Ten Essential Features of European Dual Career Development Environments : A Multiple Case Study

This is a self-archived version of an original article. This version may differ from the original in pagination and typographic details. Author(s): Title: Year: Version: Copyright: Rights: Rights url: Please cite the original version: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Ten Essential Features of European Dual Career Development Environments : A Multiple Case Study © 2021 Elsevier Accepted version (Final draft) Storm, Louise K.; Henriksen, Kristoffer; Stambulova, Natalia; Cartigny, Emily; Ryba, Tatiana V.; De Brandt, Koen; Ramis, Yago; Erpič, Saša Cecić Storm, L. K., Henriksen, K., Stambulova, N., Cartigny, E., Ryba, T. V., De Brandt, K., Ramis, Y., & Erpič, S. C. (2021). Ten Essential Features of European Dual Career Development Environments : A Multiple Case Study. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 54, Article 101918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2021.101918 2021 Journal Pre-proof Ten Essential Features of European Dual Career Development Environments: A Multiple Case Study Louise K. Storm, Kristoffer Henriksen, Natalia Stambulova, Emily Cartigny, Tatiana V. Ryba, Koen De Brandt, Yago Ramis, Saša Cecic Erpic PII: S1469-0292(21)00036-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2021.101918 Reference: PSYSPO 101918 To appear in: Psychology of Sport & Exercise Received Date: 14 June 2020 Revised Date: 17 February 2021 Accepted Date: 18 February 2021 Please cite this article as: Storm, L.K., Henriksen, K., Stambulova, N., Cartigny, E., Ryba, T.V., De Brandt, K., Ramis, Y., Erpic, S.C., Ten Essential Features of European Dual Career Development Environments: A Multiple Case Study Psychology of Sport & Exercise, https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.psychsport.2021.101918. This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. CRediT author statement Louise K. Storm: Conceptualization; Methodology; Data Curation; Formal analysis; Writing – original draft. Kristoffer Henriksen: Conceptualization; Methodology; Data Curation; Formal analysis; Writing – original draft. Natalia Stambulova: Conceptualization; Methodology; Data Curation; Formal analysis; Writing – review & editing. Emily Cartigny: Project administration; Data Curation; Formal analysis; Writing – review & editing. Tatiana V. Ryba: Methodology; Data Curation; Formal analysis; Writing – review & editing. Koen De Brandt: Data Curation; Formal analysis; Writing – review & editing. Yago Ramis: Data Curation; Formal analysis; Writing – review & editing. Saša Cecić Erpič: Data Curation; Formal analysis; Writing – review & editing. Journal Pre-proof Ten Essential Features of European Dual Career Development Environments: A Multiple Case Study Louise K. Storm 1 , Kristoffer Henriksen 1 , Natalia Stambulova 2 , Emily Cartigny 3 , Tatiana V. Ryba 4 , Koen De Brandt 5 , Yago Ramis 6 and Saša Cecić Erpič 7 1 Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark 2 School of Health and Welfare, Halmstad University 3 School of Sport and Exercise Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University 4 Department of Psychology, University of Jyväskylä 5 Movement and Sport Sciences Department, Vrije Universiteit Brussel 6 Department of Basic, Developmental and Educational Psychology, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona 7 Faculty of Sport, University of Ljubljani We have no conflicts of interest to disclose. This research was supported by the Erasmus+ Programme of the European Union (Grant ID: 590476-EPP-1-2017-1-UK-SPO-SCP). The authors would like to express their gratitude to all who participated in the study. We thank all members of the Erasmus+ Sport project entitled “Ecology of Dual Career - Exploring Dual Career Development Environments across Europe” (ECO-DC) for their cooperation during this study and the entirety of the project. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Louise Kamuk Storm, Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense M, Denmark. E-mail: [email protected] Journal Pre-proof Abstract Aim: Dual career development environments (DCDEs) support athletes’ effort in combining their competitive sporting careers with education or work. The characteristics of the environments may differ across cultures. The aim was to identify essential features of DCDEs based on a crosscase analysis of seven European DCDEs in Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom within the Erasmus+ Sport project “Ecology of Dual Career”. Design: The study was designed as a multiple case study and based on two holistic ecological working models (Henriksen et al., 2020). The cross-case analysis included series of focus group discussions, in which two-three researchers from each partner country and four dual career (DC) support providers compared the findings across seven national cases with a primary focus on similarities rather than differences. Results: A list of ten essential features of the DCDEs, structured into two overarching themes. (1) Holistic structure with five subthemes: Dedicated DC support team, Integration of efforts across the whole environment, A clear understanding of DC issues and support from across the environment, Role models and mentorship, and Access to expert support. (2) Shared DC philosophy also had five subthemes: A whole-person approach, An empowerment approach, Flexible DC solutions, Care of DC athlete’s mental health and wellbeing, and An open and proactive approach to the development of the environment. Conclusion: The features are introduced in the manner of discussions, thus providing detailed information about the DCDEs without losing (too much) contextual information. These features can help researcher-practitioners to understand DCDEs and guide their optimization. Keywords: Holistic ecological approach, case study, sport and education, cross-national, Erasmus+ Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 1 1 2 3 Ten Essential Features of European Dual Career Development Environments: 4 A Multiple Case Study 5 6 Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 2 Abstract 7 Aim: Dual career development environments (DCDEs) support athletes’ effort in combining 8 their competitive sporting careers with education or work. The characteristics of the environments 9 may differ across cultures. The aim was to identify essential features of DCDEs based on a cross-10 case analysis of seven European DCDEs in Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, 11 and the United Kingdom within the Erasmus+ Sport project “Ecology of Dual Career”. 12 Design: The study was designed as a multiple case study and based on two holistic ecological 13 working models (Henriksen et al., 2020). The cross-case analysis included series of focus group 14 discussions, in which two-three researchers from each partner country and four dual career (DC) 15 support providers compared the findings across seven national cases with a primary focus on 16 similarities rather than differences. 17 Results: A list of ten essential features of the DCDEs, structured into two overarching themes. 18 (1) Holistic structure with five subthemes: Dedicated DC support team, Integration of efforts across 19 the whole environment, A clear understanding of DC issues and support from across the 20 environment, Role models and mentorship, and Access to expert support. (2) Shared DC philosophy 21 also had five subthemes: A whole-person approach, An empowerment approach, Flexible DC 22 solutions, Care of DC athlete’s mental health and wellbeing, and An open and proactive approach to 23 the development of the environment. 24 Conclusion: The features are introduced in the manner of discussions, thus providing detailed 25 information about the DCDEs without losing (too much) contextual information. These features can 26 help researcher-practitioners to understand DCDEs and guide their optimization. 27 Keywords: Holistic ecological approach, case study, sport and education, cross-national, 28 Erasmus+ 29 Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 3 Ten Essential Features of European Dual Career Development Environments: 30 A Multiple Case Study 31 Athletes strive to succeed not only in sport but also in education or work (European 32 Commission, 2012). They have to prioritize and make shifts in this prioritization depending on life 33 situations (e.g., school during the exam period or sport when approaching competitions). The 34 potential value and benefits of combining sport and studies are short-term and long-term. For 35 example, the skills learned in one area may be transferable and valued in others; the intellectual 36 stimulation may also help to maintain interest and commitment in training when athletes face ups 37 and downs; a dual career (DC) gives a sense of balance and that there is more in life than elite sport; 38 and finally, having a fall back plan provides a sense of security, that may even influence the athletes 39 in manners so they perform better (e.g., Aquilina, 2013; Stambulova et al., 2015). Additionally, DC 40 athletes are often better prepared for the post-sport life (e.g., Torregrossa et al., 2015). The DC 41 pathway can be challenging, and inflexible schedules can be a major barrier for DC athletes (Lopez 42 de Subijana et al., 2015; Stambulova & Wylleman, 2019). Therefore, maintaining an optimal DC 43 balance defined as “a combination of sport and studies that helps student-athletes achieve their 44 educational and athletic goals, live satisfying private lives and maintain their health and well-being” 45 (Stambulova et al., 2015, p. 12) should be supported to safeguard athletes from burnout (e.g., 46 Sorkkila et al., 2017) and staying motivated (e.g., Lupo et al., 2017). Obtaining an optimal DC 47 balance also means the possibility of shifting priority for sport or studies in certain periods 48 (Cartigny et al., 2019). 49 European DC Research 50 Two major factors are influential in DC adjustment, including personal resources of the DC 51 athlete (e.g., DC competencies; see De Brandt et al., 2018) and the external DC support provided on 52 different levels (Giudotti et al., 2015; Stambulova & Wylleman, 2019). In European countries, sport 53 Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 4 is usually club-based, and therefore, special arrangements are needed between sport and educational 54 institutions to facilitate athletes’ DCs. Within the European context and taking into account the 55 differences between educational policies in different European countries, Aquilina and Henry 56 (2010) identify four different types of policy systems: (1) A state-centric regulation where the 57 responsibility is placed on the institution to provide adapted opportunities for student-athletes (e.g., 58 Spain), (2) the state as sponsor or facilitator, whereby the state promotes formal agreements to 59 ensure that student-athletes’ needs are met (e.g., Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Sweden), (3) the 60 national federations or sports institutes as facilitators or mediators between student-athletes and 61 educational bodies (e.g., United Kingdom: UK), and (4) systems with no formal structures where 62 arrangements rely on individually negotiated agreements (e.g., Slovenia). This typology illustrates 63 the diversity in DC management approaches across Europe. 64 Recently, in a state-of-the-art critical review on the psychology of European athletes’ DCs, 65 Stambulova & Wylleman (2019) identified a lack of “a whole environment” perspective as a major 66 gap in the literature. The holistic lifespan perspective (Wylleman et al., 2013) is a central driving 67 force of the current European DC research. It promotes “a whole person” and “a whole career 68 approach” and illustrates that across the athletic life span, DC athletes interact with different people 69 (e.g., coaches, teachers) in a variety of organizations, such as schools, colleges, universities and 70 sports clubs (see Debois et al., 2015). Accordingly, there is a need to capture the whole spectrum of 71 athletes’ experiences in sport and beyond, including environmental influences from micro and 72 macro levels, as well as athletic and non-athletic domains (Stambulova et al., 2020). 73 The ECO-DC Project, Holistic Ecological Approach, and the European Context 74 This study forms part of the Erasmus+ Sport project “Ecology of Dual Career - Exploring 75 Dual Career Development Environments across Europe” (ECO-DC). Within the ECO-DC project, a 76 dual career development environment (DCDE) is defined as a purposefully developed system that 77 Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 11 sent to the entire project research group. The project research group reached final agreement on the 219 essential features of European DCDEs, with descriptors and opposite poles, as presented in Table 2. 220 The fifth stage - the list of essential features used as a coding frame for a deductive analysis 221 of all the seven cases - provided enriched detailed descriptions for direct comparisons of the cases. 222 In line with the post-positivist stance of the ECO-DC project, we used a coding reliability thematic 223 analysis approach, conceptualized themes as data domains (Braun & Clarke, 2019) for the second 224 round of the case descriptions. Each national research team deductively analyzed their data set (see 225 Table 1) using Table 2 as a coding frame and produced descriptions of their DCDEs (now) based on 226 the essential features. Then, the working group summarized and condensed these descriptions in 227 Tables 3 and 4 to finally confirm the overarching categories – the holistic structure and the shared 228 DC philosophy – and the relevant essential features. 229 Reflecting on the rigor of this five-stage cross-case analysis grounded in the post-positivist 230 epistemology (see McGannon et al., 2019 about various approaches in defining rigor in qualitative 231 research), we would like to mention the following: (a) from the very beginning we didn’t plan to 232 identify (exactly) ten DCDEs’ essential features but we kept in mind that these features should have 233 clear connotations with the DCDE and DC-ESF working models; (b) during the analysis we 234 realized that all the DCDEs under comparison had stronger and weaker points, and that is why we 235 shifted from the concept of shared features to essential features and also provided descriptions of 236 positive meaning and opposite meaning of each feature; (c) in all the stages of the analysis, we went 237 back and forth between the cases and the crystalizing list of DCDEs’ essential features moving 238 through a series of open and critical discussions in which members of our project research group 239 challenged each other and searched for mutual understanding; (d) we moved to each next stage in 240 the analysis only after the partners had agreed on a previous stage; and (e) we think that the 241 outcome of the fifth stage (i.e., of the deductive analysis of all the cases using the essential features 242 Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 12 as a code-frame; Braun & Clarke, 2019) confirmed the list of essential features as comprehensive 243 and credibly derived from the DCDEs compared. 244 Results 245 The European DCDEs varied in terms of the age of the athletes, the type of environment (e.g., 246 sport friendly university, private sport club and elite sport school), and the level of sport and 247 education they supported. All the essential features of DCDEs will be introduced below in the 248 manner of the discussion to illustrate how the project research group contrasted, debated, and 249 developed the features in the focus groups and reached consensus. We selected extracts from the 250 dialogues in the project research group and give the readers a feel of our discussions. Table 2 is an 251 overview of the ten essential features and their descriptors. We include in this table the opposite 252 poles of the essential features to further clarify the meaning of each. The positive pole and the 253 opposite pole can be seen as designing a continuum that provides a richer and more nuanced 254 reading of each feature. The ten features are structured into two overarching themes - Holistic 255 structure and Shared DC philosophy - each with five subthemes. Table 3 displays the characteristics 256 of the holistic structure and Table 4 displays the characteristics of the shared DC philosophy across 257 the seven DCDEs. Tables 3 and 4 should be read one case (vertical) and thus one feature 258 (horizontal) at a time. While the horizontal reading of Tables 3 and 4 allow the reader to look at one 259 DCDE at a time, we emphasize that the condensed analysis does not present the rich in-depth 260 illustration that is expected of a case study (Hodge & Sharp, 2016). In the following, we illustrate 261 the diversity of the DCDEs and provide selected examples, but not all cases are mentioned in each 262 feature even though all national research groups contributed with insights in the construction of 263 each feature. 264 [Insert Table 2 around here] 265 Holistic Structure 266 Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 13 As an overarching theme, the holistic structure refers to the specific components of the 267 environment (people, institutions etc.), the roles and functions of these components, and the 268 communication and coordination between the different components and levels of the environment. 269 The holistic structure of each DCDE was centered around the student-athletes and embraced micro270 and macro-levels, and sport, study and private domains. This overarching theme contains five sub-271 themes representing five essential features of DCDEs (see Tables 2 and 3). 272 [Insert Table 3 around here] 273 Dedicated DC Support Team 274 The dedicated DC support team refers to having a designated team (or person) responsible for 275 coordinating sport and study that helps to facilitate an optimal DC balance. In the best cases, one 276 central entry point was provided, but promoted helping student-athletes as everybody’s (e.g., 277 coaches, managers, teachers, family) business. 278 Organization of the DC support varied across the seven cases. The Swedish research group 279 investigated a combined DC system for university student-athletes and identified that the DC 280 support team consisted of four stakeholders with a clear distribution of roles and functions (e.g., 281 coordination, organization, contacts with student-athletes, coaches, teachers, administration, 282 experts, and external partners). This team coordinated flexible study and helped with other aspects 283 of DC athletes’ life (e.g., planning and prioritizing), facilitating their search for optimal DC balance. 284 Student-athletes’ main entry point for DC support was the coaches from whom they got initial 285 support and advice on how to proceed. Then the DC support team, who had close contact with the 286 coaches, organized a more attuned support based on the nature of student-athletes’ needs. By 287 contrast, the Finnish research group investigated a Finnish elite sport school for winter sports and 288 found no DC support team. Athletes still combined sport and studies, but the school did not have a 289 person or team responsible for DC issues. If athletes struggled with school issues, they had to 290 Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 14 approach student counselors like all other students. The Slovenian research group found two 291 designated people (a pedagogical school coordinator and a school psychologist) that provided DC 292 support. If the student-athletes had problems with school grades, the teachers contacted the 293 pedagogical coordinator and they collaborated to find a solution. The Spanish research group, 294 studying a private multiple sports club, found no people with formal responsibility for helping 295 student-athletes manage their DCs, but a few well-intentioned people (a teacher and a sport 296 psychologist) compensated for this lack of formal structure by helping the athletes regardless. These 297 well-intentioned people met adolescents who needed help finding a balance in life. The Spanish 298 research group described this as a weakness, because it left the athletes uncertain of whom to 299 approach. When they discussed this with the club management, they agreed and decided to remedy 300 this in the future. 301 Integration of Efforts Across the Whole Environment 302 The integration of efforts across the whole DCDE refers to the coordination and 303 communication between representatives from the sport, study, and private life domains (e.g., 304 coaches, teachers, family, DC support team). Microand macro-levels were linked through formal 305 or informal networks. When integrated, the efforts to support the student-athletes allowed them to 306 experience concordance and synergy in daily life. 307 The Danish research group investigated a sports friendly university and identified a DC-308 support team that functioned as a key connecter between the sport and the study domains, especially 309 at the macro-level. The head of this team had a large network in the local and national elite sport 310 system, as well as within the university system. To the benefit of the student-athletes, the head of 311 the team ensured that the efforts of people across the DCDE were in sync. For example, he visited 312 the national training centers to explain the ideas of DC to coaches, family, and athletes. The day-to-313 day coordination of the DC, however, was mainly the task of the student-athletes. In general, in 314 Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 15 Denmark, the combination of sport and study is considered the norm and a key ingredient of the life 315 of an elite athlete, not a barrier to sporting achievements. The Belgian and Finnish research groups 316 explored DCDEs where the student-athletes lived, trained, and studied within the same 317 environment. In the Finnish elite sport school, the student-athletes did not experience integration 318 and coordination, but rather contradicting priorities in daily life. The coaches primarily focused on 319 sporting achievements, whereas the teachers expressed concerns over sports interrupting day-to-day 320 rhythm of student-athletes. The Flemish (i.e. northern part of Belgium) elite sport school for 321 gymnastics provided integrated efforts due to a successful collaboration between three 322 organizations - boarding school, sports federation, and the school. One person from each domain 323 constituted the DC support team and they had weekly meetings, which provided good 324 communication and quick follow up if problems occurred. Living at a boarding school facilitated 325 integrated efforts, but some student-athletes (aged 12-18) suffered from homesickness. 326 A Clear Understanding of DC Issues and Support from Across the Environment 327 A clear understanding of the challenges faced by student-athletes allows the support network 328 to provide appropriate support for student-athletes to allow them to focus on the sport and study at 329 different time points depending upon key priorities at that time. It refers to family, coaches, and 330 teachers acknowledging, accepting, and supporting the DC athletes’ dedication to combining sport 331 and study. 332 The UK DCDE under study was a sports friendly university, the DC support team promoted 333 the importance of DC as a protective factor for the wellbeing of the athletes. The UK research 334 group identified that the environment was characterized by a shared understanding of the issues 335 related to DC. The DC support team worked deliberately on disseminating knowledge to family, 336 coaches, teachers, and peers so that they were able to recognize and understand the specific needs 337 of student-athletes (e.g., shift in prioritizing depending on the situations). The Belgian research 338 Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 16 group found that families played a positive supporting role. However, because there is little chance 339 to make a living from gymnastics, some parents unwittingly pressured their children by 340 emphasizing the importance of school. Responding to the Belgian story, the Finnish research group 341 similarly described how student-athletes rated (from the case descriptions) the financial support 342 provided by parents as crucial for them to be able to pursue a dual-career. 343 Role Models and Mentorship 344 Role models and mentorship refer to the presence of appropriate persons who student-athletes 345 can learn from and be guided and inspired by. Role models and mentorship was regarded essential 346 in all cases, but each environment varied in terms of how formalized the setup was. All the 347 environments provided opportunities for student-athletes to learn from others. 348 The focus group discussions showcased multiple types of role models and mentorship across 349 the European DCDEs. The UK research group identified that all student-athletes coming into the 350 environment were assigned a “buddy”, who was a second or a third-year student-athlete. The buddy 351 demonstrated what was expected within the environment and acted as an additional point of contact 352 for questions or support for the new student-athletes. The tight-knit community among student-353 athletes within the scholarship system promoted peer learning and support. Student-athletes 354 communicated with each other through the scholarship hub, in the gym facilities, or when they 355 attended workshops. Some even shared accommodation with other student-athletes. Furthermore, 356 alumni gave presentations and willingly passed on their knowledge. Responding to this story, the 357 Danish research group described how the Danish student-athletes were a part of a virtual 358 community tied together by shared narratives. The DC support team provided opportunities for 359 vicarious learning by sharing stories of challenges, dilemmas, and solutions based on previous 360 experiences. So even if the student-athletes did not necessarily meet within the environment, they 361 still learned from each other. The management of the Danish DCDE explained that one-size-fit-all 362 Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 17 workshops would not suit a diverse group of athletes from different sports and education 363 backgrounds, and, therefore, the DC team used examples of previous individualized solutions as a 364 part of their supervision of student-athletes. The project research group agreed that peer learning, 365 role models and mentorship were essential in a well-functioning DCDE. Role models helped 366 student-athletes to become aware of their career options and ways to cope with adversity and 367 challenges. 368 Access to Expert Support 369 The project research group agreed that access to expert services, such as nutrition, 370 physiotherapy, sport psychology, sports medicine was essential for a successful DC. In the different 371 cases, such access was either provided within the DCDE, or the DC support team knew how to 372 signpost the DC athletes to the relevant support. 373 The Spanish research group explored a private sports club and explained that the student-374 athletes had access to clinical and educational sport psychology support, physiotherapists, and sport 375 medical staff in the DCDE. Although access to experts was crucial in helping the athletes solve 376 their DC related issues, it was up to the student-athletes to ask for this support, and often they were 377 not aware of the services available to them. In the Finnish DCDE, the services were based in the 378 sports domain (e.g., full time employed physiotherapist and support for physical training). Access to 379 sports medicine and a mental coach was only for national team athletes, which provided them with 380 an express lane to expert assistance, however, everyone had access to a free, albeit slower and less 381 specialized, health care system. The Swedish research group found a well-organized performance 382 team of experts in sport psychology, sport medicine, nutrition, and strength and conditioning 383 training. The Swedish research group emphasized that these experts were also teachers and 384 researchers at the university, which provided a coherent structure across the sports and study 385 domains. Hearing this, the Danish research group shared how they did not find expert support 386 Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 18 within the university, but clubs and national sport organizations offered expert support services, and 387 the DC support team would refer athletes when needed. By contrast, the Slovenian research group 388 shared that in Slovenia student-athletes (or their families) pay for expert support. The project 389 research group agreed that access to expert support was not implemented in the same way across 390 the DCDEs, but it was essential for the student-athletes to thrive and develop. 391 Shared Dual Career Philosophy 392 The second overarching theme, a shared DC philosophy, suggests that key stakeholders (DC 393 support providers, sport staff, academic staff) in the environment share basic ideas and values 394 related to DCs. At the most fundamental level, there was agreement inside the environment that 395 sport and education can benefit each other and that competencies acquired in one domain (study, 396 sport, or private) could be of value in the others. The content of the philosophy, i.e. the key values 397 and ideas that were highlighted as essential to success, included five features (see Tables 2 and 4). 398 [Insert Table 4 around here] 399 A Whole Person Approach 400 A whole person approach represents the acknowledgement that sport, study, and private life 401 domains all influence student-athletes’ lives. It represents the idea of developing the student-402 athletes holistically, as seen when people from one domain take an interest in the student-athletes’ 403 experiences, challenges, and learning in the other domains. 404 The Swedish research group found a shared DC philosophy among the stakeholders in the 405 combined DC system (i.e. university): Student-athletes were neither only approached as students 406 nor only as athletes. All people in the DCDE agreed that student-athletes are whole persons with 407 individual needs and interests. For example, the coaches agreed that studies are important for 408 athletes and that a focus solely on sport is not beneficial for development. The research group 409 quoted a coach who said: ‘First and foremost you are a person, then an athlete, and only then a pole 410 Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 19 vaulter.’ The Slovenian research group investigated a swimming club and its collaboration with a 411 sport friendly school as a DCDE. The coaches considered the athletes to be more than athletes and 412 emphasized the importance of studies, and the teachers emphasized the importance of personal 413 development through elite sport. Unfortunately, a lack of communication across the domains 414 challenged this whole person approach in several ways. Coaches and teachers did not always agree 415 on what came first and did not collaborate to find an optimal balance. Inspired by the other project 416 cases, the Slovenian research group discussed this with the school management and the club coach 417 as a challenge to the optimal functioning of the environment. They agreed that more communication 418 is needed in the future, but no one had the time allocated for this task. In the UK DCDE (i.e. sports 419 friendly university), the UK research group found lifestyle advisors employed to support a whole 420 person approach. For example, the lifestyle advisors encouraged the student-athletes to nurture their 421 network and friendships outside the sport domain. 422 An Empowerment Approach 423 An empowerment approach refers to the student-athletes having opportunities to develop 424 competencies and internal and external resources to manage their own DC and become 425 autonomous. This was visible when student-athletes were actively involved in key decisions 426 regarding their own DCs. 427 In the Danish sports friendly university, the DC support team played a pro-active supporting 428 role in the athletes’ first year as a student-athlete, but a more reactive role later in the development. 429 This meant the DC support team gradually supported the student-athletes’ autonomy development 430 and helped developing their DC competences. The student-athletes matured as students, athletes, 431 and persons along the way, and the DC support team adapted to this development by increasing 432 empowerment of the athletes. In contrast, the Belgian research group investigated an elite sport 433 school in an early specialization sport (i.e. gymnastics; age 12-18). This DCDE was highly 434 Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 20 structured, and compared to the Danish case, it was more controlling and protective. For example, 435 large training and study loads and the set schedules restricted student-athletes in their interactions 436 with peers outside the elite sport context. The student-athletes developed skills such as self-437 discipline, planning skills, and work ethic in function of the demands they encountered, but they 438 sometimes struggled with motivation. Still, within this gymnastics context, the Belgian research 439 group found that the DC support team shared a philosophy and aimed for an empowerment 440 approach. The Spanish research group explored an environment for a similar age group (age 10-18), 441 and they gave an example of how the sports psychologists supported the student-athletes in 442 developing a sense of control over their own lives, within a structured set-up. 443 Flexible DC Solutions 444 Student-athletes’ needs differ depending on the sport, the education, and the individual 445 circumstances. Because athletes are different, flexibility is an essential feature of a successful 446 combination of sport and school. Appropriate support is provided to all student-athletes as 447 necessary. Flexible DC solutions are seen when the education-based DCDEs allow for extra focus 448 on sport when needed, just as when the sport-based DCDEs allow for extra focus on education 449 when needed. 450 Flexibility was a characteristic of all cases, but was exhibited in different ways. The UK 451 research group explored a well-functioning scholarship system, which was flexible, but also had 452 predetermined content (e.g., time management, career planning). The services and the support were 453 adapted to meet the student-athletes’ needs, which they recognized and highlighted as essential for 454 their thriving and success. In the Swedish DCDE, which also was higher education, the most typical 455 flexible solutions were to postpose or move exams, take the exams elsewhere, help athletes take 456 their internship at a suitable location, and to increase length of enrollment. Training was organized 457 to fit into the DC lifestyle of the student-athlete. Coaches knew the study plans of student-athletes 458 Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 27 national policy level and the student-athletes daily lives in their micro contexts. All DCDEs were 600 unique and had developed their own ways of supporting student-athletes. Still, the environments in 601 many ways employed the same principles in their work. These principles were, however, not 602 implemented in the same way across the European DCDEs. Therefore, the uniqueness of each 603 environment reflects that DCDEs are always contextually contained within socially and culturally 604 available resources (Ryba, Stambulova, Si, & Schinke, 2013). 605 Previous research on successful talent development environments (Henriksen, 2010; 606 Henriksen & Stambulova, 2017) provided inspiration to the current study in the form of an overall 607 focus on the environment, a case study methodological approach, specific working models and 608 definitions, and finally through a list of shared features (e.g., proximal role models; training that 609 allows for diversification). The essential features of DCDEs partly overlap with the shared features 610 of successful talent development environments, which is not surprising. Indeed, the athletes in most 611 of the investigated talent development environments were also students, and all the case studies 612 highlighted coordination between sport and school as a key to success (Henriksen et al., 2010a; 613 2010b; 2011). But these case studies did not investigate the environments as DCDEs and did not 614 consider the school context in the same detail as the sport context. More specifically, the features 615 related to the holistic structure of the DCDE (i.e., role models, integrated efforts and support of 616 sporting goals by the wider environment) were essential in both the talent development and DC 617 contexts. A unique feature of the successful DCDEs was the dedicated DC support team that 618 managed the holistic structure of the DCDE (see also Henriksen et al., 2020; Linnér et al., 2019). 619 The coherence and coordinated communication across domains were needed at the organizational 620 level to avoid unnecessary contradicting pulls in the daily life of the student-athletes. 621 The shared DC philosophy was an essential overarching feature of DCDEs, whereas 622 successful talent development environments were characterized by a coherent organizational culture 623 Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 28 (e.g., Henriksen et al., 2011). DCDEs cannot have strong coherent organizational cultures, simply 624 because they are composite environments. They consist of several organizations that collaborate 625 (e.g., school and club), each of which has an organizational culture. The organizational culture is a 626 set of shared assumptions (i.e. beliefs and values) specific to a particular group of people who 627 interact regularly (Schein, 2010). Thus, this concept is relevant inside a club or a team, but not in a 628 composite environment. Organizational culture might provide stability and clarity and safeguards 629 against uncertainty and confusion (Pink et al., 2015). We argue that in composite environments, the 630 shared DC philosophy serves the same function for athletes, coaches, managers, and teachers. 631 Additionally, we consider coaches (see also Linnér et al., 2020), teachers and DC support providers 632 (Defruyt et al., 2019) as the key social agents who are in a position to take responsibility for 633 developing, furthering, and upholding such a shared philosophy. We believe that a degree of 634 coherence between the culture of an organization (i.e. elite sports school or private club) and the 635 shared philosophy of a DCDE is required for the whole environment to work. 636 Practical Implications 637 The empowerment approach found in the present study helps student-athletes build personal 638 resources to manage challenges and barriers. Autonomy supportive environments (Knight et al., 639 2018; Stambulova et al., 2015) with flexibility in both sport and educational domains teach student-640 athletes to be proactive and ask for help (i.e. facilitate adjustment/coping). The list of ten essential 641 features can be a provisional practical guideline for DC practitioners (e.g., DC support providers, 642 sport psychology consultants, coaches) to optimize DCDEs. We suggest that conversations around 643 the essential features of DCDEs can help support providers and managers develop awareness and a 644 clearer understanding of their role, relationships, and effectiveness. The list of ten essential features 645 can be useful for evaluation and optimization of existing DCDEs and provide insights for 646 stakeholders working on development of new DCDEs. Taking into account the differences between 647 Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 29 DC systems in different European countries, a valuable next step is to design context-sensitive 648 interventions to optimize DCDEs (e.g., workshops) with inspiration from the content of Table 2. 649 Further, ecological approaches previously used to develop the organizational identity of a talent 650 development environment (Storm, 2020) and to create a high-performance culture in a national 651 team (Henriksen, 2015) might inspire practitioners within the DC context. The DCDE is a potential 652 resource for the individual athlete, but how the individual DC athlete utilizes the benefits of the 653 DCDE might not be similar for all individuals. Therefore we posit that future research could benefit 654 from investigating how environments are experienced and utilized differently by individuals. 655 Methodological Reflections 656 The development of the list of essential features of DCDEs was a collaborative and reflexive 657 task and included lengthy discussions among researchers and DC support providers representing 658 seven countries and cases. The project research group possessed extensive experience and 659 knowledge in the area of ecological perspectives, DC research, and DC support. The aim of 660 reaching consensus in the project research group was fulfilled. Therefore, the cross-case analysis 661 lends itself well to the naturalistic and analytical generalization (Smith, 2017), in the sense that we 662 believe the list of features will resonate with DC support providers from across Europe and provide 663 them with ideas to improve their practices. Additionally, the study provides the basis for the 664 development of a monitoring tool to support a quantified evaluation of specific DCDE. 665 Unlike previous cross-case analyses within the field of talent development, in which the same 666 researcher investigated all cases (e.g., Henriksen, 2010; Kuettel et al., 2018), no one person from 667 the project research group has firsthand experience from all seven environments. The cases were in 668 seven different countries and demanded language skills and cultural competence. We, therefore, 669 relied on people thoroughly researching each national DCDE. A thorough process of getting 670 familiar with all cases included reading reports and watching presentation videos from each national 671 Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 30 research group to get immersed with data. This was followed by a two-day meeting with several 672 rounds of focus group discussions that challenged the results from both research and applied 673 perspectives. The nature of the project also brought with it some ethical issues. In the focus group 674 discussions, we had to accept the dual role as both participants (when representing, elaborating and 675 discussing the cases) and researchers (when integrating and summarizing data across cases; Probst, 676 2016). The shifts in role required awareness and involved movement between different levels of 677 reflection. We aimed for reflexivity and transparency by talking openly about it and by clearly 678 agreeing when we moved between the levels. We consider this approach successful and a format 679 that can be replicated in other cross-national studies that aim to balance contextual sensitivity with a 680 common message. 681 In the project research group all had their idiosyncratic approaches and backgrounds, and we 682 used our different positions to challenge each other’s blind spots. Despite the (member) diversity in 683 terms of gender, nationality, and researcher/practitioner experiences, the project research group 684 reached consensus on the ten essential features of European DCDEs based on analysis of diverse 685 cases. We consider the list of the DCDE essential features (Table 2) to be provisional and open. The 686 DCDEs included in this study represent a variety of cases (i.e. countries, types of DCDEs, age 687 groups, and sports). It would be interesting to explore a case sample of similar types of 688 environments to provide a more context-sensitive list of essential features of DCDEs for example, 689 particular types of sport, types of DCDEs (Morris et al., 2020), or across different national support 690 systems (Aquilina & Henry, 2010). Important nuances related to specific contextual factors need to 691 be considered in more detail. Therefore, we invite fellow researchers to elaborate, clarify, and 692 challenge the list in future research. 693 Conclusion 694 Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 31 DCDEs support student-athletes in combining sport and school. Such environments vary in 695 terms of their type, sports context, national culture, target groups, and degree of effectiveness. In 696 the current study, national research groups investigated seven DCDEs across Europe. A large and 697 diverse project research group of both researchers and practitioners, with extensive knowledge and 698 experience in DC research and support, shared and discussed the seven cases in focus groups to find 699 consensus on essential success features of European DCDEs. We identified ten essential features of 700 European DCDEs that contributed to the success of the environments. Two overarching features 701 were a holistic structure and a shared DC philosophy. The HEA supports holistic and ecological 702 exploration of athletes’ DCDEs, and we encourage practitioners to evaluate and optimize their 703 environments based upon the current findings. Appropriately contextualized, the ten features can 704 serve as an inspiration for evaluating and optimizing. Case studies are time consuming and, from a 705 practical perspective, rarely possible for DC support providers to conduct as part of their daily 706 workload. The development of a monitoring tool based on the essential features, therefore, might be 707 an important next step. 708 Author note 709 ¹The project research group includes those who took part in the focus group discussions in this 710 study (the authors plus names removed for the purpose of blind review). The findings presented in 711 Table 2 constitute an intellectual output of the work in this group. The national research groups 712 provided empirical data for this study. The ECO-DC consortium includes all people involved in the 713 Erasmus+ Sport project entitled “Ecology of Dual Career - Exploring Dual Career Development 714 Environments across Europe” (ECO-DC). 715 Acknowledgement 716 (Removed for the purpose of blind review) 717 718 Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 32 References 719 Aquilina, D. (2013). A study of the relationship between elite athletes’ educational development 720 and sporting performance. International Journal of the History of Sport, 30(4), 374–392. 721 https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09523367.2013.765723 722 Aquilina, D., & Henry, I. (2010). Elite athletes and university education in Europe: a review of 723 policy and practice in higher education in the European Union Member States. 724 International Journal of Sport Policy, 2(1), 25–47. 725 https://doi.org/10.1080/19406941003634024 726 Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in 727 Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 728 2159676X.2019.1628806. 729 Brown, D. J., Fletcher, D., Henry, I., Borrie, A., Emmett, J., Buzza, A., & Wombwell, S. (2015). A 730 British university case study of the transitional experiences of student-athletes. Psychology 731 of Sport & Exercise, 21, 78–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2015.04.002 732 Cartigny, E., Fletcher, D., Coupland, C., & Taylor, G. (2019). Mind the gap: A grounded theory of 733 dual career pathways in sport, Journal of Applied Sport Psychology. 734 https://doi.org/10.1080/10413200.2019.1654559 735 Chmiliar, L. (2010). Multiple-case designs. In A. J. Mills, G., Durepos & E. Wiebe (Eds.), 736 Encyclopedia of case study research (pp. 583-584). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE 737 Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412957397.n216 738 Debois, N., Ledon, A., & Wylleman, P. (2015). A lifespan perspective on the dual career of elite 739 male athletes. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 21, 15–26. 740 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2014.07.011 741 Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 33 De Brandt, K., Wylleman, P., Defruyt, S., Smismans, S., Morris, R., Deason, E., Taelman, K. 742 (2019). Exploring dual career development environments across Europe: A holistic 743 ecological approach. In: T. Breitbarth et al. (Eds.) Abstract book of the 27 th European 744 Sport Management Conference (p. 533-534). Sevilla, Spain: Melia Sevilla. 745 De Brandt, K., Wylleman, P., Torregrossa, M., Schipper-van Veldhoven, N., Minelli, D., Defruyt, 746 S., & De Knop, P. (2018). Exploring the factor structure of the dual career competency 747 questionnaire for athletes in European pupiland student-athletes. International Journal of 748 Sport and Exercise Psychology. 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2018.1511619 749 Defruyt, S., Wylleman, P., Torregrossa, M., Schipper-van Veldhoven, N., Cecić Erpič, S., & De 750 Brandt, K. (2019). The development and initial validation of the dual career competency 751 questionnaire for support providers (DCCQ-SP). International Journal of Sport and 752 Exercise Psychology, 0(0), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2019.1581827 753 ECO-DC (2018). Erasmus+ Sport Project: “Ecology of Dual Career: Exploring Dual Career 754 Development Environments across Europe.” Downloaded from https://dualcareers.eu/ 755 European Commission. (2012). EU Guidelines on Dual Careers of Athletes: Recommended Policy 756 Actions in Support of Dual Careers in High-Performance Sport. Brussels. 757 https://doi.org/10.2766/52683 758 Fuchs, P. X., Wagner, H., Hannola, H., Niemisalo, N., Pehme, A., Puhke, R., …Guidotti, F. (2016). 759 European student-athletes’ perceptions on dual career outcomes and services. Kinesiologia 760 Slovenica, 22(2), 31–48. 761 Guidotti, F., Cortis, C., & Capranica, L. (2015). Dual career of European student-athletes: a 762 systematic literature review. Kinesiologia Slovenica, 21(3), 5–20. 763 Henriksen, K. (2010). The ecology of talent development in sport: A multiple case study of 764 successful athletic talent development environments in Scandinavia (Doctoral thesis). 765 Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 34 Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern 766 Denmark. 767 Henriksen, K. (2015). Developing a high-performance culture: A sport psychology intervention 768 from an ecological perspective in elite orienteering. Journal of Sport Psychology in Action, 769 6, 141–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/21520704.2015.1084961 770 Henriksen, K., & Stambulova, N. (2017). Creating optimal environments for talent development: A 771 holistic ecological approach. In: J. Baker, S. Cobley, J. Schorer, & N. Wattie 772 (Eds), Routledge handbook of talent identification and development in sport, Abingdon, 773 Oxon: Routledge, 2017, p. 271-284. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315668017 774 Henriksen, K., Stambulova, N., & Roessler, K. K. (2010a). Holistic approach to athletic talent 775 development environments: A successful sailing milieu. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 776 11, 212–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2009.10.005 777 Henriksen, K., Stambulova, N. and Roessler, K. K. (2010b). Successful talent development in track 778 and field: Considering the role of environment. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and 779 Science in Sports, 20, 122-132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0838.2010.01187.x 780 Henriksen, K., Stambulova, N., & Roessler, K. K. (2011). Riding the wave of an expert: A 781 successful talent development environment in kayaking. The Sport Psychologist, 25(3), 782 341–362. https://doi.org/10.1123/tsp.25.3.341 783 Henriksen, K., Storm, L., Kuettel, A., Linnér, L., & Stambulova, N. (2020). A holistic ecological 784 approach to sport and study: The case of a dual career development environment in 785 Denmark. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 47, 101637. 786 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2019.101637 787 Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 35 Hodge, K., & Sharp, L. (2016). Case studies. In B. Smith, & A. C. Sparkes (Eds.). Routledge 788 Handbook of Qualitative Research in Sport and Exercise (pp. 62–74). New York, NY: 789 Routledge. 790 Khan, S., & VanWynsberghe, R. (2008). Cultivating the under-mined: Cross-case analysis as 791 knowledge mobilization. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social 792 Research, 9(1). http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0801348 793 Kiens, K., & Larsen, C.H. (accepted, 2020) Combining sport and study in high school: An insight 794 into a dual career environment in Estonia. Case Studies in Sport and Exercise Psychology. 795 Knight, K. J., Harwood, C. G., & Sellars, P. A. (2018). Supporting adolescent athletes’ dual careers: 796 The role of an athlete’s social support network. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 38, 797 137–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2018.06.007 798 Korhonen, N., Nikander, A., & Ryba, T. (2020). Exploring the life form of a student athlete 799 afforded by a dual career development environment in Finland. Case Studies in Sport and 800 Exercise Psychology, 4, 108-116. https://doi.org/10.1123/cssep.2020-0005 801 Küttel, A., Christensen, M. K., Zysko, J., & Hansen, J. (2018). A cross-cultural comparison of dual 802 career environments for elite athletes in Switzerland, Denmark, and Poland. International 803 Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 18, 454-471. 804 https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2018.1553889. 805 Linnér, L., Stambulova, N., Lindahl, K. (2019). “Support upon request”: Exploring a dual career 806 development environment at a Swedish university. In: B. Strauss et al. (Eds.) Abstract 807 book of the 15 th European Congress of Sport and Exercise Psychology (p. 274). Muenster, 808 Germany: WWU Muenster. 809 Linnér, L., Stambulova, N., Storm, L. K., Küttel, A., & Henriksen, K. (2020). Facilitating sports 810 and university study: The case of a dual career development environment in Sweden. Case 811 Journal Pre-proof ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF DUAL CAREER ENVIRONMENTS 36 Studies in Sport and Exercise Psychology, 4, 95-107. https://doi.org/10.1123/cssep.2020-812 0011 813 López de Subijana, C., Barriopedro, M., & Conde, E. (2015). Supporting dual career in Spain: Elite 814 athletes’ barriers to study. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 21, 57–64. 815 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport. 2015.04.012 816 Lupo, C., Mosso, C. O., Guidotti, F., Cugliari, G., Pizzigalli, L., & Rainoldi, A. (2017). Motivation 817 toward dual career of Italian student-athletes enrolled in different university paths. Sport 818 Sciences for Health 13, 485–494. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11332-016-0327-4 819 McGannon, K. R., Smith, B., Kendellen, K., & Gonsalves, C. A. (2019). Qualitative research in six 820 sport and exercise psychology journals between 2010 and 2017: An updated and expanded 821 review of trends and interpretations. International Journal of Sport and Exercise 822 Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2019.1655779 823 Miles, M., Huberman, A. and Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis. A methods sourcebook 824 (3 rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 825 Morris, R., Cartigny, E., Ryba, T., Wylleman, P., Henriksen, K., Torregrossa, M., Lindahl, K., & 826 Cecić Erpič, S. (2020): A taxonomy of dual career development environments in European 827 countries, European Sport Management Quarterly. 828 https://doi.org/10.1080/16184742.2020.1725778 829 Nikander, A., Ronkainen, N., Korhonen, N., Saarinen, M., & Ryba, T. (accepted, 2020). From 830 athletic talent development to dual career development? A case study in a Finnish high 831 performance sports environment. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology. 832 Pink, M., Lonie, B. E., & Saunders, J. E. (2018). The challenges of the semi-professional footballer: 833 A case study of the management of dual career development at a Victorian Football 834 Journal Pre-proof The holistic structure of European DCDEs Belgium Denmark Finland UK Slovenia Spain Sweden Dedicated DC support team Representatives from the elite sport school, sports federation and boarding school constitute the dedicated DC support team. An open and accessible team of three university people with specified roles and responsibilities is the point of entry. No specific DC support team. Two student counsellors provide support in course related matters at school. A well-coordinated DC support team with specified roles communicates with sport and academic stakeholders. A DC support team situated in the school system provides DC support mainly for the educational aspirations. No specific DC support team, but coaches, sport psychologists, teachers, the school’s sports coordinator provide support. A coordinated team of DC support providers and coaches had clear roles, and coaches were often first point of entry. Integration of efforts across the whole environment The structure is the key connector between the three domains, and student-athletes use sport and school friends for emotional support. A relationship between the student athletes and DC team connected sport and study, and microand macro systems were integrated. Poor communi-cation between school and sport, coaches and family were a barrier. The Olympic Committee provided support for coach and DC education. On-going and largely informal and ‘persondependant’ communication between DC team, sport and study ensured coherent support. A club and school that work as separate organisations with little or no integrated efforts was considered a barrier. Families provide practical support, and the school domain adapted to the sport domain to compensate for a lack of integration and coordination. The DC support team integrated efforts of sport and study staff. At the macro-level, university, local authorities, and regional and local sports collaborated A clear understanding of DC issues and support from across the environment Shared understanding of the mission to develop gymnasts with focus on graduation and wellbeing. Strong family support. Coaches were supportive and allowed flexibility. Study peers provided practical and emotional support. The whole system acknowledged the importance of DC. Academic staff considers prioritising sport as a barrier to education. Coaches support professionalisation of athletic career. Promoted by the DC support team, the importance of DC is mostly supported. Some stakeholders did not see a reason to accommodate DC athletes. A lack of shared understanding and a main focus on education were compensated for by coaches being flexible, and by sport peers being supportive. Coaches’ being insensitive to the athletes’ academic commitments were in contrast to parents’ emphasis on education. A shared understanding of athletes’ needs and challenges was visible in how coaches and teachers acknowledged DC dedication, and in peer support. Role models and mentorship No formal structures, but pedagogues were mentors and supported a balanced life. Experienced DC athletes were role models in a virtual community based on stories. Olympic athletes are present, but their potential role as mentors is not fully utilized. Mentorships include a buddy system, a tight-knit community, and active alumni. No formalized mentorships, but peer student-athletes were helpful informal mentors. Successful studentathletes were acknowledged, and coaches were role models. Informal mentorship between studentathletes at the training centre. Access to expert support Multidisciplinary meetings to follow up on injuries and training schedules, and daily access to physiotherapists. The DC support team referred athletes to clubs, federations, and Team Denmark for expert support. Access to some experts within the support system in the environment is based on athlete status. Lifestyle, sport science, sport psychology and physiotherapy services are inside the DCDE. The school provides support related to education, and the clubs provide physiotherapy and sport psychology. Clubs provide sport psychology, medical services, and physiotherapy, and school offers clinical psychology. A performance team organized by the DCDE provided sport psychology, medicine, nutrition and physiotherapy. Journal Pre-proof Table 4 Characteristics of the Environments under Study: Shared DC Philosophy Journal Pre-proof Shared DC philosophy of European DCDEs Belgium Denmark Finland UK Slovenia Spain Sweden A whole person approach All stakeholders took an interest in the other domains, and the boarding school was a main driver of the whole person approach. A clear aim was to teach the athletes to prioritize and plan, and to help them develop social skills. Student-athletes were mainly seen as athletes, and time spent on studies was seen as a barrier for sport development. DC support team took an interest in all domains, and aimed to develop competences for long-term success in sport and job. Student-athletes were seen as more than students and athletes, but there was a lack of support for this challenge. The sports domain stimulated multiple roles (friend, student, partner) but a lack of communication was challenging. Student-athletes seen as whole persons with individual needs and interests and learned to switch between domains. An empowerment approach Promotes the development of competencies such as autonomy, selfdiscipline, planning, and resilience. A shift from proactive to reactive support stimulated growth in autonomy. Direct instructions from coaches were a barrier to empowerment. Student-athletes were encouraged to take their own path in both sport and vocational careers. Student-athletes were co-creators of a good environment and expected to act as grown-ups. Athletes learnt timemanagement and emotionregulation skills. Support was provided in ways that empowered athletes to be in command of their own development. Flexible DC solutions Modular study systems, online courses, teachers tutoring during lunch breaks, and coaches shortening practice sessions in examperiods. Flexible solutions were formalized through an individual study plan, that could be changed along the way. Student-athletes’ curriculum differed from that of regular students, and there was possibility for night school and for prolonging the education. An aim to provide individual solutions was visible when services and support were adapted to the athletes’ needs. Student-athletes were allowed to spend PE classes in the club, and the school offered additional teaching. Flexibility was mainly seen from the study domain, where teachers supported athletes with planning exams and homework. Athletes received help to move exams, take exams elsewhere, or reduce study pace. Training facilities were accessible 8-10 hours per day. Care of DC athlete’s mental health and wellbeing Some athletes struggled with homesickness, but everyone had easy access to sport psychology support and pedagogues. A well-balanced DC and free access to health care was seen as protective factors. Socially responsible sport was obliged by law. Lack of specific mental health care was compensated through free access to national health care and life-skills classes. The lifestyle and sport psychology practitioners managed mental health and wellbeing issues. The pedagogical coordinator was a psychologist and provided mental health literacy. Clinical issues were referred. A clinical and a sport psychologist were responsible for athletes’ mental health. The DCDE mission was healthy performance in the long run, which stimulated to help athletes achieve balance. An open and proactive approach to the development of the environment. Improvement through on-going evaluation of services and taking part in research. Development through inspiration visits, sharing perspectives, ongoing evaluation and taking part in research. Satisfaction questionnaires and coaches engaging with sport science research. Teachers lack development opportunities. Openness to feedback, formal evaluation at the end of each academic year, and engagement sport science research. No time spend on developing the environment. No resources spend on develop the environment, but the present project stimulated a new focus and additional resources. Dialogue about improvement stimulated engagement in national networks and visits from other DCDEs. Journal Pre-proof Highlights • Seven European dual career environments (DCDEs) employed similar principles in their work. • Holistic structure and shared dual career philosophy were essential features of the DCDEs. • DCDEs recognized their responsibility for student-athlete wellbeing. • Focus group discussions facilitated a context sensitive international cross case analysis. • Ten success features can serve as an inspiration for evaluating and optimizing environments. Journal Pre-proof Declaration of interests ☒ The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. ☐The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Journal Pre-proof