1University of Montenegro, Biotechnical Faculty, Podgorica, Montenegro
Development of the Sports General Assessment Model (SGAM): A Proposed Multidimensional Framework for Sports Club Assessment
J. Anthr. Sport Phys. Educ. 2026, 10(4), Ahead of Print | DOI: 10.26773/jaspe.261001
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to create the Sports General Assessment Model (SGAM), a standardised and transferable multi-criteria approach for the integrated evaluation of sports clubs; the model integrates the main sporting-organisational capabilities with wider social and developmental values. Methods: A method based on the development of a conceptual model was used. The indicators and assessment principles were obtained through a review of the literature concerning the valuation of sports clubs, sporting and organisational performance, sports management, multi-criteria decision-making, and multidimensional evaluation models. The development process involved specifying the constructs, generating the indicators, getting rid of any redundancy, designing the rules regarding the evidence and scoring, and carrying out a theoretical, content-related, and logical review. Empirical evaluations of the clubs were not carried out. Results: SGAM consists of 20 indicators, which are divided into Main Sports Values (MSV) and Additional Sports Values (ASV), there being 10 indicators in each of these categories. The indicators are assessed on a scale ranging from 0 to 5 based on documentary evidence, expert evaluation, and, where appropriate, stakeholder perception. The scores for each dimension are adjusted so that they fall on a 0 to 100 scale and are presented as the ordered pair SGAM = (MSV N, ASV N). A two-dimensional matrix defines four general types of club profiles. The Balanced SGAM Index uses the geometric mean to summarise the level of balance and to prevent compensation between the different dimensions. The protocol also specifies the quality of the evidence, the procedures to be followed in the case of missing data, the comparison frameworks, the sensitivity analysis, and the reporting standards. Conclusion: SGAM offers a clear structure that can be used for diagnosing clubs, carrying out benchmarking and planning with a view to strategy in a variety of sports and organizational settings. At present, it is still only a preliminary framework and further work such as Delphi reviews, pilot testing, reliability and validity assessments, and replication across sports is required before it can be fully implemented empirically.
Keywords
Sports management, multi-criteria assessment, organizational performance, stakeholder evaluation, club benchmarking, SGAM
View full article
(PDF – 469KB)
References
Alaminos, D., Esteban, I., & Fernández-Gámez, M. A. (2020). Financial performance analysis in European football clubs. Entropy, 22(9), 1056. https://doi.org/10.3390/e22091056
Ati, A., Bouchet, P., & Ben Jeddou, R. (2024). Using multi-criteria decision-making and machine learning for football player selection and performance prediction: A systematic review. Data Science and Management, 7(2), 79-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsm.2023.11.001
Belhouchet, H., Dergaa, I., Zoudji, B., Ceylan, H. I., Stefanica, V., Khatrouch, I., Imane, G., Acoumambo, D., Bragazzi, N. L., & Azaiez, F. (2026). Multi-criteria decision-making in soccer: A bibliometric analysis. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 13, 595. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-026-06968-9
Bjelica, D. (2012). Komunikacije u sportu [Communications in sport]. Nikšić, Montenegro: Fakultet za sport i fizičko vaspitanje; Podgorica, Montenegro: Crnogorska sportska akademija.
Bjelica, D. (2013). Teorija sportskog treninga [Theory of sports training]. Podgorica, Montenegro: Univerzitet Crne Gore.
Bjelica, D., & Fratrić, F. (2011). Sportski trening: Teorija, metodika i dijagnostika [Sports training: Theory, methodology and diagnostics]. Nikšić, Montenegro: Fakultet za sport i fizičko vaspitanje; Podgorica, Montenegro: Crnogorska sportska akademija.
Brilha, J. (2016). Inventory and quantitative assessment of geosites and geodiversity sites: A review. Geoheritage, 8(2), 119-134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-014-0139-3
Dadelo, S., Turskis, Z., Zavadskas, E. K., & Dadeliene, R. (2014). Multi-criteria assessment and ranking system of sport team formation based on objective-measured values of criteria set. Expert Systems with Applications, 41(14), 6106-6113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2014.03.036
Gabus, A., & Fontela, E. (1972). World problems: An invitation to further thought within the framework of DEMATEL. Battelle Geneva Research Centre.
Galariotis, E., Germain, C., & Zopounidis, C. (2018). A combined methodology for the concurrent evaluation of the business, financial and sports performance of football clubs: The case of France. Annals of Operations Research, 266, 589-612. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-017-2631-z
Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications—A State-of-the-Art Survey. Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, Vol. 186. Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992). The balanced scorecard-Measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 70(1), 71-79.
Kalezić, Ž., Marković, S., Marjanović, M., Radivojević, A., & Spalevic, V. (2026). Valorisation of archaeological and geological resources in Montenegro using GAM and UGAM methodologies: Case study of Municipium S. Open Geosciences, 18(1), 20250998. https://doi.org/10.1515/geo-2025-0998
Karaköprü, U. O., & Kabadurmuş, Ö. (2020). Evaluation of stadium locations using AHP and TOPSIS methods. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 15(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.17153/oguiibf.484468
Marjanović, M., Marković, R., Šarić, K., Radivojević, A. R., Antić, A., Raičević, Đ., Schaetzl, R. J., & Marković, S. B. (2024). Geotouristic approach to the elements of geocultural heritage by using UGAM model: UNESCO World Heritage Site Felix Romuliana (Zaječar, Serbia). Geoheritage, 16, 35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-024-00940-2
Markham, T. (2013). What is the optimal method to value a football club? SSRN Electronic Journal. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2238265
Nisel, S., & Özdemir, M. (2016). Analytic hierarchy process & Analytic network process in Sport: A comprehensive literature review. International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 8(3), 405-429. https://doi.org/10.13033/ijahp.v8i3.448
Oralhan, B., Oralhan, Z., & Kırdök, N. (2022). Evaluation of ski centers' performance using multiple-criteria decision-making methods. Polish Journal of Sport and Tourism, 29(3), 29-35. https://doi.org/10.2478/pjst-2022-0018
Taherdoost, H., & Madanchian, M. (2023). Multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods and concepts. Encyclopedia, 3(1), 77-87. https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia3010006
Tomić, N., & Božić, S. (2014). A modified Geosite Assessment Model (M-GAM) and its application on the Lazar Canyon area (Serbia). International Journal of Environmental Research, 8(4), 1041-1052. https://doi.org/10.22059/ijer.2014.798
Vavrek, R. (2021). An analysis of usage of a multi-criteria approach in an athlete evaluation: An evidence of NHL attackers. Mathematics, 9(12), 1399. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9121399
Vujičić, M. D., Vasiljević, D. A., Marković, S. B., Hose, T. A., Lukić, T., Hadžić, O., & Janićević, S. (2011). Preliminary geosite assessment model (GAM) and its application on Fruška Gora Mountain, potential geotourism destination of Serbia. Acta Geographica Slovenica, 51(2), 361-377. https://doi.org/10.3986/AGS51303