Der Sportwissenschaftler als Unternehmer im Wissensmarkt

Creative ideas are the driving force behind knowledge production, the producers of which are generally domesticated at universities for the purposes of ensuring the methodological credibility of the knowledge produced, in order to minimise the impact of chance in the creation of new knowledge. The status of producers is determined by indicators designed to simulate the demand for knowledge, precipitate a quantitative and qualitative comparison of elements which are not comparable, and establish legitimacy for the means of control used. Furthermore, incentives for competitive sport research and the symbolic recognition of scientists via sport practice play a particular role for knowledge production in sports science. In order to compensate for the practical world’s unwillingness to pay for sports science expertise relevant to competitive sport, the German Federal Institute of Sports Science (BISp) functions as a simulator of demand for knowledge generated by universities, while the Institute for Applied Training Science with its services exclusively available to umbrella organisations limits the range of incentives to produce (competitive) sporting knowledge. Sports scientists are thus faced with a market situation which favours routine research and standard methods, creates legitimacy at a central level, does not necessarily tackle actual issues faced by (competitive) athletes, stimulates demand for monitoring services, and all in all leaves monoculture-driven gaps which could most likely only be avoided by advocating and applying individual scope for action throughout the research ethos.