


































Global Research in Higher Education 
ISSN 2576-196X (Print) ISSN 2576-1951 (Online) 

Vol. 3, No. 4, 2020 

www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe 

42 
 

Original Paper 

Research-informed and Evidence-based Quality Assurance and 

Enhancement in Amateur/Grassroots Football: Strategic 

Educational Inquiry for Coach Leaders/Administrators 

Harry T. Hubball
1*

 & Jorge Díaz-Cidoncha García
2
 

1
 Faculty of Education, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada  

2
 Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA), Zurich, Switzerland 

*
 Corresponding author: Harry T. Hubball, harry.hubball@ubc.ca 

 

Received: November 3, 2020  Accepted: November 16, 2020  Online Published: November 22, 2020 

doi:10.22158/grhe.v3n4p42                 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.22158/grhe.v3n4p42 

 

Abstract 

Coach leaders/administrators in diverse amateur and grassroots football contexts are increasingly 

accountable for sustaining strategic, state-of-the-art, evidence-based, effective, and efficient programs, 

initiatives, and services. However, coach leaders/administrators within these organizational settings 

face significant challenges (e.g., insufficient organizational support and research expertise) in enacting 

research-informed and evidence-based practices. Strategic Educational Inquiry (SEI) is a flexible and 

rigorous approach to practitioner research and is particularly useful for coach leaders/administrators 

to gather evidence for quality assurance and enhancement purposes. This paper critically examines 

whether and how SEI is applied in diverse amateur/grassroots football coaching contexts. Drawing on 

case study research using multiple case design, preliminary findings from this study indicate that SEI 

situates specific amateur/grassroots coaching programs and initiatives within the relevant research 

and professional literature; it focuses SEI on organization-specific priority research objectives, ethical 

inquiry, and appropriately aligned research methodology; and involves systematic data collection, 

data analysis, and dissemination of best practices. Critical organization-specific supports to facilitate 

implementation of SEI in diverse amateur/grassroots football contexts include: strategic coach 

education and skills training (e.g., access to state-of-the-art customized technology-enabled 

professional development experiences and expert mentoring support). 

Keywords 

Coach education, strategic educational inquiry, evidence-based practice, quality assurance and 

enhancement, coach leaders/administrators 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 3, No. 4, 2020 

43 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

1. Introduction 

Amateur/grassroots football organizations and coach leaders/administrators around the world are 

increasingly under scrutiny and required to account for the sustained quality, impact, efficiency, and/or 

ongoing improvements to their coaching programs, initiatives, or services (CIES Sports Intelligence, 

2020; FIFA, 2020a & 2020b; Hubball & Díaz-Cidoncha García, 2020). Drawing on twenty years of 

extensive research and coaching experience in diverse amateur/grassroots football contexts, this paper 

critically examines whether and how Strategic Educational Inquiry (SEI) is applied for quality 

assurance and enhancement purposes in local and international amateur/grassroots 55-65+ football 

coaching settings. SEI is ideally suited for coach leaders/administrators in amateur/grassroots football 

since it is a flexible and rigorous approach to practitioner research which is customized to the unique 

needs and circumstances of complex football organizations in order to provide relevant evidence (e.g., 

to sustain state-of-the-art coaching innovations, improvements and/or high impact program outcomes) 

for quality enhancement and quality assurance processes. While notions of quality assurance and 

enhancement are not new in these settings (Taylor & Groom, 2016), in practice, scant attention is paid 

to cutting-edge research on program offerings or toward systematic, rigorous, evidence-based practice. 

Typically, coach leaders/administrators face significant structural barriers, including limited resources 

and a lack of relevant research expertise to conduct strategic, effective, and efficient quality 

enhancement and quality assurance processes. This paper provides a theoretical framework and 

critically examines whether and how SEI is applied for quality assurance and enhancement practices in 

diverse amateur/grassroots football coaching contexts. Readers are invited to consider the following 

questions:  

 To what extent does research-informed and evidence-based practice shape the development of 

state-of-the-art football coaching programs/initiatives in your coaching context?  

 How effective is an existing coaching program/football initiative in your coaching/organizational 

context? What key improvements are required? How and when will you know if this is achieved? 

What is the evidence of impact?  

 What sort of challenges do you face in order to conduct strategic educational inquiry for quality 

assurance and enhancement of coaching programs/football initiatives in your organizational 

context? 

 What organizational supports are required to support strategic educational inquiry for quality 

assurance and enhancement of coaching programs/football initiatives in your coaching context? 

1.1 Theoretical Underpinnings: Strategic Educational Inquiry (SEI) for Coach Leaders/Administrators  

Strategic Educational Inquiry (SEI) is a flexible, systematic, and rigorous approach to practitioner 

research, and is particularly useful for coach leaders/administrators with limited resources in complex 

amateur/grassroots football settings. Essentially, SEI draws upon an eclectic range of research 

methodologies (depending on the nature of organization-specific research objectives) to provide relevant 

evidence-based practice for quality assurance and enhancement purposes (i.e., to sustain state-of-the-art 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 3, No. 4, 2020 

44 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

coaching program innovations, improvements, and/or high impact program outcomes). With adequate 

organizational support, SEI can foster an organizational culture for cutting-edge research and coaching 

excellence, and can help amateur/grassroots football organizations to become better known within and 

beyond the communities they serve (Allison, 2016; CIES Sports Intelligence, 2020; Hubball, Reddy, 

Sweeney, & Kauppinen, 2018).   

Diverse perspectives of SEI are shaped by context-specific frameworks (each with inherent limitations), 

including ontological (e.g., constructivist, post-positivist, pragmatist, and critical world view 

perspectives), epistemological (i.e., theoretical frameworks for generating knowledge, how we know 

what we know), and ethical (i.e., informed consent, anonymity, confidentiality, conflict of interest) 

considerations (Webb, Hubball, Clarke, & Ellis, 2020). In practice, perspectives of SEI situate the 

quality of specific amateur/grassroots coaching programs/initiatives within an organizational needs 

assessment, relevant research literature, and related coaching communities of practice. SEI also focuses 

on organization-specific research objective priorities, ethical inquiry, and appropriate alignment of the 

research objectives and methodology; and SEI involves systematic, rigorous data collection methods 

and analysis, and dissemination of best practices (FIFA, 2020a; Glassick, Huber, & Maeroff, 1997; 

Green, 2008; Hutchings, 2002). Moreover, SEI is a cyclical and iterative process; thus, it is advisable to 

consider “dissemination of best practice possibilities” during the initial needs assessment phase when 

identifying organizational-specific research objective priorities.  

These research objective priorities vary from place to place, and are commensurate with the needs and 

circumstances of the particular setting. A starting point for identifying priority SEI objectives and 

formulating preliminary SEI questions emerge from coach leaders/administrators problematizing their 

coaching context. Preliminary SEI questions typically focus on “What is the effectiveness or impact of 

„X‟?”, “What are the strengths and further developments of „X‟?”, “What improvements can be made 

to „X‟ and can these improvements be made with limited resources?”, “Why is „X‟ happening?”. Thus, 

preliminary SEI questions point to the central intent of conducting SEI for quality assurance and 

enhancement purposes, as well as the sorts of critical insights sought about specific coaching 

programs/initiatives (Hubball & Reddy, 2015). By considering these issues, coach 

leaders/administrators are also challenged to consider broader and inter-connected factors (e.g., 

theory-practice integration and process-outcome relationships) related to different phases (i.e., context, 

process, outcomes, or longer-term impact) of their coaching programs/initiatives. The framework in 

Figure 1 assists coach leaders/administrators to consider, prioritize, and formulate SEI questions within 

their particular setting. Figure 1 takes into account complex amateur/grassroots football contexts and 

reflects a wide range of potential time-phased SEI questions.  

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 3, No. 4, 2020 

45 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

Figure 1. A Heuristic Model for Investigating Potential SEI Questions 

 

SEI context questions. These questions focus on critical structures that shape coaching 

programs/initiatives. For example, priority SEI questions might include: To what extent do the scale 

and scope of amateur/grassroots program offerings reflect the organization‟s strategic vision? To what 

extent do program offerings/facilities meet the needs and circumstances of their stakeholders? To what 

extent do program offerings reflect effective cost-benefit analysis? To what extent is quality assurance 

and enhancement integral to program practices? What needs further development, why, and how?  

SEI Process questions. These priority SEI questions might be formative in nature and focus on periodic 

assessments of issues of importance that arise during coaching programs/initiatives. For example, what 

are effective coaching methods in this program? To what extent are quality competition/game formats 

provided for participants? What is the quality of the participants‟ experience? What needs to be further 

developed, why, and how? 

SEI outcome questions. These priority SEI questions might be summative in nature and focus on issues 

of importance that occur as a result of completion of a coaching program/initiative. For example, what 

were the intended and unintended outcomes from a specific program/initiative? To what extent do 

program processes and outcomes reflect the organizational context? How do participants effectively 

demonstrate program outcomes on completion of a program? What needs further development, why, 

and how? 

SEI long-term impact questions. These priority SEI questions might focus on issues of importance that 

arise as a result of the longer term impact of coaching programs/initiatives over months or years. For 

example, to what extent do participants sustain long term active involvement with the organization‟s 

programs? To what extent are participants‟ perceptions of successful long-term program outcomes 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 3, No. 4, 2020 

46 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

integrated within current program processes? What is the long-term impact of specific program 

processes and outcomes? What needs further development, why, and how? 

Epistemological considerations (i.e., the theoretical frameworks for generating knowledge and how we 

know what we know) regarding specific SEI methodologies (e.g., action research, appreciative inquiry, 

case study research, ethnographic inquiry, phenomenological inquiry, or self-study research) are 

aligned with the nature and foci of the organization-specific research objective priorities (Bullough & 

Pinnegar, 2001; Cockell & McArthur-Blair, 2012; Coe, Waring, Hedges, & Arthur, 2017; Putman & 

Rock, 2017; Webb & Welsh, 2019; Yin, 2018). Building on an appropriately aligned methodology, 

data sources for systematic, rigorous quality assurance and enhancement SEI can include qualitative, 

quantitative, or mixed methods data analysis. For example, qualitative data sources might include 

relevant documents (e.g., organizational strategic visioning documents including budgets and resources; 

historical program, team, and player development reports; coaching field notes and performance 

archives; organizational meeting minutes; plans for facilities and competitive game structures; 

organizational website information; media reports; and research outcomes); focus group interviews 

with club officials, coach leaders, players, and/or support staff (either face-to-face or via online video 

conference platforms); club video recordings and vignettes; and feedback surveys of key stakeholders. 

In contrast, quantitative data sources for SEI might include rating scale or Likert-type surveys; numeric 

records of participation, attendance, and organizational performance outcomes; strategic staffing, 

budget projections, and related accounting variables; or physiological measures related to player 

development such as aerobic capacity, anaerobic threshold, heart rate recovery, step counts, % body fat, 

and performance analysis measures (e.g., individual technique, acceleration, and distance travelled).  

Qualitative data sources can be analyzed using a range of methods (e.g., content analysis, codification, 

thematic analysis, interpretive analysis, pattern recognition, constant comparative method, or 

categorization) to establish major themes and data patterns, and to discern complex commonalities, 

contradictions, and interactions (Cresswell & Poth, 2017; Saladana & Omasta, 2017). This may be 

done manually or with the use of software such as NVivo™. In contrast, quantitative data sources can 

be subjected to the appropriate statistical analysis to detect any differences or correlations within and 

across variables. The use of iterative and multiple data sources, and triangulation between two or more 

qualitative and/or quantitative data sources, establishes the trustworthiness and validation of SEI 

findings (Coe et al., 2017). 

As with many forms of inquiry, we argue that SEI in amateur/grassroots football contexts is based on 

three underlying assumptions about knowledge generation: 1) it is inherently situated, 2) it is socially 

mediated, and 3) it is locally constructed in order to meet the unique needs and circumstances of 

programs/initiatives (Hubball & Lopes, 2019). Each assumption provides directions and cautions for 

SEI. For example, the first assumption cautions that SEI is inherently situated within broader 

communities of practice (i.e., host football organizations/clubs, with their particular cultural context 

and political landscape, strategic priorities, access to available resources, and levels of support) that 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 3, No. 4, 2020 

47 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

typically frame coaching program/initiative experiences. In short, SEI and contexts are inextricably 

linked and determine each other in significant ways (Webb, Hubball, & McKenzie, in press; Myatt et 

al., 2018). Pertaining to the second assumption, the socially mediated dimension (i.e., shaped by key 

stakeholder support and engagement by respective on-site tournament leaders, officials, coaches, and 

players) of knowledge construction speaks to the importance of arriving at a shared understanding of 

context-specific (e.g., age and ability level of participants, facilities, finance, and staffing) coaching 

programs/initiatives and how they can be effectively implemented within the specific practice setting. 

Coming to a shared understanding requires collaborative leadership, open dialogue, active engagement, 

and effective communications between diverse stakeholder representatives. The co-constructed 

knowledge that arises from such engagement is essential for effective communities of practice in 

amateur/grassroots football that uphold and honor knowledge as being always complex and dynamic 

(Friedman, 2008). Finally, the third assumption cautions that local conceptions of the “good” in 

coaching programs/initiatives will always be part of how they are continually improved, adapted, and 

understood within contextually-bound settings (FIFA, 2012; Franks, Lilley, Hubball, & Franks, 2019; 

Hubball, Franks, Sweeney, & Kauppinen, 2018). These three characteristics of knowledge construction 

are central for conducting SEI. 

Very little research has critically examined whether and how SEI is applied for quality assurance and 

enhancement purposes in amateur/grassroots football coaching contexts. Drawing on case study 

research methodology using multiple case design in local and international 50-65+ small-sided football 

settings, this study is guided by two SEI questions: 

 Research Question #1. What are specific applications and outcomes of SEI for quality 

assurance and enhancement in diverse amateur/grassroots 50-65+ small-sided football 

coaching contexts? 

 Research Question #2. What are critical challenges and key organizational supports for coach 

leaders/administrators to conduct SEI for quality assurance and enhancement purposes in 

diverse international amateur/grassroots 50-65+ small-sided football coaching contexts? 

 

2. Methodology 

2.1 Case Study Research Using Multiple-Case Design 

Case study research is a systematic in-depth inquiry that investigates a phenomenon within its real-life 

context (Pearson, Albon, & Hubball, 2015). Case study research methodology internalizes theory and 

practice by drawing on a wide range of contextually-bound data, which for this study includes 

engagement of key personnel at football club/organization institution such as coach leaders, 

administrators, officials, players, and volunteers. For the purpose of this study co-researchers included 

the Chair of the Grassroots International Masters Small-sided Football World Cup Tournament, and 

the Manager of the Amateur/Grassroots Football Department at FIFA, Switzerland. Essentially, case 

study research methodology invites coach leaders/administrators to consider which site issues are key 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 3, No. 4, 2020 

48 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

for examination (e.g., strategic, effective and efficient quality enhancement and quality assurance 

processes), how to engage key stakeholders in the process, what data to gather, when and how to 

collect and analyze these data, and, finally, to consider how these findings might be of interest to the 

respective club organizations and coach leaders/administrators, as well as to the broader football 

community and football organizations. Multiple-case design refers to case study research in which 

several instrumental bounded cases are selected to understand the similarities and differences between 

the cases, and to develop a richer and more in-depth understanding of the phenomena than a single case 

can provide (Yin, 2018). Thus, case study research using multiple-case design is highly generative in 

nature and is therefore particularly well-suited for this study to critically examine whether and how SEI 

is applied for quality assurance and enhancement purposes in diverse amateur/grassroots 50-65+ 

small-sided football coaching contexts.  

2.2 Data Collection 

In order to gather evidence for this inquiry a purposeful sample of contextually-bound data were gathered 

from the following:  

a) For research question #1, a meta-analysis was conducted from a purposeful sample of recent 

(2017-2020) peer-reviewed studies in diverse local and international amateur/grassroots 50-65+ 

small-sided football coaching settings pertaining to specific applications and outcomes of SEI (e.g., 

types of research objective priorities, alignment of research methodologies and data collection 

methods employed). Regarding the overall impact of SEI in these settings, data were augmented with 

a review of relevant grassroots organization and program documentation such as website information 

and longitudinal data pertaining to international tournament organization development, participation 

trends, performance/awards, research contributions, evolutionary program changes, innovations, 

challenges, and program impacts pertaining to the Inter UBC Masters Small-sided Soccer Academy 

Program at The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.  

b) For research question #2, site visits were conducted over an eighteen-month period in 2018-2019 at a 

purposeful sample of innovative and long-standing 55-65+ amateur/grassroots football organizations 

and clubs in North America, the UK, SE Asia, the Gulf States, Australia, New Zealand, and Europe. 

Site data included: 

 Invited research workshop sessions, and program observations at national/regional football 

associations and local clubs in Canada, USA, England, Wales, Guernsey, Jersey, Germany, 

Belgium, Denmark, Hong Kong, Singapore, Gibraltar, Spain, Oman, Qatar, Australia, and 

New Zealand. These data were augmented with a review of relevant organization website 

information and strategic visioning documents pertaining to quality assurance and 

enhancement practices. 

 Meetings and focus group interviews with program stakeholder representatives, including 

team leaders, administrators, participating seniors‟ players, and officials. Participants met in 

groups of five to eight in either face-to-face venues or online video conference platforms, with 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 3, No. 4, 2020 

49 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

a frequency ranging from once per month for 3 months to three sessions in total during the 

study period. Specific interview prompts included: 

o How is quality assurance and enhancement understood, interpreted, organised, delivered, 

experienced, and/or institutionalised? 

o To what extent do you conduct research-informed and evidence-based quality assurance and 

enhancement processes? 

o What are the most common areas of best practice for quality assurance and enhancement? 

o What are the most common challenges that hinder research-informed and evidence-based 

quality assurance and enhancement? 

o What are the roles of players and coach leaders/administrators in quality assurance and 

enhancement? 

o What organizational supports are provided or would be helpful to assist coach 

leaders/administrators to conduct research-informed and evidence-based quality assurance 

and enhancement? 

Qualitative data sources were analyzed using the constant comparative method through categorization, 

and finally to thematization (Coe et al., 2017; Friedman, 2008). Next, member checking was utilized to 

establish major themes and data patterns, and to discern complex commonalities, contradictions, and 

interactions. The use of iterative and multiple data sources established the trustworthiness of the 

research findings through triangulation. 

 

3. Results 

3.1 Research Question #1. What are specific applications and outcomes of SEI for quality assurance and 

enhancement in diverse amateur/grassroots 50-65+ small-sided football coaching contexts? 

Table 1 reports on a purposeful sample of SEI projects. These projects were grounded within 

organization-specific amateur/grassroots settings, as well as within relevant and cutting-edge research 

literature (e.g., published in international and professional journals) and football clubs‟ and 

organizations‟ websites for best practices. Moreover, particular research methodologies, and aligned 

data collection methods, were employed depending on the specific nature of priority research 

objectives within these contexts. Action research, appreciative inquiry, self-study, and case study 

research methodologies were particularly prevalent in these diverse SEI projects. Table 1 demonstrates 

the alignment of specific methodological approaches and data collection methods depending on the 

specific nature of the organization-specific SEI priority research objectives. 

 

 

 

 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 3, No. 4, 2020 

50 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

Table 1. Applications of SEI in Amateur/Grassroots 50-65+ Small-Sided Football Settings 

SEI Project Methodological Approach Data Collection Methods 

Strategic Grassroots International 

60+ Small-sided Football World 

Cup Tournament Development: 

FIFA Scholarship Application 

(submitted to CIES-Hubball, 

Franks, Kauppinen, Lopes & 

Christensen, 2020). 

Longitudinal single-case study 

research focused on strategic 

development, implementation, 

and impact assessment, with  

examination of context-specific 

best practices. 

 

Mixed methods with qualitative 

analysis of stakeholder focus 

group interviews, strategic 

planning documentation, and 

archival program materials; and 

quantitative analysis of team and 

individual performance variables. 

Development of a Grassroots 

International 50-60+ Small-sided 

Football World Cup Tournament 

& Symposium, 2006-2017 

(Hubball, Reddy, et al., 2018). 

Appreciative inquiry with 

stakeholder engagement to 

investigate strategic 

development of context-specific 

best practices and key 

organizational supports. 

Qualitative methods to analyze 

focus group interviews, strategic 

planning documentation, and 

semi-structured participant 

surveys. 

Strategic Program Development 

for Grassroots 50-65+ 

Small-sided Football Programs in 

Diverse International Settings 

(Hubball & Diaz-Cidoncha 

Garcia, 2020). 

Case study using multiple case 

design to examine 

context-specific team and player 

development program practices, 

key challenges, and 

organizational supports. 

Mixed methods with qualitative 

analysis of focus group 

interviews, strategic planning 

documentation, and field 

observations; and quantitative 

analysis of participation and 

sustainability variables. 

Performance Analysis in 

Amateur/Grassroots 50-65+ 

Small-sided Football: Strategic 

Team and Player Development 

for International Competition 

(Hubball & Lopes, 2019) 

Program action research 

methodology to examine 

effective context-specific team 

and player development 

practices, key challenges, and 

further improvements 

Mixed methods with qualitative 

analysis of team focus group 

interviews, team game plan 

documentation, and game video 

recordings; and quantitative 

analysis of team and individual 

performance variables. 

Injury prevention and 

performance enhancement for 

grassroots 50-65+ players in 

international small-sided football 

competition settings (Franks et 

al., 2019) 

Self-study inquiry to collect  

baseline data on current 

context-specific norms, barriers, 

actions, and rationales, as well 

as perceived strengths, 

weaknesses, opportunities, and 

threats (SWOT analysis). 

Qualitative methods with onsite 

physiotherapist analysis of 

competitive game situations and 

consultation regarding injury 

prevention with select 50-65+ 

players, and semi-structured 

participant surveys. 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 3, No. 4, 2020 

51 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

Data collection strategies for these SEI projects tended to be qualitative in nature, although in some 

cases, mixed-method approaches combining both qualitative and quantitative were employed. 

Qualitative data sources for these SEI projects were particularly well-suited to explore, describe, and/or 

explain complex, multifaceted, and contextually-bound phenomena (e.g., best practices for tournament, 

team/player development, and impact assessment) in amateur/grassroots 50-65+ small-sided football 

settings. It is important to note caution with these findings since all research (including objectives, data 

collection, and interpretations of quantitative data) has inherent ontological and epistemological 

(value-laden) assumptions about the nature of truth and knowledge construction, and is thus limited. 

For example, in these contexts, coach leaders/administrators were active participants in the SEI process. 

Therefore, systematic rigorous SEI (including site-specific collaborations, deep knowledge of practice 

contexts, and triangulation of data sources) was designed to reduce outcome bias and contributed to the 

authenticity, validity, and reliability of findings within these settings.  

Over a decade of implementation, SEI has been integral to quality assurance and enhancement of these 

organization-specific coaching programs/initiatives. Data suggest that timely applications of SEI have 

substantially benefited coaching program processes and outcomes. First, SEI has significantly 

contributed toward the success and 20-year longevity of the Grassroots 50-65+ Inter UBC Masters 

Soccer Academy Program. This includes sustained and responsive small-sided football team and player 

development initiatives; winning local, regional, and international tournaments, and invitations to play 

50+ small-sided football exhibition games against former professional players at Chelsea FC and Aston 

Villa FC in England, UK, as well as local, cross-border and cross-continent connections with an array 

of talented and like-minded 50+ masters football enthusiasts.  

SEI has also significantly contributed toward to the success and 15-year longevity of the Grassroots 

International Super Masters Small-sided Football World Cup Tournaments (2006-2022). This 2-day 

tournament is hosted annually at amateur/grassroots football clubs/institutions/universities and 

organizations throughout Europe and the UK. For example, the 2021 tournament will be hosted in 

Copenhagen, Denmark and includes 24 amateur/grassroots club/group/rep teams (60+ & 65+) 

registered from Denmark, England, USA, Scotland, Germany, Finland, Hungary, Gibraltar, Oman, 

Wales, Northern Ireland, Great Britain, Republic of Ireland, France, Canada, Belgium, and Team UN. 

The 2022 tournament will be hosted at the FIFA Headquarters, Zurich, Switzerland. This tournament 

has included former national players (e.g., Netherlands 65+ team), professional players (e.g., FC 

Barcelona 50+ team), 60+ teams from professional clubs (e.g., Werder Bremen, Germany), as well as a 

sustained grassroots international masters football community, and the joy of participation in 

cross-border and cross-continent connections with an array of talented and like-minded 50-65+ masters 

football enthusiasts. Finally, sustained SEI activity over these years has contributed to significant 

research productivity, peer reviewed publications, invited presentations, and engagement with 

amateur/grassroots 50-65+ small-sided football organizations around the world. 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 3, No. 4, 2020 

52 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

3.2 Research Question #2. What are critical challenges and key organizational supports for coach 

leaders/administrators to conduct SEI for quality assurance and enhancement purposes in diverse 

international amateur/grassroots 50-65+ small-sided football coaching contexts? 

3.2.1 Critical Challenges 

Conducting SEI for quality assurance and enhancement of amateur/grassroots coaching 

programs/initiatives is a complex and multifaceted process. Preliminary findings from this study in 

diverse amateur/grassroots 50-65+ small-sided football coaching contexts suggest that coach 

leaders/administrators face a myriad of obstacles. These relate to iterative and interconnected 

organization-specific factors pertaining to the art, science, and politics of conducting SEI. For example, 

data suggest that critical challenges pertaining to the “art” of conducting SEI included perceived lack 

of available time and additional effort required to develop and apply new SEI skills in current coaching 

duties. Exacerbated by already-heavy and competing coaching priorities, this typically required 

structural change regarding organizational commitments to SEI for quality assurance and enhancement 

purposes. For example, this would involve strategically supporting and re-imagining coach 

leaders/administrators roles and responsibilities with flexibility to conduct SEI as an integral part 

(rather than as a “bolt-on” activity) of their leadership practices.  

Data suggest that critical challenges pertaining to the “science” of conducting SEI included a lack of 

SEI expertise and networking opportunities to examine relevant research and professional literature; 

and difficulty identifying organization-specific research objective priorities and appropriately aligned 

research methodologies; applying systematic rigorous data collection methods and analysis; and 

disseminating best practices in their amateur/grassroots coaching setting. Clearly, the strength of 

amateur/grassroots coach leaders/administrators lies in their deep understanding of their specific 

stakeholders and organizational contexts and their vested interest with practice-based team/program 

issues and priorities. Their related experience is critical to assessing change in these settings. More 

often than not, however, coach leaders/administrators were unfamiliar with SEI methodologies and 

methods, and did not have the appropriate methodological expertise. Nor, however, was it deemed 

desirable or feasible to completely “out-source” this process to external consultants. Instead, 

amateur/grassroots coaching programs/initiatives were often informed by ad-hoc and top-down 

organizational leadership directives, coach intuition, or informal post-program participant surveys and 

feedback slips. Although a useful source of data, this evidence represented a limited view of strategic, 

effective, and efficient quality assurance and enhancement, and often resulted in less than optimal 

program offerings or sustained participation impacts. In contrast, applications of systematic rigorous 

SEI methodology and methods provided relevant and timely evidence-based practices with limited 

resources to maximize and sustain innovations, improvements, and high impact outcomes for 

tournaments, programs, teams, and individual performances.  

 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 3, No. 4, 2020 

53 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

Data suggest that critical challenges pertaining to the “politics” of conducting SEI included 

organizational cultures that did not value research-informed and evidence-based quality assurance and 

enhancement, and where minimal attention was given to organization-specific supports, incentives, 

expectations, related leadership and networking opportunities, and specific budget allocations and/or 

resources. Even under supportive organizational conditions, it was far from easy for many coach 

leaders/administrators to engage in independent or collaborative SEI. Thus, in order to overcome a 

myriad of challenges, amateur/grassroots coach leaders/administrators need to be predisposed, enabled, 

and reinforced to conduct SEI for quality assurance and enhancement purposes. Despite significant 

challenges and barriers for conducting SEI, it was noted that increasing levels of organizational support 

is testimony to the growing value placed on SEI for quality assurance and enhancement practices 

within amateur/grassroots 50-65+ small-sided football settings.  

3.2.2 Key Organizational Supports 

If organizations want to rely on cutting-edge “evidence-based practice”, then they require 

“practice-based evidence” (Green, 2008). Preliminary findings from this study in diverse 

amateur/grassroots 50-65+ small-sided football contexts concur that the benefits of conducting SEI for 

quality assurance and enhancement can only be realized with key organization-specific supports 

including: 

 strategic organizational visioning documents that espouse the importance of continual quality 

assurance and enhancement for all its coaching programs, initiatives, and services;  

 strategic coach education and skills training. For example, this involves access to state-of-the-art 

customized technology-enabled professional development experiences (i.e., responsive to the needs 

and circumstances of coach leaders/administrators in complex amateur/grassroots football settings) 

and expert mentoring support to ground specific coaching programs and initiatives within the 

relevant research and professional literature; to focus SEI on situational-specific priority research 

objectives, ethical inquiry and appropriately aligned research methodology; to apply systematic 

data collection methods and analysis; and related networking opportunities to disseminate 

evidence-based coaching programs/initiatives; 

 strategic communications and encouragement (including clear operational expectations, allocation 

of time, and resources) for coach leaders/administrators to conduct ongoing quality assurance and 

enhancement as an integral part of program development, implementation, and/or impact 

assessment. Broader football organizational supports (e.g., FIFA Research Scholarship, UEFA 

Research Grant Programme, CIES Sport Intelligence Support, Performance Analysis University 

Research Grant, Scholarship of Educational Leadership University Research Grant, Football 

Association Program Funding Initiatives) provided further guidance and/or assistance to conduct 

research-informed and evidence-based approaches for quality assurance and enhancement of 

coaching programs/initiatives in these diverse amateur/grassroots football settings; and,  

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 3, No. 4, 2020 

54 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 strategic forums and related networking opportunities to disseminate best practices pertaining to 

amateur/grassroots football coaching programming/services and initiatives within and beyond the 

communities they serve. 

Notably, coach leaders/administrators/scholars from the SEI projects in Table 1, some of whom were 

based in research-intensive universities, were empowered with appropriate knowledge, abilities, skills 

to examine relevant research and professional literature; to identify organization-specific research 

objective priorities and appropriately aligned research methodologies; and to apply systematic rigorous 

data collection methods and analysis; and disseminate best practices. They also had related networking 

experiences to conduct SEI for quality assurance and enhancement purposes within these specific local 

and international amateur/grassroots coaching contexts.  

Given the critical challenges in this regard faced by most coach leaders/administrators, however, the 

importance of strategic coach education and skills training (e.g., access to state-of-the-art customized 

technology-enabled professional development experiences and expert mentoring support) cannot be 

under-stated. Similar to professional development offerings for SEI in alternative leadership settings 

(Webb, Hubball, Clarke, & Ellis, 2020), strategic coach education and skills training in this regard can 

take many forms (individualized or cohort-based) including flexible and responsive formats (e.g., 

technology-enabled modules to assist coach leaders juggle competing time and coaching priorities in 

their specific settings), workshops, one-to-one mentoring support, and certification opportunities. 

Further, strategic coach education and skills training for SEI should be led by internal and/or external 

coach leaders/administrators/scholars with appropriate leadership expertise and relevant track-record of 

published research in this field. 

 

4. Conclusion 

Preliminary findings in this study suggest that Strategic Educational Inquiry (SEI) is a flexible and 

customized research methodology that is ideally suited for coach leaders/administrators to provide 

responsive and efficient evidence-based quality assurance and enhancement in order to maximize the 

development, implementation, or impact assessment of specific coaching programs/initiatives in 

amateur/grassroots coaching contexts. No one size fits all. Data suggests that SEI situates specific 

amateur/grassroots coaching programs and initiatives within the relevant research and professional 

literature; it focuses SEI on situation-specific priority research objectives, ethical inquiry, and 

appropriately aligned research methodology; and involves systematic data collection methods and 

analysis, and dissemination of best practices. It is important to note, however, that SEI is not value-free. 

Thus, similar to all forms of research, interpretation of SEI requires a healthy skepticism regarding 

ontological and epistemological considerations, analysis of methodological rigor, and an openness to 

alternative critique and analysis.  

 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 3, No. 4, 2020 

55 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

We have provided a theoretical framework, as well as practical examples and considerations for SEI 

applications in diverse amateur/grassroots football coaching contexts. Data suggest that coach 

leaders/administrators in these settings face critical challenges related to the art, science, and politics of 

implementation. They also require key organizational supports, such as strategic coach education and 

skills training (e.g., access to state-of-the-art customized technology-enabled professional development 

experiences and expert mentoring support) in order to conduct SEI for quality assurance and 

enhancement purposes. 

Although the case examples presented are ongoing works-in-progress, significant developments and 

commitments to SEI have contributed to strategic, effective, and efficient quality assurance and 

enhancement, such as sustained innovations and improvements; high impact tournament, program, 

team, and individual performances; and related research productivity outcomes. Further, SEI has 

fostered an organizational culture for cutting-edge research and coaching excellence within these 

settings; and, has helped amateur/grassroots football organizations to become better known, within and 

beyond the communities they serve. While there are still many challenges and areas of improvement 

for coach leaders/administrators to conduct SEI, an organizational commitment can be the basis for 

effective and efficient quality assurance and enhancement of amateur/grassroots football coaching 

programs/initiatives in diverse settings. 

 

References 

Allison, W. (2016). The FA‟s coach education and development programme: Research informing 

practice. In W. Allison, A. Abraham, & A. Cole (Eds.), Advances in coach education and 

development: From research to practice. UK: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315657486 

Bullough, R., & Pinnegar, S. (2001). Guidelines for quality in autobiographical forms of self-study 

research. Educational Researcher, 30(3), 13-21. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X030003013 

CIES Sports Intelligence. (2020). Retrieved from 

https://www.cies.ch/en/research/cies-sports-intelligence/  

Cockell, J., & McArthur-Blair, J. (2012). Appreciative inquiry in higher education: A transformative 

force. San Francisco, C.A.: John Wiley & Sons.  

Coe, R., Waring, M., Hedges, L., & Arthur, J. (2017). Research methods and methodologies in 

education (2nd ed.). Sage, London: UK. 

Cresswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2017). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five 

approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 

FIFA, Fédération Internationale de Football Association. (2020a). The FIFA Research Scholarship: 

Promoting Football-related Research. International Centre for Sports Studies (CIES). Retrieved 

from 

https://www.fifa-research-scholarship.ch/FIFA_Research_Scholarship_revised_regulations.pdf 

 

https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315657486
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X030003013


www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 3, No. 4, 2020 

56 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

FIFA, Fédération Internationale de Football Association. (2020b). Making Football Truly Global: The 

Vision 2020-2023. Zurich: FIFA. Retrieved from 

https://resources.fifa.com/image/upload/making-football-truly-global-the-vision-2020-2023.pdf?cl

oudid=z25oyskjgrxrudiu7iym 

FIFA, Fédération Internationale de Football Association. (2020b). Grassroots Manual. Zurich: FIFA. 

FIFA Education and Technical Development.   

Franks, C., Lilley, T., Hubball, H., & Franks, I. (2019). Injury prevention and performance 

enhancement: Tournament strategies for 55+ masters football teams and players. International 

Science and Football Association Newsletter Publication, 3, 24-31.  

Friedman, V. J. (2008). Action science: Creating communities of inquiry in communities of practice. In 

P. Reason, & H. Bradbury (Eds.), Handbook of action research: The concise paperback edition 

(pp. 131-143). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 

Glassick, C. E., Huber, M. T., & Maeroff, G. I. (1997). Scholarship assessed: Evaluation of the 

Professoriate. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.  

Green, L. W. (2008). Making research relevant: If it is an evidence-based practice, where‟s the 

practice-based evidence? Family Practice, 25(Suppl. 1), 20-24. 

https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmn055 

Hubball, H. T., & Díaz-Cidoncha, G. J. (2020). Strategic program development practices to enhance 

grassroots 55-65+ small-sided football in diverse international contexts: The art, science and 

politics of implementation. Global Research in Higher Education, 3(2), 34-51. 

https://doi.org/10.22158/grhe.v3n2p34 

Hubball, H. T., & Lopes, P. (2019). Performance analysis in elite masters football: Strategic team and 

player development implications. In M. Hughes, I. M. Franks, & H. Dancs (Eds.), Essentials of 

Performance Analysis in Sport (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge. 

https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429340130-20 

Hubball, H. T., & Reddy, P. (2015). Impact of walking football: Effective team strategies for high 

performance veteran players. Journal of Sports Pedagogy and Physical Education, 6(1), 13-27. 

https://doi.org/10.18848/2381-7100/CGP/v06i01/54114 

Hubball, H. T., Díaz-Cidoncha, G. J., & Robertson, S. (in press 2021). Research methods to enhance 

amateur/grassroots football: Strategic educational inquiry for coach leaders/administrators. 

International Science and Football Association, Newsletter Article. 

Hubball, H. T., Franks, I. M., Sweeney, M., & Kauppinen, R. (2018). Effective 3-a-side game formats 

and team strategies for advanced level 055-70+. International Science and Football Association 

Newsletter Publication, 2, 14-16. 

 

 

 

https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmn055
https://doi.org/10.22158/grhe.v3n2p34
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429340130-20
https://doi.org/10.18848/2381-7100/CGP/v06i01/54114


www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 3, No. 4, 2020 

57 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

Hubball, H. T., Reddy, P., Sweeney, M., & Kauppinen, R. (2018). Development and impact of the 

International Masters/Veterans 5-a-side World Cup Football Tournament (2006-2017): A 

scholarly approach. The International Journal of Sport and Society, 9(2), 1-17. 

https://doi.org/10.18848/2152-7857/CGP/v09i02/1-17 

Hutchings, P. (Ed.). (2002). Ethics of inquiry: Issues in the scholarship of teaching and learning. 

Menlo Park, CA: Carnegie Publications.  

Myatt, P., Gannaway, D., Chia, I., Fraser, K., & McDonald, J. (2018). Reflecting on institutional 

support for SoTL engagement: Developing a conceptual framework. International Journal for 

Academic Development, 23(2), 147-160. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2017.1346511 

Pearson, M. L., Albon, S. P., & Hubball, H. (2015). Case study methodology: Flexibility, rigour, and 

ethical considerations for the scholarship of teaching and learning. Canadian Journal for the 

Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 6(3), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2015.3.12 

Putman, S. M., & Rock, T. (2017). Action research: Using strategic inquiry to improve teaching and 

learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 

Saladana, J., & Omasta, M. (2017). Qualitative research: Analyzing life. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.  

Taylor, W., & Groom, R. (2016). Quality assurance procedures in coach education. In W. Allison, A. 

Abraham, & A. Cole (Eds.), Advances in coach education and development: From research to 

practice. UK: Routledge. 

Webb, A. S., & Welsh, A. J. (2019). Phenomenology as a methodology for scholarship of teaching and 

learning research. Teaching Learning Inquiry, 7(1), 168-181. 

https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.7.1.11 

Webb, A. S., Hubball, H. T., Clarke, A., & Ellis, S. (2020). Strategic approaches to SoEL inquiry 

within and across disciplines: Twenty-year impact of an International Faculty Development 

Program in diverse university contexts. Global Research in Higher Education, 3(1), 1-24. 

https://doi.org/10.22158/grhe.v3n1p1 

Webb, A., Hubball, H., & McKenzie, M. (in press). Strategic approaches to “glocalising” curriculum 

practice: Responding to faculty development needs and circumstances in diverse international 

contexts. International Journal for Curriculum and Instruction. 

Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Thousand 

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 

 

https://doi.org/10.18848/2152-7857/CGP/v09i02/1-17
https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2017.1346511
https://doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2015.3.12
https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.7.1.11
https://doi.org/10.22158/grhe.v3n1p1

