Exploratory cluster analysis reveals distinct human resource management profiles across sport federations, suggesting internal capacity variations do not directly dictate strategic outputs.
Purpose This study develops and applies an indicator framework to examine two dimensions of human resource management – internal functioning and staff skills – in Catalan Sport Federations (CSF). It identifies exploratory Human Resource Management (HRM) profiles across federations and examines the associations between these dimensions, organisational characteristics and two mission-related strategic outputs: elite sport and sport for all.Research methods Grounded in institutional theory, institutional work theory, contingency theory, organisational-capacity research, and developed through a structured process informed by best practices in indicator development and validation, a focused measurement model was constructed. Indicators were drawn from literature, reviewed by 15 experts, and transformed to a standard 1–10 scale. Governance and management data were collected from 38 CSF, along with contextual data (e.g. size, age, operating budget). Cluster analysis was used as an exploratory technique to identify HRM profiles across federations.Findings The results show that internal functioning and staff skills distinguish different HRM configurations across federations. The five-cluster solution revealed heterogeneous profiles, with some federations combining comparatively stronger staff capabilities with weaker internal systems, while others displayed more balanced or more limited HRM configurations. The HRM indicators were not significantly associated with the two strategic-output dimensions of elite sport and sport for all.Practical implications Within a positivist empirical framework, this study presents a replicable tool for evaluating HRM in sport organisations.Research contribution The study advances HRM and sport governance literature through a theory-informed, context-sensitive model that supports targeted organisational development.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Muñoz et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: