Work and Life in the Sport Industry: A Review of Work-Life Interface Experiences Among Athletic Employees

Although several different types of reviews are possible when assessing the extent and nature of research within a given topic, for this study, a scoping review was chosen.²⁵  A scoping review is the process of mapping the existing literature in a given area of study, which can be especially useful when the literature upon which the review is based is broad. The information generated by researchers examining the work-life interface of people working in the sport industry is growing rapidly, but the theoretical frameworks, study designs, and measurements used vary. A scoping review has a broader purview. It can be advantageous for reviewing a body of literature because it is not as restrictive regarding the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the review.²⁶  Because a scoping review has a wider range of types of selection criteria, it can be useful for identifying broad parameters and gaps in the body of literature.²⁷  For this study, our scoping review followed the framework outlined by Arksey and O'Malley,²⁵  along with the modifications recommended by Levac et al.²⁸  In general, the 5 steps required for this kind of scoping review are (1) identify the research question or purpose, (2) identify the relevant studies, (3) select the studies, (4) chart the data, and (5) collate, summarize, and report the results.^25,28  Please see Figure 2 for a visual schematic of this process.

We searched 3 electronic databases to find literature for this study: SPORTDiscus, PsychINFO, and Google Scholar. New articles were added to the study until October 31, 2020. We selected a variety of search terms to find articles, including work-family balance, work-life balance, role balance, work-family conflict, work-life conflict, role conflict, work-family enrichment, work-life enrichment, role enrichment, coach, trainer, athletic trainer, collegiate athletics, athlete, and athletics. These search terms were used in different combinations and configurations in the database search process. The results were limited to peer-reviewed journal articles published in English.

For each article, we examined the article title, key words, abstract, and reference list. If the title or key words matched those of interest for this study, the article was initially included for analysis. Searching the reference list was also valuable for finding articles not returned via the initial search; this process resulted in 110 total articles. This broad list of articles was then preliminarily refined by removing duplicates and examining the abstract and key words to see if it was appropriate for the scope of the review. Overall, this process of removing articles resulted in a total of 89 articles that were downloaded for full analysis.

We then performed a more thorough examination of these 89 articles via critical reading and extracting information. For each article, these data were recorded in a spreadsheet: participant demographics (ie, number, gender, and geographic location), role in athletics (ie, AT, coach, athlete, or other), study design (ie, methods), theoretical perspectives and frameworks (ie, conceptualization of work-life interface and broader overarching theory), and focus of the article as related to the work-life interface (ie, balance, conflict, and enrichment). During this process, we removed several articles because either the research was outside the scope of the study or primary data were not collected, which produced a final list of 69 peer-reviewed, published articles (Tables 1–3).

Our purpose was to provide an up-to-date review of the literature on the work-life interface, specifically focusing on the sport industry and research conducted on ATs, coaches, and other sport personnel. We selected 69 peer-reviewed, published studies to obtain insight into the current focus of work-life studies in sport. In addition, we highlighted new directions for researchers examining this topic. In the following sections, we provide summary information about the sample characteristics, athletic role, study designs, theoretical frameworks, and article focus.

The sample characteristics of the 69 studies highlighted areas in which researchers have focused their work. This information also allows future scholars to explore populations that have received less attention. Of the selected studies, 53.62% (n = 37) focused on a mixed sample of men and women, 24.64% (n = 17) focused on women only, 13.04% (n = 9) focused on men only, and in 8.69% (n = 6), participant gender was not reported. Most of the investigations (82.61%, n = 57) originated in the United States. Several international studies were also completed, but the locations of these populations were somewhat scattered: 1 sample each was obtained from Australia, France, Iran, New Zealand, Norway, Slovenia, South Africa, South Korea, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. Furthermore, as mentioned in the introduction, most participants were either ATs (49.28%, n = 34) or coaches (28.99%, n = 20). However, a few authors focused on athletes (7.25%, n = 5), general athletic department staff (4.35%, n = 3), or students looking to become ATs (4.35%, n = 3). In addition, conference commissioners, athletic directors, and referees were each the focus of at least 1 study.

Researchers used qualitative (57.97%, n = 40), quantitative (33.33%, n = 23), and mixed-methods (8.69%, n = 6) designs for collecting data. For the qualitative methods, semistructured in-depth interviews (50.72%, n = 35) were the primary source of data, with additional data provided by focus groups (2.89%, n = 2). Longitudinal interviews and observations were sources in 1 investigation. For the quantitative studies, the primary data-collection method was cross-sectional web-based surveys (33.33%, n = 23); another method was a mix of surveys and online journaling. Researchers of mixed-methods studies used both surveys and interviews as primary data-collection techniques (7.25%, n = 5).

Several theoretical frameworks were applied. Although a general discussion of balance and conflict framed most works (26.1%, n = 18), other theoretical areas of focus were burnout (4.35%, n = 3), workaholism (4.35%, n = 3), and role strain (2.89%, (n = 2). Additional specific theories were used as frameworks (eg, role congruency theory, organizational support theory, career construction theory, multilevel model of the work-life interface). However, application of these theories was somewhat scattered and inconsistent.

The focus of each article was also important to map, as it showed the primary aim. For consistency among studies, we classified each as balance, enrichment, or conflict. Some had a combination of these perspectives and were classified as such. Most authors examined conflict (46.38%, n = 32) or a mix of conflict and balance (23.19%, n = 16). Balance was the next most common focus (24.64%, n = 17), with researchers either entirely or partially focusing on enrichment (7.25%, n = 5). Some counts overlapped because the focus was split among 2 or 3 of the possible constructs. Also, some scholars used different verbiage for conflict, such as interference, but we classified these articles as conflict focused as well.

Although our goal was to map the ways in which the work-life interface has been studied in the sport industry, it is still beneficial to summarize and highlight the key findings of these studies. Such a summary provides practitioners and researchers with insight into both the items that are well understood and those that are less well understood. A summary of each study is available in Tables 1, 2, and 3. However, in the following section, we briefly highlight the connections and commonalities among the studies.

In this body of literature, the experiences of work-life conflict and struggles with work-life balance were nearly universal.^17,64  In a single study,⁷⁷  the researchers reported collegiate assistant coaches experienced only mild levels of work-life conflict but commented on the surprising nature of this finding. Several common causes of increased work-life conflict and reduced levels of work-life balance were identified among the investigations. For ATs, coaches, and other sport personnel, most sources of increasing work-life conflict or reduced levels of work-life balance were organizational factors. Of the organizational factors, the most typically cited sources of tension were work demands,^{10,40,41,46,47,49,53,63,64}  work climate,¹  lack of autonomy,^9,32,49  travel requirements,^1,9,46,47  low salaries,^32,78  managerial incompetency,⁶²  role strain,^37,62  long work hour requirements,^{1,9,12,32,40,46}  and inadequate staffing.^47,53,63  Individual factors were also important reasons for increases in work-life conflict or decreases in work-life balance. These individual factors included items such as personal life stage,^29,30,38,40  age,^13,29,30  workaholism,^17,82  and career stage.^13,16,29,30  In some studies, the family situation (eg, being a parent) was discussed as an individual contributing factor.^{9,12,38,41,52}  However, a number of authors clearly outlined that work-life conflict was experienced by both men and women^{10,11,33,47,64}  and pointed out that those without children also experienced increased levels of work-life conflict and reduced work-life balance as a result of working in sport.^16,47,67  From a sociocultural perspective, sexism and gender bias were commonly cited sources of tension.^12,57,66 

Along with reporting frequent sources of tension based on working in sport, scholars described successful coping strategies for reducing work-life conflict and increasing work-life balance. The coping strategies included improving time management,^12,43,84  compartmentalizing work and personal life,^12,50,55,78  integrating work and personal life,^{12,18,36,42,78}  using formal workplace supports,^54,61  using informal workplace supports,^58,66  cultivating family-friendly work climates,^{42,43,44,45,51,61}  calling on coworker support,^{31,43,46,51,53,55,56,61}  setting work boundaries,^{36,44,46,51,53,55,70}  finding successful mentors,^31,43,66  increasing workplace flexibility,^43,79  increasing autonomy,⁷⁶  managing priorities,^{14,36,42,50,84}  maintaining consistent physical exercise,^18,50  relying on supervisor support,^{46,53,56,61,76}  and reducing roles or tasks.^14,70  Although using organizational supports, such as formal workplace policies, was discussed less often, orientation sessions increased the awareness of and confidence in them and administrator support.^34,58  Authors^{9,12,46,53,64,67,83}  also determined that nonwork social support (eg, support from spouse, family, extended family, or friends) was a strong influence in decreasing work-life conflict and increasing work-life balance. Many researchers^{2,13,14,32,38,67,70,72}  found that participants viewed the sport industry as fundamentally incompatible with having a balanced life⁵²  and saw career exit and change as the only solutions for restoring work-life balance.

As we indicated, working in sport presents several challenges for achieving work-life balance, especially from an organizational perspective. That is, the primary sources of challenge to the work-life interface come from organizational pressures and dynamics. To compound this challenge, those working in sport believe the primary responsibility for coping rests with the individual. It appears that working in the sport industry, no matter the capacity, is associated with tension and stress regarding the work-life interface. Consequently, understanding these dynamics remains important for those researching the work-life interface in sport. In the following section, we suggest ways the field might continue to progress.

The body of literature focused on the work-life interface of those working in the sport industry is expanding. Of the 69 articles included in this study, 56 were published between 2011 and 2020, and 38 of those were published between 2016 and 2020. This suggests a rapidly expanding scholarly conversation centered on ways to help ATs, coaches, athletes, and others in the sport industry achieve balance between work and nonwork activities, reduce conflict, and enrich their work and personal lives. With that in mind, several areas in the literature need clarification. Additionally, certain research questions still need to be asked and answered. In the following sections, we discuss these needs in more detail.

One area that may benefit the overall field would be unified and clear definitions of the terms related to the work-life interface. For example, several researchers used work-family language instead of work-life language. Typically, as long as the work-family construct is being used to describe work and family life, this language is descriptive and useful. However, if work-family is used to describe populations generally and not specifically in the context of actual family dynamics, more inclusive work-life terminology should be used.

Another area that could be improved is the use of the terms balance and conflict. As noted in the introduction, balance and conflict are constructs with specific, independent meanings. That is, balance is not defined as the absence of conflict.⁸⁶  Yet when discussing experiences of balance and conflict in sport, investigators often used the terms interchangeably, which may cause confusion among readers and practitioners. In addition, some authors^37,62,74  used role conflict in place of work-life conflict or the construct of interference instead of conflict. A new scholar in the field who wants to examine the work-life interface of employees in the sport industry may feel confused and uncertain about these terms and meanings. Being particular about terminology and focusing with clarity on specific, independent constructs will help advance the literature.

In this scoping review, we also highlighted gaps in the field that require attention. Some of the biggest needs are advancing scholarship on enrichment, developing an international voice, considering directionality, and characterizing the athlete perspective. Future researchers should highlight the experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and other individuals and racial and ethnic minority populations. Furthermore, comparing work-life interface policies, procedures, and cultures among sport organizations would also provide useful insight. As mentioned in the Results, only 7.25% (n = 5) of the sample explored enrichment. As the trend toward positive organizational behavior studies increases,⁸⁷  looking at enrichment will be more important. Consequently, focusing on enrichment and its antecedents, experiences, and outcomes will be a rich area of study.

Another gap in the literature is the failure to highlight international populations. Although samples from several countries were included in this review, most researchers focused on US populations (82.61%, n = 57). Broadening the literature beyond the United States will likely allow a more nuanced understanding of the work-life interface to emerge. Input from people working in sport who have different priorities, cultures, experiences, and perspective on negotiating work and nonwork responsibilities will enhance the literature and demonstrate the nuances of these experiences. In general, examining cultural differences between work-life enriching places of employment and those filled with conflict, as well as how different races and ethnicities view the experiences of managing work and nonwork obligations in the sport industry, will broaden our understanding. Characterizing international populations may be challenging for those focusing on ATs, however, as many countries do not yet recognize this profession.⁸⁸  Even so, pushing outward to include broader populations where possible will enrich the literature.

Clearly, the work-life interface is bidirectional.⁴  That is, just as work influences personal life, personal life can conflict with or enhance work life. However, few researchers have addressed this bidirectionality in detail. In several studies^9,12,22,23  in this review, the importance of building support networks outside work was discussed. Thus, examining the experiences of life-work enrichment or life-work conflict and their outcomes on work could contribute to the literature.

Finally, giving a voice to athletes' experiences of managing various life roles would add to the literature. Based on anecdotal evidence, gaining access to athletes as research participants can be a major challenge. Nonetheless, athletes likely have distinct experiences and perspectives that are important to examine. Exploring these perspectives may provide important contributions to the overall understanding of the work-life interface. Exploring athletes' perspectives will also probably have important outcomes for practitioners, as understanding coping strategies or outcomes of conflict may provide avenues for performance enhancement.

Although a scoping review was useful in allowing us to address the current literature on the work-life interface in sport, this study was not without its weaknesses. As with many scoping reviews, our investigation suffered from a lack of evaluation about the quality of the articles reviewed.²⁴  That is, all articles included in the scoping review were weighed equally despite their quality. This leads to a potential for bias in the overall results. To combat this bias, we provided extensive notes on and insights into the articles used for the review (Tables 1–3), as well as a transparent description of the process used to find and review the articles that were included in the final study.

A second weakness, which is true of all review types, is that our review likely missed important articles not contained in the databases or not identified in the citations during the article collection process. Because the literature on the sport industry is broad, we encourage researchers to publish reviews to guide the advance of new work in the field. In addition, because of the nature of the review, we included only studies that involved data collection. This necessitated the removal of several important and influential manuscripts that have shaped the discussion of the work-life interface in sport. Although these omissions were regrettable, it was important to apply a consistent set of selection criteria to the articles in the final sample, which resulted in the removal of several.

The culture of sport and its emphasis on performance, competition, and winning have serious outcomes for those working in the field. Consequently, more study is needed to progress our understanding of the experiences of various populations working in and around sport. Gaining insight into the theoretical and practical sides of the work-life interface will provide useful and important findings, which can be used to slowly improve the ability of those in the sport industry to successfully manage work and nonwork obligations and improve their overall quality of life.