Paper detail

Equity, diversity, and inclusion in sports analytics

This paper presents a landmark study of equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) in the field of sports analytics. We developed a survey that examined personal and job-related demographics, as well as individual perceptions and experiences about EDI in the workplace. We sent the survey to individuals in the five major North American professional leagues, representatives from the Olympic and Paralympic Committees in Canada and the U.S., the NCAA Division I programs, companies in sports tech/analytics, and university research groups. Our findings indicate the presence of a clear dominant group in sports analytics identifying as: young (72.0%), White (69.5%), heterosexual (89.7%) and male (82.0%). Within professional sports, males in management positions earned roughly 30,000 USD (27%) more on average compared to females. A smaller but equally alarming pay gap of 17,000 USD (14%) was found between White and non-White management personnel. Of concern, females were nearly five times as likely to experience discrimination and twice as likely to have considered leaving their job due to isolation or feeling unwelcome. While they had similar levels of agreement regarding fair processes for rewards and compensation, females "strongly agreed" less often than males regarding equitable support, equitable workload, having a voice, and being taken seriously. Over one third (36.3%) of females indicated that they "strongly agreed" that they must work harder than others to be valued equally, compared to 9.8% of males. We conclude the paper with concrete recommendations that could be considered to create a more equitable, diverse and inclusive environment for individuals working within the sports analytics sector.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.