title: Organizational Infrastructure in the Collegiate Athletic Training Setting, Part II: Benefits of and Barriers in the Athletics Model.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  The athletics model, in which athletic training clinical programs are part of the athletics department, is the predominant model in the collegiate athletic training setting. Little is known about athletic trainers' (ATs') perceptions of this model, particularly as it relates to organizational hierarchy.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To explore the perceived benefits of and barriers in the athletics model.
  
  
  METHODS
  Qualitative study.
  
  
  METHODS
  National Collegiate Athletic Association Divisions I and III.
  
  
  METHODS
  Eight full-time ATs (5 men, 3 women; age = 41 ± 13 years, time employed at the current institution = 14 ± 14 years, experience as a certified AT = 18 ± 13 years) working in the collegiate setting using the athletics model.
  
  
  METHODS
  We conducted semistructured interviews via telephone or in person and used a general inductive approach to analyze the qualitative data. Multiple-analyst triangulation and peer review established trustworthiness.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Two benefits and 3 barriers emerged from the data. Role identity emerged as a benefit that occurred with role clarity, validation, and acceptance of the collegiate AT personality. Role congruence emerged as a benefit of the athletics model that occurred with 2 lower-order themes: relationship building and physician alignment and support. Role strain, staffing concerns, and work-life conflict emerged as barriers in the athletics model. Role strain occurred with 2 primary lower-order themes: role incongruity and role conflict.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The athletics model is the most common infrastructure for employing ATs in collegiate athletics. Participants expressed positive experiences via character identity, support, trust relationships, and longevity. However, common barriers remain. To reduce role strain, misaligning values, and work-life conflict, ATs working in the athletics model are encouraged to evaluate their relationships with coaches and their supervisor and consider team physician alignment. Moreover, measures to increase quality athletic training staff from a care rather than a coverage standpoint should be considered.
authors.affiliation: Department of Health and Exercise Science, Appalachian State University, Boone, NC.
authors.forename: Ashley
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Goodman
authors.affiliation: Department of Kinesiology, Athletic Training Program, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
authors.forename: Stephanie M
authors.initials: SM
authors.lastname: Mazerolle
authors.affiliation: Department of Athletic Training and Exercise Science, Lasell College, Newton, MA.
authors.forename: Christianne M
authors.initials: CM
authors.lastname: Eason
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D056352:Athletes / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D004651:Employment / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007400:Interprofessional Relations; D008297:Male; D008962:Models, Theoretical; D024382:Professional Role; D036301:Qualitative Research; D013177:Sports / Q000193:education*; D013178:Sports Medicine / Q000458:organization & administration*; D013334:Students; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D014481:United States; D014495:Universities / Q000458:organization & administration; D016526:Workload
keywords: congruence; role strain; staffing; work-life conflict