The interpretation of the evolutionary theory prevailing in sport, based on the approach that the strongest survive, varies with the rules inherent in the criminal world, forbidding to “take out” negative information about interrelationships, in this case, outside the team or group. Such traditionally established culture puts pressure on athletes to suffer from bullying and follow the “silence law”. In the long run, this turns into a precondition for unsafe environment for athletes, which, due to negative consequences for the individual, can be identified as threats to social sustainability at the individual level. Such a situation is also indirectly approved by the heads and coaches of organizations. The latter, who lack competencies to resolve conflict situations, are left to solve arising problems on their own and do not receive any support from the management of organizations. Therefore, the aim of this research is to reveal the factors determining the specificity, emergence, and development of bullying and harassment in sport as threats to social sustainability at the individual level. The research was conducted using a semi-structured interview method with eight coaches representing team, individual, and duel sport branches. Inductive content analysis served as the basis for the data analysis. Research results disclosed factors determining the specificity of emergence of bullying and harassment in sport and hindering the entrenchment of social sustainability in sport at the individual level. The results revealed the euphemisms distinguished by coaches, which, in sport, have a positive connotation, such as “combativeness” and “sports anger” instead of the term “aggression”. It was identified that coaches named aggressors as “harder players”, “confident players”, “active persons”, “players-torpedoes”, “emotional players”, and “competitive players”. Sports competition is justified in various forms. The emergence of bullying and harassment is grounded on “mastery differences”, it is stated that abusive actions are experienced by “physically weak” players, while physical actions used by athletes are called “mischief”; verbal actions are “raillery”. In addition, inadequate preparation of Lithuanian coaches to respond to bullying and harassment in their trained teams or groups on time and appropriately was identified. It turned out that sports organizations are not particularly interested in organizing trainings for prevention of destructive interrelations and intervention. Such kind of in-service training is left to the coach’s initiative.

In recent years, the problem of bullying, existing in sport and arising in athletes’ relationships, is increasingly emphasized. The aim of this research was to reveal the specificity of bullying in athletes’ interrelationships by elaborating on causes of its emergence, nature of actions, and its consequences. To achieve the research aim, a qualitative research paradigm was chosen. The theoretical part of the research was prepared by applying the methods of scientific literature analysis and analogy. The empirical study involved seven organized sports athletes representing individual, duel, and team sports branches, belonging to the young adult age category. The survey was conducted using the semi-structured interview method. Data were analyzed employing the conceptual content analysis. Emic and etic perspectives were used for data processing. Research results revealed that the specificity of manifestation of bullying in sport unfolded through three generalized categories: intolerable perception of behavior, nature of bullying, and bipolarity of consequences. Every category was detailed by sub-categories, highlighting the nature, causes, and consequences of bullying accepted by athletes in the contexts of their emotional state and career. We found that the factors falling into these categories were interrelated and supplemented each other; therefore, they should be analyzed in a complex way, as bullying is determined not by some single factor but by the totality of them, functioning as a kind of well-established flawed tradition supported by the cultures of the sports organization and the sport.

Primary care physicians (PCPs) should be active and reliable promoters of physical activity (PA), but there is no strong evidence that their knowledge and personal habits contribute to this. The aim of this study was to evaluate the frequency of PA recommendations provided by PCPs to patients in terms of their self-assessed PA knowledge and personal habits. This study used a cross-sectional design and data were collected through a self-reported online questionnaire. The study sample consisted of 202 PCPs from a large Lithuanian city, Kaunas, of which 122 were females (60.4%) and 80 were males (39.6%). The data were analyzed using SPSS version 29 (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) for Windows. The findings show that the frequency of recommendations related to providing PA to patients is statistically significantly dependent on PCP health-friendly or partially favorable PA habits, their self-assessed level of knowledge about physical activity, and their self-assessed competence related to providing PA recommendations to patients, but this is not statistically dependent on objectively assessed level of knowledge related to PA.

Introduction: Personal physical activity is recognized as an effective tool for the prevention and management of chronic diseases, where primary care professionals become important figures. The aim of this study was to reveal the opinions of physicians about the expression of barriers related to physical activity consultations for patients with chronic diseases, considering their own healthy exercise habits and the knowledge they have acquired during their studies and currently have about physical activity and its benefits in chronic diseases. Methods: A quantitative research strategy with cross-sectional design was used for study. The survey tool was designed to collect sociodemographic data, as well as data on primary care physicians’ self-reported barriers to providing physical activity (PA) – related recommendations to patients, their healthy exercise habits, and their knowledge of the effects of physical activity in managing chronic diseases. Results: The majority of the respondents (44.1%) have average healthy exercise habits, stated that they had received such knowledge only partially at university (98%–48.5%) or not at all (43%–21.3%) and now they have partially sufficient knowledge (109%–54.0%). The main obstacles preventing patients from providing recommendations about PA, according to the respondents, are lack of time at work (3.4 ± 0.817) and the patients themselves prefer pharmacological treatment (3.31 ± 0.790). Further analysis revealed that physicians’ healthy exercise habits and knowledge are significantly related to their opinion about the expression of barriers. Conclusion: Based on the results of the study, it can be concluded that the adequacy of physicians’ knowledge about the benefits of physical activity for patients with chronic diseases and their own healthy lifestyle habits have a significant impact on the expression of perceived barriers when counseling patients on PA issues. These data emphasize the need to improve medical curricula and professional development, strengthening physicians’ knowledge and skills in the field of PA, as well as promoting their own healthy lifestyle practices as an important factor for the successful integration of PA recommendations into primary health care.

The transition toward a digital, circular, and human-centric (Industry 5.0) economy is as much a financial and economic transformation as a technological one. Firms that build the innovation capacity to redesign how they create and capture value depend on managers and investors who allocate scarce capital under uncertainty. Yet, whether the financial support that employees perceive actually accompanies innovative behavior, or whether the human and organizational conditions surrounding it matter more, remains underexamined at the firm level, particularly in service industries. This study examines how employees’ perceptions of their organization’s financial capability and willingness to support innovation relate to innovative work behavior (IWB) and how those perceptions operate alongside perceived organizational climate (OC), using the sports economy—a large and innovation-dependent service sector—as a test case. A quantitative cross-sectional survey was conducted among 181 coaches employed in for-profit sports organizations in Lithuania. Data were analyzed using correlation and hierarchical multiple regression with demographic controls, a test of the climate–finance interaction, and diagnostic checks for common-method bias and multicollinearity. OC was positively associated with both IWB and perceived financial support for innovation. Perceived financial capability and willingness correlated with IWB at the bivariate level but added no significant variance once OC and the controls entered the model (ΔR² = 0.013, p = 0.230). The climate–finance interaction was likewise non-significant. OC remained the strongest correlate, accounting on its own for approximately 24% of the variance in IWB and for an additional 19 percentage points beyond the demographic controls. Because all measures were self-reported at a single point in time, these results are interpreted as associations rather than causal effects, and the pattern is consistent with—though does not establish—an interpretation in which perceived financial support accompanies innovative behavior only where the organizational climate already supports it. The study contributes to research on innovative work behavior, human resource management, and the human-centric premise of Industry 5.0, suggesting to managers and funders that innovation budgets are unlikely to translate into innovative behavior unless paired with motivation, learning opportunities, leadership support, and psychological safety.