The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of newly hired coaches in relation to their predecessors, and utilize the analysis to provide guidance to decision makers in college athletic departments. This study examined 185 coaching changes in Division I women’s basketball in 16 conferences between 2000 and 2009. Data were collected from online sources including institutional websites, media guides, and media articles. Latent class analysis was employed to reduce the data to one item per factor. Factors included demographics, coaching ability, coaching experience, past team performance, hiring factors (coaching level change, inside/outside hire, interim, conference affiliation), and institutional factors (public/private, demographic market area, enrollment, budget, and National Association of Collegiate Directors of Athletics standings). Mixed models analysis was performed to identify which categories have a relationship with changes in the number of wins following a coaching change. Results suggest that past team performance was the strongest indicator of future performance after a coaching change.
WeightECooperCG. An entrepreneurial beginning: Recognizing the value of “nonrevenue” programs through NCAA administrator and coach perceptions. Int J Sport Manage2012; 13: 285–308.
5.
WeightEA. The surviving wrestling coach: The role of the entrepreneurial coach in intercollegiate “non-revenue” sports. Int J Sport Manage2010; 11: 16–30.
AndersenJ. A new sports manager does not make a better team. Int J Sports Sci Coach2011; 6: 167–178.
8.
GiambastistaRRoweWRiazS. Nothing succeeds like succession: A critical review of leader succession literature since 1994. Leadership Q2011; 16: 963–991.
9.
RoweWGCannellaAJrRankinD. Leader succession and organizational performance: Integrating the common-sense, ritual scapegoating, and vicious-circle succession theories. Leadership Q2005; 16: 197–2-19.
10.
AllenMPanianSLotzR. Managerial succession and organizational performance: A recalcitrant problem revisited. Admin Sci Q1979; 24: 167–180.
11.
GruskyO. Managerial succession and organizational effectiveness. Am J Sociol1963; 62: 21–31.
12.
GamsonWScotchN. Scapegoating in baseball. Am J Sociol1964; 70: 69–72.
13.
BennetGPhillipsJDraneD. The coaching carousel: Turnover effects on professional sport. Int J Sport Manage2003; 4: 192–204.
14.
WhitePMcTeerWPersadS. Manager/coach midseason replacement and team sport performance in professional team sport. J Sport Behav1995; 18: 58–68.
15.
Lago-PenasC. Coach midseason replacement and team performance in professional soccer. J Hum Kinet2011; 28: 115–122.
16.
WhitePPersadSGeeC. The effect of mid-season coach turnover on team performance: The case of the National Hockey League. Int J Sports Sci Coach2007; 2: 143–152.
17.
SoebbingBWashingtonM. Leadership succession and organizational performance: Football coaches and organizational issues. J Sport Manage2011; 25: 550–561.
18.
FizelJD’ItriM. Managerial efficiency, managerial succession and organizational performance. Manage Des Econom1997; 18: 295–308.
19.
AudasRDobsonSGoddardJ. Team performance and managerial change in the English football League. Econom Affairs1997; 17: 30–36.
20.
AudasRDobsonSGoddardJ. The impact of managerial change on team performance in professional sports. J Econom Business2002; 54: 633–550.
21.
DohrnSLopezYPGeinhardtG. Leadership succession and performance: An application to college football. J Sport Manage2015; 29: 76–92.
22.
BrownMC. Administrative succession and organizational performance: The succession effect. Admin Sci Q1982; 27: 1–16.
23.
CannellaARoweW. Leader capabilities, succession, and competitive context: A study of professional baseball teams. Leadership Q1995; 6: 69–88.
24.
MagnusenMJKimYKPerrewéPL. A critical review and synthesis of student-athlete college choice factors: Recruiting effectiveness in NCAA sports. Int J Sports Sci Coach2014; 9: 1265–1286.
25.
PfefferJDavis-BlakeA. Administrative succession and organizational performance: How administrative experience mediates the succession effect. Acad Manage J1986; 29: 72–83.
26.
Bandura A. Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Corporation, 1971.
27.
BanduraA. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1986.
28.
KrumboltzJDMitchellAMJonesBG. A social learning theory of career selection. Counsel Psychol1976; 6: 71–81.
29.
ChartrandJMRobbinsSBMorrillWH. Development and validation of the career factors inventory. J Counsel Psychol1990; 37: 491–501.
30.
EricksonKCôtéJFraser-ThomasJ. Sport experiences, milestones, and educational activities associated with high-performance coaches' development. Sport Psychol2007; 21: 302–316.
31.
BidwellM. Paying more to get less: The effects of external hiring versus internal mobility. Admin Sci Q2011; 56: 369–407.
32.
EhrhardtKMcEvoyCBeggsB. Successor type and coaching performance in intercollegiate football. Int J Sport Manage2011; 12: 288–300.
33.
BoschD. Organizational leader selection: The impact of tenure, job level experience, and being an insider on effectiveness. Int J Business Human Technol2014; 4: 10–18.
34.
SPSS. Linear mixed-effects modeling in SPSS: An introduction to the mixed procedure, SPS Technical Report, Chicago, 2012.
35.
GeiserC. Data analysis with Mplus, New York: Guilford Publications, 2013.
36.
Clogg CC. Latent class models. Handbook of statistical modeling for the social and behavioral sciences. New York: Springer US, 1995, pp.311–359.
37.
ByrneB. Structural equation modeling with EQS, Manwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, 2006.
38.
HolmesP. Win or go home: Why football coaches get fired. J Sports Econom2011; 12: 157–178.
39.
MagnusenMJKimYKPerrewéPL. Gaining a competitive edge when recruiting student-athletes: The role of political skill. Int J Sports Sci Coach2014; 9: 1291–1310.
40.
TreadwayDCAdamsGHanesTJ. The roles of recruiter political skill and performance resource leveraging in NCAA football recruitment effectiveness. J Manage2014; 40: 1607–1626.
