or boosters (Miller). The reality of collegiate athletics is however paradoxical with the amateurism belief propagated by the NCAA. Student athletes for this reason should be accorded monetary appreciation for their athletic efforts. Thomas Hurst for example revealed that only about 40% of college students participate in college sports for the sake of having fun. The remaining 60% favor being rewarded for their athletic contributions. Proponents of offering monetary rewards to college athletes on the other hand hold it that the athletes should be paid because they often need the money. Full scholarships do not afford any spending money to student athletes. Idolizers of compensating student athletes in excess of the allowable scholarship amounts have also cited the demanding nature college athletics as a reason for the students to be entitled to pay. College athletics should be considered as a part-time job. Finally, supporters of according monetary incentives to student athletes also believe that these students are entitled to a section of the college sports budgetary allocation, sponsorship deals, and TV deals. These funds are currently pocketed by NCAA, schools, and coaches.
