'Knowing we have these rights does not always mean we feel free to use them': athletes' perceptions of their human rights in sport

Objectives

Modern sport safeguarding strategies include published global rights declarations that enshrine athletes' entitlements at the policy level. It is unclear how these documents translate to athletes' lived experiences. The study aimed to determine athletes' knowledge, attitudes and beliefs about their human rights in sports settings.

Setting

Web-based survey.

Participants

1159 athletes from 70 countries completed a validated web-based survey. Over half of participants (60.1%) were between 18 and 29 years, currently competing (67.1%), not members of players' unions (54.6%), elite (60.0%) and participating in individual (55.8%) non-contact (75.6%) Olympic (77.9%) sports. Gender distribution was equal.

Primary and secondary outcome measures

Participant demographics (eg, gender, age) and athletes' knowledge, attitudes and beliefs about their human rights in sports settings.

Results

Most (78.5%) were unaware of any athletes' rights declarations. Gender influenced participants' confidence in acting on their rights in sport significantly. Males were more likely to accept pressure from coaches and teammates than females, but age affected how likely males were to accept this pressure. Paralympic athletes were less likely to agree that violence is acceptable in sports, compared with Olympic. Player union membership increased confidence in freely expressing one's opinion in sports settings. Athletes' rights-related awareness, knowledge and beliefs were disconnected.

Conclusions

Awareness raising is not enough to prevent human rights violations in sports. The cultural climate of the entire ecosystem must be targeted, using systems-level strategies to shift stakeholders' biases, beliefs and behaviours. This approach takes the onus of addressing abuse off athletes' shoulders and places accountability on sports organisations.

Leadership legitimacy and the mobilization of capital(s): Disrupting politics and reproducing heteronormativity

The rise of populist leaders in the political sphere mounts a challenge to normative understandings of leadership. To better understand this challenge, we examine how political leaders mobilize different forms of social capital in pursuit of leadership legitimacy, providing insight into the dynamics of how leadership norms are maintained. While research has tended to focus on specific forms of capital, this article considers capital as multidimensional and strategically mobilized. The article applies a multimodal analysis to examine interactions between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton during peak ‘Twitter Moments’ of the three 2016 presidential election debates. We theorize the paradoxical dynamics of the mobilization of multiple capitals and their intersection as a simultaneously disruptive and reproductive resource. While the mobilization of multiple capitals operates to disrupt traditional notions of who can claim legitimacy as a leader in the political field, their disruptive mobilization serves to reproduce implicit heteronormative leadership values. Hence, our theorization illuminates the resilience of implicit leadership values, and their intimate connection with heteronormativity, calling for the need to interrogate leadership legitimacy claims that promise ‘new’ approaches.

From “blue sky” to real world research

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to share reflective insights on three key questions of concern to critical diversity scholars: what influences play a part in framing a research project and the research questions, what determines the chosen methodology and what knowledge contributions do we want our research to make?

Design/methodology/approach

The paper, drawing on organisational ethnography, incorporates key fieldwork experiences to provide reflective insights on an innovative research project design conducted in multiple organisation sites.

Findings

The paper highlights the author’s learning from the conceptualisation of an innovative research project to the actual “doing” of what was proposed. It reflects on the unforeseen dilemmas that required continual adaptations be made because of the shifting demands of the research settings.

Practical implications

The paper is important as it provides the sharing of ideas into the influences that shaped a major piece of externally funded research and highlights a range of practical considerations if planning a critical diversity research project where negotiating access to organisations is required.

Originality/value

By reflecting on some important learning and insights into the crafting of an innovative research project and the challenges of enacting what was proposed, the paper is of value to post-doctoral and early career scholars and/or researchers interested in some insights into operationalising an organisational ethnographic methodology.