In 2005, Division II built an identity.

In 2006, Division II built a strategic-positioning platform based on its identity.

In 2007, Division II built relationships with the community constituents the strategic-positioning platform said were inherent in its identity.

Now, in 2008, Division II will take the next step to create “game environments” that keep those same community constituents the strategic-positioning platform said were inherent in its identity coming back to campus.

Division II has indeed used a formulaic and strategic approach to build a foundation that has transformed its membership from one that referred to themselves by what they weren’t (Division I or Division III) to one now comfortable with its NCAA footprint.

The turnaround began with Division II’s first chancellors and presidents summit in summer 2005 that identified the division’s attributes and goals, then gained momentum through the strategic-positioning platform that created tools for members to match their behaviors with those attributes. Community engagement was a major issue last year; now it stands to reason that the next effort is developing community-friendly environments that kindle those relationships.

“We’ve done more than just develop an identity,” said Pfeiffer University President Charles Ambrose, who as chair of the Division II Presidents Council the last two years has had a hand in much of Division II’s transformation. “We are providing tools in community engagement, game environment, life skills and championships administration that allow institutions to live Division II’s ‘life in the balance.’ We’ve gone from a division driven by legislation to one that enables institutions to use an array of tools to become better Division II members.”

“Game environment,” which Division II is using to describe what others refer to as “sportsmanship,” goes beyond the behavior of players and coaches to include all that surrounds the event, including game administration, fans and student supporters. The Division II Management Council sponsored a game-environment summit last July to get the idea percolating, and the 2008 Convention will feature a follow-up session January 12 from 12:45 to 2:15 p.m. aimed at providing a clearer definition of a positive competitive environment.

“Division II institutions have long been a source of pride to their communities and a great night out for families who like to see outstanding athletics competition,” Ambrose said. “The game-environment initiative should help institutions re-establish the link between the educational purpose of Division II athletics and the competition environment at Division II events.”

Shippensburg University of Pennsylvania Athletics Director Roberta Page will moderate the January 12 panel that includes University of New Haven Athletics Director Deborah Chin, former Bentley College student-athlete and SAAC Vice Chair Carey Demos, Winona State University Athletics Director Larry Holstad, Mars Hill College Athletics Director Dave Riggins and Grand Valley State Athletics Director Tim Selgo.

In addition — as it did with community engagement last year when Division II sought counsel from consultant Rich Luker — officials are turning to other experts in the game-environment field, including a high-performance consultant at the University of California, Berkeley.

Choosing behaviors

While a former rugby player might not be what comes to mind when looking for a game-environment specialist, that’s what Division II found in Darren Treasure, who scrummed during his formative years in the United Kingdom before crossing the pond to earn master’s and doctoral degrees at the University of Illinois, Champaign.

Treasure, who will join the Convention panel, was a tenured associate professor at Arizona State University with appointments in the kinesiology and psychology departments before he began consulting full time. He has published more than 50 scientific articles and book chapters on motivation and the psychology of peak performance and currently is the lead consultant on a high-performance initiative at California. Treasure also works with Nike’s Oregon Project and is the author of the National Federation of State High School Associations new coaches education program launched in 2007.

“He appealed to Division II because he understands our desire to reconnect events with the educational purpose of athletics,” said Division II Vice President Mike Racy.

In turn, Treasure believes Division II is on to something with its game-environment initiative that may transcend the usual focus on sportsmanship.

“When you start talking about this with administrators and faculty and presidents at the DII level, it resonates with them,” he said.

Treasure said when people enter sports venues as a spectator, they often suspend or regress their moral level of functioning. “We’re much more prepared to allow ourselves to behave in a way that is inconsistent with the way we would normally behave out on the street,” he said. “There’s no reason for that other than we have decided that is the case.”

A purposeful approach

While that may explain some of the behaviors, Treasure said the good news is that if those are chosen behaviors, they can be “unchosen.”

“As long as there is nothing hardwired into this that is determining these behaviors — and we know there isn’t — we can change it. We can choose to create an environment that will encourage a certain set of behaviors that we are looking for, particularly at the DII level because of the community-engagement initiative.”

Treasure is motivated by personal experience. He said he took his 7-year old daughter to a Division I women’s basketball game recently and sat close to one fan who berated and abused the opposing coach from the get-go. The behavior was so boorish that Treasure appealed to game security to do something, but they did not respond. Treasure had a trump card in that he knew the local chief of police, and he used that to “persuade” the person in charge of game management to take action. The fan was eventually escorted from the arena.

“That’s just one example,” Treasure said, “and it occurred in a Division I environment. But the reality is that if we say that had happened at DII, and I’m the person in the community we’re trying to connect with for all of the engagement reasons we understand, why would we create an environment that prompts that person to take his 7-year old and walk out of the building? That’s the basic premise here. We should do this because it’s the right thing to do, and we can do this because we have the fortitude to push through. It can be done.”

Particularly in Division II, he said. Treasure cited fewer barriers and challenges at the Division II level than in Division I.

“That’s not to say you don’t have the same acknowledgment of sportsmanship and game-environment issues from DI folks, but when you have 65,000 people at the big game — and you don’t have much control over who those people are — no matter how well-intentioned you may be, that is a much bigger challenge than perhaps doing it at the DII level where every comment is heard and you could have a personal relationship with every person who comes to the event.”
Treasure calls for “a purposeful and deliberate approach” to create the appropriate context to prompt the desired behaviors. First, he said, administrators must define what they want the Division II experience to be. They have help now in that regard because of the strategic-positioning platform.

“What is the purpose of intercollegiate athletics in DII? That’s what we did with the high school coaches education program,” Treasure said. “They said it’s about education. It’s a co-curricular activity that helps educate the student. The same thing applies for DII. If we’re clear about what we’re trying to teach through the experience and how we want to connect with the community, then it’s more feasible to execute that strategy and achieve those goals.

“I like the concept of game environment — it covers virtually every aspect of the experience as opposed to sportsmanship. From a literal perspective, sportsmanship is narrowly about the athlete, but game environment is a way to bring more people into the fold.”

Treasure believes the Convention session and other efforts have a chance to make an impact. According to him, the goal is to cross-educate Division II constituents and spur collective action. He said Division II must battle a perception in which Institution A claims it has established the correct environment but is at a competitive disadvantage because Institution B hasn’t.

“We need to agree that we’re all in this together and to create an environment that is conducive to the mission and purpose of the activity,” he said. “So let’s get over that perception and move forward. If we decide to do this collectively, and we give athletics directors the tools and gain the support from presidents, we can make a difference in this area, because of the uniqueness of Division II.”