Key drivers of the evolution of the sports management model demonstrated by an example of Armenia and EU Countries

. The problem of the successful functioning of organizations and institutions, including sports-related ones, has become more acute in view of growing turbulence of the exogenous and endogenous environment. Building modern management model and its implementation in the sports industry is a key tool for solving this problem. The aim of the article was to determine the specifics of building modern management model and its implementation in the sports industry. The research involved the method of synthesis, stakeholder analysis, statistical analysis. The method of strategic analysis formed the methodological framework of the study. The study identified key drivers for the development of the sports management model in terms of technological and social innovations, as well as social entrepreneurship. The key role of the relationship between the micro and macro levels in the context of the model is emphasized. The relationship between the state policy in the field of sports and the management goals of sports organizations is identified. The effectiveness of the proposed changes in the sports management model was assessed on the basis of the EU statistics. The study proposes that sports management model should have a balanced structure in the context of blocks of strategic and operational management with a particular focus on human capital management, financial and operational efficiency. In particular, it is noted that EU experienced a significant increase in GDP growth associated with the sports industry from 1.93% (2015) to 2.16% (2020) due to sport management model’s enhancement. The analytical tool was built on the basis of the assessment of strategic gaps between the current and target state in the context of the model.


Introduction
Institutions and organizations need to adopt new forms and structures for their functioning against the background of a rapidly changing work environment. The modern sports industry is no exception. So, the issue of studying the drivers of the evolution of the sports management model demonstrated by an example of Armenia and the EU countries has become relevant.
It should be noted that modern macro-trends -digitalization, inclusiveness, social entrepreneurship -have an impact not only on such traditional economic agents as business, households, states, but also on the field of sports. The position of the sports sector at the intersection of various groups of stakeholders and its actual status of a complex social construct between the public, commercial and non-profit sectors represents particular difficulty in the context of providing an adequate response to the challenges of macro-trends in this sector. An additional difficulty is the fulfilment by the sports sector of the complex tasks of socio-economic development in combination with the need to ensure its uninterrupted operation in the short and long run. In this context, stakeholder views are critical for consideration. In particular, Appio et al. (2019) stress that modern concept of smart cities is realized through social innovation oriented first of all on sport industry both for professional and general public usage. Additionally, Zawadzki (2022) outlines the need for taking into considerations popular opinion on budget spending for professional sports infrastructure improvements.
This reflects the significant socio-economic benefits from building a modern sports management model and its implementation. However, in the current conditions of digitalization and the development of other technologies, as well as the need to increase the efficiency of organizations and institutions in terms of balanced achievement of micro-and macro-level goals, the aforementioned mechanism faces significant challenges. All this causes a significant need to study the modern features of building sports management model and its implementation demonstrated by the example of both developed and developing economies.
The aim of the research is to identify and analyse the features of developing and building a current sports management model demonstrated by an example of Armenia and the EU countries. The aim involved a number of research objectives: 1. Analyse the drivers of the exogenous and endogenous environment that affect the development of the sports management model at the present stage; 2. Develop proposals for improving the sports management model with due regard to the best practices of developed and developing countries; 3. Conduct an analysis of the economic efficiency of the proposed solution.

Literature review
There is a significant number of studies on the sports management model. In this context, Pichot et al. (2009) analyze key management approaches based on sport management model aimed at key stakeholder groups engagement and satisfaction. Further, Beech and Chadwick (2004) study key challenges for sport management model in terms of strategic hurdles. Study by Ratten (2011) further elaborates on the issue of strategic challenges for sport management outlining need for social innovation. In research Tjønndal (2017) gives insight on the classification and structuring of innovations in the sports industry and their impact on the development prospects of the current sports management model. Vrontis et al. (2019) study the role of technological innovation in the development of modern sports industry. In their work Frevel et al. (2022), authors provide a vision on trends and directions of technology impact on the development of the sports industry. The above-mentioned studies contributed to the analysis of the impact of innovations on the dynamics of the development of modern sports, as well as identifying the role of social innovations and entrepreneurship in the context of the sports management model. Christensen et al. (2018) study the problems of socalled breakthrough innovations, including in the field of sports. Yuksel et al. (2021) analyse the driver of digitalization in the context of the development of new sectors of the sports industry. Corthouts et al. (2021) analyse a three-tier innovation model in the context of the development of the non-profit sector of the sports industry in Belgium and the Netherlands. Goebeler et al. (2021) andSanabria Navarro et al. (2023) study the problems of the hybrid model of modern sports in the context of the development of technological innovations. The study by Ehnold et al. (2020) focuse on the digitalization of sports in the context of achieving the goals of an individual sports club. The works referred to above contributed to the study of the problem of the impact of innovations on the sports management model at the strategic and operational levels in this article.
In work Açıkgöz et al. (2021) studied the issue of social innovation in the context of youth sports development. In turn, Tjønndal et al. (2021) considered the issue of social innovation in the field of digital sports. Escamilla-Fajardo et al. (2020) analyse the role of innovation and entrepreneurial institutions in the development of football. The works studied above were used for the analysis of the role of innovation and social entrepreneurship in the development of a modern model of sports management carried out in this study. Peterson and Schenker (2018) study the problem of the interaction of social innovations and the modern sports management model in Sweden. The work of Moustakas and Kalina (2021) provides another example of the role of social entrepreneurship in the development of the sports industry in a developed economy in the context of Germany. In turn, Putri and Moustakas (2022) consider the issue of social entrepreneurship in the field of sports on the example of a developing country (Indonesia). The study by Tjønndal et al. (2021) focuses on the involvement of young people in the sports industry as part of the digital sports development. The work of Nilssen and Tjønndal (2021), deals with the issue of the intersection of social innovation and sports in urban planning and urban development strategy. Appio et al. (2019) worked on the problem of ensuring the modern concept of smart cities through social innovation and the modern sports industry. Corthouts et al. (2019) focused on the issue of social inclusion through social entrepreneurship in the sports industry. Analysed the problem of involving fans as a key stakeholder group in the context of sports innovation (Naess & Tickell, 2019;Shchokin et al., 2023). In work Gipson et al. (2021) examine the role of social innovation in the development of the cross-fit movement in North America, their impact on the current realities of the sports industry and social structures. The abovementioned studies were used in the analysis within this study of the drivers of technological and innovative changes in the sports industry.
The study Glibo et al. (2022) focuses on the issues of strategic management and sustainable development of sports organizations in the context of the challenges of the current sports management model. Altman et al. (2019) study the role of organizational dynamics and ecosystems in the context of the development of the established institutions, including sports ones. Best et al. (2021) analyse the problem of organizational ability to adopt innovations in the context of the development of a current model of sports management in the non-profit sector. Piggott et al. (2022) focus on the leadership component in the digital sports development. Moustakas et al. (2022) study the development of a current sports management model at the Retos, número 49, 2023 (3º trimestre) • -Review of current research related to the sports management models • -Determining the aim and objectives of the study in the context of drivers for changing the sports management model intersection of key public institutions: education, entrepreneurship, human capital. Naess and Tjønndal (2021) consider the problem of innovation management within the current sports management model. Lenneis andTjønndal (2021), Niebles Nuñez et al. (2023) develop this thesis, analysing the problems of organizational innovation in the context of the modern sports industry. In turn, Gerke et al. (2021) consider the configuration of innovations in the field of sports at the cluster level. The aforementioned works contributed to this study in terms of building an adequate management system (interaction, monitoring, control) for the sports management model both at the state level and at the level of separate sports organizations. Bjärsholm and Norberg (2021) studied the development of a current sports management model at the level of public policy in Sweden in the modern context of neoliberalism. In turn, in work Moustakas and Tshube (2020) analyse the problems of planning and implementing sports policy in the developing country (Botswana). The theses of the state policy in the field of development of the sports industry in the context of stimulating the socio-economic development of Botswana are developed in the work Moustakas and Işık (2020). Zawadzki (2022) analyses the problems of public opinion regarding budget spending on the development of professional sports infrastructure. Svensson et al. (2019) study the role of social innovation in the field of sports in the context of achieving sustainable development goals and socio-economic targets at the national level. Svensson and Mahoney (2020) consider the issue of the ability of sports organizations for innovative development in the context of achieving the global goals of peace. The works referred to above contributed to this study in terms of analysing the directions for the development and implementation of state policy in the field of sports in the context of the challenges of the current sports management model.

Research Design
The main research stages are illustrated in Figure 1. The first -preparatory -stage involved a review of relevant studies on the development of a sports management model under the influence of key drivers. The aim and objectives of the study of the drivers for changing the sports management model in Armenia and the EU are determined based on a critical assessment of the results of previous studies. The merging of the EU sport model with the Armenian model in this study is driven by several factors. First, the need to compare the model of a developing country (Armenia) with the models of developed countries (EU). Second, the EU sports industry data is of higher quality and depth compared to Armenian data. The next component of the preparatory stage is the development of research design in terms of choosing methods and features of the sample for studying the sports management model. This is followed by the collection of the initial data of the EU sports industry for their subsequent processing and use in the study of the drivers of the sports management model SAGE (2022).
The second stage of the research involved the study of the sports management model using stakeholder analysis. The stage also provides for the interpretation of the obtained results using the synthesis method in terms of the drivers for changing the sports management model in Armenia and the EU, as well as the identification of a set of improvements for the sports management model. The statistical analysis tools were also used at this stage based on data from the sports industry of the EU countries as part of the analysis of the economic efficiency of the proposed changes in terms of the sports management model.
The final stage of the study involves identification of the limitations in terms of the methodology and implementation of the study of the sports management model, as well as drawing conclusions on the drivers of the sports management model in Armenia and the EU.

Methods
The following methods were used in this research to study the problem of the impact of the public-private partnership mechanism on the effectiveness of microfinance programmes: • synthesis -to identify trends in the context of the sports industry and evaluate drivers in the initial part of Results where major context of modern sport management both in Armenia and EU is identified; • stakeholder analysis -to analyse and form recommendations for building a modern model of sports management in the context of the needs and motivations of key stakeholder groups in the middle part of Results where structural blocks of the modern model of sports management are outlined; • statistical analysis -to assess the effectiveness of the proposed changes within the sports management model in the final part of results where sport management models are analysed in terms of GDP statistics and specific sport industry statistics. Stakeholder analysis is a method of studying the needs and motivations of various groups of stakeholders in the context of the potential results of changes and their rela-tive impact on stakeholders. The stakeholder analysis is a key component of the complex strategic analysis. The specialized information and analytical platform SAGE notes that this method is widely used in the strategic programme planning and management policy development, including the sports sector.
The methodological framework of the analysis is the method of strategic analysis. Strategic analysis is a set of quantitative and qualitative tools for studying an economic agent, exogenous and endogenous environment in order to develop and implement a strategy.
The sample was formed from the statistics of the sports industries of 27 EU countries. This sample size is sufficient for the purposes of analysing the effectiveness of the sports management model at the national level. The choice of the sports industry in the EU countries was determined by the development of the sports management model in these countries and the high quality of data in open sources of information.
The results of the factors of influence within the sample were studied by analysing official statistics in the context of the sports industry of the EU countries. The analysis of the factors of influence was carried out for 2015 and 2020. Table  1 provides the description of the variables. Eurostat, Statista, MS Excel were used to analyse the sample data (Eurostat, September 15, 2022;STATISTA, September 15, 2022 The share of the country's sports-related GDP of the total GDP for the year, % Demand financing by the state budget, % The share of the item "Sport" in the expenditures of the state budget for the year, % Employment in sports, % The share of the sports industry in the total employment of the population in the national economy for the year, % Employment of women in sports, % The share of the sports industry in the total employment of women in the national economy for the year, % Population regularly engaged in sports, % The share of the population regularly engaged in sports throughout the year, % Source: prepared by the author

Results
The problems of the evolution of the sports management model are considered below based on its essence and the building logic. It is also important to take into account the peculiarities of the architecture of the sports industry and the needs of various stakeholder groups in this analysis. It should be noted that the sports industry includes three organizational sectors: public, non-profit, commercial. These sectors play a key role not only in the nature of building a sports management model from a structural perspective and in terms of legal forms. The features of the aforementioned sectors are also reflected in the nature of management decisions made and the interaction of stakeholders. There is an influence on the way of achieving the goals, the choice of sources of financing, etc.
It is important to note that the above organizational structures complement each other and contribute to the full functioning of the sports management model at the macro level. Accordingly, each of the selected sectors has its own specific functions and features. The selected sectors are described in more detail below.
Sector 1 "Public". This sector includes government institutions of different levels: national, regional, local, represented by various agencies and departments. In the context of the sports management model, the public sector is tasked to create the most acceptable conditions for sports activity and recreation of citizens in order to provide public goods. In practical terms, this includes the creation and maintenance of public sports facilities, park areas, sports grounds, as well as the implementation of programmes to promote sports and a healthy lifestyle. It is important to take into account the interests of different groups of stakeholders (the public, sports organizations, local residents, etc.). Successful functioning of the sports management model in the public sector also requires developing differentiated solutions that meet the needs of different age and socio-cultural groups of citizens. In other words, solutions provided in the sports model for young people will not be suitable for older citizens. So, the public sector within the sports management model should be inclusive and balanced to match the interests of various stakeholder groups.
The public sector within the sports management model also affects the non-profit and commercial sectors. In particular, this applies to financing sports programmes of public organizations and commercial areas, subsidizing certain areas of sports initiatives. A separate block in this context is the support of social entrepreneurship related to sports, recreation and a healthy lifestyle.
The role of the public sector is also essential in developing public policy to ensure equal and free access of citizens to sport in a safe and supportive environment, in particular, for women and girls; people with disabilities; individual religious groups, etc. The role of the public sector is also important in the development and implementation of state policy in the fight against doping and fraud in professional sports.
Sector 2 "Non-profit". This sector is represented by non-governmental organizations, which are not intended to make a profit, but to implement socially useful initiatives and solve particular problems of society. It should be noted that the non-profit organizations is typical not only for the sports industry, but also for culture and education ones.
The EU sports management model often implies that sport in educational institutions -both secondary and tertiary -is managed by a combination of the non-profit and public sectors. For example, the public sector provides partial funding for the programme in educational institutions, while the non-profit sector provides operational management and methodological support, as well as staffing and resources.
Sports professional organizations of various levels is another component of the non-profit sector in the sports management model. The above-mentioned sports professional organizations unite both ordinary members and professional management, as well as governing bodies. Local sports clubs and organizations are separately distin-guished -at the local level.
Sector 3 "Commercial". The final component of the current sports management model is a complex of commercial companies operating in the sports sector for profit. The commercial sector is represented by the following groups: • professional sports clubs and organizations; • providers of sports services (ski resorts, fitness clubs, recreational facilities, etc.); • sports infrastructure operators (management companies of sports facilities, sports marketing agencies, sports media, etc.) • manufacturers of sports equipment; • sporting goods retailers.
Sponsoring corporations play a significant role in the commercial sector of the sports management model. In EU practice, the commercial sector has a dominant position in the sports management model and is a key provider of sports goods and services. The above features reflect the complexity of the current sports management model and significant challenges for stakeholders.
It should be note that similar sports goods, services, and public goods in the field of sports are created in all three sectors. So, in order to obtain the maximum effect for wide groups of stakeholders, it is necessary to effectively interact with the public, non-profit and commercial sectors within the current sports management model. In other words, balancing various sectors within a single sports management model is relevant. In this context, it is important to single out the structural blocks of the current sports management model, which ensure meeting the needs of stakeholder groups and achievement of goals of various levels (Table 2). -Determining the position in the exogenous environment, studying the main challenges and assessing the strategic gap in the context of the "current -target position"; -Development of an appropriate strategy and efficient use of available resources as part of the implementation of the chosen strategy; -Efficient development and implementation of innovations within the model.
Organizational structure and management -creation of an appropriate organizational structure to effectively coordinate the work of departments, groups of employees and volunteers; -creation of an effective process of making managerial decisions; -balancing the needs in formalizing business processes, adopting innovations, monitoring the work of employees and volunteers, motivating the involved stakeholders; -optimization of the management structure in order to improve cost efficiency and reduce budget needs; -setting up a communication and reporting system inside and outside the organization; -development of a procedure for the selection of governing bodies; -building an adequate management system in the context of powers and areas of responsibility of management bodies; -building a control and monitoring system Operational management and performance management -improving the operating model and reducing the organization's costs; -making the organization's actions faster through the use of lean management; -Improvement of operational planning processes; -setting up and implementing a system of key performance indicators (KPIs) in order to monitor and control the achievement of goals at various levels Sports marketing -stimulation of demand for sporting goods and services; -development of the interest of the target audience in non-sports goods and services sold by sports organizations; -maintaining a system of communication with the population and groups of stakeholders in the field of sports Human capital management -ensuring high motivation and satisfaction of staff: both employees and volunteers; -attraction and retention of highly qualified staff; -development of a supportive organizational culture; -maintaining the leadership programme within the organization in order to ensure the continuity and manageability of the model in the medium and long rum; -setting up effective horizontal and vertical links within the organization; -building an interaction culture in the sports industry Retos, número 49, 2023 (3º trimestre) Financial management -setting up a system for making financial management decisions with due regard to the specifics of the sports industry (including unstable cash flows, seasonality, a special cost structure); -improving financial management practices allowing for the structure of income and the main drivers of cash flow generation; -developing approaches to management of generating business income in the field of sports gambling, selling the rights to broadcast sports events, managing grant funding; -developing a position on corporatization of sports clubs and organizations, work on stock market platforms, implementation of publicprivate partnerships in the sports industry Source: prepared by author based on internal analysis As a result, a current sports management model should cover a variety of areas at the strategic and operational level in order to achieve high results for a wide range of stakeholders. In this case, it is important to balance the diverse needs at both the micro and macro levels in the management of the sports industry. Separate attention is also drawn to the importance of supporting the formation and implementation of the state policy in the field of sports by individual management units. In turn, the policy level in the sports industry should be adequate to the needs of stakeholders at the micro level.
In this context, there is a need to adapt the current sports management model to key changes in the exogenous and endogenous environment. The drivers of technological innovations, social innovations, social entrepreneurship, inclusion, the level of adaptability of the sports management model to the national peculiarities of the sports industry were selected for the analysis. The driver analysis was used to assess the adaptation of the sports management model in Armenia and the EU countries, as well as to assess the strategic gap. The results of the driver analysis are presented in Table 3.
A statistical analysis of data on the EU sports industry will be conducted to assess the economic efficiency of the proposed solution. This analysis was carried out for individual indicators in the context of 2015 and 2020 based on data from Eurostat and Statista (Figure 3). It should be noted that noticeable improvements were achieved in a number of indicators of the sports industry in the EU as a result of the implementation of the programme to support the development of sports in the EU. The analysis showed that improvements in economic indicators were achieved as a result of the implementation of changes within the sports management model in the EU. There is an increase in the GDP volume associated with the sports industry from 1.93% (2015) to 2.16% (2020). The share of sports financing in the budget structure also increased from 0.37% (2015) to 0.40% (2020). Positive changes of social development indicators are also noticeable: women's employment in sports increased from 0.64% (2015) to 0.65% (2020). The share of citizens who regularly go in for sports increased from 29.9% (2015) to 31.0% (2020). In Armenia, a comparative approach revealed similar positive effects both in the economic and social sectors due to the implementation of changes in the sports management model.  So, the assessment of the drivers of the current sports management model revealed a certain direction of its improvement and development prospects for the medium run. In terms of bridging the EU-Armenia strategic gap, there is a moderate gap in the drivers of social innovation, social entrepreneurship, and inclusion. This gap to the target level of development of the sports model in Armenia can be overcome through the coordinated work of the public, non-profit and commercial sectors of the sports industry through studying the best practices and their effective adaptation in Armenia, taking into account the goals of the macro and micro levels. The Armenia-EU gap in the technological innovation driver is assessed as significant. In turn, the approach to work towards the development and implementation of technological innovations in the sports sector in Armenia should be based on setting a strategic goal, operational objectives in the short and medium run, using effective project management tools in the context of implementing technological innovations. The efforts on technological innovation driver should be supported by adequate funding and interaction with stakeholders. Armenia surpasses the EU countries in the driver of the adaptability of the sports management model to the national peculiarities of the sports industry. This is explained by the deep tradition of national sports schools, a sound assessment of the opportunities and resources available, and the competent focus of the public, commercial and non-profit sectors on priority areas in the sport of Armenia.

Discussions
So, the features of the development of the sports management model under the influence of exogenous and endogenous drivers were identified. The results of this study are supported by previous findings on both developed and developing countries. The obtained results are further revealed in greater detail.
This study indicates that the modern exogenous and endogenous environment is characterized by rapid change and innovation. This is confirmed by earlier study Tjønndal (2017), in which identified the key role of innovation in the development of the sports industry -in particular, in terms of digitalization, the emergence of new business models in sports. This thesis is confirmed in the study conducted in terms of the development of a current sports management model by building an ecosystem (Altman et al., 2019). An additional confirmation of the results obtained is an earlier study Vrontis et al. (2019), which focuses on the key role of technological innovations in the management of the sports industry at the present stage. This study develops the earlier findings of Yuksel et al. (2021) regarding the key role of digital innovation in creating new directions in the sports industry. In terms of the high importance of innovation for the modern model of sports management, this study finds additional confirmation in the work of Corthouts et al. (2021) as regards the model for planning and implementing innovations in the non-profit sector of the sports industry. Additional confirmation of the results obtained can be found in the work of Frevel et al. (2022) in terms of evaluating various technologies for the development prospects of the sports management model.
This study identified a significant role of building an adequate management system that covers and interaction, monitoring and control in order to ensure the effectiveness of the current sports management model. Given the specifics of the objectives and the resources available in the sports industry, this is a critical aspect of the adequate functioning of the sports management model. This finding is confirmed in the work Piggott et al. (2022) in terms of building a leadership system in the digital sports sector.
This thesis is also supported by Naess and Tjønndal (2021), who insist on the importance of developing structures to manage social innovation in the sports industry. Additional confirmation of the result obtained can be found in work Peterson and Schenker (2018), who link social entrepreneurship and the sports industry within the sports management modern model. An additional confirmation of the obtained result is the previous achievements of Corthouts et al. (2019) on strengthening the role of social inclusion within the sports management model at the present stage.
However, unlike earlier studies, the results of this study focus on the fact that the current sports management model should take into account the features of management in the sports industry, both at the micro and macro levels. As a result, this provides a balanced sports management model. A separate focus within the distinguished difference emphasizes the dependence of the effective implementation of sports policy and practical steps in the context of financing decisions and management decisions. In turn, the effective use of the sports management model at the micro level is significantly hampered without an adequate policy in the field of sports.
Therefore, this study emphasizes the importance of the relationship between the blocks of the current sports management model at the micro and macro levels, which is poorly reflected in the earlier studies. The results of this study are confirmed by a statistical analysis of data from the EU sports industry. Positive dynamics in the economic and social development of the EU sports industry during the period of its changes confirms the effectiveness of the proposed changes. A similar positive effect is expected for the Armenian sports industry under the comparative approach in terms of its economic and social indicators provided the implementation of the proposed changes.
A separate focus of this study is the importance of analysis under the stakeholder approach, that is, taking into account the needs of various groups of stakeholders. There is a noticeable lack of studies that maintain such a line of analysis of the current sports management model. In this aspect, the distinguishing findings of this study echo the need for analysis at both the micro and macro levels out-lined above.

Conclusions
The problem of effective management in the field of sports is becoming increasingly important in the context of accelerating changes in the exogenous and endogenous environment. One of the key levers for solving this problem is the development and implementation of a current sports management model. The complex influence of environmental drivers and macro-trends represent particular difficulties. This is due to the specifics of the sports industry: its position at the intersection of the interests and needs of wide stakeholder groups.
The current sports management model should have a balanced structure in the context of blocks of strategic and operational management. Sports marketing, human capital management, financial and operational efficiency should be a special focus of the model. The consistency of the goals of state policy and the sports organization should be its integral characteristic. Data from the EU sports industry testifies to the effectiveness of the selected approach to building a model. Accordingly, model changes had a beneficial effect in the economic and social context in the EU. A similar positive effect is expected in Armenia under a comparative approach in case of competent planning and implementation of the proposed changes. As regards the development of the sports management model in Armenia based on the experience of the EU, it is important to take into account national priorities and the specifics of the country's sports industry. It is also necessary to take into account the developing technological and social innovations, as well as social entrepreneurship and inclusiveness in the model. In particular, special focus has to be directed to stakeholder needs and views in terms of enhancing sport management model, especially in the part of social innovations. Further we stress ia major role of building an adequate management system covering stakeholder interaction, monitoring and control blocks in order to ensure the effectiveness of the current sports management model.
Limitations of this study are in the availability of comparable data for EU and Armenia sport sectors.
Prospects for further research include a more comprehensive study of the factors of influence of exogenous and endogenous drivers on the sports management model in terms of the balanced fulfilment of macro-and micro-level development goals, as well as taking into account the national specifics of the sports industry.