Free to Move

In an age where there seems to be more focus on fitness and health than ever before, why are fewer women playing sport?

WORDS Ashleigh Went

FROM PLAYING BACKYARD CRICKET to hitting the waves for a surf, or kicking a footy around the oval, sport has always been an integral part of Australian culture.

Yet, when we look at the statistics, we know that participation in most sport is on the decline. The Future of Australian Sport study produced in 2013 by the Australian Sport Commission and CSIRO revealed that while participation rates in aerobics, running, walking—along with gym membership— have all risen sharply over the past decade, participation rates for many organised sports have held constant or declined.

And the decline for womens’ participation is even more marked.

It is leading to some of the savvier ACT sporting groups to look behind the data and get creative when it comes to attracting and engaging women in team sports.

But it is a tough ask.

Sporting bodies need to combat two entrenched barriers to participation: the practical and the perceived. From a practical standpoint, research shows again and again that our discretionary time is more fragmented than ever. AusPlay data shows that “not enough time/other commitments” was the second most common barrier faced by women, after poor health or injury.

Team sports obviously require assembling people together to simultaneously engage in an activity. As anyone who has tried to round up a busy group of friends for brunch can attest, that is no easy feat.

From a perception standpoint, many of us lack the confidence to participate in traditional sport. Studies suggest that while many of us participate in sport as children and teenagers, we are unlikely to take up sport once we become adults.

Sporting bodies need to combat two entrenched barriers to participation: the practical and the perceived.

Gen Y is a demographic fascinated with selfdevelopment and actualisation. In short, we’re more often focussed on the self: the individual pursuit of success in all its forms, including our fitness. This, in turn, affects our competitiveness. Rather than aiming to ‘win’ a game, we’re looking for a personal best—a principle at odds with a traditional view of sport where a level of teamwork and competitiveness isn’t just desirable, but necessary.

But when it comes to changing habits and demographics of fitness, who better to learn from than the commercial fitness industry? While most traditional club sports are on the decline, the fitness industry (and by extension, the wellness industry) continues to boom.

Fitness Business Consultant for global group exercise provider Les Mills Miriam Cohen acknowledges the huge importance of consumer research in meeting client expectations and building on success.

“We’re a global business, which means that we have access to thousands of clubs and millions of consumers of fitness around the world,” says Miriam. “We partner with big research companies like A.C Nielsen and IHRSA to make sure we’re constantly doing consumer research.’

One piece of research that yielded valuable insights was a collaboration between Penn State University and the American College of Sports Medicine.

“Their goal was to find out how you can get sedentary and overweight people to actually stick to an exercise routine,” says Miriam. “It was a 30-week trial, and what they found was that for a lot of people, doing their first Body Pump class was excruciating.”

The results of the project led Les Mills to implement a program called Smart Start, where new participants are led through a program that gradually eases them into the full range of programs over a period of six weeks.

“People need to feel successful after their first time, and they need to try a variety of things to find out what they enjoy. When you see yourself achieving more every week and feel successful, you’re more likely to stick to it.”

In making their products more appealing, Les Mills is not only modifying the delivery of its products, but also providing a precursor program to build confidence and buy-in, providing a pathway, or an alternative, to their core product line.

It is this exact form of consumer-driven tailoring that is being taken up by clever sporting bodies across Canberra.

BASKETBALL ACT

Basketball ACT CEO Michael Haynes says “we identified through some discussions with a couple of mums who had kids playing that they were interested in doing some basketball but didn’t necessarily have four or five friends that were also interested that they could create a team with.”

The result was Mums Who Ball, a flexible program aimed at mothers with young children delivered through a drop-in format with a low-cost entry point, fitness focussed activities, modified rules that allow for a more accessible game and even provides a simultaneous program for children.

“Things happen, particularly when you’re at home with young kids, where you might not be able to make a regular session,” says Michael. “Not having that commitment to a team was really important.”

Not only has Mums Who Ball proven to be a successful program, but it’s also provided an opportunity to mothers to meet each other and subsequently for a team to play in the traditional competition.

“We didn’t necessarily have that as an express goal” says Michael, “but it’s a very pleasing part of it.”

Michael admits that offering a product like this can be challenging for sports, particularly from a financial perspective.

“We’re lucky because we own the Belconnen Stadium, so we don’t have to pay court hire. But financially, it can often be a barrier.”

TENNIS ACT

Tennis Australia has partnered with Fitbit, the producer of the fitness tracker of the same name, to produce Cardio Tennis.

“It was designed for the young adult to adult age group, where we saw a gap in the market. Tennis Australia has designed a program around fitness— around what people that age want to do” explains Tennis ACT Participation Manager, Lenka Greenhalgh.

Tapping into the national sporting body means that Tennis ACT was able to access the program and roll it out across Canberra. Not only does it address the issue of limited time, offering shorter sessions than traditional tennis, but it also helps develop basic tennis skills and confidence on the court.

“The way that your racquet skills improve with your fitness is really great,” explains Lenka. “By the end of the term, you can go on to other tennis offerings.”

HOCKEY ACT

Hockey ACT is another organisation at the forefront of modified sports, having recognised that traditional club hockey presents barriers to new players.

CEO Gavin Hunt explains that “to play traditional hockey, there’s a six-month competition season, you’re paying around $700 to play for the season and buying around $300 of gear. So you’re about $1,000 out of pocket, plus committing that much of your time, to find out if you actually enjoy the program.”

Hockey ACT partnered with their Victoria counterpart to develop J-Ball, a social version of hockey with modified rules and court conditions played in three 12-minute periods.

With a background at the Australian Sports Commission, Gavin is well versed in the studies behind sports participation.

“I understand a lot of the research in the shifting nature in people’s desire from sport. That, coupled with the feedback we were receiving in the community that people wanted to get involved, but they didn’t know how. A shift in sport holistically from club-based programs to modified social product offerings, is something that greatly informed that piece.” •