Advertisement

We Are Minnesota!

Chapter
  • 144 Downloads

Abstract

We assess stakeholders’ reflections ten years post-merger including the challenges that they feared and which fears actually occurred. Stakeholders’ reflections about the current merged department and what it represents were analyzed. Last, we report on the department’s current gender-political status.

Keywords

Reflecting on change Moving forward Ideas for the future 

References

  1. Ager, D. L. (2011). The emotional impact and behavioral consequences of post-M&A integration: An ethnographic case study in the software industry. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 40, 199–230.Google Scholar
  2. Bacchi, C., & Eveline, J. (2003). Mainstreaming and neoliberalism: A contested relationship. Policy and Society, 22, 98–118.Google Scholar
  3. Barreiro, D. (1995, June 25). Lose Voelz and cut losses. Star Tribune, p. 3C.Google Scholar
  4. Brady, E. (2007, 28 March). Arguments pro, con on Title IX stay unresolved. USA Today. Retrieved from http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/college/2007-03-28-title-ix_N.htm
  5. Burton, L., & Grappendorf, H. (2015). Only in crisis? Leadership selection in intercollegiate athletics after an ethical scandal. Paper presented at the North American Society for Sport Management Conference, Ottawa, ON.Google Scholar
  6. Collins, G. (2005). The gendered nature of mergers. Gender, Work and Organization, 12, 270–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Collins, G., & Wickham, J. (2002). Experiencing mergers: A woman’s eye view. Women's Studies International Forum, 25(5), 573–583. Retrieved from http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-0036752870&partnerID=40&md5=31524201266fe347aee174c8e11dc37d.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hartman, S. (1993, May 21). Tapani, Erickson are crucial to Twins’ fate. Star Tribune, p. 2C.Google Scholar
  9. Kihl, L. A., Shaw, S., & Schull, V. (2013). Fear, anxiety, and loss of control: Analyzing an athletic department merger as a gendered political process. Journal of Sport Management, 27, 146–157.Google Scholar
  10. Meyerson, D. E., & Tompkins, M. (2007). Tempered radicals as institutional change agents: The case of advancing gender equity at the University of Michigan. Harvard Journal of Law and Gender, 30, 303–322.Google Scholar
  11. Page, M. L. (2011). Gender mainstreaming—Hidden leadership? Gender, Work and Organization, 18, 318–336.Google Scholar
  12. Rayno, A. (2015, June 11). Feds weigh allegations of gender inequity in University of Minnesota sports. Star Tribune. Retrieved from http://www.startribune.com/feds-weigh-allegations-of-gender-inequity-in-u-of-m-sports/306866861/
  13. Reusse, P. (2003, March 31). Women’s game doesn’t miss Ms. Star Tribune, p. 1C.Google Scholar
  14. Schull, V., Shaw, S., & Kihl, L. A. (2013). If a woman came in … She would have been eaten up alive: Analyzing gendered political processes in the search for an athletic director. Gender & Society, 27, 56–81.Google Scholar
  15. Schweiger, D. M. (2002). M&A integration: A framework for executives and managers. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  16. Shaw, S. (2006). Scratching the back of ‘Mr X’. Analyzing gendered social processes in sport organizations. Journal of Sport Management, 20, 510–534.Google Scholar
  17. Tienari, J. (2000). Gender segregation in the making of a merger. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 16, 111–144.Google Scholar
  18. USA Today. (2015). NCAA Finances. (2015). Retrieved from http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/
  19. Velija, P., Ratna, A., & Flintoff, A. (2012). Exclusionary power in sports organisations: The merger between the Women’s Cricket Association and the England and Wales Cricket Board. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 1–16. doi:  10.1177/1012690212455962 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA
  2. 2.Minnesota State UniversityMankatoUSA
  3. 3.University of OtagoDunedinNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations