Event and Club Volunteer Potential: The Case of Women’s Rugby in England
Niki Koutrou*a and Paul Downwardb
School of Sport & Exercise Sciences, University of Kent, Kent, UK; b School of
Sport, Health & Exercise Sciences, Loughborough University, Leicestershire,
UK
a
Abstract
Sports could not survive without volunteers as they are vital to the ‘playing of sport’.
Volunteering in sports is typically associated with sports-club systems or sport
events. The purpose of this study is to explore the potential of harnessing volunteer
activity in different contexts, as a result of previous sports club volunteering
experience and to establish what determines the decision to volunteer and to continue
volunteering. This is important for government policy, given the current objectives
to promote a ‘Big Society’ and reduce public expenditure. A total of 168 volunteers
involved in women’s rugby in England completed a web-based survey. Factor
analysis was employed to summarise volunteers’ satisfaction with their experience.
The analysis yielded six reliable factors of volunteers’ satisfaction. Regression
analysis was then applied to identify which aspects of satisfaction, which
motivations, how much previous sports engagement and which socio-demographic
characteristics had an impact on actual volunteering for the women’s rugby world
cup, and future plans for volunteering in a rugby club at a rugby event, or at other
sport events. Regression results provide statistical support for the transfer of
volunteer efforts across activities. Thus, the UK government may meet its objectives
to stimulate a Big Society and widen community engagement through sport
volunteering, by acknowledging that social mobility varies between and within
1
sports and is determined by the experiences, interests, motives and characteristics of
both the individual volunteers and Voluntary Sport Organisations (VSOs).
Keywords: determinants of volunteer behaviour, single-sport event, sport clubs, Big
Society. Social Capital
1. Introduction
Sports volunteering is vital to the ‘playing of sport’ (Taylor 2004), and is typically
associated with either sports-club systems or single or multi-sport events (Schulz et
al.2010). Sport volunteering in the UK generally accounts for 26% of the total
volunteering activity. Voluntary sport clubs (VSCs) are where most of this
volunteering takes place. For example, it is reported that VSCs account for 75% of
sport volunteering and 83% of sport volunteer hours in England. In contrast, major
sports events comprise 1% and 0.6%, respectively (Sport England 2003). Despite
this difference in relative size, however, sport events also need volunteers and are
essential for elite-level sports as the culmination of competition within a given sport
either in a single-sport event, organised by the governing body, or across a variety of
sports in multi-sport events such as the Olympic Games that governing bodies seek
to be involved in. Indeed, such interconnectedness in volunteering is recognised in
UK sports policy in which it is argued that elite level-competition is essential for the
symbiotic development of mass participation, for example, through Olympic legacy
(DCMS/Strategy Unit 2002).
Prior to hosting the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games, the formation of
a Conservative-majority Coalition Government after the General Election in 2010
marked the promotion of the ‘Big Society’ idea. This was proposed in an attempt to
use volunteering as a means of ‘rolling back the state’, to help in reducing the state
2
deficit, following economic austerity, by decentralising state intervention and power
from the government to the individual, and also to develop social capital through
enhancing citizens’ opportunities for a more active involvement in community life
(Scott 2011). Investment into social capital accumulation was sought to be realised
through non-traditional, informal educational methods, for example volunteering,
given the benefits associated with such activities (Morgan 2013). One aspect of this
was that it was proposed after the effective staging of the London 2012 Olympic
Games, provision of sport participation opportunities through the voluntary sector
was anticipated to lead the legacy objectives of the Coalition Government, to address
the low sport participation rates and improve the health of the nation, and creating
opportunities for individuals to volunteer to enhance their self-esteem, confidence
and leadership skills; that is human capital which would be beneficial for the
community as a whole (Paylor 2011). The Department of Culture, Media and Sport
(DCMS), moreover, has also highlighted in their recent strategy for young people
-‘Creating a Sporting habit for life’- that sport volunteering has the potential to
reinforce social capital development by retaining young people into sport once
leaving school (DCMS 2012).
Despite such policy pronouncements, the evidence for a ‘trickle down’ effect is
typically weak (Frawley and Cush 2011), with some research indicating positive
effects from spectators attendance at events (Ramchandani and Coleman 2012) as an
inspiration to participate. It remains, however, that volunteers are important for both
events to occur and to facilitate mass participation. It follows that the recruitment,
training and organisation of volunteers should be informed by the interconnections
between club and event activity. This is particularly important because the
recruitment of new volunteers is five times more time-consuming than retaining the
3
existing ones (Strigas and Jackson 2003). In essence, this is also reinforced by the
very nature of sport and sport clubs where social inequalities often exist and social
capital acquisition vary between and within sports (Coalter 2007). For instance,
individuals who come from a higher socio-economic status and well networked
community are more likely to maintain their involvement, develop and mobilise
social capital in different sporting opportunities compared to individuals from less
advantaged communities (Kisby 2010, Taylor et al. 2012).
As discussed in the next section, the sport volunteering literature largely focuses on
volunteers’ motivations, satisfaction and future volunteering, or the substantial
economic contribution of volunteers in a wide array of activities pertaining to either
sport events or sports clubs (Clary et al. 1998, Cnaan and Goldberg-Glenn 1991).
There is some literature that examines the impact of sports event volunteering on
future volunteering (Downward and Ralston 2006, Doherty 2009, Hallmann and
Harms 2012). It follows that little is known about how specific sports’ club
volunteering provides a platform from which to harness volunteer effort in sports
events in the same sport, or in different sports to contribute towards society’s broader
sporting needs. In particular, in order to implement government policies of
increasing community engagement through volunteering, more evidence is needed
on the different motives, values and interests that attract individuals to volunteer and
on the factors that promote future volunteering in sports. Consequently, this article,
building upon previous work from Taylor et al. (2012), aims to address three key
concerns in the literature. First, to identify the separate effects of different factors,
such as socio-demographic characteristics, previous engagement in sport,
motivations and satisfaction with volunteering on the decisions to continue
volunteering. Second, to examine whether involvement with one sport volunteering
4
context, for example, in sport clubs, stimulates interest in further volunteering in
similar or different sport volunteering contexts, such as in sport events. Lastly, to
comment on the actions that should be undertaken from the government and national
governing bodies (NGBs) to ensure that the ‘Big Society’ policy could be realised
through volunteering in sports.
This article begins to fill this gap in the literature, by examining a case-study of
women’s rugby union in England. It was conducted with the support of the Rugby
Football Union for Women (RFUW). The RFUW is the national governing body for
the sport of women’s rugby in England and aims to promote, develop and govern
both community and elite women’s rugby in England. It was founded in 1994 and at
the time of this research consists of 288 clubs comprising of 187 senior clubs, 54
student teams, 110 Under 18’s teams and 125 Under 15’s teams (RFUW, 2010). As
the RFUW hosted the Women’s Rugby World Cup in August 2010, this presented an
ideal opportunity to test the actual impact of club volunteering on event volunteering
as well as to investigate stated intentions of future activity in volunteering through
regression analysis. The RFUW aimed to recruit volunteers from both clubs and the
community.
2. Literature Review
It is argued that one of the positive externalities derived from volunteering in sports
is that it contributes to social capital development and social mobility (Handy and
Brudney 2007). Social capital refers to the ‘trust and reciprocity’ occurring on
individuals’ relationships when working together for achieving a common goal
(Bailey et al. 2003). Bourdieu (1986) defined social capital as ‘the aggregate of the
actual or potential resources which are linked to the possession of a durable network
5
of more or less institutionalised relationships of mutual acquaintance and
recognition’ (p.248). In this regard, the role of sports and sport clubs in promoting
social capital and a shared identity is commented on a number of sources (Coalter
2007, Delaney and Keaney 2005). Similarly, volunteers are often described as the
targeted ‘soft infrastructure’ following the legacy plans of governments aiming to
host a major sport event, referring to the potential of mobilising human resources to
other similar events and projects that the wider community would benefit from
(Solberg and Preuss 2007).
As noted, the role of volunteering in embracing wider communities is especially
critical nowadays, as recent policy priorities of the previous Coalition Government in
the UK acknowledge the value of the voluntary sector as an asset in empowering
social action and a more dynamic and active community engagement, development
and responsibility (McCabe 2010). The ‘Big Society’ policy in the UK emerged in
2010 after the British Elections, when the Conservatives formed a coalition
government with the Liberal-Democrats, with the aim ‘to put more power and
opportunity into people’s hands’ across neighbourhoods, communities, social
enterprises, charities, clubs and local authorities (Cabinet Office 2010, p. 1). The
economic austerity climate and the necessity for reduced public expenditure led to
the re-examination of the relationship between the state and the society in the
delivery of public services, by bringing local communities and citizens to the fore of
improving society through volunteering (Smith 2010). While, the boundaries of the
Big Society policy are not restricted to sports volunteering, it should be
acknowledged that the main area that volunteering takes place in the UK is sports
(Taylor et al. 2012). Therefore, sport volunteering is expected to play a great role in
Big Society policy aspirations, as a substitute for the provision of reduced public
6
sector opportunities and as a means of promoting community activism (HM
Government 2010). However, there is considerable debate over whether the Big
Society Policy is simply just a means to an end, implying that the policy is used to
legitimise the cuts to public expenditures and the shrinking over public services
(Pattie and Johnston 2011). Critics of the Big Society policy question its potential to
bring more people into volunteering, as a result and as a substitute of reduced
government interventions. The assumption that active community engagement
enhances the acquisition of social capital and subsequently facilitates social mobility
is rather unexplored (Morgan 2013). In addition, another concern with the Big
Society policy is its focus on enhancing volunteer activity in the most deprived
communities and areas of the country. However, as several authors argue the
decision to volunteer depends more strongly on macro-economic factors and the
magnitude of social and relational networks than on the place of residence. For
instance, the socio-economic status of an individual and his mutual acquaintances
will have an impact on their decisions to form social networks and volunteer (Kisby
2010, Taylor et al. 2012). In addition, individuals, organisations or communities
with a higher network of connections are more likely to mobilise social capital
through engaging in multiple activities and if such network construction is allowed
by the time, effort given and other resources at their disposal (Bourdieu 1986,
Morgan 2013). This suggests that current inequalities in sport volunteering will
continue to exist, if no additional support is provided by the government to tackle
them (Kisby 2010, Taylor et al. 2012). There is also lack of empirical evidence to
support whether this bottom-up approach to policy implementation coincides with
the values, willingness, ability and interest of the grass-roots organisations to be
involved in the process of promoting and providing sport participation opportunities
7
and facilitate social mobility through social capital development (May et al. 2013).
Voluntary sport clubs (VSCs) are more restricted to outsiders and tend to operate in
isolation compared to other voluntary associations, given that their members’
interests are concentrated around specific activities and stem from the love of sport.
Thus, VSCs do not reflect general volunteers’ motivations for involvement in a
broader sense suggesting that opportunities for social capital development are
occasionally neglected in sports (Morgan 2013, Nicholson and Hoye 2008). Given
that British volunteers are more likely to get involved in sport clubs for the love of
the sport, or to give something back to the club (Allison 2001), rather than to achieve
the Government’s policy aspirations, it is doubtful whether the individual sport
volunteer will be engaged in the ‘Big Society’ mission for social capital creation
(Morgan 2013). However, it should be noted that while volunteering in sport clubs
reflects the needs of like-minded people and the club’s priorities, individuals who
engage in club volunteering bring into the network, pre-existing levels of social
capital developed through their involvement in similar pursuits and this potentially
reinforces social mobility (Nicholson and Hoye 2008). This aligns to Putnam’s
(2000) distinction of social capital creation through bonding, bridging or linking
processes referring to the way connections and networks are formed in sports
between homogenous or rather disparate groups of people.
Thus, the findings of the current study will inform policy makers on whether the
aspirations of a sport participation, physical activity and volunteering legacy, after
the London 2012 Games can be translated into wider community involvement and
social action through sport volunteering, and whether there is potential for VSOs and
individual volunteers, to be transformed into active agents of the ‘Big Society’ idea.
8
To generate the hypotheses to be investigated, and to provide a rationale for the
factors to be included in this empirical research, the volunteering literature is now
reviewed. Examination of the VSC and sports-event volunteering literature reveals
relatively distinct sets of motivations for volunteering and constituencies from which
volunteers emerge. These are now discussed along with the possibility that
volunteers’ satisfaction with their activity and sports engagement may then lead the
individual to progress to other volunteering pursuits in organisations or at events.
2.1. Volunteer motivations
An extremely large and international literature has generally argued that the
motivation to volunteer arises out of a balance between self-interest (albeit expressed
in a variety of ways) and altruism (see Stebbins 1996, Taylor 2004). For example,
early work such as Clark and Wilson (1961) identified that there are both tangible
and intangible dimensions of volunteering. These stem from the material reward
from being engaged in an activity or the solidarity and emotional attachments that
are experienced, respectively. Such motivations have been formalised into scales
such as the Motivation to Volunteer (MTV) scale developed by Cnaan and
Goldberg-Glen (1991) in which both altruistic and egoistic motivations for
volunteering are identified. More recently, the Volunteer Function Inventory (VFI)
derived from Clary et al. (1998) identifies six motives ranging from altruism,
development of skills, social interaction, career enhancement, personal esteem and
personal development.
Despite this formality of conceptualisation and direct applications of these scales in
empirical work, the motivations for volunteering are also expressed more informally
in a variety of empirical contexts. For example, altruism, through helping the
9
organisation to achieve its goals by putting personal efforts and time commitment
into sport, is noted in sports clubs in general in England (Sport England 2003). This
particularly happens with the former players of clubs, as it is reported that they have
an existing interest and desire to repay the organisation from which they benefited in
the past in the sector they volunteer for (Cuskelly et al. 2006; DCMS 2011).
Moreover, it is noted that most sport volunteers start to volunteer in order to support
a cause they believe in, or because they want to support a member of their family
that participates in the club’s activities, such as their children (Doherty 2005). Of
course, there are social benefits too, in which degrees of self-interest emerge.
Consequently, seeking friendship and camaraderie through club membership are
significant motives as well (Sport, England 2003, Doherty 2005, Cuskelly et al.
2006).
In the context of sports events, investigations of motivations have also produced
formalised scales, with subsequent application to specific contexts. Farrell, Johnston
and Twynam (1998) proposed the Special Event Volunteer Motivation Scale
(SEVMS) based on a development of the VFI. This measures four underlying
dimensions covering the desire to contribute to community by doing something
useful; social interaction and networking; extrinsic influences on an individual’s
propensity to volunteer; and, finally, the expectations of others. Bang and
Chelladurai (2003) proposed the Volunteer Motivations Scale for International
Sporting Events (VMS-ISE) and identified the importance of; expressing values;
patriotism; interpersonal contacts through meeting new people; personal growth
through feeling needed; career orientation through gaining experience and, finally,
extrinsic rewards connected with factors such as access to the event. Subsequently,
10
Bang et al. (2008) have added the love of sports as a general motivation for such
volunteering.
An important feature of the literature on volunteering motivations is the possibility
that motivations may change over time and across settings (Slaughter 2002). For
instance, it is argued that long-term volunteers are more likely to volunteer in order
to give something back to the community rather than to experience being part of a
unique experience, or the seeking of social interaction and networking (Cuskelly et
al. 2006). The latter reasons might be much more likely at a sports event given its
relatively unique nature. Thus, as Cuskelly et al. (2006) identified, experiences may
influence volunteers’ levels of commitment to an organisation or a voluntary cause.
It is argued that this issue needs to be considered more closely by researchers, in
order to evaluate the impact of such changes in time and context on future
volunteering behaviour (Bang et al. 2009). The next sections, consequently, indicate
how the context of volunteers, through their socio-economic circumstances as well
as their more general engagement in sports, in addition to their experiences, affects
volunteering.
2.2. Socio-Demographic Characteristics
The empirical research reveals that VSCs and sports events tend to recruit volunteers
from quite distinct socio-economic constituencies that are, in turn, different from
other volunteer contexts. Sport England (2003) and more recently the DCMS (2011)
reported that compared with general volunteers, sport-club volunteers tend to be
from higher socio-economic groupings, possess a higher education level and,
typically, have a White-British ethnic background. Moreover, parental motivation for
committing to volunteering is less relevant in the sporting context than elsewhere. It
11
is argued that in part this is because males are more likely to volunteer than females
and younger age-groups are more prevalent (DCMS 2011). Most sports volunteers
are in the relatively low age band of 35-44 years (Nichols and Padmore 2005). On
the other hand, it is argued that where present, older volunteers are more likely to
undertake formal roles in clubs (Sport England 2003). Major-event volunteers’
characteristics can reflect the gender and age profile of the participants in the
specific sport concerned, producing similar profiles to club volunteers. However, it is
also noted that the larger and more unique the event the broader the volunteer
demographic. There can also be much less connection with sports (Downward and
Ralston 2006).
2.3. Sports Engagement
The fact that major-event volunteers can be less connected with their sports is
indicative of the possibility that prior sport engagement, for example, as a
participant, might be an important factor that underpins the motivation for sports
volunteering. However, the role of sports engagement has not been researched well
in the volunteering literature. Many studies, such as those reviewed in the motivation
literature in section 2.1, do not investigate its relevance at all, or subsume its impact
within generalised concepts such as the love of sports, or retaining links with clubs.
Burgham and Downward (2005), however, identified a strong influence of
volunteers’ previous participation in swimming, as well as the current participation
of their children, in determining the decision to volunteer and the duration of the
activity. Finally, based on small-scale qualitative research, Cuskelly and O’Brien
(2012) identified that the psychological and social connection of the former players
can underpin the transition to become a volunteer.
12
2.4. Satisfaction with the Volunteering Experience
The final determinant to be considered concerns how satisfaction through experience
of volunteering may affect continued activity in the future, and its potential transfer
to other contexts. The literature argues that volunteers’ job satisfaction is an outcome
of their experiences (Cuskelly et al. 2006), which is essential in leading to higher
levels of commitment to the sports organisation and then consistency in subsequent
behaviour (Stebbins 1996).
In this regard, research into community organisations suggests that if individuals
experience fewer rewards than costs from their volunteer involvement with an
organisation, then this relationship is not likely to be maintained and volunteers may
withdraw from their duties (Galindo-Kuhn and Guzley 2002). For example,
Silverberg et al. (2001) concluded that job satisfaction of volunteers at public
recreation parks arises from a combination of the job environment and psychological
needs that are met by volunteering. Therefore, volunteers expect appreciation,
support, sound operations, good communications with co-workers and meeting their
personal aspirations, in exchange for their time and efforts currently and in the
future. Most recently, Schlesinger et al. (2012) identified that the solidarity
experienced through volunteering, along with job satisfaction correlated positively
with long-term volunteering commitment.
Similar sentiments are expressed at sports events. Downward and Ralston (2006)
identified that experiences at the Manchester Commonwealth Games encouraged
volunteers’ greater interest in sports, as well as their intentions to volunteer in future
sports and non-sports contexts. Similarly, Doherty (2009) identified that experiences
at the 2001 Canada Summer Games affected the future intentions of volunteers to be
13
involved in another major festival or event in local communities. Doherty (2009)
also noted that the study would be improved by accounting for the influence of
volunteers’ socio-demographic characteristics on their stated future behaviour, as
these were not investigated.
3. Theoretical Foundations
The above discussions are indicative of a well-established literature that examines
the determinants of broadly either VSC or sports-event volunteering. They suggest
that the motivations of volunteers, and their related underpinnings deriving from
volunteers’ socio-economic background and their engagement with sports, as well as
satisfaction with their experience, help to determine volunteer effort. To a greater or
lesser extent, the discussion of each of these determinants also indicates how they
can affect future volunteering. For example, through the desire to experience unique
events, or to retain community connections, that volunteering is highly contingent on
socio-demographic characteristics, and can be affected by sports participation.
However, it is only in a small number of studies in the event-volunteering literature
that a direct examination of the transfer of volunteer effort to other contexts has been
undertaken. For example, Hallmann and Harms (2012) identified that the
motivations to volunteer at a handball or equestrian event were positively associated
with intentions for future sports club or sports event volunteering. Furthermore, by
the authors’ own admission, the model did not account for the satisfaction of
volunteers and was thus incomplete.
A number of specific theoretical approaches have been adopted to construct and to
interpret the evidence on why people volunteer and how and why volunteer
behaviour changes. However, there is no consensus, or uniformly acceptable
14
approach. In part, this reflects the multidimensional nature of volunteering, but it
also reflects the different theoretical traditions connected with different disciplines
(Hustinx et al. 2010). Consequently, an economics approach might focus on
volunteering as the rational balancing of the costs and benefits of altruistic
behaviour, and examine volunteering as the consumption-production of ‘club-goods’
with the consequent development of human and social capital. Prior investment in
human and social capital might then make it more ‘economical’ for an individual to
volunteer more as it contributes to their sense of individual well-being. The point
about club-goods is that their consumption-production enhances individual wellbeing which may be directly influenced by enhancement in the well-being of others.
Self-interest is not the same as selfishness (Downward et al. 2009).
Sociologists, psychologists and political scientists emphasise that it is primarily
social cohesion, personality traits such as pro-social behaviour, or civic engagement
and formation of social capital that drive volunteering (Hustinx et al. 2010).
Accounting for changes in volunteering behaviour might then draw upon socialexchange theory. This suggests that the organisation and the volunteer are tied to an
exchange relationship with the needs of both being met in order for this relationship
to be maintained (Doherty 2005). Alternatively, following a process called
disconfirmation (Oliver 1980), and similar to consumers who continue to purchase
products or services when they are satisfied from what they experienced, volunteers
may continue to volunteer depending on the extent that their volunteering experience
is satisfying, rewarding and meets their needs (Cnaan and Goldberg-Glen 1991).
In the current research, and recognising the multifaceted nature of volunteering, no
specific theory is prioritised or sets of theories tested between. Rather, to facilitate
15
the empirical analysis, and following the approach of Downward and Ralston (2006),
the current research embraces the shared predictions from these theoretical
perspectives as hypotheses to be investigated.
Consequently, it is expected that the motivations for, and satisfaction with,
volunteering from VSC volunteers will not only contribute to further sports club
volunteering intentions, but also transfer to volunteering at the same sports’ events,
as well as those of other sports. It is also to be expected that such behaviour will be
influenced by engagement with sport and socio-economic circumstances.
Whilst these hypotheses take their foundation from either the VSC or event contexts,
it applies them to examining not only future club volunteering, but also the transfer
of effort between VSC and event volunteering. Some suggestions for the
mechanisms by which this happens can be offered. First, common to the different
theoretical traditions noted above is the shared perspective that volunteering can
increase social capital. The different theoretical perspectives on the specific role of
sports and sports clubs in promoting social capital are reviewed in a number of
sources (Delaney and Keaney 2005, Coalter 2007, Downward and Rasciute 2012).
Nonetheless, as indicated earlier, drawing on Putnam (2000), the literature generally
recognises that both bonding and bridging social capital can be developed through
voluntary association. The former applies to the strengthening of links between
members of homogenous groups, whilst the latter to the development of links across
more heterogeneous groups. Recognising this distinction suggests that it might be
expected that volunteers who have formed tight-knit communities in clubs, through
their joint experiences, might be less inclined to volunteer in a different context, such
as an event, even though it may be connected with the same sport if bonding
dominates. If it does not, then bridging might be encouraged which would promote a
16
transfer of effort across contexts. The balance of these forces needs to be identified
empirically. Second, the motivations to volunteer, as discussed earlier in the specific
context of events or VSCs, draw upon deeper more abstract desires to satisfy selfinterest, but also to express altruistic behaviour. It follows, therefore, that the
volunteer will seek to express concrete expression of these motivations in a variety
of different contexts. It might be the case that a volunteer is prepared to transfer his
efforts to another context, even if the current experience has not been satisfactory in
seeking to meet the needs expressed by the motivations. This implies that volunteers
might substitute their efforts. This nuance represents an additional element to the
standard hypothesis of the literature and comprises further theoretical novelty in the
current research.
4. Context, Data and Variables
4.1. Population, Sampling and Data Collection
The population of women’s rugby club volunteers is to a degree uncertain.
Consistent with the developing profile of women’s rugby, women’s teams are often
based at traditionally male clubs and share training facilities and coaches. They have
merged or move their base between clubs and cover much wider areas of recruitment
of players and competition (RFUW 2010). The founding of the national governing
body of the women’s game, the RFUW in 1983, is a prominent example of groups of
like-minded individuals, who formed their own organisational structures to enable
previously excluded social groups to participate in their sport of interest (Houlihan
and White 2002). Rugby is a traditionally male prevalent sport (Dunning and Sheard
1979), and despite that men’s rugby had its own governing body, the Rugby Football
Union (RFU) since 1871, the women’s game was developed much later by a group
17
of women graduates, who had practised the sport while at University and sought to
continue playing rugby after graduating (Houlihan and White 2002). Thus, it might
be expected that women’s rugby in England attracts participants and/or volunteers of
a higher educational background, given that University teams established the sport.
This supports Coalter (2007) in arguing that social capital manifestations may vary
between and within sports.
Club volunteers may also share duties with the men’s game, which is allowed for in
the analysis. Consequently, the specific club identities of volunteers were not a focus
of the research. Nonetheless, as records suggest that most women’s rugby clubs are
run with help from no more than five specifically identified formal volunteers
(RFUW 2010), this suggested a base population of approximately 750 volunteers as
a total of 150 clubs were identified as taking part in the national league structure of
women’s rugby at the time of the survey. Nonetheless, as only 100 clubs had an
active online page at the time of the survey, this constrained the sampling frame to
the corresponding potential 500 club volunteers.
An email invitation including a link to an internet-administered questionnaire was
sent to each of the contact addresses for the club encouraging them to identify
respondents. The research instrument was examined by a panel of experts, including
academics and RFUW representatives, prior to distribution, to ensure content
validity and any ethical implications. Access to the volunteer database of the RFUW
was not granted to the researchers, however, it was agreed that a link to the online
questionnaire would be sent by email to the relevant volunteers, by the RFUW
volunteer coordinator. A participant information sheet was also included to inform
potential respondents that their participation is voluntary, and all personal
information provided would be treated with absolute confidentiality by the
18
researchers. The sampling yielded a total of 168 responses. Incompletion of some
items suggested that for most variables, 161 responses were usable. In the regression
analysis, the available sample was 131 responses, which comprised the maximum set
of observations across all of the variables analysed. This is, in absolute sense, a small
sample. Rules of thumb for regression analysis, for example, often suggest that a
ratio of five observations to one variable is required (Hair et al. 2006). As is
discussed below, 33 covariates are used to measure motivation, socio-economic
characteristics, sports engagement and satisfaction with volunteering which suggests
a required minimum sample size of 165. However, it can be shown that for a
multiple regression, based on a widely accepted level of the power of a test of 0.8, a
significance level of 5%, the 33 covariates to be employed in the study, and a
conventionally ‘large’ effect size of 0.35, a minimum sample size is 100
observations (Cohen 1988). Given also that the population of volunteers is small and
the response rate for the current study represented more than a third of this, the
sample was deemed satisfactory for empirical analysis. The survey instrument was
distributed prior to the rugby world cup and then, following an audit of respondents
and actual event volunteers’ contact details, as provided by the RFUW, it was
possible to identify those that actually volunteered at the rugby world cup.
4.2. Dependent Variables
Table 1 provides details of the dependent variables. All of the variables except actual
volunteering at the rugby world cup, ‘rwc’, were scored on a seven-point Likert scale
with values ranging from ‘1 – strongly disagree’ to ‘7- strongly agree’. The variable
‘rwc’ was a binary variable with ‘1 – volunteered’ and ‘0 - did not volunteer’ as
values.
19
INSERT TABLE 1 HERE
The statements that were used to investigate volunteers’ future intentions were
adapted from Downward and Ralston (2006), who sought to explore the future
intentions of 2002 Manchester Commonwealth Games volunteers as a result of
experiences at the event. The table reveals that recognising that the mean value of a
binary variable represents a sample proportion, approximately 24% of the club
volunteers also volunteered at the rugby world club. Significantly, there is also
support for further volunteering intentions, but this tends to prioritise club activity,
as indicated by a higher mean value and smaller standard deviation than is the case
with future volunteering at rugby events and other sports events.
4.3. Independent Variables
Table 2 provides details of the socio-demographic variables used in the analysis. As
the variables are all measured as binary values, the mean values indicate the sample
proportions of the relevant categories being measured. The data reveal that the
sample is effectively balanced between males and females, suggesting that the
support for women’s rugby is not highly gendered, and that only approximately 27%
of the sample have dependent children.
INSERT TABLE 2 HERE
As the age categories reveal relatively balanced proportions between 25 and 60 years
of age, this suggests that there are, perhaps, fewer connections with children as a
form of association with women’s rugby than in other sports. Here, as Nichols
(2006), through secondary analysis of Sport England 2002 data, identified that 51%
of all sport volunteers initially volunteered because their children took part in sport.
It is revealing to note that out of the 27% of volunteers with children, 21% of this
20
total comes from; 12.4% belonging to the age range of 35-44 years, and 8.7%
belonging to the age range between 45 and 59 years. The data also show an
extremely high incidence of degree-level education. As one might expect a younger
age profile of volunteers if their children are involved in the sport, the wider age
profile suggests either that older volunteers in women’s rugby are perhaps less
constrained by family commitments, or that they might have had children later in
life. This could also be reflected in the higher educational profile of volunteers.
Higher education has also been instrumental in facilitating the development of
women’s rugby as noted earlier. Reflective of the broader population (Sport
England, 2003, DCMS 2011), however, approximately 92% of the sample is White
British.
Table 3 provides descriptive information on the sports engagement of volunteers in a
number of binary and continuous variables, as well as volunteer motivations for
being involved in their rugby club. In the latter case motivations were measured by a
series of questions that were adapted from Sport England (2003), which was the last
major investigation into sports volunteering in England. Each of these variables was
measured on a 5-point Likert scale.
INSERT TABLE 3 HERE
The first sets of variables reveal a high degree of sports engagement generally, but
particularly with rugby. Almost 60% of the sample currently played the game, with
approximately 67% of the sample primarily volunteering in the women’s game but,
nonetheless, indicating the joint efforts with the men’s game as noted above. As is
typical with years of experience, and hours volunteered, the data suggest skewed
distributions, but it is clear that a high level of volunteer commitment is evident both
21
during and outside the rugby season. Significantly, approximately 44% of the sample
played other sports and approximately 32% of volunteers also volunteered in other
contexts. These latter results hint at the potential for the transfer of volunteer effort
across contexts. The motivational variables provide further supporting evidence of
the sentiments expressed in the literature review. Ranked most highly are
motivations concerned with some self-interest, that is meeting the individual’s needs,
but, it is noted that this is in the context of also wanting to help people, to meet the
needs of family and friends and the community. Much less relevant motivations are
connected with starting the club – which is potentially salient in the developing sport
of women’s rugby - or undertaking activities connected to their paid work.
Finally, table 4 presents the items that were used to construct the independent
variables measuring satisfaction from a factor analysis as presented in the next
section. The items were adapted from Silverberg et al. (2001) who aimed to measure
the level of job satisfaction for volunteers in public recreation parks. Some items
were removed from the original scale or slightly modified, in order to be suitable for
use with the rugby volunteers’ sample. The rest of the items reflected the benefits
associated with the sport volunteering experience, for example, as identified in Sport
England (2003). All of the questions were rated on a seven point Likert scale from 1
(strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).
INSERT TABLE 4 HERE
Mean scores are typically above four, and close to five or six with standard
deviations less than two, and often close to one. This suggests broad satisfaction with
experiences. There are some nuances apparent in the data. The first is that lower
means scores around three or four are typically accompanied by higher standard
22
deviations, indicating less uniformity in satisfaction. The second is that it is the items
measuring negative experiences that typically fall into this category. This suggests
that there is a distinct subset of volunteers that have experienced lower satisfaction
than others. This hints at the potential relevance of dissatisfaction with volunteering
experiences on the transfer of effort. The higher means scores above five appear to
be broadly connected with satisfaction from the role undertaken in contributing to
the community, mean scores around four are typically connected with good
relationships within the club, and lower scores associated with job tasks and lack of
communication in, and appreciation from, the club.
Finally, an exploratory factor analysis was undertaken to summarise the items
measuring satisfaction from volunteering. Factors were extracted by making use of a
Principal component analysis with Varimax rotation.
An examination of the Kaiser-Meyer Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy
suggested that the data matrix was amenable to factor analysis (KMO=0.861) and the
Bartlett test for sphericity indicated that the dataset was significant at the 0.000 level.
Items that loaded higher than 0.45 on a single factor were retained in keeping with
the literature (Stevens 1996, Hair et al. 2006). Initially eight factors were extracted
by considering their eigenvalues being greater than 1.0, as well as the percentage of
the total variance explained by each factor. However, the other factors comprised
only two items, or had low reliability and these were eliminated from further analysis
(Stevens 1996). The subsequent factor analysis produced five factors accounting for
67.2% of the variance in the data.
23
5. Results
5.1. Factor Analysis
Table 5 presents the results from the exploratory factor analysis.
INSERT TABLE 5 HERE
The five extracted factors were labelled: satisfaction with the volunteer role and contribution
(rolesatisf),
satisfaction
with
contingent
rewards
(rewards1),
satisfaction
with
communications (communication), satisfaction with club’s support (support), and satisfaction
with volunteer appreciation (rewards2). Significantly, the communication and rewards2
factors measure elements of dissatisfaction connected with club organisation and
communications and the lack of reward for volunteers.
The Cronbach Alpha reliabilities for each of the extracted factors ranged from 0.66 to 0.94.
As the current study follows an exploratory research framework, in keeping with the
literature, a Cronbach’s Alpha value of 0.60 was adopted as acceptable (Hair et al. 2006,
Suhr and Shay, 2009). The findings demonstrate that the implemented satisfaction scale was
a reliable instrument.
5.2. Regression Analysis:
In this section, results of the regression analysis are presented. The regressions examine the
impact of the club volunteer’s satisfaction with, and motivation for, volunteering, their
engagement with sports, and the volunteer’s socio-demographic characteristics upon the
decision to volunteer for the women’s rugby world cup, and intentions to volunteer further
for rugby events, the rugby club and other sports events.
INSERT TABLE 6
24
Table 6 provides the regression results for each case. The dependent variables are given at the
top of the relevant column. As ‘rwc’ is a binary variable, a logistic regression was employed.
In the other cases of Likert scales, ordinary least squares (OLS) regression was employed.
For each model, the table presents estimated coefficients and the corresponding (asymptotic)
‘z’ or ‘t’ values. The latter are all calculated using robust standard errors to control for
potential problems of heteroscedasticity. This might arise because of the use of cross-section
data and that measurement of the dependent variables takes place on truncated scales. The
table also details the sample sizes as ‘n’. The ‘pseudo’ R2 along with the corresponding Wald
test statistic, which tests the null hypothesis that the ‘pseudo’ R2 is equal to zero, are also
presented for the logistic regression. The corresponding R2 and F statistic for the OLS
regressions are also presented. For ease of interpretation, significant variables at the 1%, 5%
and 10% level are reported and are indicated by ‘***’, ‘**’ and ‘*’, respectively. In the case
of the logistic regression, for ‘rwc’, marginal effects are presented for significant variables, to
indicate the scale of effects; that is the probability of volunteering for the rugby world cup,
for a given unit change in the independent variable concerned. All Variance Inflation Factor
(VIF) statistics were below 10 with the vast majority of variables less than 2, which is
indicative of no serious multicollinearity in the results. Nonetheless the oldest age-group was
dropped in the estimation because of no variation in the data and consequent collinearity with
the constant. The fact that this occurs for the oldest age groups is to be expected.
The results of the regression analysis support the hypotheses under investigation. This can be
illustrated by examining each equation in turn. For ‘rwc’, the analysis suggests that for the
satisfaction with volunteering variables, satisfaction with the volunteer role and
communications within clubs raises the likelihood of the club volunteers having volunteered
for the women’s rugby world cup. As noted earlier, the job environment, communication with
co-workers, and a volunteer role that meets volunteers’ needs are strong determinants of
25
volunteer commitment (Silverberg et al. 2001, Schlesinger et al. 2012), which is evident in
this volunteering context as well.
For the sports engagement variables, currently playing rugby enhances the chance of
volunteering for the rugby world cup. However, this is not the case for years volunteering.
This perhaps indicates the relative uniqueness of the rugby world cup as well as the
opportunity costs of time. This is also suggested in the motivation variables in which as well
as looking to meet others’ needs, which captures the usual altruism of volunteering (Clark
and Wilson 1961, Cnaan and Goldberg-Glen 1991; Sport England 2003), having time to
spare increases the probabilities of volunteering at the event. The socio-economic variables
confirm data from the Active People Survey (APS) 1 (2005/2006) and the 2002 Sport
England survey that suggest the positive effects of ethnicity and the level of education on
expected sport volunteering (Taylor et al. 2012), as white British are more likely to volunteer
in sport and for the world cup, as with respondents having a higher education. Significantly,
working full-time and being a student are factors that reduce the probability of having
volunteered for the world cup. This suggests that both time and income might have
constrained opportunities to volunteer in this context, confirming previous research that
suggests income, time constraints and the level of engagement in sports volunteering are
directly related (Taylor et al. 2012). As, APS 1 offers contradictory findings by suggesting
that generally students and adults in paid employment are most likely to volunteer in sport
(Sport England 2009), this contrast is perhaps linked to the uniqueness of the event.
The OLS results for ‘othrugevt’ show that for the satisfaction variables, communication
within the club would promote a greater intention to volunteer for another rugby event. None
of the sports engagement variables are significant. For the motivation variables, and
consistent with the literature, for example as stated in Sport England’s 2002 survey,
significant determinants are connected with the personal objectives of seeking to make
26
friends but also altruism by offering to help, and then in meeting the needs of current friends
and family. Being of white ethnicity and retired are the main socio-economic variables
increasing the stated intention to volunteer at another rugby event. Interestingly, the APS 1
supports that the economically inactive are less likely to volunteer (Sport England 2009).
The regression results examining future intentions to continue volunteering in the club,
‘rugbyclbvol’, show that satisfaction with the roles undertaken is significant for the
satisfaction variables. For the motivation variables, there is evidence of self-interest in that
having the personal needs of the volunteer being met by the volunteer experience reduces the
intention of further volunteering in the club. This is because volunteers are also more likely to
express an intention to increase their volunteering in the future as a result of seeking to make
friends rather than to help others, which would logically include their current friends. Being
of white ethnicity is the only socio-economic variable that is significant and in support of past
research that identifies that white British are more likely to volunteer in sports in the UK
(Sport England, 2003, DCMS 2011).
The final regression results examine the intention to volunteer for other sport events,
measured as ‘othspevt’. The satisfaction variables that are significant include satisfaction
with current roles and with communication within the clubs. None of the sports engagement
variables are significant. As with ‘othrugevt’, having a motivation to meet the needs of others
in the family is shown to reduce the stated intention. However, this does not mean that an
altruistic motivation is missing, as seeking to help others is, in contrast, a positive impact on
intentions to volunteer. As with the other cases, having a white British ethnicity increases the
stated intentions to volunteer for another sports event, other than rugby, but there is also
evidence of age effects unlike in the other regressions.
27
Overall, therefore, there is evidence that both the retention of club-volunteering effort, as well
as its transfer to other contexts is affected by volunteer satisfaction as experienced through
the club. There is also evidence of altruistic motivations, in seeking to help others, and not
necessarily family members or pre-existing friends. Sports engagement and the
socioeconomic context also affect the results, but less generally. Collectively these results
suggest statistical support for the hypothesised impact of standard variables affecting
volunteering to the transfer of volunteer effort as stated earlier.
It is also apparent, however, that there are some variations in the emphasis of the results. For
example, sports engagement was only significant for actual volunteering at the rugby world
cup, reflecting the significance of self-interest such as love of the sport and being a current or
former athlete in determining the transition to become a volunteer (Burgham and Downward
2005, Cuskelly and O’Brien 2012).
It was also only evident here that previous volunteering experience was less likely to promote
(world-cup) volunteering and that the motivation of ‘having time’ was more likely to do so,
as was meeting the needs of existing friends and family. This could be due to women’s rugby
being of a developing stage, which perhaps suggests a greater reliance on the existing tightknit and informal structures within the clubs to support the sport, compared with other sports
that may rely on paid employees. Overall, this suggests that the volunteering activity
associated with this major international sports event for women’s rugby, compared to the
other contexts, had a degree of greater spontaneity and uniqueness associated with it and
primarily draws upon existing club connections. The former might also explain why the
income and time constraints associated with working full-time and being a student also both
had a negative influence on actual volunteering at the event, but not in the other contexts,
which is consistent with previous research suggesting that students and paid employees are
overrepresented in sport volunteering (Sport England 2009).
28
In contrast, in the analysis of other rugby events, which is most likely to include local and
regional tournaments, older retired volunteers were more likely to express an intention for
further volunteering. The significant motivations were also to make friends rather than to help
current family. Making friends also appears to be one of the main motivations for further
intended club volunteering, and this suggests that a degree of self-interest is predominant.
This is because if club volunteering meets volunteer needs, they are less likely to continue
volunteering in the future. This reduced intention is also the case in connection with the
motivation of seeking to help others. These results suggest that with club volunteering, a
degree of satiation of future intended activity can occur, once the need to make friends are
met and is consistent with McClelland’s (1961) motivational theory that supports the need for
affiliation as a relevant motivation in explaining volunteers’ behaviour.
Finally, it is only with the results for other sports events that significant age effects are
identified. They indicate that intentions to volunteer for other sports events are most likely for
the younger to middle-aged groups. As no age effects are significant in the rugby
volunteering equations, this suggests that variations in age have no obvious effect on
volunteer behaviour within the sport, but transferring volunteering activity to other sports
could be age limited. This could of course, reflect a reluctance of older volunteers to move
across contexts, and is perhaps linked to the commitments that older volunteers typically have
in their sport, as they tend to undertake more formal and supervisory roles within the club and
their motivations prioritise the desire to give something back to the club, and the need for
affiliation by establishing or maintaining interpersonal relationships with others or to satisfy a
self-interest arising from their children participation in sport if there is time to be able to do
so (Sport England 2003, DCMS 2011).
29
These results, consequently, imply that despite the general applicability of the established
framework by which satisfaction, motivations, sports engagement and socio-economic
circumstances affect volunteer behaviour, and can be employed to examine the transfer of
effort across contexts, considerable nuance exists depending on that context. Indeed further
variation in the results also provides support for the further hypothesis noted above, in which
it is argued that the general drives to volunteer, for example stemming from altruism and selfinterest, might mean that a volunteer is prepared to transfer their efforts to another context,
even if the current experience has not been satisfactory.
In this regard, the communication factor, as one of the satisfaction variables, actually records
a lack of communication and organisation in the club and yet it is shown to have a positive
effect on either rugby world cup volunteering, or intentions to volunteer at other rugby
events, or other sports events but not future club volunteering. This means that there are
‘push’ factors to volunteering in other contexts that arise from unsatisfactory club
volunteering, which implies some substitution of effort to a different context rather than the
building of a complementary set of interests and community.
6. Conclusions
This article is one of the few studies, which has examined the linkage between sports club
volunteering and volunteering in other contexts. It has also sought to address the limitations
of past research (see Doherty 2009) by embracing all of the dimensions that are perceived to
be relevant to understanding volunteer behaviour; that is, satisfaction, motivations, sports
engagement and socio-economic characteristics, in this endeavour. The cases of actually
volunteering for the rugby world cup, and intentions to volunteer for other rugby events,
further club-rugby volunteering and volunteering at other sport events have been examined.
There are limitations with the research, which are suggestive of future research activity. First,
30
this is a study of one sport and clearly more work needs to be done investigating if the results
transfer across other sporting contexts. Within the confines of the current study, and for
future work, moreover, a greater sample size would improve the robustness of the findings.
Longitudinal data would also be better in tracking the shifts of volunteering activity over
time. Nonetheless, the main general findings of the research are that there is evidence in
support of the relevance of the widely known determinants of volunteering to the
continuation of future club volunteering as well as its transfer to rugby and other sport events.
This highlights the potential for sports governing bodies to recruit efforts from their existing
volunteers in clubs to events organised by them, and that potential exists to transfer volunteer
activity across to other sports contributing further to the Big Society agenda. Generally the
research indicates that satisfied club volunteers have the potential to transfer effort to other
contexts. It follows that communication of opportunities and the promotion of a rugby
identity that is more collective than just the club, could harness this potential, if the benefits
of developing a shared identity and how this could promote women’s rugby further are
communicated more clearly from the RFUW to its clubs and volunteers’ network, as some
VSCs seem reluctant to follow wider policy and NGB objectives, if by doing so there is no
direct benefit to the club itself and its members (May et al. 2013).
However, the research also indicates that other, more tailored mechanisms might need to be
developed. More specifically, the analysis broadly indicates that it is the uniqueness of the
world cup that can be harnessed for club volunteers, but if the event is not to primarily recruit
from current players and those with more flexibility in time and income, planning needs to be
undertaken to develop more flexible timescales for involvement and, perhaps, to offer some
support towards the costs of volunteering in other locations. Identifying the world-cup more
clearly as being part of the continuum of a shared rugby experience, and perhaps in this
31
regard less ‘unique’ by volunteers, might also be needed to help to recruit existing longerterm and more experienced club volunteers.
For recruitment to other rugby events, policy could emphasise the opportunity to make
friends. However, it appears that such an opportunity rests on volunteers being retired. If this
involves drawing upon existing and older club volunteers, who might also carry large club
volunteering burdens, then clearly further coordination support might be offered by
governing bodies to help to facilitate cross-club responsibilities.
From the point of view of generating further club volunteering, matters appear to be more
complicated, as the analysis above suggested some satiation of activity, for example, once
friends are made. This suggests that greater club memberships and the potential that this has
for making new friends might need to be harnessed. However, the English sporting context is
unique in its resistance to follow other European models of forming multi-sport hubs, where
sport enthusiasts are brought together to share their love of sport, to cooperate and create
opportunities of social mobility, which is then translated as an interest to various forms of
sport participation (May et al. 2013). This could perhaps be addressed through regular local
and regional multi-sport events or sport demonstration days organised by the volunteers in
the area with the support of the NGBs. Governing bodies might seek to embrace wider
communities than they have done before to support this. For example, this might take place in
connection with other sports clubs, universities, schools and community groups. Lastly, in
connection with volunteering in other sports, the results suggest that capitalising on younger
to middle-aged volunteers might be appropriate. As noted above, this might be consistent
with them having less club responsibilities and thus more time available to volunteer in other
contexts (Sport England 2003, DCMS 2011). It remains, however, that across these contexts
having an opportunity to have a satisfying experience and one within which altruistic
32
objectives can be met should be a general policy emphasis for recruitment and retention of
effort as well as its potential transfer.
This last objective is important because, uniquely, the current research indicates that a
common determinant of either volunteering at the rugby world cup, or other rugby and sports
events, is poor satisfaction with club experience. This suggests that some recruitment of
volunteers to events can involve a substitution of effort as volunteers seek to satisfy their
motives elsewhere. The challenge for policy is thus not to assume that all recruitment at such
events is a success, but to ensure that such recruitment takes place in which it is fully viewed
as a complementary activity, an aim towards which the policies described above might be
targeted. Clearly this is an important area of future research.
The results of this article are relevant both to areas of recruitment and retention of sport
volunteers. They also offer insights on how sport clubs’ volunteering can provide a platform
for volunteer effort to be harnessed to other contexts, thus supporting the ‘Big Society’
policy. They also raise awareness on the challenges in implementing the ‘Big Society’ Policy
in sports, as sport volunteering attracts a specific profile of individuals, which may deter
potential volunteers from other ethnic backgrounds or with no existing social networks within
sports to participate, suggesting that the decision to volunteer not only depends on
government’s agenda but more importantly on personal abilities, interests and the level of
existing social capital (DCMS 2011).
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors
33
References
Allison, M., 2001. Sport clubs in Scotland. Research Report 75, Sport Scotland: Edinburgh.
Bailey, S., Savage, S., and O’Connell, B., 2003. Volunteering and social capital in regional
Victoria. Australian journal on volunteering, 8 (2), 5-12.
Bang, H. and Chelladurai, P., 2003. Motivation and satisfaction in volunteering for 2002
World Cup in Korea. Paper presented at the conference of the North American society
for sport management. Ithaca, New York.
Bang, H., Alexandris, K., and Ross, S.D., 2008. Validation of the revised volunteer
motivations scale for international sporting events (VMS-ISE) at the Athens 2004
Olympic
Games.
Event
management,
12
(3),
119131.doi:10.3727/152599509789659759
Bourdieu, P., 1986. The forms of capital. In: J. Richards, ed. Handbook of theory and
research for the sociology of education. New York: Greenwood Press, 241-258.
Burgham, M. and Downward, P., 2005. Why volunteer, time to volunteer? A case study from
swimming. Managing leisure, 10 (2), 79-93.doi:10.1080/1360671050014610
Cabinet Office, 2010. Building the big society. [online]. Available
http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/sites/default/files/resources/building-big
society_0.pdf. [Accessed 23 Sept 2014].
from:
Clark, P.B. and Wilson, J.Q., 1961. Incentive systems: a theory of organizations.
Administrative science quarterly, 6 (2), 129-166.doi:10.2307/2390752
Clary, E.G., et al., 1998. Understanding and assessing the motivations of volunteers: a
functional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74 (6), 15161530.doi:10.1177/0021886391273003
Cnaan, R.A. and Goldberg-Glen, R.S., 1991. Measuring motivation to volunteer in human
services.
The
journal
of
applied
behavioral
science,
27,
269284.doi:10.1177/0021886391273003
Coalter, F., 2007. A wider social role for sport. Who’s keeping the score? London:
Routledge.
Cohen, J., 1988. Statistical power for the behavioural sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, N.J.:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cuskelly, G., Hoye, R., and Auld, C., 2006. Working with volunteers in sport: Theory and
practice. London, UK: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Cuskelly G. and O'Brien, W., 2012. Changing roles: Applying continuity theory to
understanding the transition from playing to volunteering in community sport.
European sport management quarterly. doi:10.1080/16184742.2012.744767.
34
DCMS/Strategy Unit, 2002. Game Plan: A strategy for delivering government’s sport and
physical activity objectives. London. DCMS.
DCMS, 2011. Taking part: The national survey of culture, leisure and sport. London. DCMS
[online].
Available
from:
http://www.culture.gov.uk/publications/7995.aspx
[Accessed 13 January 2015].
DCMS, 2012. Creating a sporting habit for life: a new youth sport strategy. London: DCMS.
Delaney, L. and Keaney, E., 2005. Cultural participation and social capital: Evidence from
survey data. Dublin: Economic and Social Research Institute for public policy
research, 32.
Doherty, A., 2009. The volunteer legacy of a major sport event. Journal of Policy Research
in Tourism, Leisure, and Events, 1 (3), 185 –207. doi:10.1080/19407960903204356
Doherty, A., 2005. A profile of community sport volunteers. Ontario: Parks and Recreation
Ontario and Sport Alliance of Ontario [online]. Available from:
http://www.216.13.76.142/PROntario/PDF/reports/FinalReport_phaseOne2005.pdf
[Accessed 16 Jan 2014].
Downward, P.M., Dejonghe, T., and Dawson, A., 2009. The Economics of sports: Theory,
policy and evidence. Elsevier: London.
Downward, P. and Ralston, R., 2006. The sports development potential of sports event
volunteering: insights from the XVII Manchester Commonwealth Games. European
Sport Management Quarterly, 6, 333–351.doi:10.1080/16184740601154474
Downward, P. and Rasciute, S., 2012. Sport and social exclusion: an economic perspective.
In: S. Dagkas & K. Armour, eds. Inclusion and exclusion through youth sport.
London: Routledge.
Dunning, E. and Sheard, K., 1979. Barbarians, gentlemen and players: a sociological study
of the development of rugby football. Oxford: Martin Robertson.
Farrell, J.M., Johnston, M.E., and Twynam, G.D., 1998. Volunteer motivation, satisfaction
and management at an elite sporting competition. Journal of sport management, 12,
288-300.
Frawley, S. and Cush, A., 2011. Major sport events and participation legacy: The case of the
2003
Rugby
World
Cup.
Managing
leisure,
16,
6576.doi:10.1080/13606719.2011.532605
Galindo-Kuhn, R. and Guzley, R.M., 2002. The volunteer satisfaction index: Construct
definition, measurement, development, and validation. Journal of Social Service
Research, 28 (1), 45-68. doi:10.1300/J079v28n01_03
Hair, J.F., et al., 2006. Multivariate data analysis. 6th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Pearson/Prentice Hall.
35
Hallmann, K. and Harms, G., 2012. Determinants of volunteer motivation and their impact on
future voluntary engagement: a comparison of volunteer's motivation at sport events in
equestrian and handball. International journal of event and festival management, 3 (3),
272 – 291.doi:10.1108/17582951211262701
HM Government, 2010. Building a stronger civil society. London: Office for Civil Society,
Cabinet Office.
Handy, F., and Brudney, J., 2007. When to use volunteer labour resource? an organizational
analysis for nonprofit management. University of Pennsylvania Departmental Papers
(SSP), Available from http://repository.upenn.edu/spp_papers/91/ [Assessed 18
March 2014].
Houlihan, B. and White, A., 2002. The politics of sport development: development of sport or
development through sport? London: Routledge.
Hustinx, L., et al., 2010. Social and cultural origins of motivations to volunteer: a comparison
of university students in six countries. International sociology, 25, 349-382.
doi:10.1177/0268580909360297
Kisby, B., 2010. The Big Society: power to the people? The political quarterly, 81 (4), 484491.doi:10.1111/j.1467-923X.2010.02133.x
May, T., Harris, S. and Collins, M., 2013. Implementing community sport policy:
understanding the variety of voluntary club types and their attitudes to policy.
International journal of sport policy and politics, 5 (3), 397-419.
doi:10.1080/19406940.2012.735688
McCabe, A., 2010. Below the radar in a big society? Reflections on community engagement,
empowerment and social action in a changing policy context. Birmingham: TSRC
Working
Paper
(51)
[online].
Available
from:
http://www.tsrc.ac.uk/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=OMbpEZaAMKI%3d&tabid=500.
[Accessed 10 Sept 2014].
McClelland, D. C., 1961. The achieving society. New York: The Free Press
Morgan, H., 2013. Sport volunteering, active citizenship and social capital enhancement:
what role in the ‘Big Society’? International journal of sport policy and politics, 5
(3), 381-395. doi:10.1080/19406940.2013.764542
Nichols, G., 2006. Research into sports volunteers: reviewing the questions.Voluntary
Action:The Journal of the Institute for Volunteering Research, 8 (1), 55-65.
Nichols, G. and Padmore, J., 2005. Who are the volunteers in sports clubs? Sheffield
University Management School, working paper.
Nicholson, M. and Hoye, R., 2008. Sport and social capital. In: M. Nicholson & R. Hoye,
eds. Sport and social capital. London: Elsevier, Butterworth Heinemann, 1-18.
Oliver, R.L., 1980. A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction
decisions. Journal of marketing research, 17, 460-469. doi:10.2307/3150499
36
Pattie, C. and Johnston, R., 2011. How big is the Big Society? Parliamentary affairs, 64, (3),
403-424. doi:10.1093/pa/gsr013
Paylor, K., 2011. Volunteering and health: Evidence of impact and implications
for policy and practice. Institute for Volunteering Research [online]. Available from:
http://www.ivr.org.uk/Institute+of+Volunteering+Research%2fDoH+literature+revie
w+October+2011.pdf [Accessed 23 Jan 2014].
Putnam, D., 2000. Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New
York: Simon Schuster.
Ramchandani, G.M. and Coleman, R.J., 2012. The inspirational effects of three major sport
events. International journal of event and festival nanagement, 3 (3), 257 – 271.
doi:10.1108/17582951211262693
RFUW, 2010. Community development through rugby. Rugby development in the
community. Report to the Department of Culture, Media and Sport. Twickenham:
Rugby
Football
Union
[online].
Available
from:
http://www.rfu.com/WomensRugbyPortal [Accessed 23 Oct 2010].
Schlesinger, T., Egli, B., and Nagel, S., 2012. Continue or terminate? Determinants of longterm volunteering in sports clubs. European sport management quarterly.
doi:10.1080/16184742.2012.744766
Schulz, J., Nichols, G., and Auld, C.J., 2010. Issues in the management of voluntary sport
organisations and volunteers. In: B.Houlihan and M.Green, eds, The Routledge
Handbook of Sports Development, London: Routledge.
Scott, M., 2011. Reflections on the Big Society. Community Development Journal, 46 (1),
132-137. doi:10.1093/cdj/bsq057
Silverberg, K.E., Marshall, E.K., and Ellis, G.D. 2001. Measuring job satisfaction of
volunteers in public parks and recreation. J Park Recreat Adm, 19 (1), 79-92.
Slaughter, L., 2002. Motivations of long term volunteers at events. Journal of Sport &
Tourism, 7 (3), 35-36. doi:10.1080/10295390208718732
Smith, M.J., 2010. From ‘Big Government’ to ‘Big Society’: changing the state-society
balance. Parliamentary affairs, 63 (4), 818-833. doi:10.1093/pa/gsq023
Solberg, H.A. and Preuss, H., 2007. Major sport events and long- term tourism impacts.
Journal of Sport Management, 21, 213-234. Human Kinetics.
Sport England, 2003. Sports volunteering in England in 2002: Summary report of the
findings of the sports volunteering study commissioned by Sport England. London:
Sport England [online]. Available from: http://www.sportengland.org/volunteering-inengland.pdf [Accessed 13 July 2013].
37
Sport
England, 2009. Active People Survey 1 [online]. Available from:
http://www.sportengland.org/research/active_people_survey/active_people_survey_1.
aspx[Accessed 18 May 2015].
Stebbins, R.A., 1996. Volunteering: a serious leisure perspective. Nonprofit and voluntary
sector quarterly, 25, 211-224. doi:10.1177/0899764096252005
Stevens. J., 1996. Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. 3rd ed. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Strigas, A. D., and Newton Jackson, E.Jr., 2003. Motivating volunteers to serve and succeed:
design and results of a pilot study that explores demographics and motivational
factors in sport volunteerism. International Sports Journal 7 (1) 111.
Suhr, D. and Shay, M., 2009. Guidelines for reliability, confirmatory and exploratory factor
analysis
[online].
Available
from:
http://www.wuss.org/proceedings09/09WUSSProceedings/papers/anl/ANLSuhrShay.pdf. [Accessed 15 Mar 2014].
Taylor, P., 2004. Driving up participation: The challenge for sport. London: Sport England.
Taylor, P. D., Panagouleas, T., and Nichols, G., 2012. Determinants of sports volunteering
and sports volunteer time in England. International journal of sport policy and
politics, 4 (2), 201-220. doi:10.1080/19406940.2012.656679
Table 1: Dependent Variables
Variable Name
Description
Mean
Standard Deviation
rwc
Volunteered at the Rugby
World Cup or not
0.235
0.426
othrugevt
I am willing to volunteer for
any other rugby-related event
5.298
1.573
rugbyclbvol
I intend to continue
volunteering at my rugby club
5.894
1.381
othspevt
I am willing to volunteer for
any major sport event
4.764
1.708
n=161
38
Table 2: Socio-demographic variables
Variable
Description
Mean
St. Dev
Gender
‘1 Male, 0 Female’
0.497
0.502
Children
Have children ‘1 Yes, 0 No’
0.267
0.444
Ethnicity
‘1 White British, 0 Other ethnicity’
0.919
0.273
Education
‘1 Degree level education, 0 Other’
0.621
0.468
Fulltime
‘1 Full time work, 0 Not’
0.795
0.405
Part time
‘1 Part time work, 0 Not’
0.087
0.283
Student
‘1 Student, 0 Not’
0.031
0.174
Retired*
‘1 Retired, 0 Not’
0.050
0.218
age1824
‘1 Aged 18 to 24 years, 0 Not’
0.149
0.357
age2534
‘1 Aged 25 to 34 years, 0 Not’
0.267
0.444
age3544
‘1 Aged 35 to 44 years, 0 Not’
0.224
0.418
age4559
‘1 Aged 45 to 59 years, 0 Not’
0.248
0.433
age6069**
‘1 Aged 60 to 69 years, 0 Not’
0.112
0.316
Note: *Unemployed is omitted category
**Aged 70 years and above is omitted category
Table 3: Sports engagement and motivation variables
Variable
Name
n
Description
Mean
St.Dev
plyrugby
161
Playing rugby ‘1 Yes, 0 No’
0.590 0.493
plyothsp
161
Playing other sport ‘1 Yes, 0 No’
0.441 0.498
type
161
Volunteer in women’s game ‘1 Yes, 0 No’
0.666 0.474
years
161
Years volunteering at the club
7.373 7.328
hrsseason
161
Weekly hours volunteering in season
8.689 10.150
hrsnotseason
161
Weekly hours volunteering out of season
6.515 9.720
Engagement
39
othvol
161
Motivation
Volunteer elsewhere ‘ 1 Yes, 0 No’
0.317 0.466
Range: ‘5 very important to 1 unimportant’
myneeds
159
Meets my needs or interests
4.119 0.970
othneeds
159
Meets needs of friends, family etc
3.673 1.145
paidwork
159
Connected to paid work
1.937 1.071
community
158
A need in the community
3.594 1.047
help
160
I wanted to help people
4.206 0.728
friends
159
Wanted to make friends
3.459 0.946
asked
160
I was asked for help
3.531 1.046
hadtime
160
Had time to spare
3.081 1.040
offered
159
I offered to help
3.535 1.095
clubstart
156
I started the club
2.231 1.304
goodatit
158
I am good at it
3.652 0.944
40
Table 4: Satisfaction Items
Item
I have gained some useful experience through volunteering in rugby
I have the feeling that I am doing something stimulating
Satisfied from giving something back to my club
Satisfied from putting something back into the community with volunteering
Satisfied from helping others through volunteering in rugby
Satisfied from helping my club to function successfully
Satisfied from the opportunity to gain new skills through volunteering
Satisfied from the sense of belonging to the club and the community I have gained
Satisfied from the social benefits I gain from volunteering in rugby clubs
Satisfied from my volunteer role
Satisfied with my abilities to cope with my volunteer tasks
I find my volunteering experience in rugby worthwhile
My club doesn't take its volunteers for granted
My club carefully plans my volunteer workload
I feel satisfied with the training and support I receive from my club
I am satisfied with the interest shown by my club
I feel I receive a fair amount of the recognition for the volunteer work I do
When I do a good job in volunteering I receive the recognition for it that I should
I do not feel that the volunteer work I do is appreciated
There are few rewards for volunteers
My efforts are rewarded the way they should be
My club shows too little interest in the feelings of volunteers
Many of the rules and procedures from the RFUW make doing a good job difficult
I like doing the things I do during my volunteer experience
I feel a sense of pride as a volunteer with my rugby club
Communications seem good within my club
The goals of my club are not clear to me
I often feel that I do not know what is going on at my club
My volunteer assignments are not fully explained
n
168
168
168
168
168
167
168
167
166
168
167
167
167
167
167
164
166
166
167
164
164
167
157
166
165
168
167
166
168
Mean
6.02
5.87
6.21
5.9
6.04
6.14
5.37
5.78
5.97
5.63
5.92
5.93
4.87
3.89
4.46
4.42
4.8
4.58
3.53
4.17
4.45
3.43
3.99
5.58
5.78
4.91
3.38
3.18
3.18
St.Dev
1.199
1.128
1.014
1.139
0.99
1.049
1.429
1.262
1.157
1.265
1.092
1.175
1.606
1.552
1.597
1.401
1.453
1.461
1.689
1.653
1.479
1.565
1.41
1.171
1.174
1.443
1.555
1.562
1.454
41
Table 5: Factor Analysis
Satisfaction Item
I have gained some useful experience through volunteering in rugby
I feel that I am doing something stimulating
Satisfied from giving something back to my club
Satisfied from putting something back into the community with volunteering
Satisfied from helping others through volunteering in rugby
Satisfied from helping my club to function successfully
Satisfied from the opportunity to gain new skills
Satisfied from the sense of belonging to the club and the community I have gained
Satisfied from the social benefits I gain from volunteering in rugby clubs
Satisfied from my volunteer role
Satisfied with my abilities to cope with my volunteer tasks
I find my volunteering experience in rugby worthwhile
I like doing the things I do during my volunteer experience
I feel a sense of pride as a volunteer with my rugby club
I feel I receive a fair amount of the recognition for the volunteer work I do
When I do a good job in terms of volunteering I receive the recognition for it that I
should
My efforts are rewarded the way they should be
My club shows too little interest in the feelings of volunteers
The goals of my club are not clear to me
I often feel that I do not know what is going on at my club
My volunteer assignments are not fully explained
My club doesn't take its volunteers for granted
My club carefully plans and schedules my volunteer workload
Satisfied with the training and support I receive from my club
Satisfied with the interest shown by my club
Communications seem good within my club
I do not feel that the volunteer work I do is appreciated
There are few rewards for volunteers
Many of the rules and procedures from the RFUW make doing a good job difficult
Cronbach’s alpha
rolesatis
0.781
0.827
0.696
0.653
0.825
0.787
0.741
0.74
0.82
0.759
0.691
0.809
0.651
0.71
rewards1
communication
support
rewards2
0.891
0.858
0.773
0.485
0.865
0.898
0.72
0.59
0.804
0.662
0.62
0.459
0.943
0.867
0.81
0.844
.
0.756
0.828
0.636
0.66
42
Eigenvalues after Rotation
Total Variance After Rotation (%)
n = 141
8.472
29.214
3.423
11.803
2.697
9.301
2.627
9.057
2.276
7.848
43
Table 6: Regression Analyses
rwc
Marginal
Effect
rolesatisf
0.738**
0.348
(2.09)
rewards1
-0.512
(-1.36)
communication
1.870***
0.088
(4.18)
support
0.811*
0.038
(1.84)
rewards2
-0.450
(-1.12)
plyrugby
2.235*
0.099
(1.79)
plyothsp
-0.854
(-1.05)
type
-0.640
(-0.63)
years
-0.121*
-0.006
(-1.71)
hrsseason
0.239
(1.45)
hrsnotseason
-0.220
(-1.41)
othvol
1.016
(1.29)
myneeds
-0.620
(-1.60)
othneeds
1.345***
0.063
(2.57)
paidwork
0.617
(1.39)
community
-0.300
(-0.66)
help
0.916
(1.59)
friends
0.158
(0.22)
asked
-0.407
(-0.80)
hadtime
1.210**
0.057
(2.18)
offered
0.282
(0.74)
clubstart
-0.374
(-1.27)
goodatit
0.673
othrugevt
rugbyclbvol
othspevt
0.217
(1.26)
-0.0297
(-0.22)
0.390***
(2.69)
-0.0505
(-0.31)
-0.127
(-1.12)
0.172
(0.40)
-0.344
(-0.95)
-0.485
(-1.26)
0.00107
(0.04)
0.00157
(0.03)
0.0108
(0.20)
0.128
(0.31)
-0.104
(-0.54)
-0.253*
(-1.77)
-0.166
(-1.11)
0.188
(1.16)
0.0509
(0.22)
0.496**
(2.17)
0.0730
(0.54)
-0.283
(-1.84)
0.344**
(2.35)
-0.0885
(-0.68)
0.442***
(3.56)
0.195
(1.52)
-0.0621
(-0.53)
-0.0431
(-0.37)
-0.0750
(-0.70)
0.00711
(0.02)
0.210
(0.79)
-0.223
(-1.00)
0.0170
(0.93)
-0.0262
(-0.68)
0.0291
(0.68)
-0.437
(-1.52)
-0.163*
(-1.73)
0.0546
(0.58)
0.0516
(0.42)
0.00298
(0.02)
-0.395**
(-2.15)
0.334**
(2.24)
-0.100
(-1.13)
0.191
(1.63)
0.121
(1.25)
-0.118
(-1.10)
0.336**
(2.18)
-0.205
(-1.32)
0.287*
(1.64)
0.295
(1.57)
0.0134
(0.10)
0.189
(0.42)
0.0648
(0.18)
-0.0873
(-0.21)
0.0187
(0.70)
-0.0220
(-0.36)
0.0171
(0.23)
0.582
(1.33)
0.0689
(0.34)
-0.353**
(-2.48)
-0.0836
(-0.50)
0.0899
(0.54)
0.380*
(1.85)
0.245
(1.02)
0.107
(0.65)
0.00375
(0.02)
0.126
(0.76)
-0.0691
(-0.48)
-0.0843
0.0910
-0.239
44
gender
children
ethnicity
education
Fulltime
Parttime
Student
Retired
age1824
age2534
age3544
age4559
_cons
(1.17)
0.725
(0.64)
-0.660
(-0.57)
7.245***
(2.56)
2.699***
(2.64)
-4.950**
(-2.01)
-2.958
(-1.14)
-6.857*
(-1.78)
1.924
(0.94)
0.590
(0.29)
-2.603
(-1.21)
-1.162
(-0.55)
-0.176
(-0.11)
-18.82**
(-3.10)
131
0.079
0.118
-0.708
-0.058
n
R2
Pseudo R2
0.551
2
Wald χ (35)
49.83**
F (35, 95)
Note: t statistics in parentheses
*
p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01
(-0.46)
0.540
(1.43)
-0.0680
(-0.17)
1.135**
(2.32)
-0.516
(-1.62)
0.734
(0.92)
1.468
(1.56)
1.034
(1.06)
2.116**
(2.38)
1.096
(1.45)
1.153
(1.42)
0.594
(0.81)
0.364
(0.57)
1.998
(1.38)
131
0.367
(0.46)
0.226
(0.93)
0.508
(1.63)
1.741***
(3.98)
0.0486
(0.18)
-0.311
(-0.46)
-0.346
(-0.44)
0.715
(0.86)
0.720
(1.15)
0.689
(0.99)
0.703
(1.08)
-0.0599
(-0.09)
0.716
(1.40)
4.061***
(4.01)
131
0.446
(-1.16)
0.626
(1.44)
0.0220
(0.05)
1.470***
(2.99)
-0.418
(-1.15)
0.226
(0.31)
0.772
(0.86)
0.0992
(0.11)
0.878
(0.92)
2.694***
(3.27)
1.789**
(2.25)
1.708**
(2.11)
1.003
(1.57)
-0.198
(-0.14)
131
0.394
3.11**
4.63***
4.91***
45