Organizational Capacity and Organizational Ambition in Nonprofit and Voluntary Sports Clubs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This research measures organizational capacity and organizational ambition in nonprofit and voluntary sports clubs. The organizational capacity dimensions of Hall et al.’s (The capacity to serve: A qualitative study of the challenges facing Canada’s nonprofit and voluntary organizations, 2003) multidimensional framework are completed with corresponding dimensions reflecting organizational ambition, and the human resources dimension is further detailed. Each dimension is adapted to be applicable in a sports clubs setting, resulting in the following organizational ambition and capacity dimensions: human resources (board, coaches, volunteers, youth coaches), accommodation, management, financing, and external orientation. Data obtained from a sample of 585 Flemish sports clubs were analyzed using exploratory factor analysis, revealing five types of sports clubs that are labeled ‘ambition,’ ‘coaches,’ ‘volunteers,’ ‘management,’ and ‘accommodation deficiency.’ The findings support the use of a multidimensional framework based on the dimensions organizational capacity and organizational ambition, and the usefulness of distinguishing among four types of volunteers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".