IBJNews

Big-time college sports leadership still a man's world

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Forty years after the U.S. government’s Title IX law required equal athletic opportunities for men and women, just four women are in charge at the 120 sports departments in college football’s top tier.

Women haven’t been groomed for a top job that includes everything from overseeing fundraising and negotiating licensing deals to hiring and firing coaches. They still battle a perception they’ll struggle to manage an entrenched football program, two female athletic directors said.

As college football—the biggest revenue sport—begins its conference schedules at the end of the month, only the University of California-Berkeley, North Carolina State, Western Michigan University and the University of Nevada have female athletic directors in the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s top football division. That’s about 3 percent.

“The numbers are really, really small,” says Sandy Barbour, athletic director since 2004 at Cal-Berkeley. “Frankly, we’ve actually gone backward. At one point, there were eight of us.”

Title IX took effect in 1972, a federal law forcing schools to provide roughly the same number of places on sports teams for women and men. For example, there should be 100 spots on women’s teams to offset a 100-man football roster.

Barbour, 52, said she’s given women at Cal a chance to show they can handle football and revenue-related jobs. Her men’s and women’s basketball supervisors, chief financial officer and director of development all are women. The department had $65.2 million in operating revenue in fiscal 2011, according to the university.

Of all the athletic programs in Division I, including those without football teams, women represent less than 10 percent of ADs, or 30 of 343 positions, according to an survey by the Indianapolis-based NCAA for the 2010-2011 school year. They make up about 30 percent of associate athletic directors, or 446 of 1,503 positions.

Patti Phillips, executive director of the National Association of Collegiate Women Athletics Administrators, said women are making progress, though slower than they might have imagined 40 years ago.

“The pipeline from top to bottom has to get bigger,” she said. “There are more women in the No. 2 positions working on football, operations and facilities, and that’s going to continue to grow.”

Among those who recruiters say may move into the top slot over time are University of Texas Women’s Athletic Director Chris Plonsky; University of Iowa Senior Associate Director of Athletics Jane Meyer; University of Georgia Executive Associate Athletic Director Carla Williams; NCAA Vice President of Women’s Basketball Championships Anucha Browne Sanders; and University of Louisville Executive Senior Associate Athletic Director Julie Hermann.

Decades ago, schools often promoted an aging football coach to athletic director. When television and sponsorships became a bigger part of the job, the role gravitated toward administrators who had experience with contracts and finding new sources of revenue. Women, often working in NCAA-rules compliance, athlete welfare or academic support, weren’t in the mix.

“You can become very cubby-holed in your responsibilities unless you come with a resume where you are allowed to do more than one certain thing,” Plonsky said.

“Are you going to be in compliance forever, or are you going to cross-pollinate into fundraising? Like in football, unless you get someone advanced to the coordinator position, how are you going to get them into a head coaching position? You have to be well-rounded.”

Broader skills development for men and women is now more of a focus at schools including the University of Michigan, where Athletic Director Dave Brandon, the former CEO of Domino’s Pizza Inc., took over in 2010. He’s applying business principles to staffing, he said.

“Succession planning is a huge part of a senior executive’s job in the corporate world,” said Brandon, 60. “In higher education, it’s something that isn’t emphasized. When you don’t have a plan driven by strategy, you become more of a victim of the marketplace.”

Brandon said he’s identifying members of his staff and people outside Michigan with leadership potential. He said he’s hired 39 women since his arrival, and that his leadership team is about 40-percent female. Michigan’s operating revenue for fiscal 2011 was $122.7 million, according to the university.

NCAA President Mark Emmert said the lack of succession planning and internal development in higher education isn’t just a problem in sports.

“Every time there is a search for a dean or provost there is almost always a fire drill about what’s next,” said Emmert, a former University of Washington president and Louisiana State University chancellor. “It’s as if we never anticipated this person would leave or grow old.”

Women still face preconceptions about what it takes to run a big-time sports program, according to Berkeley’s Barbour.

“These big programs are dominated by football,” she said. “And there is this thought that, in order to lead one of these programs, you have to have played football. You certainly have to address it.”

Jed Hughes, vice chairman at executive search firm Korn/Ferry International, said women need to work for athletic directors who can develop talent. Gathering the necessary experience can take 15 to 20 years, and may mean managing tickets and suite sales, events and operations, student athletes’ support services, and overseeing football or men’s basketball, he said. Plus, candidates need to understand fundraising.

“If you are going to be a successful athletic director, you have to have had the gamut of responsibilities,” he said.

The NCAA’s Emmert said preparing women to run athletic departments is about fairness. Even more important, it’s about becoming more competitive.

“When I have a more diverse leadership team in gender and race and perspective, I have better decision-making processes and more thoughtful voices at the table,” he said.

“There’s no doubt that they bring a different way to thinking about problems,” Emmert said. “It benefits all of us.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I am not by any means judging whether this is a good or bad project. It's pretty simple, the developers are not showing a hardship or need for this economic incentive. It is a vacant field, the easiest for development, and the developer already has the money to invest $26 million for construction. If they can afford that, they can afford to pay property taxes just like the rest of the residents do. As well, an average of $15/hour is an absolute joke in terms of economic development. Get in high paying jobs and maybe there's a different story. But that's the problem with this ask, it is speculative and users are just not known.

  2. Shouldn't this be a museum

  3. I don't have a problem with higher taxes, since it is obvious that our city is not adequately funded. And Ballard doesn't want to admit it, but he has increased taxes indirectly by 1) selling assets and spending the money, 2) letting now private entities increase user fees which were previously capped, 3) by spending reserves, and 4) by heavy dependence on TIFs. At the end, these are all indirect tax increases since someone will eventually have to pay for them. It's mathematics. You put property tax caps ("tax cut"), but you don't cut expenditures (justifiably so), so you increase taxes indirectly.

  4. Marijuana is the safest natural drug grown. Addiction is never physical. Marijuana health benefits are far more reaching then synthesized drugs. Abbott, Lilly, and the thousands of others create poisons and label them as medication. There is no current manufactured drug on the market that does not pose immediate and long term threat to the human anatomy. Certainly the potency of marijuana has increased by hybrids and growing techniques. However, Alcohol has been proven to destroy more families, relationships, cause more deaths and injuries in addition to the damage done to the body. Many confrontations such as domestic violence and other crimes can be attributed to alcohol. The criminal activities and injustices that surround marijuana exists because it is illegal in much of the world. If legalized throughout the world you would see a dramatic decrease in such activities and a savings to many countries for legal prosecutions, incarceration etc in regards to marijuana. It indeed can create wealth for the government by collecting taxes, creating jobs, etc.... I personally do not partake. I do hope it is legalized throughout the world.

  5. Build the resevoir. If built this will provide jobs and a reason to visit Anderson. The city needs to do something to differentiate itself from other cities in the area. Kudos to people with vision that are backing this project.

ADVERTISEMENT