Abstract
Performance regimes are a ubiquitous form of management and governance. They merit investigation because they seldom scrutinise their own performance, despite evidence of unanticipated effects and administrative costs. Previous research in sport has investigated the impacts of regimes on actors at national and community levels. Gaps exist regarding how performance regimes operate in the ‘black box’ between government and the non-profit sector, with a corresponding lack of research examining the creation and administration of regimes by government agencies and officials. Accordingly, this study is broadly about better understanding the mechanisms through which governing takes place (i.e., through a performance regime). More particularly, the thesis investigates three inter-related aspects of the regime: (a) its origins and purposes; (b) its sources of value conflict and challenges for officials; and (c) its institutional changes and transformations.
Drawing from institutional theory, the study conceptualises the performance regime as an administrative institution, characterised by collections of rules, practices, and narratives (Lowndes & Roberts, 2013). Founded upon a critical realist ontology, the case study consists of contextualisation, documentary analysis (e.g., legislation, policy documentation, and investment frameworks), and 15 semi-structured interviews with ten (10) Sport NZ officials.
There are three broad findings. First, Sport NZ officials and the regime had to pursue multiple, conflicting demands simultaneously relating to accountability, learning, and partnership. Accountability demands from government sometimes conflicted with the need for partnership emerging from the institutional arrangements of the community sport network. The result was a form of ‘organisational hypocrisy’ (Brunsson, 2006) where concerns for accountability were perceived to be neglected to support underperforming partners. Secondly, it was found that ambiguity between these imperatives at a policymaking level pushed conflict down to the implementation level, where officials faced a range of problems and challenges such as an excessive focus on ‘counting’ shortened forms of participation targeted towards children. In response, new narratives emerged (e.g., emphasising service ‘quality’) that would later serve as precursors to the reform of rules and practices. Thirdly, the research found that transformations of the regime stemmed from the choices of officials as to whether new rules would be ‘layered’ alongside or ‘displace’ existing policies. Shifts within the regime illustrate how seemingly innocuous incremental and endogenous institutional change can result in significant transformation.
This thesis highlights the institutional complexity in using a performance regime while straddling two distinct institutions. It concludes that the ‘transfer’ of business-like techniques (such as performance regimes) into community sport is unlikely to occur smoothly, owing to the latter’s distinctiveness and embedded practices – which serve as both a source of strength and powerful constraint. Indeed, these constraints show the need for actors to engage in conflict and compromise, hypocrisy and learning, and patience towards endogenous and incremental change.