Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Luc Patberg
Summer 2019
Doherty , A., Paradis, K. F. (2016). Understanding the Sport Event Volunteer Experience: An
Investigation of Role Ambiguity and Its Correlates. Research Gate, Volume 30, No. 4, pages 353-
369
Purpose
The purpose of this article and observation is to understand the levels of role ambiguity in
different scenarios and settings at the 2012 Ontario Summer Games and to understanding what
factors increase the chances of miscommunication and in turn poor work performance. This
study considers several earlier factors and outcomes of role ambiguity that may be common in
sport event volunteer settings. The current study examines the impact on the total satisfaction
of volunteer's perceptions of their effort, performance, and satisfaction for their role in the
event.
Rationale
This research was performed to understand what factors affect volunteer satisfaction or
ambiguity. This research can be beneficial to those volunteers and their organizers or bosses in
ways that can make working on a volunteer basis more efficient and productive. This can be the
case for both event volunteers and full-time organizational volunteers. This test was performed
to distinguish between factors that make a bad supervisor and one who gets the most out of his
Patberg 2
volunteers and employees. Negative event experiences and satisfaction can lead to not
wanting to partake in volunteer events in the future. At first, I thought the dependent variable
for this study is the ambiguity within the 2012 Ontario Olympics committee and event and the
independent variables are every volunteer between the ages of 14-60. But as I continued to
read and comprehend, I figured the dependent variable is role ambiguity and the independent
variables are role difficulty, training, supervision, effort, performance, means-end/scope and
Methods
Role ambiguity was measured using the multidimensional measure of organizational role
ambiguity during volunteer sport organizations created by Sakires. This developed way of
measurement represents three dimensions of role ambiguity. The first being scope of
measurement has been slightly altered to attest to short term volunteer events. The
measurement for role ambiguity consisted of 22 items that participants had to evaluate and
rate using the Likert scale from one to seven, seven being completely agree. These tests were
performed with some different questions and items across multiple variables and labels. These
Likert scale tests were performed to test role ambiguity, role training, role difficulty, role
supervision, role effort, role performance, role satisfaction, overall satisfaction, future
volunteer intentions. The organizing committee of the 2012 Ontario Summer Olympics emailed
every volunteer after the event that had a link to an online survey to participate and give
feedback.
Patberg 3
Data Analysis
A confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to test the measurement model that included all
the variables of interest and different hypothesis. This test is split into a two-step equation
modeling (SEM). The author states that “in the first step the measurement model was
examined to assess construct reliability, as well as convergent and discriminant validity. In the
second step, the structure of the hypothesized was examined for overall model fit and for the
Conclusion (s)
One of the findings suggested the direct link between ambiguity and satisfaction. The models
show that role satisfaction predicted overall satisfaction and overall satisfaction predicted
future intentions. The findings provide insight into several possible antecedents of sporting
events for different volunteer roles. It was useful at points when reviewing the findings as it
clarified the process and what the outcome was. A good amount of the hypothesis tested
guidance. Ideas such as increased performance are directly associated with overall satisfaction
with the games. This proved to be more vital than what the volunteer's perception of the effort
contributed.
Critique
Patberg 4
I thought that the purpose and intent of the research was clear and understanding as it gave a
clear sense of the background behind its tests and what events where highlighted. When the
reading got deeper and deeper, I began to lose a sense of understanding at times. The sections
in which it described the findings and results of the different tests was a little more confusing
than the rest of the article. A clearer representation of the findings and what each testes
measurement actually correlates to. It even goes into describing the difference in some results
being before or after a rating of .50 on the scale. For this specific measurement, factors were
tested based on how good and relevant they were with each other. If it was above .50 then it is
considered to be good and is therefore kept and used. The amount of different measurements
and findings from other researchers before made it confusing and tricky to read at times as
Reflection
Prior to this to reading this case study research, I had not ever really thought too much into
what all goes into role ambiguity. I had never really even put two and two together, but it
makes clear sense now. There are so many factors that can determine good or bad volunteer
performance when it comes to working events or for an organization on a full-time basis. Things
like bad supervision or lack of communication are things I have thought about when
understanding a new role but reading this study opened a new idea about all of the possibilities
that go into a good connection between the volunteer and the supervisor. I had not ever out a
title or name to these thoughts and factors as role ambiguity, but I feel like from here on out in
my life, I will sub consciously label these thoughts and actions as such knowing truly what it
Patberg 5
means. When an issue arises in the workplace, I can now more precisely figure out why a lack of
performance may be happening and what can change this to be the more efficient. If at any
point I am getting treated unfairly or in turn am the supervisor with slacking employees, a basis