Download 1.5.3 Sports sponsorship relationship

UNIVERSITE CATHOLIQUE DE LOUVAIN
LOUVAIN SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT
and
VYTAUTAS MAGNUS UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF ECONOMICS AND
MANAGEMENT
THE EFFECT OF SPORTS SPONSORSHIP
RELATIONSHIP
Supervisor at LSM: Prof. Thierry Zintz
Supervisor at VMU: Assoc. Prof. Nina Klebanskaja
Research Master’s Thesis
Submitted by Laura Zemaityte
With a view of getting the degrees
Master in Marketing
Master in Management
ACADEMIC YEAR 2012-2013
FOREWORD
This thesis is written for Double Degree Master‘s studies of Universite catholique de
Louvain, Louvain School of Management, Belgium and Vytautas Magnus University, Faculty of
Economics and Management, Lithuania. The research is conducted with a goal to perceive
relationship marketing application to sports sponsorship relationship.
I would like to thank my supervisors Prof. Thierry Zintz for a great collaboration, finding a
clear focus and organisation of the research, and for Assoc. Prof. Nina Klebanskaja for
understanding and guidance in writing the thesis. Also I would like to thank Mr. Denis Van Damme
for being my interviewee and sharing his experience, without it my thesis would not have happened.
I would like to express my gratitude to Prof. Valdone Darskuviene and Prof. Pierre Semal for
ensuring all the procedures for compliance between both universities.
Thanks for my family for providing the opportunity to study and my destiny friends for
sharing this experience together.
CONTENTS
Abstract ................................................................................................................................................ 4
Santrauka ............................................................................................................................................. 5
THE MAIN CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS OF THE PAPER .................................................... 6
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 9
I. THEORETICAL ANALYSIS OF RELATIONSHIP MARKETING ........................................... 11
1.1 Concept of relationship marketing .............................................................................................. 11
1.2 Network orientation of relationship marketing ........................................................................... 16
1.3 Sports marketing .......................................................................................................................... 24
1.4 Relationship marketing in sports ................................................................................................. 26
1.5 Relationship marketing in sports sponsorship relationship ......................................................... 28
1.5.1 Sponsorship relationship .......................................................................................................... 29
1.5.2 Sports sponsorship .................................................................................................................... 30
1.5.3 Sports sponsorship relationship ................................................................................................ 32
1.5.4 Elements of successful sports sponsorship relationship in a co-marketing alliance ................ 33
1.5.5 Effect of brand image from sports sponsorship relationship .................................................... 35
II. THE ANALYSIS OF SPORTS SPONSORSHIP RELATIONSHIP ........................................... 41
2.1 Research methodology ................................................................................................................ 41
2.2 Research results ........................................................................................................................... 45
2.2.1 RBHA case study results .......................................................................................................... 45
2.2.2 Online survey results ................................................................................................................ 53
2.3 Discussion of the results .............................................................................................................. 56
III. PROJECT DECISIONS FOR SUCCESSFUL SPORTS SPONSORSHIP RELATIONSHIP ... 59
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMENDATIONS ............................................................................... 76
REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................. 80
APPENDIXES ................................................................................................................................... 84
3
Abstract
Author of diploma paper:
Laura Zemaityte
Full title of diploma paper:
The effect of sports sponsorship relationship
Diploma paper advisors:
Prof. Thierry Zintz and Assoc. Prof. Nina Klebanskaja
Presented at:
Universite catholique de Louvain, Louvain School of
Management and Vytautas Magnus University, Faculty
of Economics and Management, 2013
Number of pages:
83
Number of tables:
2
Number of figures:
14
Number of appendixes:
5
The aim of the diploma paper
To propose a network model for successful sports sponsorship
relationship.
Short content of
The first theoretical part of thesis presents the literature review of relationship
the main parts of marketing where the concept and network orientation of relationship
the paper
marketing, sports marketing, relationship marketing in sports and in sports
sponsorship relationship are analyzed.
Semi-structured face-to-face interview for the single case study and online
survey with self-administered questionnaire have been conducted to collect
qualitative and quantitative primary data. In the second part of the paper
research results are presented and analyzed.
In the third part of the work project decisions for successful sports sponsorship
relationship are presented. To create relevant platform for sponsors for
successful sports sponsorship relationship building and maintenance sports
organisations must perceive the differences of sports marketing and choose
network-based RM perspective, prepare organisation for RM application, set
up sports organisation itself as the centre of the network, take care of external
communication and prepare network platform for sponsors, classify sponsors
based on return on investments, take into consideration relationship evolution
plan, properly perceive sponsorship relationship and implement non-economic
elements inseparable from relationships.
4
Santrauka
Baigiamojo darbo autorius:
Laura Žemaitytė
Pilnas baigiamojo darbo pavadinimas:
Sporto rėmimo santykių nauda
Baigiamojo darbo vadovai:
Prof. Thierry Zintz ir Doc. dr. Nina Klebanskaja
Baigiamojo darbo atlikimo vieta ir
Liuveno Katalikiškasis universitetas, Liuveno Verslo
metai:
mokykla ir Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas, Ekonomikos
ir vadybos fakultetas, 2013
Puslapių skaičius:
83
Lentelių skaičius:
2
Paveikslų skaičius:
14
Priedų skaičius:
5
Baigiamojo darbo tikslas
Pasiūlyti tinklo modelį sėkmingiems sporto rėmimo santykiams.
Pagrindinių
Teorinėje darbo dalyje atliekama literatūros analizė, kurioje analizuojamas
darbo dalių
santykių marketingas, jo samprata, santykių marketingo tinklo orientacija,
trumpas turinys
sporto marketingas, santykių marketingas sporte ir sporto rėmimo santykiuose.
Atliktas vieno atvejo tyrimas pusiau struktūrizuoto akis į akį interviu pagalba
ir struktūzizuota internetinė apklausa kokybininiams ir kiekybiniams
pirmininiams duomenims surinkti. Antroje darbo dalyje pateikiami ir
analizuojami tyrimo rezultatai.
Trečioje darbo dalyje pateikiami projektiniai sprendimai siekiant įgyvendinti
sėkmingus sporto rėmimo santykius. Norint sukurti tinkamą platformą
rėmėjams siekiant sėkmingų rėmimo santykių kūrimo ir palaikymo, sporto
organizacijos turi suvokti sporto marketingo skirtingumą ir pasirinkti tinklu
grįstą santykių marketingo perspektyvą, paruošti organizaciją santykių
marketingo taikymui, statyti pačią sporto organizacija kaip tinklo centrą,
pasirūpinti tinkama išorine komunikacija ir parengti rėmėjams tinklo
platformą sėkmingam ryšių užmezgimui, klasifikuoti rėmėjus remiantis
investicijų grąža, atsižvelgti į santykių raidos planą, tinkamai suvokti rėmimo
santykių koncepciją ir įgyvendinti ne ekonominius elementus, kurie yra
neatsiejami nuo rėmimo santykių.
5
THE MAIN CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS OF THE PAPER
Commitment - a short-term investment for the long-term benefits of the relationships in a comarketing alliance or in a network.
Communication - an internal and an external two-way communication and the most related factor
to interaction which ensures bilateral value creation in a network.
Customer markets - one of the elements of network relationships and a central element of the six
markets model including two types of customers - customers (intermediaries, distributors or
retailers) and consumers (end purchasers, users and consumers).
Customer orientation/empathy - one of the elements of successful relationships in a network
where the higher degree of it enhances the possibility of the long-term relationships with customers.
Customer oriented RM - long-term relationship building and maintenance with customers through
high knowledge and understanding about them, competitors and organisation itself in order to apply
personalized marketing and gain sustainable competitive advantage.
Customer-centred network perspective of RM - customer perceived as a centre in the network,
because it illustrates the purpose of relationship marketing where customer value, satisfaction and
loyalty are created and leads to improved profitability in the longer term (Peck et al., 2004).
Evolution of relationships - relationship development through 4 stages (start, development,
established and decline) between sports organisation and its stakeholders.
Experience - one of the elements of successful relationships in a network and an important factor
having the impact on customers’ satisfaction which has the effect for further relationship building
with them.
Firm-centred network perspective of RM - focal firm perceived as a centre of the network
because of its role as an integrator and facilitator of relationship development with other
stakeholders in the network.
Influence markets - one of the elements of network relationships in the six markets model which
do not have the direct added value to the products or services, but the representatives from these
markets (such as shareholders, financial analysts, stockbrokers, media, user groups, unions,
investors, government and others) can have negative or positive impact on the organization’s
activities.
Interaction marketing indicates dyadic buyer–seller interactions with the influence of atmosphere,
power/dependence, trust, mutual goals, commitment, satisfaction, adaptation where interactions
occur at a firm and an individual level (Sin et al., 2005).
6
Internal markets - one of the elements of network relationships in the six markets model where a
company seeks employees to work in a way agreed with its mission, strategy and goals and also
manage them as suppliers and customers within the company.
Market-oriented RM in sports - relationship building between sports organisation and its
stakeholders where CRM (customer relationship management) is applied for loyalty building to
business-to-business commercial and non-commercial relationships.
Network marketing - complex relationship creation with customers, distributors, suppliers,
producers, competitors and other organizations in order to serve clients better and receive common
benefits in a network with integration of such elements like collaboration, trust, power and choice.
Network-oriented RM in sports is a network relationship building between sports organisation
and its different stakeholders to achieve the same objectives and value.
Recruitment markets - one of the elements of network relationships in the six markets model
including colleges, universities, recruitment agencies, executive search consultants and others from
whivh a company seeks to attract the valuable employees providing certain skills and experiences
and matching the companies profile in order to represent it to the customers and provide them
higher service value.
Referral markets - one of the elements of network relationships in the six markets model
consisting of customer and non-customer referral sources which make recommendations to the
potential customers about the organization.
Relational marketing - includes four types of marketing - database marketing, e-marketing,
interaction marketing and network marketing and is long-term buyer–seller relationships which
create value to the parties involved and focuse on customer attraction, their retention and loyalty.
Relationship marketing - “marketing based on relationships, networks and interaction, recognizing
that marketing is embedded in the total management of the networks of the selling organization, the
market and society” (Gummesson, 2002).
Satisfaction - one of the main elements of successful relationships in a co-marketing alliance and in
a network which consists of economic (outcomes from the relationship with its partners) and noneconomic (positive emotional response to psychosocial aspect of the relationships) satisfaction.
Self-congruity - a match between self-concept (actual self, ideal self, etc.) of customers and the
image of a product, store, sponsorship event and etc. (Sirgy et al., 2008).
Sponsor - a company supporting sports team, event, athlete, sports facility or others in order to
increase brand awareness through associations between sponsoring entity and sponsor’s brand.
7
Sponsorship relationship - a long-term bilateral perspective of relationships between two parties
in a co-marketing alliance where partners bare marketed together as a system providing competitive
advantages through longer term associations and are seen as a strategic value and this system should
consist of commitment, trust and economic and non-economic satisfaction.
Sports consumer - a fan, enthusiast, spectator of particular sports.
Sports marketing - “building a highly identified fan base such that fans, sponsors, media, and
government pay to promote and support the organization for the benefits of social exchange and
personal, group, and community identity within a cooperative competitive environment”
(Wakefield, 2007).
Sports organization - an organization of particular sports including athletes or sports team,
administrative, management and other individuals working in it and seeking common objective and
good results.
Sports product - a three-dimensional item consisting of material goods (licensed cloths, sports
equipment, etc.), intangible supporting services during a sports event (game referees, staff,
departments, etc.) and a game or sports event (consisting of a game itself and supporting during the
event such as talisman, music, contests and etc.) (Schwarz et al., 2008).
Sports sponsorship - any acquired rights of a company to be associated with sports products and
sports events in order to benefit from this association.
Stakeholders oriented RM - long-term internal relationship within organization and external
relationship with customers, suppliers, distributors, public institutions and other stakeholders
creating strategic alliances, partnerships and strategic networks where the parties are exchanging of
value.
Supplier and alliance markets - one of the elements of network relationships in the six markets
model where a company manages relationships with suppliers from competition to collaboration
perspective.
Transactional marketing - short-term transaction-oriented marketing focus on individual
transactions in order to attract more customers.
Trust - one of the main elements of successful relationships in a co-marketing alliance and in a
network and is the cornerstone of the strategic partnership encouraging parties to work in a longterm perspective in order to receive benefits.
8
INTRODUCTION
There is a broad range of definitions of relationship marketing as it attracts much attention
from academics and practitioners and is applicable in different industries. Not exception is sports.
Relationship marketing is assessed differently among academics and its various perspectives on one
hand might be widely applicable, but on the other hand contributes to the confusion which
perspective is the most suitable to the relevant situation. This influences uncertainty about the
effects relationship marketing can bring (Bonnemaizon, et al., 2007). Therefore, it also has the
impact on relationship marketing application to the sports context. Sports itself is different from
other industries and has respective exceptional attributes which brings advantages, but also more
complicated relationship marketing implementation. Consequently, two marketing types - sports
and relationship converge. For sports organisations relationship marketing strategy is very
important, because it has two types of customers - one financing and other paying. Sports
organisations, basically, apply relationship marketing, because it fits better the situation and the
goals of sports organisations than transactional marketing (Ferrand et al., 2009), but sports
organisations have short-termism in seeking to attract finances and for relationship building with
both customers bilateral long-term perspective is needed (Baron et al., 2010). One of the customers
of sports organisation providing finances can possibly be the sponsors and short-termism with them
is also improper. In this case relationship concept should appear. Even sports sponsorship is widely
used marketing communication tool as it helps to create great brand awareness, potential value can
be created only from long-term relationships. To understand completely the value of sports
sponsorship can take years regarding improved consumers’ attitude about sponsor’s brand,
therefore, sponsorship relationships should be perceived as strategic business building initiative.
As relationship marketing is perceived from different perspectives, its application to sports
sponsorship relationship is also complex. Two parties are involved in sponsorship relationships
perceived as partners where this partnership establishes challenges for both parties in relationship
building and maintenance. Moreover, sports organisations have many sponsors to build
relationships with what makes it more challenging. There are many researches done considering
sponsorship relationship from sponsor’s perspective, but lack of researches considering it from
sports organisation’s perspective reflecting how relationship marketing contributes to the effect of
sports sponsorship relationship.
9
Therefore, the problem of this paper is how sports organisations should create the
relevant platform for sponsors for successful sports sponsorship relationship building and
maintenance.
Object of the research - sports sponsorship relationship.
Aim of the paper - to propose a network model for successful sports sponsorship
relationship.
Tasks of the paper:

to conduct theoretical analysis of relationship marketing;

to conduct analysis of sports sponsorship relationship;

to conduct project decisions of sports sponsorship relationship.
Logic of the paper (consistency): the first part of the work presents the literature review
of relationship marketing where the concept and network orientation of relationship marketing,
sports marketing, relationship marketing in sports and in sports sponsorship relationship are
analyzed. The second part of the work presents applicable research value, research object and
objective, research methodology, the results of the case study and the online survey. In the third part
of the work project decisions of sports sponsorship relationship are presented.
Research methods: a literature review is conducted on the basis of scientific articles,
books, using online databases; descriptive research and mixed-method research for qualitative and
quantitative primary data collection is conducted, qualitative data is collected using the single case
study with a help of non-standardised semi-structured face-to-face interview, quantitative data is
collected using online survey and self-administered questionnaire.
10
I. THEORETICAL ANALYSIS OF RELATIONSHIP MARKETING
In this part of the work literature are reviewed to analyze the key issues concerning
relationship marketing. It shows how relationship marketing is assessed among the academics and
how it is related to sponsorship relationship. Thus, the analysis helps to proceed to sports
sponsorship relationship and ascertain relationship marketing applicability to it.
1.1 Concept of relationship marketing
Development of relationship marketing
Relationship marketing (later in the text RM) is widely discussed in marketing literature
and increased attention from academics and practitioners makes RM mostly discussed domain in
many articles and special journal issues. Therefore, increased interest in RM builds up new opinions
how relationship marketing should be defined. This leads to a broad range of definitions of
relationship marketing. According to S.Baron et al. (2010) relationship marketing is often seen as a
new type of marketing (Baron et al., 2010). Other authors (Tadajewski et al., 2008; Tadajewski,
2008; Gummesson, 1999; Palmatier, 2008) argue that RM is not a new idea and it existed long time
ago and is just a new way of thinking (Plewa et al., 2005; Wang, 2007; Egan, 2003; Christopher et
al., 2008).
In 1950s and 1960s because deregulation and technological change had the impact on the
international trade and as a result it was rippled, classical models of marketing were often adopted.
The marketing concept was simplified and popularized into 4 Ps and increasing consumer demand
for standardized goods (Lindgreen et al., 2004) led to manipulative approach to consumer, where
relationships between companies and consumers were kept as transactions (Peck et al., 2004). But
this concept was not proper for industrial and services contexts were relationships with clients were
particularly important. According to S.Baron et al. (2010), “trading through strong relationships
occurred years ago when owners of small businesses knew and understood the needs of their
customers.” When the size of the companies grew over the years, it was hard to retain such
relationships with customers, but new technologies and modern data bases made it possible again.
According to M.Tadajewski (2008), markets are matured and customer can easily choose which
products and services to buy. Therefore, organizations perceived the need to create and maintain
relationships again with its clients, suppliers and other stakeholders. Business has changed its
orientation from production to selling, then to marketing and at last to relationship marketing
orientation (Sin et al., 2005).
11
It might be confusing to understand which RM definition to adopt, but the authors give different
definitions, because of two different approaches predominant in the literature. According to some
authors (Maxim, 2009; Egan, 2003; Christopher et al., 2008; Gronroos, 2002), the approach of
relationship marketing in the literature differs because of different regions of academics i.e., NorthAmerican and the Nordic and Anglo-Australian schools representatives where RM definitions are
given from narrower, end-user customers oriented, to broader approach where all relationships that
appear in the business context are between companies and not only customers, but also other
stakeholders. Both views will be discussed.
Narrower, customer oriented, view of RM
According to H.Peck et al. (2004), such environmental factors as technological advances
and markets’ deregulation causing increasing global competition have changed and now time-based
competition and channel power are the factors changing dynamics of the market. Customers can
easily select products from global marketplace to satisfy their demanding needs, therefore, it is
turning to a buyers’ market (Peck et al., 2004). Consequently, it is important to develop close
relationships with customers, because it leads to sustainable competitive advantage. It is much more
expensive to attract new than retain existing customers (Tadajewski, 2008). Earlier supplying
companies were only interested in selling the products to the customers and then seeking new ones.
But nowadays the view has changes and suppliers desire not only to sell the product to the
consumer, but also develop and maintain established relationship with him (Baron et al., 2010).
Therefore, the high knowledge and understanding about the customers, competitors and even its
own internal organisation are needed in order to apply personalized marketing that these long term
relationships with customer could “offer a unique and sustainable competitive advantage” (Baron et
al., 2010). Even though, the company has to make the dialogue and be creative in order to build and
maintain long-term relationships with its customers.
Broader, stakeholders oriented, view of RM
Traditional marketing models are not relevant for industrial and services context where the
highest importance is paid to relationships with customers and even in consumer markets it is not
relevant anymore (Peck et al., 2004). In the first stages of relationship marketing there was a focus
on long-term profitable relationships between organisation and its customers. Later broadened
concept added the importance of internal relationship management which was the basis of
successful external relationships - “customer satisfaction and loyalty are built through the creation
12
of superior value for the customer, and that value is created throughout the organization and
beyond” (Peck et al., 2004). Relationship marketing should include relationships with other parties
such as suppliers, distributors and public institutions. Relationship marketing is more and more seen
between academics as broader perspective, not only just customer–supplier dyad.
A.Bonnemaizon et al. (2007) state the broadest definition of relationship marketing has
become the most relevant in marketing two decades ago and it includes the focus on relationships
between business and its customers and different stakeholders. S.Baron et al. (2010) also indicate
that relationship marketing is often seen more than buyer–seller relationship, but also includes
suppliers and other partners and often is involved in strategic alliances, partnerships and strategic
networks where the parties are exchanging of value. According to E.Eiriz and D.Wilson (2006), RM
involves internal relationships within organization and relationships between the organizations, but
also RM includes relationships between organizations and individuals. J.Egan (2003) analyzing the
definitions of RM made the conclusion that customer relationship management is important part of
RM, but only one part of it, because other stakeholders must be included in order to develop
customer-supplier relationship.
Managerial challenges of market-based (customer oriented) and network-based (stakeholders
oriented) RM
K.Moller and A.Halinen (2000) discuss two types of relationships of RM - customer
oriented (market based) and inter-organizational (network based) and show what managerial
challenges occur when adapting corresponding type. Market-based relationship marketing is
treating large number of customers individually in a profitable way and network-based RM is
management of interdependencies between different entities in a business (Moller et al., 2000). In
network-based RM there are also interactions with external partners, more individually handled
customers and other stakeholders. Market-based RM should not be identified with traditional
marketing management, because RM focuses on customer relationships and traditional marketing
on transactions. But S.Baron et al. (2010) argue that in order to reach success not only building and
maintaining relationships with customers, but also with other stakeholders should be deliberated. In
contrast, K.Moller and A.Halinen (2000) state the companies rarely adopt only one of these two
types of RM, more commonly they are having the aspects from both perspectives. Table 1 implies
all managerial challenges for both types of relationship marketing.
13
Table 1
Managerial challenges of two types of relationships of RM
Note: Adapted from K.Moller and A.Halinen (2000).
Transactional marketing vs. relational marketing
In marketing literature relationship marketing is often compared with transactional
marketing (Tadajewski, 2008; Baron et al., 2010; Gummesson, 2006). Transactional marketing
focuses on individual transactions, “the one-shot deal” (Gummesson, 2006), in order to attract more
customers where relationship marketing focuses on maintaining long-term relationships with
customers and their retention - foster customers’ loyalty. M.Tadajewski (2008) comparing
transactional marketing and RM also indicates transactional marketing being focused on customers’
attraction rather than their retention. But according to L.Y.M.Sin et al. (2005), short-term
transaction-oriented approach should be replaced by long-term relationship perspective.
Relationship marketing is opposite to the transactional marketing as it is long-term
relationships between customers and suppliers and creates value to the parties involved and focuses
on customer attraction and knowing them better (Maxim, 2009). According to A.Maxim (2009),
relational RM consists of four types of marketing - database marketing, e-marketing, interaction
marketing and network marketing. These five marketing types (including transactional marketing)
might be used in different organizations depending on its strategies. All the types of relational
marketing will be briefly discussed, but the focus will be more on network marketing.
14
Database marketing
In database marketing, according to A.Maxim (2009), clients are identified and as an
example can be personalized SMS sent to the clients. Here database marketing and transactional
marketing have the same feature - it is marketing towards the customer, but not with the customer.
E-marketing
E-marketing creates a dialogue between the company and the client through such
technologies as email, Internet discussion groups, call-centre, telephone, fax and etc. (Maxim,
2009).
Interaction marketing
According to S.Baron et al. (2010), interaction marketing approach is the predecessor of
relationship marketing. Interaction approach focuses on supplier and purchaser interactions, but
relationship marketing sees buyer and seller in maintenance of long-term relationship then only
buying and selling. Interaction marketing indicates dyadic buyer–seller interactions with the
influence of atmosphere, power/dependence, trust, mutual goals, commitment, satisfaction,
adaptation where interactions occur at firm and individual levels (Sin et al., 2005). A.Maxim (2009)
indicates interaction marketing as closer, personalized relationships between firm and its clients.
These interactions are face-to-face connected to business issues.
Network marketing
Network approach extends dyadic relationships to a wider range of relationships created
with customers, distributors, suppliers, producers, competitors and other organizations (Sin et al.,
2005; Maxim, 2009) which help to serve clients better and receive common benefits (Maxim,
2009). It is more complex than dyadic relationships and integrates in a network such elements like
collaboration, trust, power and choice (Webster et al., 2004). According to E.Gummesson (2006),
relationship marketing itself is based on interactions in the networks of relationships.
Previous definitions of RM were focused on supplier-customer dyad relationships, where
customers were the centre of these relationships and the focus was not only to obtain, but also retain
them. Later the RM definitions adopted wider approach, where relationships were seen not only as
dyadic, but more as networks and interactions. Relationship marketing expanded from two-way
dialogue between supplier and customer to the development of other relationships of a company
(Egan, 2003). CRM (customer relationship management) and one-to-one are applied to customer15
supplier interactions, but not applicable to networks and networks can grow into vey complex
structures requiring active contacts between the parties of the networks (Gummesson, 2006;
Gummesson, 2002). For many, development of network relationships within and outside the
company is the core marketing and such marketing tools as advertising, public relations, image
building and others are mainly supportive, but not the main tools (Gummesson, 2006).
Network approach of relationship marketing can also be illustrated by C.Gronroos (2004)
definition:
“The process of identifying and establishing, maintaining, enhancing, and when necessary
terminating relationships with customers and other stakeholders, at a profit, so that the objectives of
all parties involved are met, when this is done by mutual giving and fulfilment of promises.”
E.Gummesson (2002) also illustrates the importance of networks and management of it in
his definition of total relationship marketing:
“Total relationship marketing is marketing based on relationships, networks and
interaction, recognizing that marketing is embedded in the total management of the networks of the
selling organization, the market and society.”
After discussing the
concept
of relationship marketing, the
complexity and
multidimensional perspective of relationship marketing can be found. The conclusion of this
chapter can be illustrated by E.Gummesson (2006) saying: “There is no general marketing theory
that makes us see everything at the same time. New categories, concepts, model and theories work
as lenses through which we perceive the world. […] As marketing is a complex field, a single pair
of glasses is not sufficient. There are bifocals that allow two perspectives, but we need more than
two. […] If we look through these glasses we can only see relationships, networks and interaction.
RM is about what you see through these glasses.”
The focus of this paper is on the broader view of relationship marketing based on networks
and relationships between the parties in a network.
1.2 Network orientation of relationship marketing
This chapter focuses on the networks of relationships. Two perspectives of networks and
different relationships within it are illustrated and discussed. Classification of the network
relationships and the elements for successful relationship creation in a network are also covered.
16
Firm-centred network perspective of RM and types of relations
Some authors (Baron et al., 2010; Peck et al., 2004) discussing the different types of
relationships in a network adapt R.M.Morgan and S.D.Hunt (1994) model.
R.M.Morgan and S.D.Hunt (1994) present a model of rational exchanges where
organization can have four types of partnerships - supplier, lateral, buyer and internal partnerships.
Figure 1 shows all the types of relationships and the elements of it. R.M.Morgan and S.D.Hunt
(1994) give the numbers for every relationship in the model.
Source: R.M.Morgan and S.D.Hunt (1994).
Therefore, ten types of relationships are recognized in all the partnerships. These relational
exchanges are:
Supplier partnerships:
1.
between manufacturers and their goods’ suppliers;
2.
involving service providers, as between advertising agencies and its respective clients;
Lateral partnerships:
3.
strategic alliances between firms and their competitors;
4.
alliances between firm and non-profit organizations, as public purpose partnerships;
5.
partnerships for joint research and development, as between firms, local state or
national governments;
17
Buyer partnerships:
6.
long-term exchanges between firms and ultimate customers, as particularly
recommended in the services marketing area;
7.
working partnerships, as in channels of distribution;
Internal partnerships:
1.
exchanges involving functional departments;
2.
exchanges between a firm and its employees, as in internal marketing;
3.
exchanges within firm involving such business units as subsidiaries, divisions.
Customer-centred network perspective of RM and types of relations
H.Peck, A.Payne, M.Christopher and M.Clark (2004) in their book discuss the six markets
model. Earlier some of these authors together with others (Christopher, Payne and Ballantyne,
1991) developed this model where it was addressed at organizational level - focal firm or internal
markets were placed in the centre of the model because of its role as an integrator and facilitator of
relationship development with other markets (Peck et al., 2004). These other markets are customer
markets, referral markets, supplier markets, employee (recruitment) markets and influencer markets.
Organization is involved with different types of relationships which help to improve market
effectiveness.
But H.Peck et al. (2004) revised this six markets model where customer markets were
placed in the centre of it. Placing customer markets in the centre of the model illustrates the purpose
of relationship marketing where customer value, satisfaction and loyalty are created and leads to
improved profitability in the longer term (Peck et al., 2004). This model is created to show the
complexity of relationship marketing and gives strategic view of it. The six markets model is shown
in Figure 2.
S.Baron et al. (2010) also highlight that the most successful networks are customer-driven,
because it creates higher customer value. The main benefits of relationship marketing from a firm’s
perspective are customer retention, because it is more expensive to attract new customers than
retain old ones and long-term relationships are more profitable for the firm. This is more expensive
not only because of direct costs the company experiences, but also because of customer defection
costs and negative word-of-mouth comments. Therefore, because of relationship marketing the
main factors of firm’s profitability are customer loyalty, where it should be understood instead of
brand loyalty, where long-term win-win relationships become more important than price (Baron et
al., 2010). According to E.Gummesson (2006), customer loyalty in relationship marketing is mainly
18
emphasized and customers after created long-term relationships with the suppliers can become
supporters and advocate of them. These factors help firm to predict the outcomes and be more
secure about it.
Source: H.Peck, A.Payne, M.Christopher and M.Clark (2004).
As mentioned before and how Figure 2 shows, the six markets model consists of customer
markets, referral markets, supplier markets, employee (recruitment) markets and influencer
markets. All the markets of the model will be briefly discussed.
Customer markets
According to H.Peck et al. (2004), organizations have two types of customers - customers
(intermediaries, distributors or retailers) and consumers (end purchasers, users and consumers).
Organizations may have both types of customers, but it have to decide with who the stronger
relationship development will be. It depends on organization’s value system. For manufacturing
company the focus on relationship building with retailers might be more important and the latter
might consider on relationship development with end consumers. Therefore, the difference between
19
traditional and relationship marketing is recognized, as traditional marketing focuses on how to
attract direct buyer and relationship marketing perceives more than that - the reach of direct buyer is
also determined by relationships with intermediaries in the distribution chain and it is very
important to maintain such relationships (H.Peck et al., 2004).
Referral markets
According to H.Peck et al. (2004), referrals markets consist of customer and non-customer
referral sources. The best marketing for the organizations is the word-of-mouth from current
customers about good quality products or services which is very important indicator at this point.
Non-customer referral sources can be third parties such as networks, multipliers, connectors, third
party introducers, agencies and others. They make recommendations to the potential customers
about the organization. Customers deciding whether to purchase at high risk or choosing between
similar products try to find a trusty advice, therefore, the both referrals might be a source. Referral
markets can be crucial for an organization to build relationships with its customers.
Influence markets
Even if influence markets do not have the direct added value to the products or services,
managing relationships with the representatives from these markets (such as shareholders, financial
analysts, stockbrokers, media, user groups, unions, investors, government and others) are very
important, because they can have negative or positive impact on the organization’s activities. It can
be the impact on possibility to purchase or prevention from the offer, barriers to reach the market or
opposite, to open new markets. Well managed relationships with influences can also help to
influence legislation for the benefit of an organization or public opinion which saves expenditure
for advertising.
Recruitment markets
These markets are also very important for the company, because it seeks to attract the
valuable employees where some of them can create the core competencies for the company
providing certain skills and experiences. If a company wants to attract such people, it needs to
present itself like the employer of the first choice to the third parties such as colleges, universities,
recruitment agencies, executive search consultants and others, or to the particular people. But
according to H.Peck et al. (2004), “if it [company] also wants to keep these valuable employees, it
must be the employer of first choice”, not only present itself being such company. One more
20
important aspect in this market is that a company tries to attract employees with certain skills and
experiences who match the companies profile in order to represent it to the customers and provide
them higher service value.
Internal markets
Internal markets are important when stressing out two aspects. The first is to make
employees work within the company in a way agreed with its mission, strategy and goals. The
second aspect is that employees within the company are suppliers and also customers. It is very
important to manage internal markets, because according to H.Peck et al. (2004), the evidence exist
that there are the links between employee and customer retention in business-to-business situations.
Supplier and alliance markets
According to H.Peck et al. (2004), relationships with suppliers are the main notice in
relationship marketing in recent years. The approach is changing from the competition to
collaboration with suppliers. Companies are focusing on stronger relationship building, but with
less suppliers in order to reduce costs in building integrated supplier chain, make better competitive
advantage and propose higher value to the end customers.
To conclude the review of this model, the focus of relationship marketing from the
consumer perpective is a necessity, but this would not be enough, because other important
relationships or markets must be identified and also other segments within these markets.
Different orders of relationships in a network
The essential question is also about the importance of the types of relationships within the
network. S.Baron et al. (2010) adopt the approach of three orders of relationships from C.L.Martin
and T.Clark (1996) and explain this classification. Three levels of relationships are reviewed - the
first, the second and the third order. A company (focal firm) has the first order direct relationships
with its stakeholders in the market - competitors, suppliers, customers and regulators. The second is
the relationships between different parties in the network, for example, between competitors and
customers. And the third level is internal relationships inside the parties’ organizations, which can
be customer-to-customer interactions. All the relationships of three orders in a network are
illustrated in Figure 3. This concept also can be adapted to the non-profit organizations.
21
Source: S.Baron, G.Warnaby and T.Conway (2010).
All the figures discussed represent different view of relationship marketing, but the same
principle still remains: “If marketing is to be successful, other suppliers, partners, distributors,
financing institutions, the customers’ customers, and sometimes even political decision makers may
have to be included in the management of the relationship in the network of relationships”
(Gronroos, 2004).
Elements of successful relationships in a network
Relationship means bilateral interaction between two parties, but these relationships can be
not only positive, but also negative. But on the other hand, interaction not surely means that there is
a relationship. Many factors are discussed for successful relationships in the literature, according to
S.Baron et al. (2010), the most common are these five - commitment, trust, seller's customer
orientation/empathy, experience/satisfaction, communication. C.Plewa et al. (2005) agree
successful alliances in relationship marketing should involve trust, commitment and
communication. These five elements of successful relationships in a network will be discussed.
Commitment and trust
22
Commitment is a long-term investment into relationships between the parties and it is very
important factor and a major success element (Baron et al., 2010). C.Plewa et al. (2005) also sate
commitment is very important factor which is related with trust and communication.
Trust is also seen as substantial factor and is a primary condition causing further
commitment in relationships. Trust is the most recognized and core element in the relationships
which might create value (Plewa et al., 2005). Trust, as much as commitment, encourages retain
investment in relationships with collaborating parties. It can influence development of customer
orientation/empathy and the higher the level of trust, the higher the level of customer
orientation/empathy. According to C.L.Wang (2007), trust together with commitment are the main
elements in relationship building to encourage parties to work in a long-term perspective in order to
receive benefits in staying with existing partners.
Customer orientation/empathy
According to S.Baron et al. (2010), “the greater the degree of empathy between the parties
concerned, the fewer the barriers to relationship development”. This factor stimulates trust and
enhances the possibility of long-term relationship which can lead to higher sales where the customer
needs are more important than competition. It is even possible after unsuccessful service to the
customer - empathy can still build relationships with him.
Experience/satisfaction
The last experience is the most remembered and is known as “recency effect” (Baron et al.,
2010) therefore, the last experience can have the impact on previous ones. This is important factor,
because experience has the impact on satisfaction which has the effect for further relationship
building. Satisfied customer not necessarily will be retained, because he can leave even being
satisfied, but not having good experience (Baron et al., 2010). Satisfaction causes subsequent trust
and commitment.
Communication
Communication is essential to relationships as it is not possible to create it without
communication (Plewa et al., 2005). Organization has two levels of communication - internal and
external. Communication has the impact on the level of commitment between business relationships
and trust, for example, between buyer and seller. But communication can be effective only if it is a
two-way communication, because the feedback is also necessary for the sender (Baron et al., 2010).
23
According to C.Plewa et al. (2005), communication is the most related factor to interaction which
ensures bilateral value creation.
All the elements discussed are interconnected and have the major impact to successful
creation of relationships in a network.
1.3 Sports marketing
The purpose of this chapter is to transit from relationship marketing to relationship
marketing in sports, but to achieve this, the concept of sports marketing must be discussed as it is
different from traditional marketing, what is presented later on. Therefore, this chapter briefly
discuss why sports marketing differs from traditional marketing and what are the main differences.
Concept of sports marketing
Sports marketing is not the same as marketing of other industries and it is as a special case,
because its processes do not operate the same for other products and services (Wakefield, 2007;
Basil et al., 2008). „Sports marketing is building a highly identified fan base such that fans,
sponsors, media, and government pay to promote and support the organization for the benefits of
social exchange and personal, group, and community identity within a cooperative competitive
environment” (Wakefield, 2007). According to E.C.Schwarz and J.D.Hunter (2008), there is no
difference between traditional and sports marketing in theory, but in practice there is a main
difference. Sports marketing is a process creating and implementing activities related with
production of sports products, pricing, distribution, promotion and advertising of sports products
(Schwarz et al., 2008).
Differences between sports and traditional marketing
The essential difference between sports and traditional marketing is the consumer
(Wakefield, 2007), because this consumer in sports is fan, that is why the fans should be
differentiated form consumers. For the traditional consumers the value of products and services is
economic and companies seek satisfaction of these consumers. But the value which fans benefit in
participating in sports events is more than economic and they experience not only satisfaction: when
their sports team wins, fans experience pleasure and excitement. That is why K.L.Wakefield (2007)
suggests not to chose price the fans pay for sports event as an incentive, because fans pay this price
24
until their value of experience is equal or exceeds the price a team sets as a charge for possibility to
attend the game.
Fans are also flexible when they face the loss of their team - delight and excitement turn
into distress and gloom (Wakefield, 2007). Therefore, according to K.L.Wakefield (2007), the main
objective is not to attract as many consumers, but the fans of a team, because despite winning or
loss of their team, fans are willing to buy licensed merchandise of the team in order to support their
team, buy season tickets to the games, go to watch games outside the local market, support taxbased initiative for building new arena or stadium for a team, be a supporter of the league a team
plays in, dedicate their time for discussions, watching, interest generating about the teams with
others.
E.C.Schwarz and J.D.Hunter (2008) discussing about sports marketing stress out not the
uniqueness of sports consumer, as K.L.Wakefield (2007), but the sports product adaptation to
consumers needs. According to E.C.Schwarz and J.D.Hunter (2008), sport has the ability to spread
over all spheres of life and this provides a range of target markets and requires the sports industry to
create variations of sports product. These variations should represent demographically different
consumers, including age, gender, level of income, race, nationality and geographical location in
order to enhance customer satisfaction. But the opinion of consumers is always subjective and can
be interpreted variously, besides, knowing that prediction of sports results is not possible and there
is no possibility to ensure the quality of playing of sports participants becomes challenging to
ensure satisfactions of sports consumers (Schwarz et al., 2008).
Differences between traditional and sports product and its variations
Consequently, E.C.Schwarz and J.D.Hunter (2008) the essential difference between
traditional and sports marketing keep the product: sports can be a product or service to the
consumer, commercial good or commercial service. Sports are an end-product which is created for
mass attraction of consumers, spectators and participants. The main nature of sports product can be
tangible and intangible, but the prime sports product is constantly intangible, subjective and
variable. According to E.C.Schwarz and J.D.Hunter (2008), the most traditional goods are linked to
economic concept - supply and demand, but the prime sports products, also the market, is demandbased, because most of the sports products are sell in terms of need. Furthermore, sports product as
sports event is perishable, because it is produced and consumed at the same time. Therefore, sports
product must be sold in advance and to achieve this, the expected performance and the expected
facilities must be “sold”.
25
E.C.Schwarz and J.D.Hunter (2008) stress out several differences between traditional and
sports product. Firstly, the producers of traditional product at the same time are the experts of it and
consumers usually trust the company selling this product or even the industry in which the product
is produced. But in sport it is different - consumers believe they are the experts. As an example can
be sports consumers discussing the yesterday’s game, explaining how a coach or the players should
have acted in one or another situation. The number of media channels even intensifies this - sports
websites, sports channels, sports programs, announcements, news and etc. Secondly, sports
organisations compete and collaborate with other sports organisations at the same time. Even sports
organisation competes with another one on the court it collaborates with it at the same time to
ensure the existence and stability of it. It is a challenge for sports organisation, because it must sell
the sports product taking into account competing and collaboration. For example, two sports team
compete on the court, in the standings and in the minds of fans must support each other, because if
one team decides not to come to the game, the sports event will not happen (Schwarz et al., 2008).
1.4 Relationship marketing in sports
According to S.Baron et al. (2010), for no-profit organizations relationship marketing
strategy is very important, because of two types of customers. One who finances the services and
the second who pays for it, thus, the reciprocal benefit is needed. The problem here occurs because
of short-termism of non-profit organizations seeking to attract funds. But here on the contrary, the
long-term perspective is necessary to build relationships with both types of customers.
According to A.Ferrand and S.McCarthy (2009), traditionally, sports marketing is
discussed as transactional where the main principal is value exchange - products and services
exchanged for money. But the same authors agree that relationship marketing approach has been
chosen by many sports organizations. “The relational approach suits the situation and goals of
sports organisations better than transactional approach” (Ferrand et al., 2009).
A.Ferrand and S.McCarthy (2009) also discuss two types of relationship marketing in sport
- market-based and network-based, but according to them, the third element should be also taken
into account - internal marketing. In sports organization case, relationship marketing should be
applied within organisation, because the main difference between sports and commercial
organisations is the fact that sports organisations have both - paid and non-paid staff. But to manage
both types of staff within the sports organisations is very important, because they have the contact
with stakeholders. They must work towards achieving organisation’s goals and manage the
26
interactions with all the stakeholders the organisation has in the best way. Besides, they also have to
know how to improve service quality and customer satisfaction. Figure 4 illustrates both types of
relationship marketing in sports. Both types will be discussed.
Source: A.Ferrand and S.McCarthy (2009).
Market-oriented RM in sports
This approach represents stakeholder theory where relationships are built and loyalty is
stimulated between sports organisation and its stakeholders. According to A.Ferrand and
S.McCarthy (2009), for loyalty building CRM (customer relationship management), named key
account management, is applied to business-to-business relationships where commercial and noncommercial relationships are controlled. Commercial relationships not necessary developed up to
partnerships are built between sports organisation and the parties like partner (committing resources
to achieve the same objectives with sports organisation), advocate (emotional link with supporters
who promote sports organisation especially through word of mouth), supporter (emotional
connection with fans, but not active and supporting not all the time), client (regular spectators people and organisations), customer (sports organisations’ followers to whom single commercial
transaction is performed - people and organisations) and prospect (potential relationships with
people or organisations).
Network-oriented RM in sports
Sports organisations and different stakeholders build network relationships between each
other to achieve the same objectives. Therefore, such networks provide value to different
27
stakeholders, but “the value of a relationship depends on the benefits obtained by each partner”
(Ferrand et al., 2009).
According to A.Ferrand and S.McCarthy (2009), stakeholder theory which includes 8
dimensions (discussed below) of two parties moves from organisational approach where
stakeholders are treated separately creating benefits only to organisation with a network-oriented
approach where all parties of the network, including organisation, are interdependent and related in
relationships.
Evolution of relationships between sports organisation and its stakeholders
A.Ferrand and S.McCarthy (2009) also consider the relationship development between the
sports organisation and each stakeholder. According to them, relationships go through 4 stages start, development, established and decline. But relationships go through those stages involving also
dimensions of relationships between two parties. The authors illustrate the evolution of
relationships with their dimensions. They identify 8 dimensions - loyalty (functional and
emotional), stakeholders’ status (from client to partner), related benefits (social, functional etc.),
distance of exchange (distant, face-to-face etc.), resources involved (financial, human, technical
etc.), involvement, trust and nature of exchange (B2C, B2B or network). All the dimensions and
every stage of evolution of relationships between sports organisation and its stakeholders are
presented in Figure 5.
Source: A.Ferrand and S.McCarthy (2009).
1.5 Relationship marketing in sports sponsorship relationship
In this chapter sports sponsorship relationship is analyzed starting from the primary
concept of sponsorship and sponsorship relationship and turning to sports sponsorship and sports
28
sponsorship relationship where it is more deeply analyzed to help to reveal the objective of the
study.
1.5.1 Sponsorship relationship
Sponsorship
A.Ferrand and S.McCarthy (2009) identify three different types of relationships with the
target - one-to-many, one-to-one and many-with-many. According to these relationships, different
marketing tools are used depending on what relationships sports organisations want to create with
its target. All the tools used in different relationships with the target are presented in Figure 6.
Therefore, there is also seen the position of sponsorship, which is between one-to-one and manywith-many relationships.
Concept of sponsorship relationship
F.Farrelly and P.Quester (2005) quote Sergio Zyman, former Chief Marketing Officer at
Coca-Cola: “sponsorship, the way it is done today, is dead”. According to the same S.Zyman
(2001), “the term sponsorship is partly to blame because it intimates a one sided relationship in
which the sponsor provides financial assistance, and carries with it connotations of philanthropy,
despite its commercial application”. Sponsorship is a communication tool which is very important
for companies or its brands’ positive publicity increase (Cliffe et al., 2005). M.Lamont et al. (2011)
describe sponsorship as sponsor’s exchange of resources with other party which can be individual,
cause or event expecting return on investment. But F.Farrelly and P.Quester (2005) suggest the
sponsorship happens between two stakeholders as co-marketing alliances and it is a bilateral
perspective and in sponsorship relationships the partners can benefit from co-marketing alliances
and share intangible assets such as brand image and corporate reputation. Sponsorship occurs when
a “corporation creates a link with an outside issue or event, hoping to influence the audience by the
connection” (Rifon et al., 2004). According to L.Urriolagoitia and M.Planellas (2007), traditional
view of sponsorship as a short-term transaction and marketing communication nowadays are
rejected and recognized as the strategic role of sponsorship and the potential value can be created
only from long-term relationship. S.C.Cliffe and J.Motion (2005) suggest, that “sponsorship offers
firms the ability to build brand awareness, develop brand image, demonstrate product offerings and
gain customer trial, leverage the brand internally, create brand loyalty, to provide an experience for
the consumer and other stakeholders, and increase financial value.”
29
Source: A.Ferrand and S.McCarthy (2009).
1.5.2 Sports sponsorship
The growing media interest to sports have attracted marketers’ attention willing to reach
the audience by applying sponsorship and advertising through sports (Wolfe et al., 2002; O’Reilly
et al., 2013). These marketing tools not only generate additional revenue to sports organisation, but
sponsors also benefit from this relationship, because sport has the capacity to reach large size and
diverse audience. According to N.O’Reilly and D.L.Horning (2013), sponsorship nowadays is used
as a key strategic business building initiative where the spending on sponsorship from a global
perspective will reach 53.3 billion of US dollars and increase from 2005 is 75 percent.
Traditionally, sponsorship is used in the sports sector and about 54–65 percent of expenditure is
spent here (Madill, 2010).
30
Concept of sports sponsorship
Sports sponsorship is another significant element of the promotional mix (Schwarz et al.,
2008). Sports sponsorship includes any company acquired rights to be associated with sports
products and sports events in order to benefit from this association. Sports organization establishes
various criteria and uses it to the selection of companies to which it wants to be partners with. This
is another major sports marketing promotional mix element, as its main objective is to promote
products and services through the third party. Sports sponsorship is assessed at different levels - in
sports business environment, teams, athletes, conditions, events, broadcasts (Schwarz et al., 2008).
Areas of sports sponsorship
According to F.Farrelly and P.Quester (2005), sports sponsorship can take a variety of
forms - the naming of stadium, the use of sponsored athletes as product endorsers, the positioning
of a brand using a status of “official supplier“ of a sports event. E.C.Schwarz and J.D.Hunter (2008)
divide sports sponsorship into six categories: 1. Sports governing body sponsorship such as
National Football League (NFL), International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the Fédération
Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) and etc. having a status of “official sponsor” and
being the only one having the association with sports organization in that category of products and
services usig sports organization’s logo in their marketing campaign and being in the marketing
campaign of sports organization. 2. Sports facility sponsorship “is naming rights agreements for
stadiums, arenas, and other sport facilities” (Schwarz et al., 2008). 3. Sports event sponsorship is
creating associations with sport events where sponsorship relationship occurs in this type of sport
events like tournaments, championships and other major events. 4. Broadcast and media
sponsorship happens through broadcasting rights contract and there must be the association between
sports organization and the media outlet which gets status of “official broadcasting partner” of a
team, sports organisation or sport event. 5. Athlete sponsorship is when the company seeks the
association with the athlete and benefits from that association. 6. Sports team sponsorship is usually
used in sponsoring local sport teams in order to become official sponsor of a team. Sponsorship
opportunities occur when sign of sponsoring company is placed on the field or on the court or when
the name of a company appears on the game uniforms. Sponsorship opportunities also occur when
making associations with special events such as home team introductions, halftime, breaks, time out
contests, sponsoring cheerleaders and dance teams, giving promotional packages. “The goal of most
team sponsorships is to create long term and mutually beneficial relationships between the team and
a corporation” (Schwarz et al., 2008). Sponsoring company gets benefits from sponsoring a sports
31
team such as awareness of products and services, strengthening, building relationships with new
customers, brand image association with sports team, using of sales incentives programs and etc.
1.5.3 Sports sponsorship relationship
As there is a broad range of definitions of relationship marketing which is seen from
different perspectives, that way a broad range of definitions of sports sponsorship relationship also
occurs. And it is logic, because there are many parties involved which have different benefits from
the sports sponsorship relationships. Therefore, the concept of sports sponsorship relationship from
different perspectives is discussed.
Concept of sports sponsorship relationship
According to J.Madill and N.O'Reilly (2010), sports sponsorship relationship is a connection
“created in the minds of consumers between a sponsor and sponsee, differentiates sponsorship from
advertising, and results in image transfer whereby the sponsor and sponsee are associated with each
other and benefit from that association”. Sponsors provide asset to a sponsee in order to create
associations with sports organisations or events in the eyes of consumers (Madill et al., 2010) and
develop relationships with them, as sponsors are in direct contact with spectators in the sports
arenas (Ferrand et at., 2009). Sponsorship is a tool to develop brand image and customer loyalty in a
relationship between sports organisation and a sponsoring company because of created associations
between them (Schwarz et al., 2008) and regarding long-term associations provide sustained
competitive advantages (Cousens et al., 2006). Sports marketing sponsorship is increasingly used
by sponsors, because of the use of corporate and brand marketing strategy (Farrelly et al., 2005).
According to F.Farrelly and P.Quester (2005), engagement between sponsors and sports entities is a
typically business relationship, but both parties invest time and efforts to reach predetermined and
bilateral beneficial objectives.
Network orientation of sports sponsorship relationship
According to R.Wolfe et al. (2002), the network theory recently more and more has been applied to
business-to-business relationships. The authors identify sports as an industry and network
perspective should be applied to sports context as it brings significant insights to the management of
it today. Relationships within sports networks are different than in other industries and, according to
R.Wolfe et al. (2002), in sports context, sports networks are developed between sports, media and
sponsors. But relationships are created more than between the parties as sports organisation, media
32
outlet and sponsor. All the parties of sports networks are different and have different goals and the
growth and success depend on the relationships between them. “Sports organisations are necessarily
network based because they operate in a system formed by numerous stakeholders” (Ferrand et al.,
2009).
1.5.4 Elements of successful sports sponsorship relationship in a co-marketing alliance
F.Farrelly and P.Quester (2005) believe, that sports sponsorship relationships “have the
potential to develop into co-marketing alliances where the product, brand, or corporate image of the
alliance partners bare marketed together as a system”. Co-marketing alliance should consist of
commitment, trust and satisfaction (Farrelly et al., 2005), where commitment is described as “a
willingness by the parties involved in the sponsorship relationship to make short-term investments
with the expectation of realising long-term benefits from the relationship”. Another element of
sponsorship relationship is trust and it is defined as the cornerstone of the strategic partnership
(Farrelly et al., 2005). Trust has a very positive impact on the parties’ relationships and its
components are such as planning, investment, satisfaction and performance. The third element of
co-marketing alliance is satisfaction which consists of two parts - economic and interpersonal.
Economic satisfaction is the outcomes from the relationship with its partners, such as sales volume,
margins and discounts (Farrelly et al., 2005). Non-economic or interpersonal satisfaction consists of
positive emotional response to the “non-economic psychosocial aspect of the relationship and is
evident if the interactions are fulfilling, gratifying, and easy” (Farrelly et al., 2005).
Even though these three components of relationship have the positive effect in the comarketing alliance, but it also has some difficulties to implement. According to F. Farrelly and P.
Quester (2005), trust in the relationship is something, that has to be “exercised” and if trust fails to
implement in joint activities, sponsors may think the relationship failed to reach its potential. Also
in contrast, the lack of property commitment appears as the main factor which limits the promising
development of co-marketing alliance. Perception of inequity lowers satisfaction of relationships, as
the sponsors feel that the opportunities have been lost, because of the passivity of property. It may
cause the separation of sponsors’ property from key decisions. Whether to continue the relationship
or not depends on the reached balance of sponsors’ prior commitment.
R.Wolfe et al. (2002) also agree that while parties in the sports network gain benefits from
relationships between each other, there is also a possibility of the conflicts in the network. Sports
entity must meet the needs of sponsors and media and at the same time attract spectators to sports
events to gain revenue. According to R.Wolfe et al. (2002), conflicts between parties may occur
33
when the volume of money in the network increase, for example, when sponsors pay too much, the
media gives too much and the National Governing Bodies lose too much. In order to avoid such
conflicts the authors suggest foster partnership again through trust–commitment relationship within
the network.
Connections between the elements of sports of sponsorship relationship
F.Farrelly and P.Quester (2005) conducted an empirical research to examine the impact of
key relationship drivers in the context of sports sponsorship and to find out the critical success
factors. Figure 7 shows the results of the research that the authors have made - the connections
between the main four elements of sports sponsorship relationship.
As it is seen in figure 7, sponsor’s commitment has a direct positive impact on economic
satisfaction. The authors also have found that when determining the objectives of sponsorship and
integrating sponsorship into corporate or marketing plan and also stimulating the future prospect it
is a significant contribution to the commitment which results in economic satisfaction including the
added value to the brand (Farrelly et al., 2005).
Source: F.Farrelly and P.Quester (2005).
Trust has a positive impact on both - economic and non-economic satisfaction. But the
strongest impact is found between trust and non-economic satisfaction. Sponsor’s trust also has a
strong impact on commitment to relationship. But the fact that the trust of sponsors has direct
impact on their satisfaction of relationships should stimulate sports organizations to manage sports
sponsorship relationships more proactively (Farrelly et al., 2005).
The influence between commitment and non-economic satisfaction is not found. The
findings of the research show that sponsors inferred economic satisfaction from their non-economic
34
satisfaction. So, F.Farrelly and P.Quester (2005) suggest, that the most important goal for major
sport entities seeking long-term sponsorship relationships should be to foster non-economic
satisfaction.
Trust is therefore the essential variable in the sponsorship relationship - it influences not
only economic satisfaction directly, but also impact both - commitment and non-economic
satisfaction.
1.5.5 Effect of brand image from sports sponsorship relationship
Positive impact for brand image
There is no wonder why expenditures in sports sponsorship are so high, because according
to R.Wolfe et al. (2002), researches have shown the positive impact of company’s image through
sponsorship, therefore, organisations sponsoring sports seek association with the values available in
the world of sport. But according to N.O’Reilly and D.L.Horning (2013), only adapting sponsorship
does not mean a success. Activation of sponsorship can lead to successful brand differentiation
from competitors, excel promotional activities and ambush marketing. But it can be possible when
sponsors are investing in sponsorship activation.
“Sponsorship has been recognized as a powerful platform for building brands” (Cliffe et
al., 2005). The major objective of sponsorship is not only the positive impact of sponsor’s image at
corporate (Westberg et al., 2011), but also at brand level (Chien et al., 2011). Sports organization’s
brand image also enhances sponsors’ positive corporate brand perception to their customers or other
stakeholders, as the brand of sports organisation reflect the identity of all the stakeholders in the
network including internal and external (Farrelly et al., 2006). “The brands of both sponsor and
sport entity are central to the success of the relationship and large scale sponsorships have been
referred to as co-branding partnerships” (Kahuni et al., 2009).
Strong brand equity can enhance not only positive corporate brand perception, but also
corporate reputation, manage to high prices and cause recommendations. On the other hand, a
strong brand of sports organization can attract potential sponsors and create sponsorship
relationships, enjoy the increased attention in the media. Thus, effective management of brand
image is necessary for successful relationship development with sponsors.
Negative impact for brand image
As the positive image of sports organization’s brand can enhance brand equity of sponsors
and strengthen relationships between the parties, thus, negative or inappropriate behaviour of
35
athletes may have the negative impact of that sports organization’s brand image and the
relationships with sponsors. According to P.H.Schurr (2007), negative impact of sports
organization’s and at the same time sponsor’s brand image can damage the relationships between
the parties - “negative critical incidents have the ability to cause stakeholders to review long-term
relationships and can cause destabilization” (Van Doorn et al., 2008). Consequently, it may cause
decreasing cooperation, trust, mutual understanding and joint benefits (Schurr, 2007). Besides, the
negative incident accomplished by one partner, can have the negative effect to the other, because of
his tolerance of these negative actions (Votolato et al., 2006). Also negative player behaviour can be
called crisis which causes negatively sports organization and its sponsors (Wilson et al., 2008). This
crisis can also damage sports organization’s reputation. In the most cases, the crises are negative for
sports organizations, but not necessary can negatively influence the relationships with stakeholders
(Westberg et al., 2011). According to A.T.Kahuni (2009), the efforts and effective management by
both partners can minimize the negative impact.
Increase in brand loyalty through sports sponsorship relationship
According to M.J.Sirgy et al. (2008), there is a fast increase in sponsoring various cultural
and sports event in order to enlarge brand image and brand loyalty and the main objective for
sponsoring it is to increase brand loyalty. Brands are used to develop relationships between
organisation and its consumers, besides brands are the value for them. But for sports organisation
the functions of brands for sports organisations’ consumers are different from other companies’
brands functions. “When end-users and stakeholders develop a bond with a sport organisation’s
brand, that brand also becomes a source of value for the sports organisation” (Ferrand et al., 2009).
M.J.Sirgy et al. (2008) conducted a study in order to find out the connection between selfcongruity with a sponsorship event and brand loyalty. “Self-image congruence refers to the match
between consumers’ self-concept (actual self, ideal self, etc.) and the user image of a given product,
store, sponsorship event, etc.” (Sirgy et al., 2008). Congruency is one of the reasons of sponsorship
and it is “the idea that an interested consumer is exposed to three images in a sponsorship - the
sponsor, the sponsee, and the association between the two” (O’Reilly et al., 2013). Sponsee
communicates the image the sponsor wishes through associations in the consumers mind.
Therefore, suitable sponsee-sponsor fit is necessary to create desired associations.
The research of M.J.Sirgy et al. (2008) shows that self-congruity has a positive influence
on brand loyalty and positive influence of a customer’s self-congruity with a sponsored event on
brand loyalty is likely to be greater when the consumer is highly involved with the sponsored event.
36
The results also show that self-congruity does not have a positive influence on brand loyalty when
consumer’s involvement with the sports event is low. The results reveal that if consumers do not
have knowledge about the firm, sponsoring the event, self-congruity will not have a positive
influence on brand loyalty and conversely, if consumers have knowledge about the firm, sponsoring
the event, self-congruity will have a positive influence on brand loyalty. Also, the stronger
influence on brand loyalty is when consumers’ awareness of sponsoring firm is high.
Therefore, as it is shown in figure 8, self-congruity with sponsored event has a significant
influence on brand loyalty and it is stronger when the conditions - consumer involvement and
consumer awareness are involved. Of course, the higher involvement of these conditions, the higher
brand loyalty and opposite - the lower self-congruity conditions, the lower brand loyalty.
Source: M.J.Sirgy, D.J.Lee, J.S.Johar and J.Tidwell (2008).
The conclusion of the research that is made by M.J.Sirgy et al. (2008) lead to the fact that
marketers should invest in expanding marketing communication campaigns in order to improve
their consumers’ involvement in sponsoring events and increase consumers’ awareness of that firm,
sponsoring the event. But to make these conditions work, according to M.J.Sirgy et al. (2008), first
of all, the characteristics of the consumer attending to the event should be find out. Consumers need
to feel that they belong to the group attending to the sponsoring event and that they are similar to
them. That means they are identifying themselves to the same group having the same characteristics
and to the sponsoring event - they have self-congruity with sponsored event. When customers
experience it, the marketers should strengthen the awareness of the sponsoring firm and
involvement in the sponsoring event by sending the promotional message. According to M.J.Sirgy
et al. (2008), awareness can be easily developed through advertising, but make customers more
37
involved with the sponsoring event emotionally can be challenging. Different kind of games and
contests for the consumers during the event can be one of the examples.
Creation of sports consumer involvement and awareness
As discussed above, marketers should invest in communication campaigns in order to
improve consumers’ involvement in sports event and increase their awareness of sponsors’ brands,
sponsoring that event. There was also discussed that positive image of sports organization’s brand
can enhance brand equity of sponsors and also reflects the identity of the organisation’s network of
stakeholders. Therefore, to enhance brand loyalty both of sponsor and sports organisation could be
beneficial through strengthening consumer identification with sports team.
Every person is tend to identify himself with a certain group and this group can be a sports
team or an athlete (Wakefield, 2007; Basil et al., 2008; Kelley et al., 2008; Madrigal, 2008;
Schwarz et al., 2008). Fans tend to attribute themselves to a certain sports team and respond to its
winnings or losses. Therefore, every sports team must attract more fans, create its identity and seek
recognition among them. Strong social identity, in turn, influences the higher brand (i.e., the team)
loyalty. Thus, to attract more fans K.L.Wakefield (2007) recommends take into consideration five
factors - players’ attractiveness, social acceptance, variety seeking, involvement in sports, team
performance.
Players’ attractiveness. Mostly attractive players for fans are those who play well and have
many winnings, besides, people tend to state the similar to them as attractive (Wakefield, 2007).
According to S.W.Kelley and K.Tian (2008), fans see their team as an extension of themselves and,
therefore, they come to identify themselves with the teams that win. As an example can be the
phrase “We won” or a wearing of clothes with teams’ attributes. Thus, it is needed to identify sports
team’s characteristics which are relevant to the players and which fans agree on. Fans identify
themselves with a sports team more easily when it is an example for them and expresses the same
characteristics as its fans. According to M.D.Basil and W.J.Brown (2008), formation of fans’
characteristics is a formation of imaginary associations through which fans perceive themselves as
members of an existing group.
According to K.L.Wakefield (2007), the more fans identify themselves with a sports team,
the more this sports team enjoy social acceptance. According to E.C.Schwarz and J.D.Hunter
(2008), there are many projects in sports in order to achieve relations with the community which
can be initiated by league, team, player or a sports event, besides, players can strengthen relations
with the community by themselves. According to J.J.Zhang et al. (2011), media has a big impact on
38
community relations, image, promotion opportunities, sports broadcasting and consumer behaviour
of sports organisation.
When the first two factors help to increase awareness of sports team among the fans,
variety seeking has negative impact, because people who seek variety hardly identify themselves
with a certain team or player. Variety seekers attend to sports games in order to change place or
looking for new things, therefore, they can come to a game one time and do not come again for
whole season. According to K.L.Wakefield (2007), it is important to understand this type of people,
because good sales promotions of sports events are proper for making variety seekers loyal. But this
should be implemented carefully, because otherwise irrelevant sales promotions and discounts may
create the audience’s view that a sporting event is not worth a visit. It is needed to offer promotions
associated with a team, event and its players.
Involvement in sport can be short-term or long-term. A person who is highly involved in
particular sports will always follow the results of it, read news in different media. And opposite for
a person with short-term involvement with sports. Both persons can come to sports event
accidentally, but only the one with high involvement in sports will enhance his emotional
experience, other not necessarily will enhance his interest in particularly sports or sports team
(Wakefield, 2007). Enhanced involvement in sports of people with short-term involvement will lead
to higher emotional and social exchange and higher sports team awareness. It is also possible to
enhance involvement in sports of people with long-term involvement by enhancing possibility of
their attendance to sports events by providing information about the rules of the game, giving full
information about the game and the players, easing media work.
Everything is easier when a team wins. Team which has a deep tradition of success the
authentication source for its fans is winnings. Improved team performance almost always leads to a
better attendance to the games (Wakefield, 2007). According to Y.K.Kim and G.Trail (2010), lack
of success of the team is an important determinant, because fans lack going to a game when a team
lose. People distance themselves from the failures of the people to defend their self-esteem and it is
opposite when a team is a long time winner (Kim et al., 2010). Fans who weakly identify
themselves with the team after its loss distance from it (Madrigal, 2008). But according to
K.L.Wakefield (2007), in this situation a team should propose to the fans something more than a
winning and change image into some specific characteristic a team has. But according to Y.K.Kim
and G.Trail (2010), not for all the fans attendance to a game is influenced by a team’s winning,
therefore, sports marketing professionals or managers should not be discouraged by team loss - it is
just a limitation, but it is not impossible.
39
After conducting theoretical analysis, the complexity of relationship marketing is
identified, as various assessments are found in the literature. Different definitions and perspectives
of relationship marketing lead to diverse interpretations of it. Therefore, various approaches of
relationship marketing influence its application to sports sponsorship relationships. Managing sports
sponsorship relationships from a network perspective is beneficial for many parties within a
network, but as literature review has shown it is not an easy task which includes many conditions to
be conducted and that inadequate management of sports sponsorship relationships can have
negative impact for all the parties involved in this network.
40
II. THE ANALYSIS OF SPORTS SPONSORSHIP RELATIONSHIP
The second part of the study covers the research methodology where applicable research
value, research object and objective are presented and evaluated. Research process, logic, type, data
and collection methods and techniques are also discussed including samples’ design and data
analysis. Later, the results of the case study and the online survey are presented and discussed to
answer to the objective of the research and the study.
2.1 Research methodology
Applicable research value, research object and objective
Sponsorship is widely used communication tool by the companies and expenditure is
growing in recent years comparing with other marketing promotional tools (Lamont et al., 2011).
Sports have particularly great attention for sponsorship, as it has capacity to attract a large diverse
audience and media attention. Therefore, sports sponsorship is used by sponsors for corporate and
brand marketing strategy (Farrelly et al., 2005) and even as a key strategic business building
initiative (O’Reilly et al., 2013). About 54–65 percent of sponsorship expenditure is used in the
sports sector (Madill, 2010) also providing additional revenue to sports organisations. Knowing that
sponsorship does not allow sponsors to measure direct return of investment, they may not realize
any return of it until much later. It can even take years to understand completely the value of sports
sponsorship regarding improved consumers’ attitude about sponsor’s brand (Farrelly et al., 2006).
Consequently, as discussed in the literature analysis sports sponsorship relationship should be
considered as a long-term bilateral perspective linked with partnership. Considering that two parties
are involved in such partnership, these relevant challenges for sponsors should not be perceived as
irrelevant for sports organisations, as it has the impact for sports organisations’ sponsorship
relationship management. Many researches consider sports sponsorship relationship from
companies’, i.e., sponsors’ perspective and emphasize successful relationship building with sports
organisations in order to share beneficial attributes together. Strong sports organisations having a
large base of fans and spectators can choose the sponsors it want to be partners with. At the same
time, sponsors seek sports sponsorship relationships with such sports organizations. But for the
sports organisations which are not assigned to the most popular sports to create sports sponsorship
relationships with strong sponsors is a challenging task. Such partnerships might include more than
increased brand image, awareness and customer loyalty or other benefits analyzed in the theoretical
part and might have a change in perception of value of sports sponsorship relationship. Besides,
41
even relationship marketing is applied in sports context where sports organisations are definitely
considered as having relationships with different stakeholders, but relationship marketing
application particularly in successful sports sponsorship relationship creation and development is
barely examined. Furthermore, the complexity of relationship marketing and its different
assessments and perspectives influence its application to sports sponsorship relationship. Therefore,
the object of the research is sports sponsorship relationship and the objective of the research is to
analyze the effect of sports sponsorship relationship with the following two tasks. Firstly, analysing
sports sponsorship from sports organisation’s perspective and including consideration how
sponsorship relationship is perceived and from what relationship marketing perspective, how
relationship is created and what are the successful elements of sports sponsorship relationship.
Secondly, analysing sports sponsorship relationship from sports consumers’ perspective and finding
out how sports organisations’ relationships created with sponsors influence customer buying
behaviour of sponsors’ products and customer perceived value.
Research type
Descriptive research has been selected for situation analysis, because it is a systematic
study allowing to describe the situation, measure approaches and to find out the facts. Its purpose is
to obtain empirical data that provides the detailed image of the phenomena (population) and its
structural elements. This study is chosen due to the fact that the population of the research is a
relatively large group of people which is characterized by different aspects.
Data source and collection methods
To investigate the research problem the primary source of data and mixed-method research
of data collection methods are selected. This method combines qualitative and quantitative methods
and helps to collect data at the same time using both techniques and not mixing it (Saunders et al.,
2009). Case study is selected as research strategy for qualitative data collection. A single case study
is selected to define the actual case for exploration of existing theory. A survey is selected as
research strategy for quantitative data collection to find out the facts, opinions, approaches,
attitudes, cause of behaviour from a large population.
Data collection techniques
Chosen data collection technique for conducting the single case study is non-standardised
semi-structured interview, because it helps to collect qualitative data for the first part of mixed42
method research. Face-to-face interview form is selected and audio-recording is used to record
answers of the interviewee. Semi-structured face-to-face interview allows explaining the questions,
expanding the words or ideas used by interviewee and leading the discussion into areas that have
not been previously considered, but which are significant for the understanding and which helps to
address the objective of the research. It also allows explaining the reason why the participant of
interview has not given the answers to the particular questions or how the questions have been
answered. Listed key questions and themes have been prepared before conducting interview, but the
questions and the order of it have changed during the interview. Additional questions also have
been prepared and used to cover the research objective. Two types of questions have been used
during the interview: 1. open questions to define and describe a situation, 2. probing questions to
explore responses that are significant to the research objective, to explain, reveal the reasoning of
the responses. All the questions for the interviewee have been asked trying to avoid the usage of
leading or proposing types of questions in order to avoid any bias these questions could result.
Chosen data collection technique for completing the survey - self-administered
questionnaire is chosen taking into account its advantages - easy to fill, easy to handle. All the
questions have been designed upon the theoretical part of the study. The same questions have been
provided to all respondents in the questionnaire, but to which questions they are answering and
what are the order of these questions depend on the filter questions. Two types of data variables
have been used in the questionnaire: 1. behaviour to establish respondents’ behaviour, 2. attribute to
group respondents by social-demographic characteristics. The questionnaire has been contained
using the “principle of a funnel”, and selecting appropriate respondents have helped two options
answer questions (yes or no) having filter function. All questions are closed in the questionnaire.
The answers to the questions are submitted by two or more alternative answers letting to select one
alternative. Likert scale has also been used to know the degree of the respondents’ agreement or
disagreement with the statements. Taking into account the objective and the tasks of the study,
selected depth of research is 8 questions, as selected number has been chosen for being enough to
review the situation and taking into account the attractiveness of the questionnaire to the
respondents. It has been intended not to overload the respondents with the questions and seek them
willing to cooperate.
Survey method
Chosen method of the survey is an online survey or Internet-mediated questionnaire to
collect and process data operatively, deliver results and reach the required respondents with
43
different social-demographic characteristics. The questionnaire (see Appendix 1) has been
composed in French language in order to reach the respondents better and published on one online
survey
website
-
http://www.qualtrics.com/.
The
link
(https://qtrial.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_bxb6ZZjl3kr2PAN) of the survey has been distributed in
the groups of social networks created especially for field hockey and sports enthusiasts and fans and
other websites related to sports and field hockey. This distribution pattern has been chosen because
of the capacity of social networks to attract a lot of users and because of groups created according to
the users’ tastes and needs which allow achieving the right respondents.
Samples’ design
There are two types of respondents in the research - sports organisation and sports
consumers. For choosing the first type of respondent - sports organisation for the case study nonprobability purposive or judgemental sampling is selected (Saunders et al., 2009). It is formed on
the basis of personal preferences and considerations and sports organisation is chosen taking into
account the meeting of necessary characteristics (represents not the most popular sports, have longterm sponsorship relationships with sponsors) and enabling to answer to the research question and
objective of the study. Therefore, typical case sampling and The Royal Belgian Hockey Association
(RBHA) as a particularly informative and representative case is selected. Interview has been
conducted with Marketing and Communication Director of RBHA.
Sports consumers are the enthusiasts and fans of field hockey. Sports consumers, i.e.,
population would be very difficult to count, because it is relatively large group of people with
different ages and characteristics, therefore, non-probability convenience (or haphazard) sampling is
selected. This sampling is based on the most convenient, closest and the most easily accessible
elements’ selection of population and based on subjective judgement of researcher (Pranulis, 2007;
Saunders et al., 2009). The main disadvantage of this sample is that there is no guarantee that the
respondents represent the total population. This disadvantage has been eliminated with the first
question-filter selecting only those respondents which are needed - enthusiasts and fans of field
hockey, continuing their participation in the survey. As sample elements possibility to be involved
in the sample can be equal to zero and it is formed on the basis of personal preferences and
considerations, therefore, the elements are chosen at random - selected research width is 100
respondents. Whereas before the research the sample size has not been fixed and during the survey
time periodically checked results have showed trends which have not changed with increasing
number of respondents (also taking into account that representativeness of the sample does not
44
depend on its size, but on a set of selection procedures) selected research width can properly
represent opinion of the population.
Data analysis and interpretation
After collecting the data, its analysis and interpretation have been carried out. All recorded
answers of the semi-structured interview have been listened few times, checked carefully also
indicating the tone and circumstances of the answers. All audio-recorded answers have been
transcribed and analyzed based on the objective of the research expressing the main points.
The data of online survey has been analyzed using univariate technique (Pranulis, 2007).
This calculation is used to averages, percentage calculations and determination of distribution of the
sample parameters according to the respondents’ characteristics, as well as determination of
distribution of the frequencies. For Likert scale the calculation methodology of an arithmetic
average of the numerical evaluations has been used. The sum of numerical evaluations is calculated
by multiplying the evaluation score with the number of respondents and by summing the
multiplications. Numerical arithmetic average of the evaluations is obtained by dividing the sum of
the numerical evaluations from number of all respondents answered to the question (see Appendix
2). Obtained data has been processed in Microsoft Excel program. The data is analyzed according to
the structure of the questionnaire separately evaluating and summarizing the results of each
question and identifying the most important factors.
2.2 Research results
This part of the paper reveals the results of the research where the case study of The Royal
Belgian Hockey Association (RBHA) and the results of the online survey are presented and
analyzed. The primary data of the interview with Marketing and Communication Director of RBHA
is provided in Appendix 4 and the primary data of the online survey - in Appendix 5.
2.2.1 RBHA case study results
Brief history of The Royal Belgian Hockey Association (RBHA)
Belgian field hockey is growing constantly. For the past two years there is a growth of 9
percent of membership of field hockey. Over the past 6-7 years the number of hockey players
doubled and grew form 18000-19000 to 31000 at this moment. There are two main reasons
explaining this growth. The first one is organisational changes in RBHA where organisational
45
analysis of the quality of organisation has been made. It was analysed from the inside of the
organisation what was working well and what was not, the structural analysis was also made. The
purpose of this analysis was to completely professionalise the organisation. The analysis showed
that people working inside the company were not professionals of their scope. There were people
working in the association who were just hockey players or fans and not specialized in their work
field. As an example can be a person responsible for communication and working in this area just
because of having a passion of photography. Field hockey was growing anyway and to run it
became more complex for them. For such reasons, according to the findings, the new plan was
prepared. Therefore, it was necessary to attract new professionals in different areas. The
interviewee, recent Marketing and Communication Director of RBHA, was also one of them who
joined the renewed team.
The second reason of the growth of field hockey in Belgium was sporting success to which
contributed one person responsible for developing sports level by attracting proper people like
coaches for national teams, also setting the plan for the future better results, setting the ambitions
and finding more money. This person had a lot of experience and was professional in his area. The
proof of sportive success can be elevated place of women and men national teams of field hockey in
the world ranking. Men’s team rose from 19th place at that time to 9th place this year and women’s
national team rose from very low level to the 13th place this year. Therefore, Belgium can compete
in field hockey with the countries which have a larger number of players and higher media
attention. There was also one more turning point to field hockey growth. The mentioned sporting
success had contributed to men national team overcoming the qualification to Beijing Olympic
Games which brought increased attention and awareness of field hockey in the media and among
Belgian people which increased spectators’ base and youth willing to play field hockey.
RBHA still has bigger ambition for the future what drives to grow and go further,
therefore, higher amount of money is needed for this growth.
RBHA also had and has some challenges to manage like functioning in a country with
three regions what determines also structural changes in sports clubs and sports federations. RBHA
and hockey sports are also reorganised into two parts - Flemish and Walloon. RBHA has to adapt
and manage relationships with two governments in order to receive their support.
Main stakeholders
One of the main stakeholders named by RBHA is Belgian Olympic Committee which is
very important from the sports side and helps to develop it and receive better results and better
46
results in the Olympic Games. Another main stakeholder is Belgian Hockey Federation which is
national federation and reorganised into two leagues underneath - the Flemish league and the
French speaking league. This change in structure of the federation was made in order to be
acceptable for governments and receive support from it and work together to have evolution of the
Belgian field hockey. Therefore, governments are very important stakeholders, as field hockey is
growing and it requires more money to maintain this growth where governments are able to provide
the help (for ex., build more hockey pitches).
The most important one named by RBHA is the members of field hockey, because
without them there would be no field hockey clubs and without clubs there would be no federation.
The position of sponsors is hardly defined, because looking from received amount of income
governments would be the first, revenues from membership fees would be the second and sponsors
come in the third or the fourth place. But the sponsors are not perceived as important as, for
example, members are expressed as the most important stakeholder even if it is not the first
stakeholder according to received revenues.
Members of field hockey are people who are in one way or another involved in field
hockey, affiliated to a field hockey clubs, thus it is field hockey players, but also non non-playing
members. As mentioned before, there are 31000 hockey players, but according to RBHA, taking
everyone who is involved in filed hockey because of those players it would be 100000 or 120000
people in total who are in one way or another involved in field hockey. This group is the most
important stakeholder for RBHA, because it is a target group for sponsors, for Belgian Olympic
Committee and governments. Members of field hockey are the group where the elite players come
from and represent the national field hockey teams and evenually play in the Olympic Games to win
medals and it is also a group who votes for politicians, therefore, politicians by supporting field
hockey and trying for members want to gain their votes. That is why the members of field hockey
are such important stakeholder.
When talking about spectators and fans of field hockey, it was not expressed as very
ponderable stakeholder for RBHA. It took some time to think about how important this group is.
Spectators of field hockey are also the members of field hockey who are discussed above as it
involves non-players and people affiliated to field hockey and are the group of people who also
becomes as spectators. Spectators make sports events bigger and eventually help to attract more
media attention.
Earlier, spectators of field hockey were the players themselves coming to see the games of
other divisions, the games of other teams of their clubs and the games of national teams, thus,
47
people form hockey family. But nowadays it is evolving and due to increased attention to field
hockey more people who are sports fans come from outside, because they also like this type of
sports. Field hockey also attracts spectators, because it is a dynamic sports which involves
intersesting attributes such as stick for playing it. Field hockey is a real family sports where players
come from several generations of the same family and which involves women and men of different
ages. Therefore, spectators represent group of people of different ages.
Sponsorship relationship
Considering the importance of sponsorship to RBHA, according to it, sponsors also
contributed to field hockey growth, as growth contributed to bigger sponsors’ attention to field
hockey. This is like a circle where both variables have the impact to each and one can not appear
without the other.
RBHA considers sponsorship relationship as a way to exchange means and it is a win-win
situation. I can be exchange of money, services, products or something that makes both sides better.
Thus, sponsors are giving something or helping and making RBHA better and backwards, RBHA
helping sponsors, but it can only work with mutual exchange. Sponsorship relationship is mutual
exchange of the same value or added value. It is not always about the value that is written on the
paper or fixed value, because at the particular time this value can be worth more. It is about the
value that is given and sometimes it is worth more than is paid or money spent. And, therefore, the
ways how to give this value should be found. From the RBHA point of view, it is about how to
bring sponsors in the moments where they feel or realize that this moment is worth every paid cent
or even more. That moment could be winnings of field hockey teams were it is not possible to pay
for it. It is about giving added value to each other.
Sponsorship relationship also can not be created in a short-term. Short-term sponsoring can
appear, but it gives no sponsor’s involvement and later they will be sponsoring someone else and
opposite, but this is not a relationship. Good sponsor is the one who is possible to keep for a long
time and can grow together. And the one who can help and also receive help from the other party in
a difficult period of time. Besides, sponsors are called and perceived as partners and it is more about
partnership than sponsorship. Sponsor for RBHA is just the one giving amount of money and
getting something back. Partner is a lot more than this, because partners help each other, find winwin situation, develop something together. Thus, sponsors not only helping in development of field
hockey together, but also RBHA helping in development of sponsors’ businesses.
48
Elements of sponsorship relationship building and maintenance
There are many important elements for RBHA when talking about attracting sponsors and
building relationships with them. But the principal one for RBHA is communication and both external and internal. External communication is very significant and is the one who attracts
sponsors’ interest, because they want to be visible, be the ones which are talked about and be
involved when talking about hockey. This communication may include not only words, but also
visuals, pictures, therefore, visibility during the hockey events, also in the media and created visible
associations with hockey. If visibility is a substantial element for sponsors, creating that visibility is
essential for RBHA. Anyway, there are some sponsors with strong brands (for ex., “BMW”) to
whom visibility is not the most important element, but anyway RBHA consider that proper
visibility for its sponsors is a necessity, because it knows sponsors “will always be sensitive about
their logo being visible.” Even if it not the main goal for sponsors, RBHA continues to convince
them as this is an important attribute in creating relationships with the field hockey world and
showing that they are important partners for the field hockey and for RBHA.
Internal communication is the one which builds relationships with sponsors. Relationship
building skills are needed for RBHA to identify what is relevant and important for each of the
sponsors, because they all have different demands. According to RBHA, “The most important thing
is to make him [sponsor] feel important for us and to serve him well.” It requires knowledge about
each sponsor. And on the other hand, the sponsors have to be acquainted to RBHA, its goals and
what hockey in Belgium is about. Consequently, when sponsors are happy in relationships and are
pleased, normally, they stay in these relationships and grow together. Economic situation can
influence, but do not break off relationships when sponsors are happy all the time. Relationship
creating is the most important thing in sponsoring. This leads to mutual understanding that moving
up is considerable step for both sides. Moving up means giving more, not only more money, but
also exchanging services and helping to each other. For RBHA it is also about working a lot to have
good relationships and knowing what sponsors want.
Non-economic attributes are also significant elements in relationship building and,
according to RBHA, there should not be forgotten that sports are all about the emotion. Earlier, the
biggest sponsors were those who were players themselves, had children playing field hockey or was
somehow involved with this sports and wanted to help for it. But nowadays it is a bit different,
because of better results of field hockey, growing media attention, thus, better visibility, growing
number of members of field hockey and, therefore, becoming interesting channel for companies to
come in. It is not emotion-based anymore. However, RBHA tries to put sponsors on emotional level
49
anyway. Seeing the teams winning in the events of field hockey (for ex., qualification for the
Olympic Games) and enjoying success or loss together are what it wants to share with sponsors,
because it touches even those who are not that involved in sports. This stimulates to work together
to get that success again. According to Marketing and Communication Director of RBHA, a lot of
passion is needed to put to explain why sponsors’ involvement in such hockey events and moments
and being together are necessary and to show and sell them that it is the place where success
happens, tell them that field hockey success is also their success. “If you would ask me what is the
most important thing for you in your job, the end answer would be trying to get those sponsors at
the same level of my enthusiasm for that sports and say OK - we win together, we lose together and
we develop together.”
The next non-economic attribute that brings RBHA and its sponsors together is sharing
the same values. Sports, and thus, field hockey is not a separate part from the rest of the world, as
also the companies. Both parties have to be accountable to it. Sports of field hockey, as having its
personality should not forget the values, fight for it, actively work for it, communicate it, have the
reaction to the problems, otherwise those values will disappear and this personality will lose a very
important part. And this part is the first one which attracts the other companies the most, because
they also has the value based policies and have to be social responsible and to comply to those
values to be accepted by the public as a company. And when sponsors bring up the aspects such as
money and visibility and put it higher than the first thing they have come into sponsoring - values,
therefore, RBHA has a right to remind them about that. Proposition with sharing the same values
for the companies is something what field hockey and also RBHA can differentiate itself from other
sports, because for other sports it is more difficult to show it. Thus, RBHA is trying to say it and
show it as much as they can. Likewise, when creating relationship with sponsors, the match
between the values of sponsors and the values of RBHA should be met and is the first argument
when creating sponsorship relationship where other aspects come after that.
The main value for RBHA is firstly respect and is considered in every area. RBHA states
that the many aspects in the world are seen from negative side, therefore, as being the part of the
world field hockey should consider that and work to keep these values and use it, as it is not
something that is everlasting. Therefore, RBHA created a campaign to foster respect and reflect its
views. For RBHA respect is the number one, because it consists of many other values. It includes
respecting opponents on the hockey pitch, empire, tem members, infrastructure, respecting
ourselves, spectators, therefore, spectators respecting the tams and empire and etc. Fair play is
respecting the rules of field hockey or human relationships, tolerance is respecting the other person,
50
trust is also respect and etc. Understanding sponsors when they have difficulties and can not fulfil
commitments and trust when they promise to do it later are also about respecting them.
Furthermore, for sponsors it is also to respect RBHA when it is time to grow in sponsoring.
Therefore, respect from one party at particular time will cause respect form another party when
there is a necessity and it is a heart in the relationships with sponsors. It is about respecting every
area that can be imagined. These are the values or one value RBHA complies and tries to
communicate to the others, therefore, also to the sponsors.
Respect is what RBHA and sponsors have to match for working together and use it to
relationship building for having mutual respect in order to have good and long-term relationships. It
is possible to have common things that are interesting at first, but after some time one or another
side will not feel happy about it if there is no respect and relationships will not last long. Both sides
have to respect each other. Respect is also perceived when talking about the money. If the value
RBHA proposes to its sponsors does not reflect the financial value sponsors propose for it, it means
they do not respect RBHA. And on the other side, if it is not taken care about the things that are
important for the sponsors, for example, the visibility of sponsors’ logo does not represent their
personality, there is no respect from RBHA’s side. As mentioned before, sharing the same positive
values is why sponsors firstly engage in relationship with RBHA.
Network relationships
Relationships with different stakeholders are considered as a network. RBHA tries to
create good relationships with its stakeholders and bring them together in the family of field
hockey. Bring field hockey members, create relationship with people to come to watch the games,
with supporters of filed hockey national teams (“Red Tribe”) and also bring together and create
relationships with governments, which are very important relationships, but also a challenging task,
as both of them want to create different things separetelly. To keep them together is an important,
but also a difficult task.
As for one sponsors of RBHA visibility is essential, for others it is possibility to create a
network - possibility to create relationships or make contacts with other sponsors, other companies,
members of certain hockey clubs or with other people form hockey world This can be done during
the hockey events inviting relevant stakeholders to participate in it. RBHA tries to create a platform
of a big network and propose this platform to its sponsors. Therefore, RBHA encourages everyone
from a big hockey family to invite each other and bring everyone together that way helping in
creating contacts between the parties concerned.
51
Centre of the network
RBHA has not tried to identify before what is the centre of the network they create. When
asked about it, sporting success has been identified as an element which is common to all
stakeholders in the network. Governments support sports in order to have good results and,
therefore, successful image of sports, Belgium and themselves towards other countries. Sponsors
want to be partners of the sports that is successful, because if field hockey had not been successful
they would not have been sponsoring field hockey. The supporters, people who come and watch the
games, also come to see the team winning, therefore, that is again the same element. Belgian
Olympic Committee helps field hockey to increase the level of this sports. Success would be the
common driving element at the moment, but later maybe other element would appear, as it is not
clearly considered what this centre would be.
Speaking form organisational or stakeholders’ perspective, the centre of the network would
be 31000 members of field hockey, because without them there would not be successful national
teams, there would not be the public for sponsors which is the target group they want to reach.
Sponsors and their classification
RBHA classify sponsors, because when it is win-win situation the proper level of return on
investments should be given. Sponsor giving larger amount of money should receive higher level of
return. If there is the same return for all the sponsors, they will find out it very quickly and will not
be happy about it. This classification is necessary to know what should be given back in return on
investment to each of the sponsor. Therefore, the classification is based on the financial value that is
given to RBHA to determine the right return on investment. This classification is perceived as a
pyramid where the biggest sponsor is on the top in this case it is a bank “Fintro”. Then going down
on the second level there are the main sponsors - the national lottery “Lotto”, “Athlon Car Lease”
car leasing company, Dutch company “Sligro” and upcoming sponsor of car manufacturing “Audi”.
On the third level there are consultancy company “BDO” which will be replaced by other company
soon, food retailer “Delhaize” and “Adidas” which is the equipment supplier. Those are the most
important sponsors and on the last level are the official suppliers which do not support with money,
but provide products and receive visibility and some hospitality in return. The biggest sponsors for
RBHA are those who provide support with one part by money and with another part by services and
products.
52
2.2.2 Online survey results
All 100 respondents who have participated in the survey have been asked to indicate if
they are fans of any field hockey team or national teams choosing one of the three options - they
are, are not or partly are the fans. Distribution of the answers is shown in Figure 8. Majority of all
the respondents - 72 percent are the fans of any field hockey team or national teams, 16 percent of
all the respondents are partly fans and 12 percent are not fans of any field hockey team.
Further, it has been attempted to find out if respondents participate in field hockey games.
As it is seen in Figure 9, 78 percent of all respondents participate in field hockey games and 22
percent do not participate.
Those respondents who participate in field hockey games have beed questioned about how
often do they go to the games. The results can be seen in Figure 10. 56 percent of them participate
1–2 times a week, a little bit less - 33 percent go to field hockey games randomly. Other options of
responses are distributed similarly - 3 percent go more than 2 times a week, 3 percent - more than 2
53
times a month and 5 percent of respondents attending to field hockey games participate 1–2 times a
month.
All respondents have been asked to identify the sponsors of field hockey they know. They
have mentioned various sponsors which might also be former sponsors of field hockey, but which
are still remembered by spectators, as an example can be named “Volkswagen”. Mostly identified
sponsors are “BMW“ which is not going to be a sponsor anymore, „Adidas“, „Fintro“, „Delhaize“,
„BDO“, „Hockey Player“, „Lotto“, „Athlon“. Those sponsors are listed according to the
identification frequency of respondents. Four first sponsors in the list are named more often than the
remaining ones. Respondents who have not identified any of the sponsors of field hockey switched
to the classification questions.
Those respondents who have answered they know sponsors of field hockey or some of
them have been questioned about the impact those sponsors have for them. They have been asked to
evaluate the impact by assessing the degree of agreement or disagreement with the statements
where the degree has been measured by arithmetic average of the numerical evaluations (for
calculation see Appendix 2). Responses are presented in Figure 11 in ascending order.
As it can be seen in Figure 11, respondents mostly agree with the statement that they have
always liked field hockey, no matter of sponsors’ support, an average of this response is 4,46.
Considerably less than the statement before respondents agree with a further three statements that
are distributed similarly - average of 3,16 for the statement that respondents feel respect for the
sponsors, because they support their favourite field hockey teams or sports itself, average of 3,14 respondents see the sponsors as an integral part of field hockey and 3,08 - they had become more
aware of sponsors’ brands. Even less respondents agree with the statements that their perception of
54
sponsors’ brand/corporate image had changed to more positive and that their perception of
sponsors’ brand/corporate image had not changed, averages respectively are 3,03 and 2,92.
For the statements - respondents had started to trust more in sponsors or/and their products/services
and that they had become more loyal for sponsors’ brands the averages of the degree of agreement
or disagreement are respectively 2,57 and 2,38. At the least respondents agree that they had started
to buy more products/services of sponsors where average is 2,19, that they had become more
involved in field hockey - 2,14, that they buy sponsors’ products/services to support their favourite
team (s) - average 2,03 and at least that they had started to attend to more field hockey games where
average is 1,97.
Classification questions have been also presented for the respondents. The answers are
shown in Figure 12. Mainly in the survey participated people of 18–25 years old - 84 percent of all
the respondents. Other age groups are distributed similarly - 4 percent of people in a 26–30 age
group, 2 percent of 31–35 years, 4 percent of 36–40 and 6 percent of respondents are over 40 years
old.
55
Respondents have been also asked about their incomes per month. The answers are
contained in Figure 13. Mostly of them receive up to 1500 Euros per month - 82 percent of all
respondents. Other groups of incomes are distributed almost the same - 4 percent for each of the
groups of 1501–2000 Euros per month, 2001–2500 Euros and 2501–3000 Euros. A little bit more
answers have distributed to the group of incomes of over 3000 Euros per month - 6 percent of the
respondents.
2.3 Discussion of the results
Summarizing the results of the research, the case study of RBHA revealed that field
hockey in Belgium is growing constantly and the main two reasons of it are organisational changes
in RBHA where professionals have been attracted to work in it and sporting success to which
56
contributed one person responsible for developing sports level by attracting proper people, setting
the plan for the future better results, setting the ambitions and finding more money.
The case study also has shown the main stakeholders of RBHA which are members of field
hockey, Belgian Olympic Committee, Belgian Hockey Federation, Flemish and Walloon
governments of Belgium. Sponsors come after these stakeholders. The most important stakeholder
is members of field hockey and spectators and fans of field hockey are not expressed as a very
ponderable stakeholder for RBHA.
Relationships with stakeholders and sponsors are considered form a network perspective.
Possibility to create a network for sponsors is very important, therefore, RBHA tries to create a
platform of a big network and propose this platform to its sponsors. RBHA the centre of the
network relationships considers sporting success or looking from organisational or stakeholders’
perspective as a centre is considered members of field hockey.
RBHA defines sponsorship relationship as a long-term mutual exchange of the same or
added value to each other and it is a win-win situation where both parties are helping for each other
to make both sides better. Sponsors are considered as partners and both parties are partnering in
order to develop something together.
The most important element in relationship creation and maintenance with sponsors is
communication, thus, external and internal communication. Accordingly, the most important noneconomic elements in relationship creation and maintenance with sponsors are emotion in sports
and sharing the same values. Therefore, the most important value is respect which is a base value
considered in every area and including many other values.
RBHA classify sponsors by return on investment should be given to them. Sponsor giving
larger amount of money should receive higher level of return. Therefore, classification is perceived
as a pyramid where the biggest sponsor is on the top and official suppliers are on the last level. On
the top is “Fintro”, on the second level - “Lotto”, “Athlon Car Lease” “Sligro”, upcoming sponsor
“Audi”, on the third - “BDO” which will be replaced by other company soon, “Delhaize” and
“Adidas” and on the last are official suppliers.
Online survey has revealed that people interested in field hockey mostly are the fans of any
team or national teams of field hockey and mostly they participate in the games of field hockey.
People attend to hockey games generally 1–2 times a week or participate randomly. “BMW“,
„Adidas“, „Fintro“ and „Delhaize“ are the sponsors of field hockey which have been identified
more frequently by respondents.
57
People interested in field hockey have always liked field hockey, no matter of sponsors’
support, but they feel respect for the sponsors, because they support their favourite field hockey
teams or sports itself and see sponsors as an integral part of field hockey. But people interested in
field hockey have not started to attend to more field hockey games because of sponsors and do not
buy more products/services of sponsors of field hockey even to support their favourite teams.
Respondents who participated in the survey are mostly 18-25 years old and receive up to
1500 Euros of incomes per month.
58
III. PROJECT DECISIONS FOR SUCCESSFUL SPORTS
SPONSORSHIP RELATIONSHIP
The perception of sports sponsorship as being a widely used marketing communication
tool is not reasonable anymore. Sports have a capacity to attract a lot of media attention and reach
large size and diverse audience, thus, is an advantageous platform for sponsorship. Therefore, the
reason is not about this tool being not effective anymore to increase brand awareness, but about
changed perception sports sponsorship can bring. Academics agree that sports sponsorship can not
be understood as a short-term one way transaction and marketing communication, because
sponsorship includes more important role and is a bilateral perspective and used for strategic
business building initiative where potential value can be created only from long-term relationships.
To create sponsorship platform in sports is not an easy task, therefore, relationships appear as a
significant and requisite element for this creation. As already mentioned, there are two parties
involved in sports sponsorship relationships, therefore, two challenges occur from both parties sponsor and sports organisation. The first challenge is from sports organisation’s perspective where
the main task is to create attractive sponsorship platform for sponsors and the second challenge is
from sponsor’s perspective to get the access to this platform. One factor connecting both challenges
is popularity or success of the sports. There is more difficult for sports organisation to create
attractive platform for sponsors when sports does not have great popularity and it is more difficult
for sponsors to access sponsorship platform of the sports which is very popular and attracts great
attention, therefore, sports organisations can choose sponsors to create partnerships with.
The first challenge is chosen for the analysis of the effect of sports sponsorship relationship
and reveals the main problem - creating relevant platform for sponsors for successful sports
sponsorship relationship building and maintenance. This problem includes three main factors to
be analysed and solutions for it to be found:
1.
interlacement of relationship marketing and sports marketing in the sports sponsorship
relationship;
2.
economic prospect of sports sponsorship relationship;
3.
non-economic prospect of sports sponsorship relationship.
1. Interlacement of relationship marketing and sports marketing in the sports
sponsorship relationship. Setting up proper understanding about interlacement of relationship
59
marketing and sports marketing and its application, lays the base for successful sports sponsorship
relationship creation and maintenance. As analysed in literature review, relationship marketing is
assessed differently and can be seen from different perspectives. Even though it is widely used in
different industries and sports are not an exception, the complexity of relationship marketing makes
it more difficult to implement. This implementation is even more difficult when taking into account
sports itself. Sports are clearly different from other industries, therefore, sports marketing should be
taken into account. Consequently, two different marketing concepts interlace - relationship and
sports marketing. The perception about the sports itself and relationship marketing where both of
them are complex, and incorporating it both together brings exclusivity, should be properly
identified.
Sports marketing diversity
For better understanding about relationship marketing application in sports and, therefore,
sponsorship relationship, the differences between sports marketing and traditional marketing
concepts should be assessed and highlighted. One of the main differences is consumer who, in
sports case, is sports consumer. Fort the traditional consumer perceived value is economic where
companies seek his satisfaction and loyalty sometimes using price incentives, but for sports
consumer satisfaction is perceived differently and this incentive should not and even is not
recommended to use. For traditional consumer loyalty might be influenced by their satisfaction, but
for sports consumer loyalty is perceived differently, because sports consumers experience not only
satisfaction, but also pleasure, excitement, distress and gloom which are related to the winnings and
losses of the sports teams or athletes. Therefore, loyalty can be fostered through sports consumers’
identification with certain group which can be a sports team using such factors, as players’
attractiveness, social acceptance, involvement in sports and team performance discussed in
literature review.
The next significant difference between traditional and sports marketing is product. In
sports the product is sports itself which consists of three dimensions and is mainly intangible,
subjective, variable and perishable. Traditional goods are supply and demand based where sports
product is demand-based selling expected performance. Sports organisations perfectly understand
these main differences and must transfer this different understanding about sports when creating
relationships with sponsors.
60
Emotional base
It may appear that the differences between traditional and sports marketing discussed
above are disadvantages for sports being different, but it is not. This uniqueness bring advantages in
creating relationships between sports organisations and its sports consumers, between sports
organisations and its sponsors and between sponsors and sports consumers. For bringing these
parties all together the RBHA example can be taken where emotional basis of sports is exploited.
RBHA suggests that it should not be forgotten that sports are all about emotion, especially talking
about relationships between sports organisation and sponsors. To create this emotional base is more
difficult when sponsors themselves are not somehow involved in particular sports and have a desire
to help it. Sports are more about being attractive channel for companies to come in with good
results, growing media attention, thus, higher awareness. But the example of RBHA shows it is
possible to put sponsors on emotional basis which contributes to more successful relationships. This
emotional basis means sharing the attributes sports can provide, thus, providing the experience of
sports consumers. As a no-profit organisation, sports organisation has two types of customers where
one of them finances the services and another one pays for it, therefore, it can be sponsors and
sports consumers and sports organisation has to build relationships with both of them. Transferring
the experience of sports consumers to sponsors would mean putting both customers of sports
organisation on the same level and basically on the same emotional level.
Possibility to participate in sports events for sponsors and enjoy the sports moments
sharing success or loss together, and make them feel as a big part of it are what sports organisations
should foster. Sports organisations should create proper environment for enjoying these moments,
because it is something that can not be bought, but should be sold for sponsors as a stimulation to
work together to get the success of sports. Sports events are the place where success happens and
when it happens, then it is success of everyone. It stimulates to achieve better results and experience
it again or, in a case of the loss, fosters to work again to get that success again. These factors are
something that should be felt and, therefore, sports have that capacity to bring all together. This
capacity must be exploited by sports organisations, because it is a uniqueness the sports have. This
might not be an easy task and require a lot of work and efforts.
This is one of the non-economic attributes in sports sponsorship relationship where more
non-economic factors will be discussed later in the third part of creating relevant platform for
sponsors for successful sports sponsorship.
61
Network-based perspective
After understanding about sports differences and what it can bring, the right relationship
marketing perspective should be chosen. There are two different relationship marketing
perspectives applicable in sports - market-based and network-based which are discussed in the
literature review. Probably, there is no one right opinion which approach to adopt, but taking into
account sports differences and two different customers of sports organisations, relationship
marketing strategy is very important for sports organisations.
Before applying chosen relationship marketing strategy all the stakeholders must be
identified in order to determine the relationships with them and, thus, with sponsors. Many
academics agree and the research shows that the best relationship marketing perspective for
application in sports context is a network-based. In market-based perspective relationships with all
the stakeholders are built, but all of them are treated separately fostering loyalty. Relationships are
created to receive added value from each of the stakeholder. But in the case of a network-based
perspective, it is moving form organisational approach to relationships perceived and treated as a
network where all the parties are interconnected and the value is shared together with all the
stakeholders. In a case of a market-based perspective, relationships with stakeholders not necessary
grow to partnerships where in a network-based relationship marketing perspective all parties are
perceived as partners and work together for a common goal and create and share added value in
being together. Therefore, sports organisations should apply a network-based perspective which can
be proposed also to the sponsor in successful sponsorship relationships and which contributes to
economic and non-economic factors in relationships where these factors are discussed in the second
and the third parts.
Centre of the network
In choosing relevant relationship marketing strategy, in this case network-based, the centre
of the network should be considered. Centre shows who is the initiator of creation and fostering
relationships with the parties. Literature again provides two different perspectives - customercentred and firm-centred. But as the case study has revealed, the sports consumers should be
identified. In a case of RBHA, sports consumers are interconnected with members of field hockey,
because growing membership brings more sports consumers involved in this sports, thus, members
can be seen as growing organisation and as growing spectator base. But looking from the sports
perspective and taking into account the example of a case, sports organisations should adopt firmedcentred perspective of a network. Anyway sports consumers is a significant stakeholder for all
62
sports organisations, but when creating network relationships there are more important parties
involved and the initiator of relationship building is sports organisation itself. In the case of RBHA,
the most important stakeholder for it is the members of field hockey. The members are under
RBHA’s umbrella and it means they are contributing force to organisational growth. These
members attract more sports spectators and they are appealing market for sponsors and other
stakeholders and contribute to sporting success. Therefore, the centre of the network of RBHA is
sports organisation itself and can be as an example for other sports organisations to apply the same
approach. Besides, the theory suggests that internal market is a very important element when
applying relationship marketing and building relationships. Internal marketing should be also
applied within sports organisation. The reason is because having different types of staff - paid and
non-paid. Both types of staff have the contact with other stakeholders the sports organisation has
relationships with and they can be very important factor in its maintenance and in successful
relationship building with new stakeholders, as the staff reflects the organisation itself and its
objectives. The case of RBHA shows how important is to foster relationships in internal market,
because, as mentioned before, it is an attractive market for other stakeholders, including sponsors.
Importance of sports consumers
Even placing the sports organisation itself and not sports consumers in the centre of a
network, the importance of sports consumers should not be forgotten. The importance of them
should not only be clearly defined, but also they should be perceived as one of the main
stakeholder, because they are the market for other stakeholders although for sponsors. In a case of
RBHA, the importance of sports consumers are not clearly defined, because the most of the
attention is dedicated to the members of field hockey who attract other persons involved in field
hockey including spectators. All the concept of field hockey is perceived as one big family
including people with different ages. It does not mean that relationships with sports spectators
outside the family are not created, because the results of online survey show high awareness and
frequent participation in field hockey games and created fan base of particular field hockey teams.
But it might be improved increasing sports spectators’ attention and identification with sports by
already mentioned factors such as players’ attractiveness, social acceptance, involvement in sports
and team performance for better platform for sponsors to build relationships with those spectators
and fans. The results of online survey also have revealed that fans of field hockey do not have
strong associations with sponsors products or services, they have not started to buy more products
or services of the brands of sponsors and they have not become loyal to those brands. This is not
63
unexpected, as RBHA basically creates members-based market for sponsors, but it is also an
example showing that the focus should be also moved to the spectators and fans base.
Organisational changes
It might not be easy or even possible to implement relevant relationship marketing
perspective with existing organisational structure and people working in the sports organisation.
Changes in the perception might require changes in the inside organisation. Therefore, the analysis
about the quality of activities of the sports organization should be done in order to identify if all the
people working in it are capable of taking corresponding responsibilities, build relationships with
stakeholders including sponsors and contribute to the overall growth of these relationships.
Therefore, inside market is very important as having connection with the stakeholders. The
importance of internal market will be discussed later. Proper people in the organisation might be
needed not only talking about marketing activities, but also about professionals contributing to
sports success and sports growth. Sporting success is an important attribute in creating relevant
platform for sponsors for successful sports sponsorship relationship building and maintenance.
Sporting success has been discussed above speaking from the side of emotional base and will be
discussed in the third part when talking about non-economic factors contributing to successful
relationships with sponsors.
2. Economic prospect of sports sponsorship relationship. The second part considers
economic prospect in creating sports sponsorship relationship. Economic prospect means economic
elements which are significant in relationship creation with sponsors, because it brings economic
benefits for them and sports organisations must ensure the presence of these elements.
External communication
As the main sponsors’ purpose in sponsoring is to increase brand awareness of already
known brands and create associations between sponsors and sponsee in the minds of sports
consumers and benefit from that association, therefore, it is the responsibility of sports
organisations to ensure the visibility of sponsors’ brands and help to create those associations.
Many academics and the case study shows, sports organisations must ensure and have a
good external communication, as it is mainly the first element and the most important one which
attracts sponsors the most. External communication means having comprehensive communication
in different types of media like television, newspapers, visibility during the sports events using
64
billboards and advertising on sportswear, and etc. Choosing these channels depends on the sports
organisations and sponsors, but the main point is to create the link between sponsors and particular
sports using respective media channels. Even though, there are some highly-known brands and for
them visibility is not the main purpose of sponsorship, in a case of RBHA it is “BMW”, for RBHA
it is an essential element, because it knows sponsors are anyway sensitive about their brands
visibility. Furthermore, it is not only about that. The awareness of sponsors’ brands is an important
attribute in creating relationships with sports and showing their importance for being its sponsors.
External communication becomes even more important, because otherwise to create a link between
sponsors and sports consumers not showing their significant contributions to sports would be very
difficult. Therefore, sports organisation must ensure that and selecting media channels is important
when deciding which ones are better for this link and associations in consumers’ minds creation,
than media channels itself. The results of online survey show that chosen attitude of RBHA to
create visibility of sponsors brands, no matter how known they are, confirms, because it helps in
link creation between sponsors and sports consumers. Sports consumers feel respect for sponsors
because of support of their favourite teams and contribution to the sports. Consequently, sports
consumers see sponsors as integral part of sports, in this case, sports of field hockey. Moreover,
External communication and created associations have helped to increase brand awareness and
positive attitude towards sponsors’ brands. This again confirms how important external
communication is in creating both - brand awareness and sponsors involvement in sports.
Platform for network
When adopting network-based relationship marketing perspective to sports organisations,
this network also becomes significant for sponsors. It is not only about creating and sharing value
between the parties in the network, but also for creating favourable platform for sponsors’ attraction
and for them to come in. The case study has revealed that it is very important factor in relationships
creation with sponsors. This means giving the possibility to create other relationships in the
network. This is another significant element sponsors are looking for in the sports sponsorship
relationships. That is why participation in sports events of different stakeholders is important not
only for emotional basis discussed above, but also for possibility to create new contacts which helps
in the fostering of their businesses. Therefore, sports organisations seeking successful relationships
with their sponsors must create this platform of making contacts with other parties involved. This
can be done not only inviting stakeholders of the network in the sports events, but also encouraging
65
these stakeholders to invite other persons concerned form their environment. This again proves how
important is to chose relevant relationship marketing perspective, thus, network marketing.
Sporting success is also the element which contributes to the attraction of different parties
in the network. Sporting success has the capacity to attract everyone and also because of economic
reasons - it attracts great attention, therefore not only sponsors, but also other parties involved in the
network want to be associated with this success and increase awareness. Therefore, it is the factor
which brings all together and also helps to create contacts.
Classification of sponsors
As it is considerable to identify the main stakeholders and the relevance of relationships
with them it is as well important to identify the main sponsors. No matter how many sponsors
sports organisation has, to maintain the same level of relationships with everyone would not be easy
not even for sports organisation, but also looking from sponsors’ perspective as they do not want
the same level of relationships. It is talking about the return on investments each sponsor should
receive. Therefore, the classification of sponsors is needed. It is up to every sports organisation how
to classify their sponsors, but mainly sponsors are classified according to the financial value they
give to sports organisations for support. The reason why this classification is advantageous is
because of having a right determination of return on investments for them. Accordingly, sponsors
giving the larger amount of money should receive higher level of return. The absence of this kind of
classification might destroy relationships with sponsors, as they will not be satisfied knowing about
other sponsors receiving the same or not adequate return. Besides, sponsors giving larger amount of
money might receive the rights to be associated as official sponsors, the main sponsors, the biggest
sponsor, official suppliers and etc. In successful relationship building and maintenance the rights to
respective associations of sponsors should be clearly assessed and determined, therefore, this type
of classification allows it.
Evolution of relationships
Despite of successful relationship with sponsors, it anyway can not last forever. In
literature proposed evolution plan with different stages of relationships with stakeholders can be
applicable for sponsorship relationships. This plan consists of four stages - start, development,
established and decline. This evolution plan is important for predicting how long the relationships
might last in order to develop these relationships successfully with sponsors. The first stage is
significant in setting up and determining relationship with sponsors. Here the expectations and a
66
plan in conjunction for future growth are formed. Both parties set the length, the strength, amount
of investments from sponsors during the period of relationships and the rights to the respective
associations for them. It is an important stage considering future development and expected
perceived value - both - economic and non-economic.
The second stage lets to determine the growth in sponsorship relationships for both parties.
From sponsors point of view the growth of investments and from sports organisation return on these
investments. This stage not only lets sponsor to increase their investments, but also lets sports
organisation to demand for higher amount. The third stage describes the stability and strength of
relationships, but also signals the possibility of the end of it. Therefore, it should be taken into
account that sponsorship relationship will end eventually. If future growth and perspectives for
creating value might not be seen in partnering together, therefore, the relationships transfer to the
last stage - decline. There might be long lasting the third stage and both parties might transfer from
the fourth stages to first again, but trying to keep these relationships might be more damaging than
completing it, even if after the ended relationships sponsors receive return on investments for longer
time, because sports consumers identify the sponsoring company as the sponsors of sports
organisation. The case study shows that sports consumers still identify the companies’ brands of
former sponsors. This also establishes challenge for sports organisations and sponsors to take over
the position of former sponsors. Sports organisations must consider the evolution plan for building
and maintenance of sports sponsorship relationships as it gives certainty for future development.
This plan of evolution includes not only economic elements through all the stages, but also
non-economic, but it will be discussed in the third part.
3. Non-economic prospect of sports sponsorship relationship. The third part of creating
relevant platform for sponsors for successful sports sponsorship relationship building and
maintenance covers what non-economic elements should be included in sponsorship relationships.
Despite the economic side of relationships and economic value obtained, there are non-economic
factors that should be included, because sponsorship relationships can not exist without it.
Perception of sponsorship relationship
How proper perception about relationships within network is needed, therefore, it is the
same with perception about relationships with sponsors. The understanding what is sponsorship
relationship has the impact on development and maintenance of these relationships. As literature
review has revealed and the case study has showed, sponsorship relationship must be perceived as
67
long-term win-win relationships between sports organisation and sponsor committing each other in
partnership for sharing added value in being in these relationships. The case of RBHA has showed
that short-term sponsoring can appear, but then it would be impossible to create relationships and
short-term sponsoring it is not a relationship. Besides, it does not create value and the parties do not
share the benefits relationships can create. Therefore, when creating a network of sponsors, they
must be perceived as long-term partners and other attitude is not acceptable. That is why
sponsorship relationship includes economic and non-economic factors, because for long-term winwin perspective both parties should invest in order to receive added value and, therefore, sports
organisation must maintain relationships with sponsors that they could receive economic and noneconomic satisfaction.
Elements for successful relationships
As external communication is the first element that attracts sponsors the most, without
internal communication would be impossible to build relationships with them. Firstly, it is twosided communication. This element helps sports organisations to find out all the needs and
preferences of each sponsor. It is very important to know each sponsor and what are their
expectations from the relationship. As mentioned in the part of economic prospects, some of the
sponsors prefer high awareness of their brands, others getting access to the network and making
contacts for fostering their businesses, but the third ones might prefer sustain their corporate social
responsibility policies. Therefore, internal communication is the one which helps to investigate that
and understand each of the sponsors. On the other hand, internal communication helps for sponsors
also to know sports organisation and its goals. This leads to mutual understanding and working
together in relationship building and maintenance. Sports organisations must foster internal
communication and seek better knowing and understanding of sponsors. Without two-sided internal
communication would be also impossible to identify sponsor-sponsee match which determines the
possibility to create successful relationships.
The sponsor-sponsee match is necessary for possibility to create proper associations
between sports organisations and sponsors in the minds of consumers. At this point the nature of the
companies’ businesses plays an important role. It might be difficult to associate some brands with
sports, but it might be possible to create it with both-sided internal communication in setting up
how to achieve this. But on the other hand, for having a good external communication match it
might be difficult to create sponsorship relationships without internal sponsor-sponsee match. Here
non-economic factors play its role.
68
Internal sponsor-sponsee match means sharing the same policies of the companies, sharing
the same values. Here the base of the companies’ and sports organisations’ values plays the role.
Each company has its values which they communicate to outside the world and fosters inside the
company. Sports organisations exactly the same way must create their personalities choosing
which values they want to adapt in their daily activities and cherish it. The created personality also
attracts sponsors with the same values. The case of RBHA shows that it has created a wide range of
values it cherishes and communicates, but all of them turns in one value - respect. They have
chosen to communicate this value in every area they perform. This is created personality of sports
organisation which everyone has to accept and foster it together also the sponsors. Respect between
RBHA and sponsors should be also created and not only talking about non-economic factors, but
also respect to economic elements for proportional growth of both parties. This can be an example
for sports organisations showing the importance of exclusive personality which is the first factor of
non-economic elements which attracts the sponsors the most. It is because the companies nowadays
want to show their personalities and be accepted as social responsible companies, thus, sports are
one of the possibilities as it attracts great attention. Therefore, sports organisations having the
platform to help sponsors implement their policies and possibility to share the same values have
better opportunities in successful sponsorship relationship building and maintenance. It is the
greatest attractor for sponsors and it becomes number one in sponsorship relationships talking about
non-economic attributes and is the first argument when creating sponsorship relationships where
other aspects come after that. But on the other hand, if both parties commit in sharing and fostering
the same values, no one of the parties should put economic factor higher than this. Both parties
must remind each other that and, in the case of sports organisations, they should remind to the
sponsors that without respecting these values will be difficult to maintain relationships.
There are some elements suggested by literature and approved by the case study which are
the core of good sponsorship relationships causing economic and non-economic satisfaction of
sponsors. Trust is a significant attribute in relationships and it must be propagated from the both
parties involved. Partners committing themselves in the relationships have to trust that what is set
up for future development will be fulfilled. In the first stage of evolution of relationships, trust is the
element which also shows the presence of a sponsor-sponsee match. If trust is not set up in the first
stage, it will be difficult to transfer to the second stage of the relationship development. The case
study has indicated how partners trust each other even if the commitments can not be fulfilled in the
economic downturn. RBHA trusted sponsors having difficulties and unable to fulfil promised
69
commitments. This did not stop relationships and fostered non-economic satisfaction of sponsors
and also fostered trust to sports organisation from sponsors’ side.
As already talked about trust, it shows strong connection between two elements and when
talking about trust, commitment also appears. It supports the literature that these two elements are
interconnected. Commitment is already discussed form the point of view when there is a trust to the
commitments to be fulfilled, consequently, fulfilled commitments foster greater trust for the future
prospects. According to RBHA, it is everything about making sponsors satisfied and literature also
suggests that non-economic satisfaction influences economic satisfaction of sponsors. Therefore,
these two elements in successful relationship building and maintenance have a significant
contribution to the non-economic and, accordingly, to the economic satisfaction. Sports
organisations must foster these elements with sponsors in order receive the same from them and
make them satisfied.
Another element which contributes to successful relationship building and maintenance
with sponsors is sporting success. This element has been discussed when talking about sponsors’
emotional involvement in sports and economic prospect. Everything is much easier to the sports
organisations when the teams or athletes win. It helps with attraction more media attention, more
spectators and also sponsors. Sports organisations having the possibility to enjoy the winnings must
take an advantage of it. The case study has indicated how RBHA uses the sporting success in
relationship building not only with sponsors, but also with its main stakeholders. RBHA puts the
success of sports in the centre of the whole network looking from non-organisational perspective as
being the factor which attracts everyone to work together for the sports future growth and for the
growth of other parties.
In order to receive sporting success the organisational changes also might be needed which
already discussed in the first part. This success helps to put sponsors on the positive emotional level
which are one of the exceptional features of sports. Therefore, sporting success and emotional base
are the elements which contribute to non-economic satisfaction of sponsors. Sports organisations
having a chance to enjoy these attributes must take an advantage of it in the relationship building
with sponsors. For the sports organisations which are not successful enough, organisational changes
might be needed to bring professionals to work in this area or find other attributes to put sponsors
on the emotional basis such as personality of the sports organisations - being home town sports
team which needs of support to achieve success. This includes local people who are identified with
this team and it means this team has social acceptance.
70
Discussion
Table 2 summarizes project decisions of sports sponsorship relationship discussed in the
third part of the work. The first column shows the number of the factor which is relevant in finding
solutions for the problem - creation of relevant platform for sponsors for successful sports
sponsorship relationship building and maintenance. These three factors are discussed separately in
the third part of the work. The second column indicates mentioned factors and the third column
shows what decisions should be made within these factors. The fourth column indicates the
elements which should be taken into account in decision implementation. All the possible elements
covering the separate decision are presented in the fourth column and bolded the ones which should
be implemented.
Summarizing all the factors that should be implemented in order to create relevant
platform for sponsors and foster successful sponsorship relationships with them, firstly, the sports
marketing difference from traditional marketing should be understood. Sports bring the unique
elements other industries do not have - different sports consumer and sports product. These
elements are advantages towards other industries, because sports can bring emotional basis which
are an integral part of the sports. Bringing sponsors on the same emotional level as sports
consumers, helps in gathering together for future sports growth and success and helps to foster
sponsors’ businesses.
When properly identified beneficial sports elements, proper relationship marketing
perspective should be chosen. Sports organisations should choose and implement network-based
marketing perspective, because in a network all the stakeholders and, therefore, sponsors are
perceived as partners working together for common goal and creating and sharing added value in
being together.
Centre of the network can be customer or sports organisations itself, but firm-centred
network is better considering that there are many parties involved in the network and sports
organisation is the one which initiates and fosters relationships with different parties including
sponsors and sports consumers. Besides, internal marketing is also important for fostering
relationships inside the company, because people working in the sports organisation reflects
organisation itself and its goals to other stakeholders when having contact with them and is
important in relationship creation with them. Even as the centre of the network is considered sports
organisation itself, sports consumers’ importance must be regarded, because they are the market for
other stakeholders although for sponsors and sponsor-sponsee associations are created in the minds
of sports consumers.
71
Table 2
Plan of systematised project decisions for successful sports sponsorship relationship
Part
number
1.
Factor for the creation of relevant
platform for successful sports
sponsorship relationship building
and maintenance
Interlacement of relationship
marketing and sports marketing
Decision
Perception about
sports marketing
differences from
traditional marketing
Proper relationship
marketing
perspective
Centre of the
network
Organisational
analysis/changes
External
communication
Network platform
2.
3.
Economic prospect
Non-economic prospect
Sponsors
classification
Relationship
evolution
Elements for decision
implementation for
successful sports
sponsorship relationship
Sports consumer
Sports product
Emotional base
Market-based perspective
Network-based
perspective
Customer
Firm
Organisational
structure
Professionals
Brands’ awareness
Sponsor-sponsee link
Contact creation
Sporting success
Financial value based
Four-staged evolution
Proper perception of
sponsorship
relationship
Long-term win-win
partnership
Elements for
successful
relationships
Internal communication
Sponsor-sponsee match
Sports organisation’s
personality
Sharing the same values
Trust
Commitment
Sporting success
Emotional base
Note: Table composed by author, on the basis of made project decisions.
Relationship marketing application or, moreover, network-based relationships might
require changed attitude and the analysis of inside organisation and even organisational changes.
72
Proper people must work in a sports organisation to create successful sponsorship relationships with
sponsors and also other stakeholders, because it is not enough to apply network marketing with
sponsors not applying it to the whole context.
To attract sponsors and create and maintain successful relationships with them, economic
prospect must be created. Relevant external communication is needed properly communicate
sponsors’ brands, create its awareness and to create sponsors-sponsee link and associations in the
minds of consumers.
Another economic prospect is created network platform for sponsors to do networking
themselves and build contacts with other stakeholders. Therefore, sports organisations should invite
other stakeholders and encourage them to invite other people from their environment in the sports
events. Sporting success is again the element which attracts everyone and helps to implement their
economic prospects, therefore, sports organisations must take advantage of it.
To maintain successful relationships with sponsors and contribute to their economic
satisfaction, sponsors should be classified and the best classification is financial value based. It
helps to determine the level of their investments where sponsors giving the larger amount of money
receive higher level of return and helps to assess and determine the rights to respective associations.
The plan of evolution of relationships with sponsors must be set up in order to predict how
long these relationships might last and to develop these relationships successfully during the period
of relationships. Moreover, set up expectations and a plan in conjunction for future growth.
Non-economic prospect is very important in relationship building and maintenance with
sponsors. The proper understanding that sponsorship relationship is a bilateral perspective where
partners commit for long-term relationships in a win-win situation to share created value in being
together is needed. There are many non-economic elements which help to build relationships and its
importance should be considered. It is impossible to create relationships without internal
communication which also helps to ascertain sponsor-sponsee match. This match is very important
in creation of long-term partnership, therefore, sports organisations and its sponsors must share,
foster and communicate the same values. To attract proper sponsors and build relationships with
them, sports organisations have to create their personalities choosing which values they want to
adapt in their daily activities and cherish it. Personality and possibility to share the same values are
the ones which attract sponsors the most considering non-economic prospect and sometimes are
even above the economic factors.
73
Sports organisations must foster trust and commitment with its sponsors, because that way
it gets the same trust and commitment from them. Commitment and trust are the elements which
influence non-economic satisfactions and, continuously, economic satisfaction of the sponsors.
Sporting success and emotional base are the elements which also influence non-economic
satisfaction of sponsors. Sporting success helps to put sponsors on the positive emotional level.
Sports organisations having sporting success must take an advantage of it and for those with a lack
of it, organisational changes might be needed to get that success or find other attributes which
would help to put sponsors on the emotional basis.
Figure 14 illustrates network relationships between the parties in it including the elements
discussed for successful sports sponsorship relationships with sponsors. The main focus of the
network is between sports organisation, sports consumer and sponsors - partners, as long-term
relationships are considered as partnerships. Other stakeholders are included to illustrate the whole
network, but they are not exactly identified, because each sports organisation has different
stakeholders. Sports organisation being in the centre of the network includes its personality,
sporting success and sports product and initiates relationships. Sports organisation and sponsorspartners communicate between each other and share economic and non-economic elements in the
relationships. Sports organisation communicates and shares emotion with sports consumer and
communicates the brands of sponsors seeking to create sponsor-sponsee link. Sponsors and sports
consumer also share emotion and sponsors communicate their brands and seek associations in the
minds of consumers. Sponsors between other sponsors and stakeholders make contacts between
each other to foster their buseness.
In conclusion, in order to create relevant platform for sponsors for successful sports
sponsorship relationship building and maintenance all the elements discussed must be implemented
by sports organisations taking into account sponsors’ involvement and inseparability while
implementing it. All the elements contribute to the problem solution and reflect the theory which is
successfully implemented in practice, as the case study and the online survey have revealed. The
analysis of the project decisions has revealed that sports sponsorship relationship requires
significant changes in sports organisations if it is not prepared to create and foster successful
network-based sponsorship relationships with sponsors. Relationship marketing can not be
implemented successfully in sports sponsorship relationship when it does not fit the philosophy of
sports organisation itself. When relationship marketing is successfully implemented, the effect of
sports sponsorship relationship is created partnerships where partners can share value created in
74
working together in a long-term and contribute to the future growth of both - sports and sponsors’
businesses.
75
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMENDATIONS
After the theoretical analysis of the relationship marketing, it appears that relationship
marketing is considered form two approaches - narrower or customer oriented and broader or
stakeholders oriented. Narrower approach reveals it is important to develop close relationships with
customers, because it leads to sustainable competitive advantage. In broader approach relationship
marketing is seen more than just customer–supplier dyad and other stakeholders must be included in
order to develop customer-supplier relationship.
Literature analysis also has showed network approach of RM extends dyadic relationships
to a wider range of relationships created with customers, distributors, suppliers, producers,
competitors and other organizations which help to serve clients better and receive common benefits
by meeting joint objectives and investing in these relationships. The elements of successful
relationships in a network are customer orientation/empathy, experience/satisfaction and the most
important are commitment, trust and communication.
It has also appeared there are two network perspectives of RM - firm-centred and
customer-centred. In a firm-centred perspective focal firm is placed in the centre of a network
because of its role being an integrator and facilitator of different types of relationships and helping
to improve market effectiveness. In customer-centred network perspective customer is in the centre,
because he is the purpose of relationship marketing where customer value, satisfaction and loyalty
are created and leads to improved profitability in the longer term.
Literature review has indicated that sports marketing is not the same as marketing other
industries and is a special case, because its processes do not operate the same for other products and
services. The main differences between sports marketing and traditional marketing are sports
consumer and sports product.
For sports organisations relationship marketing strategy is very important, because of two
types of customers where the reciprocal benefit is needed, thus, RM approach has been chosen by
many sports organizations. There are two types of relationship marketing in sports - market-based
and network-based where in market-based RM in sports relationships are built and loyalty is
stimulated between sports organisation and its stakeholders, but not necessary developed to
partnerships. In network-based type of RM sports organisations and different stakeholders build
network relationships between each other to achieve the same objectives and receive value.
Relationship development between sports organisation and each stakeholder goes through 4 stages start, development, established and decline including 8 dimensions.
76
Traditionally, sponsorship is used in the sports sector where sponsors create associations
with sports organisations or events in the minds of sports consumers. Sponsors and sports entities
engage investing time and efforts to reach predetermined and bilateral beneficial objectives where
competitive advantages are available through longer term associations and are seen as a strategic
value. Sports sponsorship relationships can develop into co-marketing alliances, where the product,
brand, or corporate image of the alliance partners bare marketed together as a system and that
system should consist of commitment, trust and economic and non-economic satisfaction. Trust is
the essential variable in the sports sponsorship relationship, because it influences not only economic
satisfaction directly, but also impact both - commitment and non-economic satisfaction. Sponsors
inferred economic satisfaction from their non-economic satisfaction.
The literature analysis has showed that the brands of both - sponsor and sports entity are
central to the success of the relationship and large scale sponsorships have been referred to as cobranding partnerships. Sports organization’s brand image enhances sponsors’ positive corporate
brand perception to their customers or other stakeholders. Therefore, brand personality is as
indicator of brand image, associated with human characteristics, because consumers select brands,
which are related with their self-concept and self-image. But the negative impact of sports
organization’s and at the same time sponsor’s brand image can damage the relationship between the
parties what leads to decreasing cooperation, trust, mutual understanding and joint benefits.
Research results of the case study of RBHA have revealed that field hockey in Belgium is
growing constantly and the main two reasons of it are organisational changes and sporting success
influenced by professionals attracted to work in. Relationships with stakeholders and sponsors are
considered form a network perspective. The most important stakeholder for RBHA is members of
field hockey, spectators and fans are not expressed as a very ponderable stakeholder. Sponsors
come in the third or fourth place. RBHA tries to create a platform of a big network and propose this
platform to its sponsors as it is very important factor for them. RBHA the centre of the network
relationships considers sporting success or looking from organisational or stakeholders’ perspective
as a centre is considered members of field hockey.
RBHA defines sponsorship relationship as a long-term mutual exchange of the same or
added value to each other and it is a win-win situation where both parties are helping for each other
to make both sides better. Sponsors are considered as partners and both parties are partnering in
order to develop something together. The most important element in relationship creation and
maintenance with sponsors is external and internal communication. The most important noneconomic elements are emotion in sports and sharing the same values where the most important
77
value is respect which is a base value considered in every area and including many other values.
RBHA classify sponsors by return on investment should be given to them. Classification is
perceived as a pyramid where the biggest sponsor is on the top and official suppliers are on the last
level.
Research results of the online survey has revealed that people interested in field hockey
mostly are the fans of any team or national teams of field hockey and mostly they participate in the
games. They also identify more frequently almost the same sponsors RBHA names as the most
important ones. People interested in field hockey have always liked field hockey, no matter of
sponsors’ support, but they feel respect for the sponsors, because they support their favourite field
hockey teams or sports itself and see sponsors as an integral part of it. But people interested in field
hockey have not started to attend to more field hockey games because of sponsors and do not buy
more products/services of sponsors of field hockey even to support their favourite teams.
Project decisions of sports sponsorship relationship have revealed that in order to create
relevant platform for sponsors and foster successful sponsorship relationships with them, the sports
marketing difference from traditional marketing should be understood and advantages of it taken.
Sports organisations should choose and implement network-based marketing perspective,
because in a network all the parties are perceived as partners working together for common goal and
creating and sharing added value in being together. Centre of the network should be sports
organisation itself as initiating and fostering relationships with different parties, but sports
consumers’ importance must be regarded, because they are the market for sponsors. Network-based
relationship marketing application might require changed attitude and the analysis of inside
organisation and even organisational changes, because network marketing application is not enough
in relationships with sponsors not applying it to the whole context.
Project decisions have shown that to attract sponsors and create and maintain successful
relationships with them, economic prospect must be created such as external communication needed
for proper communication of sponsors’ brands, creation its awareness and creation of sponsorssponsee link and associations in the minds of consumers. Network platform for sponsors should be
created to do networking themselves and build contacts with other stakeholders. Sports
organisations should invite other stakeholders and encourage them to invite other people from their
environment in the sports events. Sporting success is the element which attracts everyone and helps
to implement their economic prospects, sports organisations must take an advantage of it.
The plan of evolution of relationships with sponsors must be set up in order to predict how
long these relationships might last, set up expectations and a plan in conjunction for future growth.
78
To maintain successful relationships with sponsors and contribute to their economic satisfaction,
sponsors should be classified based on financial value. It determines the level of their investments
and proper return and helps to assess and determine the rights to the respective associations.
Project decisions have indicated non-economic prospect is very important in relationship
building and maintenance with sponsors. The proper understanding that sponsorship relationship is
a bilateral perspective where partners commit for long-term relationships in a win-win situation to
share created value in being together is needed. It is impossible to create relationships without
internal communication which also helps to ascertain sponsor-sponsee match helping to create longterm partnership. Sports organisations and its sponsors must share, foster and communicate the
same values. Sports organisations have to create their personalities, because its personality and
possibility to share the same values are the ones which attract sponsors the most considering noneconomic prospect and sometimes are even above the economic factors. Commitment and trust are
the elements which influence non-economic satisfactions and, continuously, economic satisfaction
of the sponsors. Sports organisations must foster these elements to get the same back. Sporting
success and emotional base are the elements which also influence non-economic satisfaction of
sponsors. Sports organisations having sporting success must take an advantage of it and for those
with a lack of it, organisational changes might be needed to get that success or find other attributes
which could help to put sponsors on the emotional basis.
Relationship marketing can not be implemented successfully in sports sponsorship
relationship when it does not fit the philosophy of sports organisation itself. When relationship
marketing is successfully implemented, the effect of sports sponsorship relationship is created
partnerships where partners can share value created in working together in a long-term and
contribute to the future growth of both - sports and sponsors’ businesses.
Sports organisations building sports sponsorship relationship do not take complete
advantage of relationship marketing, as its implementation in sports are rather complex taking into
account the interlacement of two types of marketing. This paper provides guidelines how
relationship marketing should be applied in sports organisations in order to build and maintain
successful sports sponsorship relationship. The guidelines reflect in the theory proposed methods
which are verified by the case study and the online survey finding repairable areas.
For better understanding and application of network perspective of RM in sports
sponsorship relationship the research from sponsors’ perspective involved in the respective network
might be done to have proper reflection of their position about network-based sports sponsorship
relationship.
79
REFERENCES
1. Baron, S., Warnaby, G. and Conway, T. (2010). Relationship Marketing: A Consumer
Experience Approach. SAGE Publications Ltd. EBSCO e-book.
2. Basil, M.D. and Brow, W.J. (2008). Magic Johnson and Mark McGwire: The Power of
Identification With Sports Celebrities // Sports Marketing and the Psychology of Marketing
Communication.- Edited by L.R.Kahle and C.Riley. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
3. Bonnemaizon, A., Cova, B. and Louyot, M.–C. (2007). Relationship Marketing in 2015: A
Delphi Approach // European Management Journal, February, Vol. 25, pp. 50-59.
4. Chien, P.M., Cornwell, T.B. and Pappu, R. (2011). Sponsorship portfolio as a Brand-image
Creation Strategy // Journal of Business Research, Vol. 64, pp. 142-149.
5. Christopher, M., Payne, A. and Ballantyne, D. (2008). Relationship Marketing: Creating
Stakeholder Value. Oxford: Elsevier.
6. Cliffe, S.C. and Motion, J. (2005). Building Contemporary Brands: A Sponsorship-based
Strategy // Journal of Business Research, Vol. 58, pp. 1068-1077.
7. Cousens, L., Babiak, K. and Bradish, C.L. (2006). Beyond Sponsorship: Re-Framing
Corporate-Sport Relationships // Sport Management Review, Vol. 9, pp. 1-23.
8. Egan, J. (2003). Back to the Future: Divergence in Relationship Marketing Research //
Marketing Theory, March, Vol. 3, pp. 145-157.
9. Eiriz, E. and Wilson, D. (2006). Research in Relationship Marketing: Antecedents,
Traditions and Integration // European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 40, pp. 275-291.
10. Farrelly, F. and Quester P. (2005). Examining Important Relationship Quality Constructs of
the Focal Sponsorship Exchange // Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 34, pp. 211-219.
11. Farrelly, F. and Quester P. (2005). Investigating Large-scale Sponsorship Relationships as
Co-marketing Alliances // Business Horizons, Vol. 48, pp. 55-62.
12. Farrelly, F., Quester, P. and Burton, R. (2006). Changes in Sponsorship Value:
Competencies and Capabilities of Successful Sponsorship Relationships // Industrial
Marketing Management, Vol. 35, pp. 1016-1026.
13. Ferrand A. and McCarthy S. (2009). Marketing the Sports Organisations: Building
Networks and Relationships. Abingdon: Routledge.
14. Gronroos, C. (2002). Marketing Classic // The Marketing Review, Vol. 3, pp. 129-146.
80
15. Gronroos, C. (2004). The Relationship Marketing Process: Communications, Interaction,
Dialogue, Value // Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, Vol. 19, pp. 99-113.
16. Gummesson E. (2006). Total relationship marketing. Marketing management, relationship
strategy and CRM approaches for the network economy, 2nd Edition. Oxford: Elsevier.
17. Gummesson, E. (1999). Total Relationship Marketing: Experimenting With a Synthesis of
research Frontiers // Australasian Marketing Journal, Vol. 7, pp.72-85.
18. Gummesson, E. (2002). Relationship Marketing in the New Economy // Journal of
Relationship Marketing, Vol. 1, pp. 37-57.
19. Kahuni, A.T., Rowley, J. and Binsardi, A. (2009). Guilty by Association: Image ‘Spill-over’
in Corporate Co-branding // Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 12, pp. 52−63.
20. Kelley, S.W. and Tian, K. (2008). Fanatical Consumption: An Investigation of the Behavior
of Sports Fans Through Textual Data // Sports Marketing and the Psychology of Marketing
Communication.- Edited by L.R.Kahle and C.Riley. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
21. Kim, Y.K. and Trail, G. (2010). Constraints and Motivators: A New Model to Explain Sport
Consumer Behavior // Journal of Sport Management, Vol. 24, pp. 190-210.
22. Lamont, M., Hing, N. and Gainsbury, S. (2011). Gambling on Sport sponsorship: A
Conceptual Framework for Research and Regulatory Review // Sport Management Review,
Vol. 14, pp. 246-257.
23. Lindgreen, A., Palmer, R. and Vanhamme, J. (2004). Contemporary Marketing Practice:
Theoretical Propositions and Practical Implications // Marketing Intelligence & Planning,
No. 6, pp. 673-692.
24. Madill, J. and O'Reilly, N. (2010). Investigating Social Marketing Sponsorships:
Terminology, Stakeholders and Objectives // Journal of Business Research, Vol. 63, pp.
133-139.
25. Madrigal, R. (2008). A Review of Team Identification and Its Influence on Consumers’
Responses toward Corporate Sponsors Data // Sports Marketing and the Psychology of
Marketing Communication. - Edited by L.R.Kahle and C.Riley. New Jersey: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
26. Martin, C.L. and Clark, T. (1996). Networks of Customer-to-customer Relationships in
Marketing // Networks in Marketing, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, pp. 342–366.
81
27. Maxim A. (2009). Relationship Marketing - A New Paradigm in Marketing Theory and
Practice.
Access
via
the
Internet:
<http://anale.feaa.uaic.ro/anale/resurse/23_M04_MaximA.pdf>, (connected 2013 02 03).
28. Moller K. and Halinen, A. (2000). Relationship Marketing Theory: Its Roots and Direction
// Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 16, pp. 29-54.
29. Morgan, R.M. and Hunt, S.D. (1994). The Commitment–Trust Theory of Relationship
Marketing // Journal of Marketing, July, Vol. 58, pp. 20-38.
30. O’Reilly, N. and Horning, D.L. (2013). Leveraging sponsorship: The activation. Access via
the
Internet:
<http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1441352313000028>,
(connected 2013 02 03).
31. Palmatier, R.W. (2008). Relationship Marketing. Cambridge: Marketing Science Institute.
32. Peck, H., Payne, A., Christopher, M. and Clark, M. (2004). Relationship Marketing for
Competitive Advantage: Winning and Keeping Customers. Guildford and King’s Lynn:
Biddles.
33. Plewa, C., Quester, P. and Baaken, T. (2005). Relationship Marketing and UniversityIndustry
Linkages:
A
Conceptual
Framework
//
Marketing Theory, December,
Vol. 5, pp. 433-456.
34. Pranulis, V.P. (2007). Marketing Research. Theory and Practice. Vilnius: Vilnius University
Publishing House.
35. Rifon, N.J, Choi, S.M., Trimble, C.S. and Li, H. (2004). Congruence Effects in Sponsorship
// Journal of Advertising, Vol. 33, pp. 29–42.
36. Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2009). Research Methods for Business Students,
5th Edition. Harlow: Financial Times Prentice Hall.
37. Schurr, P.H. (2007). Buyer-seller Relationship Development Episodes: Theories and
Methods // Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, Vol. 22, pp. 161-170.
38. Schwarz, E.C. and Hunter, J.D. (2008). Advanced Theory and Practice in Sport Marketing.
Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.
39. Sin, L.Y.M., Tse, A.C.B., Yau, O.H.M., Chow, R.P.M., Lee, J.S.Y. and Lau, L.B.Y. (2005).
Relationship Marketing Orientation: Scale Development and Cross-cultural validation //
Journal of Business Research, February, Vol. 58, pp. 185-194.
40. Sirgy, M.J., Lee, D.J., Johar, J.S. and Tidwell, J. (2008). Effect of Self-congruity with
Sponsorship on Brand Loyalty // Journal of Business Research, Vol. 61, pp. 1091-109.
82
41. Tadajewski, M. (2008). Relationship Marketing at Wanamaker's in the Nineteenth and Early
Twentieth Centuries // Journal of Macromarketing, June, Vol. 28, pp. 169-182.
42. Tadajewski, M. and Saren. M. (2008). Rethinking the Emergence of Relationship //
Marketing Journal of Macromarketing, June, Vol. 29, pp. 193-206.
43. Urriolagoitia, L. and Planellas, M. (2007). Sponsorship Relationships as Strategic Alliances:
A Life Cycle Model Approach // Business Horizons, Vol. 50, pp. 157-166.
44. Van Doorn, J. and Verhoef, P.C. (2008). Critical Incidents and The Impact of Satisfaction
on Customer share // Journal of Marketing, Vol. 72, pp. 123−142.
45. Votolato, N.L. and Unnava, H.R. (2006). Spillover of Negative Information on Brand
Alliances // Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 16, pp. 196-202.
46. Wakefield, K.L. (2007). Team Sports Marketing. Burlington: Butterworth Heinemann.
47. Wang, C.L. (2007). Guanxi vs. Relationship Marketing: Exploring Underlying Differences
// Industrial Marketing Management, January, Vol. 36, pp. 81-86
48. Webster, C.M. and Morrison, P.D. (2004). Network Analysis in Marketing // Australasian
Marketing Journal, Vol. 12.
49. Westberg, K., Stavros, C. and Wilson, B. (2011). The Impact of Degenerative Episodes on
the Sponsorship B2B Relationship: Implications for Brand Management // Industrial
Marketing Management, Vol. 40, pp. 603-611.
50. Wilson, B., Stavros, C. and Westberg, K. (2008). Player transgressions and the management
of the sport sponsor relationship. Public Relations Review, Vol. 34, pp. 99-107.
51. Wolfe, R., Meenaghan, T. and O’Sullivan, P. (2002). The sports network: Insights Into the
Shifting Salance of Power // Journal of Business Research, Vol.55, pp. 611-622.
52. Zhang, J.J., Lam, E.T.C., Cianfrone, B.A., Zapalac, R.K., Holland, S., Williamson, D.P.
(2011). An Importance–Performance Analysis of Media Activities Associated with WNBA
Game Consumption // Sport Management Review, Feb, Vol. 14, pp. 64-78.
53. Zyman, S. (2001). The End of Advertising as We Know It. New Jersey: John Wiley and
Sons.
83
APPENDIXES
84
Appendix 1
Questionnaire for field hockey fans and spectators
Dear. Respondent,
I am a student of Catholic University of Louvain in second year of Master degree in Louvain
School of Management and I am writing a Master’s thesis named - The effect of sponsorship
relationships. I would like to ask all field hockey fans to fill in a survey and participate in the
research. The survey is anonymous and absolutely guarantees the confidentiality of your responses.
I ask you an honest answer to each question and fill in the form completely. It would take only 5
minutes. Thank you in advance.
1. Are you interested in field hockey?
o Yes
o No (end questionnaire)
2. Are you a fan of any team or national team of field hockey?
o Yes
o No
o Partly
3. Do you visit field hockey games?
o Yes
o No (go to question 5)
4. How often do you attend to field hockey games?
o Randomly participate in games
o 1–2 times a week
o More than 2 times a week
o 1–2 times a month
o More than 2 times a month
5. Do you know who are the sponsors of field hockey teams?
o Yes. Please specify _______________
o Some of them. Please specify _______________
o No (go to question 7)
85
Continuation of Appendix 1
6. How would you assess the impact of field hockey sponsors for you?
Express your answer by assessing your degree of agreement or disagreement with the following
statements.
1 - strongly disagree, 2 - disagree, 3 - hard to say, 4 - agree, 5 - 1
strongly agree
I had started to buy more products/services of sponsors
I had become more aware of sponsors’ brands
I had become more involved in field hockey
I had started to attend to more field hockey games
I feel respect for the sponsors, because they support my favourite
field hockey team(s)/sports
I had started to trust more in sponsors or/and their products/services
My perception of sponsors’ brand/corporate image had changed to
more positive
My perception of sponsors’ brand/corporate image had not changed
I see the sponsors as an integral part of field hockey
I had become more loyal for sponsors’ brands
I have always liked field hockey, no matter of sponsors’ support
I buy sponsors’ products/services to support my favourite team
(s)/sports
86
2
3
4
5
Continuation of Appendix 1
7. What is your age?
o 18 – 25
o 26 – 30
o 31 – 35
o 36 – 40
o Over 40
8. What is your income per month (EUR)?
o Up to 1500
o 1501–2000
o 2001–2500
o 2501–3000
o Over 3000
87
Appendix 2
Calculation methodology of the arithmetic average of the numerical evaluations
Numerical evaluation
1
2
3
4
5
a
b
c
d
e
Claim/ Factor
Arithmetic average = (1*a+2*b +3*c+4*d +5*e)/N
Note: Table composed by author, on the basis of V. Pranulis (2007) data processing methods.
88
Number of
respondents
N
Appendix 3
Interview questions planned before the interview with Marketing and Communication
Director of The Royal Belgian Hockey Association (RBHA)
Key questions:
1. The growth of field hockey in Belgium is constant. What would be the brief history of
field hockey in Belgium?
2. Who do you consider as your stakeholders?
Objectives of this question:

who are the main stakeholders and how relationships with them are consider (as a
network-based or as a market-based);

who is consider as the main stakeholder or how stakeholders are classified;

what position holds sponsors.
3. Who do you consider as most important sponsor or how do you classify them, if you
do?
4. How would you describe sponsorship relationship?
5. How do you consider relationships with your sponsors?
Objective of this question:

are relationships market-based or network-based.
6. How do you create relationships with you sponsors?
Objective of this question:

what are successful elements of relationship creation;

what is the most important one.
7. How sponsorship relationship contributes to field hockey success and growth?
8. How would you describe Field Hockey spectators and fans, who are they?
Additional possible questions if necessary:
9. What managerial challenges do you confront in relationship management with your
sponsors or/and stakeholders?
10. What would be the main stages of relationship evolution with your sponsors? Do you
identify it as important part of sponsorship relationship?
89
Continuation of Appendix 3
11. Do you consider having suitable sponsee-sponsor fit for creation of desired associations for
consumers?
12. What is the effect of sponsorship relationship for you as sports organisation?
13. What is the effect of sponsorship relationship for sponsors?
14. What is the effect of sponsorship relationship for sports consumers?
15. What do you offer for sponsors? What would be the main attributes/benefits you share
together with your sponsors as a system?
90
Appendix 4
Interview with Marketing and Communication Director of The Royal Belgian Hockey
Association (RBHA)
I was reading about field hockey here in Belgium and in the website of RBHA it was written
that growth of field hockey is constant lately. Could you tell the brief history of the Belgian
Hockey?
I have started to work in a Belgian Hockey federation 6,5 years ago. At that time in Belgium we had
18000-19000 hockey players and this moment we have 31000. In ten years we doubled the
numbers. This is a big expansion. Last two years we have more than 9 percent growth of
membership. There are two most important reasons for this growth. The first is organisational
aspect. Before I have started, Belgian federation together with professor Zintz and his students
analyzed the quality of the organisation - Belgian hockey federation. Organisation analysis was
made from the inside, what was going well and was not, what was the structure, was there a
structure. A big work was done. After that there were some findings and a plan was made to
organise, and the main purpose was to professionalise completely the organisation. At that stage it
was decided to find and attract some people to work for the federation who were professionals in
their areas, activities. Before that there were some people working in the federation who were
hockey fans or hockey players, but not always really specialized in what they were doing. The
example to explain how it was like is the person who was responsible for communication was in
fact hockey coach and hockey player and one of his hobbies was photography, so he was a good
hockey photographer and then somebody at federation said that you are a good photographer, so
maybe you could do communication. So, that was the reasoning of the people at that time. And with
the plan of Thierry Zintz and the president Marc Coudron of the federation and people who worked
on that plan the decision was to attract people and one of those people was me. I worked for fifteen
years I think in communication agencies and marketing agencies working for big companies, but I
was a hockey player, so that is the way I arrived at the hockey federation. And so there were other
people attracted, there was general secretary who was also before financial director and there was
somebody who was really also specialized in working with numbers and with the money. In
different areas there were professionals who were attracted.
So you would say that organisational structure changes made this start point?
Yes. So that was one thing, because at that time there was already a big expansion of the members,
but for people it was becoming too big to run it just like amateurs. So, that was one important thing.
91
Continuation of Appendix 4
The other important thing is that one of the professionals that was attracted is a Dutch guy, he is the
technical director, so chief of national teams and chief of sports, I can say it like that. So he is
responsible for hiring good coaches for national teams, for attracting good people to do the
development on the sports level, to write down a plan for the future to have better and better results.
So, that guy started I think one or two years before I started and he is a really great professional guy
who was national coach in the Netherlands, before he worked as a technical director also for the
sports society at big Dutch university, so he had a lot of experience and he was I think the basis of
real sports success, I think when I started the Belgian national team, the men’s team, was ranked
19th at the world’s ranking, now we are ranked 9th, but our real level I think is between 8 and 5, but
we need to win points and it is a difficult thing to go up in the ranking, but 9 th I think is below our
real strength. And with the women we were low in the world’s ranking and now they are ranked
13th and I think they are going to end to the top ten in some months. I think so the sports success of
those two teams was also a big element, of course it does not come falling out of the sky you have
to for it, so chief of sports and his team did a really good job, also to structure, to find the right
people, to have the right ambitions and also to find more money, because that is always the same,
we need money to do things right and we need more and more money if we want to keep up with
the big hockey countries. Belgium is a small country and now we are competing with really big
countries. To give an example, in Belgium we have 31000 hockey players, in the Netherlands, just
the country next to us, there are almost 300000 hockey players, so that is a big difference. And it
differs in different areas, not only less hockey players in Belgium, but that means also less visibility
in the media, because the media is interested in showing sport when they can reach a lot of people,
so if your co-group is not big enough media and TV say it is not interesting for us. So we need to
grow too. That is just an example we always want and need more money to organize better, to climb
the ladder and go where we want to go, because our ambitions don’t stop now at 9th or for 8th place
we really want to reach top three with the men and a top five with women’s team. And it is
important, because when those national teams became successful, that was first with Olympic
qualification with the men’s team for the Olympic Games of Beijing. We saw that there that was
turning point, because Olympic games that is really big thing and then in Belgium a lot of media,
TV, everybody talked about hockey, showed hockey and al lot of people discovered hockey. Before
that I think if you would take ten people out of the street and ask them some questions about
hockey, I think more than half of them would have responded oh, ice hockey, they didn’t know field
hockey. So, that has changed a lot since then, because we had Beijing and
92
Continuation of Appendix 4
afterwards successful period continued for the teams, then we had London last year with two teams
- the women’s team and the men’s team and the attention of media is constantly growing and,
therefore, also we reach more people and more people come to hockey and say oh, we want we
would like to try, where are the clubs and clubs can give some explanation and invite people to
come and to try, that’s making the number bigger. So, I think those two are most important reasons
that can explain the growth of Belgian Hockey.
So, speaking about the money, anyway you said that to attract more money you need to have
more attention to the whole sports. So, would you say that sponsors added this growth to the
field hockey?
Yes, I think, it is like the question about who was first, the chicken or the egg. The growth of the
sports bring bigger sponsors to hockey, bigger sponsors with more money help hockey to grow.
And between those two - sponsors and hockey for me you have a lot of communication, mostly via
the media, because sponsors are interested in paying bigger amounts to have bigger exposure and
more exposure for me the best way today to have a lot of exposure for me still remains TV. So, if
you can have your sports a lot on TV you will have sponsors that will pay more. I think a law in
sponsorship when you looking at Belgium football and cycling are really the two big sports, also if
you looked to Formula 1, those sports that generate a lot of money and one of the biggest reasons
it’s a lot on TV and a lot of people want look at it. So, that is the way it works.
You said that hockey was not that good at first and for bigger sports it is easy to attract
sponsors, but when hockey is not that popular comparing to other sports, how would you
describe sponsorship relationship or what is the sponsorship relationship for hockey, what is
the most important things to pay attention to attract sponsors, how do you attract them?
It’s a complex question, because I can’t give just one answer. There are a lot of things that are
important I think when you are talking about dealing with sponsors or trying to attract sponsors. Let
me just say one more thing, my message is not that when I arrived everything went better that is
not, so do not misunderstand what I am saying, I think I am just a piece of the puzzle that made the
growth possible. So, I have two different functions, but it is close together, but I am responsible for
communication and for marketing and sponsoring, so, those are two areas that touch each other. I
think that one of the important things to do to in order to have good sponsors is to have good
communication. You need to have the good ways to communicate to the outer world, because that’s
what they find interesting. They want to arrive in the situation where we can talk about them. When
we can talk al lot about hockey then in the natural way they will be involved in that communication.
93
Continuation of Appendix 4
Because for me communication is not just words it’s also visuals, pictures and we give them a lot of
visibility on our events, for example, because we know that afterwards when people talk about the
events, when TV comes and shows some of the events or when a newspaper makes an article with
the picture that means visibility for our big sponsors. I think communication is really important we
need to have external communication also the communication with the sponsors and that is more a
relationship thing. I think we need a lot of relationship skills to feel what’s important for our
sponsor and for one sponsor is not the same as for the other. You need to feel that that one is
interested in that or sensible for this or another thing and another sponsor is maybe completely
different and you need to do other things for him. So, the most important thing is to make him feel
important for us and to serve him well. Therefore, you need to know him well, so, that’s what I
mean when I am saying it’s a relationship thing. You have to know each other, they, the sponsors,
have to know us and what hockey is in Belgium, and what are our goals, and in other way we have
to know them well, so that we can do the right thing to please them. And sponsors who is pleased,
who is happy is his relationship will stay normally. Of course, you also have the economical
situation that can have an influence, but normally it is not too big problem, if you have your sponsor
happy all the time then he won’t quit, he will stay and normally he will grow with you, and he will
accept that. When you coming back to him and say okay, but now we need to make another step, he
will understand that it’s important also for him to do that step with you and to give some more, to
help and in another way. But it is not always about money, it is sometimes also about just
exchanging services. I think that relationship is the most important thing in sponsoring, for me. And
if there is a good relationship then you know what your sponsor wants and then you can work a lot
to have a lot of what he wants. And mostly it’s visibility or it’s also possibility to do a good
networking, so, therefore, we invite them on a lot of events where other people are invited, other
sponsors, but also other people from the hockey world and then there is a good networking. I have a
good experience with that. We have a lot of examples of deals that were made at hockey events. For
example, in the past our main sponsor was “Volkswagen”, the cars, and we have also sponsor
“BDO”, it’s a consultancy company, and they were together at the hockey event and some days
later Volkswagen sold, I don’t know, eighty “Volkswagen Golf” to “BDO”, because they needed to
replace a lot of their cars and that happened in a hockey event, so that is also something that
sponsors want to find, I think.
So, you would say that relationships with sponsors would be network-based mostly and to give
opportunity to build a network not only for you, but also for sponsors?
94
Continuation of Appendix 4
Yes, also fort them. I think we need to have a big network and to propose it at the platform to the
sponsors that they can come, because they have other possibilities of networking. If they are
sponsors of hockey, they interested in hockey public and, therefore, we need to give them a
platform to meet those people and sometimes it’s other sponsors, other companies, but sometimes
also it’s just members of certain hockey club. For example, if you do something here we always tell
the club also to invite their sponsors and their members, because we know that in a hockey world, in
a big hockey family, to name it like that, we know that there are a lot of decision makers of big
companies or even CEO’s of small companies or big companies, so if we can bring them together
we know that there will be afterwards, as their job to have a good chat with those people and maybe
to make some business. So, that’s an important thing, but I think the biggest sponsors are really
searching visibility and also that networking thing. But even if they say that visibility is not that
important for us, it is always very important. So, they will always be sensitive about their logo
being visible. A lot of them say that is not important and one of them is “BMW”, but now it is
finished and it was one of the important sponsors and they started the relationship by saying our
brand is strong enough we don’t need real visibility, so we don’t need to be on the shirts of the
national team, first of all they said. And we continued talking and I said yes I think it’s an error if
you look at it like that maybe it’s not your first goal to have your logo everywhere and to show we
are “BMW”. That I can understand, but if you’re claiming by not showing your presence in the
hockey world then it’s difficult to start the relationship with the hockey world. So, it’s important
also to have visibility saying that we are an important sponsor, so the reason that a logo is on the
shirt can also be not just because I want to have my logo on TV or in the newspapers on the picture,
but also I want to show the people, the co-group in a hockey world that I am an important partner of
that sports or that federation. That’s also an important message and, therefore, visibility is also
something that is a part of a good mix. And everything is about mixing there is never one sponsor
who says I am just interested in that. That doesn’t exist you need to find a good mix for your
sponsor.
So you would say that not only economical things, but also non-economical things are
important?
Yes. In sport one of the most important things, I think, for me is never forget that sport is emotion.
In the past it was mostly like that it was the people who became sponsors were hockey players
themselves or had children playing hockey, or had some kind of relationship with hockey already,
and they said I want to help my sports. That was in the past, I think, for 90 percent of the
95
Continuation of Appendix 4
sponsorships. Now because we’re becoming bigger, because it is more visibility, it is more media,
more everything and there are better results more and more companies come to hockey not on an
emotional basis anymore. It’s just more facts and figures, that’s a sports with success and they have
successful teams, have a successful growth and membership, so we can reach more people and at
the bottom line they say it’s an interesting channel for us to go in. So, that’s not emotion anymore,
but when they decide and they come to hockey and you have emotional moments like an Olympic
qualification and you can bring them and there when it happens you see that it’s the most important
thing in sports. Even people who are not involved that much with the sports, when they arrive
suddenly that’s the most important thing in the world for them. So, one of the things for me that are
important is to remember everybody of that team it’s about emotions also. Members and money are
important, but also enjoy when there is a success and be sad when there is no success and work
together to get that success again. If you would ask me what is the most important thing for you in
your job, the end answer would be trying to get those sponsors at the same level of my enthusiasm
for that sports and say okay we win together, we lose together and we develop together.
So, how do you do that?
That’s with a lot of passion first of all. If you are passionate and you can explain it and feel this is
important moment in my sports or that’s an important event and you need to sell it to your sponsors
and say you need to be there, come with us or you need to be involved in that, because that’s where
we will book a success and when there is a success it is also your success and you can say it to
everybody. And I think the most important is passion.
You said that communication is very important in creating relationships with sponsors, but
what would be other elements, would you consider, for example, commitment or trust, or
something like that?
Yes, of course. I think one of the first reasons that sponsors come to hockey is about sharing the
same values. Commitment, trust those are important positive values. So, we are working a lot on the
values of with respect, fair play, tolerance, that kind of thing. We are also saying it as much as we
can, showing it as much as we can, because we know that is something that can differentiate us
from others sports where it is more difficult or it became more difficult to show it. I think in hockey
we still have a level of respect that is really high and one of the first things that companies tell us is
we share the same values and, therefore, we would like to see if we can work together. So, those
values are, of course, something that we need to use, because it is not something that you have and
you have it forever and you need to work for it. I think everything in the world is going in the
96
Continuation of Appendix 4
negative way. People tend to have less respect for each other, fair play tends to disappear, less
tolerance in the world, so we are not different, hockey is not different from the world that is around
it. So, if we don’t fight for those values, if we don’t actively work for them, communicate them, try
to, when there are problems, to have the good reaction to those problems in that kind of area then
those values will disappear also. Then, I think, we will have an important part of our personality, as
a sports, if we can talk about personality, as a sports, then we will lose a very important part. And
probably, like I said, the part that in the first time attracts the most, because it is more and more
important for companies to have a kind of value based policy, socially they need to be right on the
side of environment. So, you need to comply to certain values to be accepted by the public, as a
company.
When you are creating those relationships you see that those values should meet each other,
for example, values of your organisation and of your sponsors and you consider that as an
important thing?
Yes, absolutely. That’s one of the things that I use the first, as an argument in my explanation.
Sometimes I go to see a new company who said I am interested and then I have presentation with
the basic things to say about hockey today and on the second page there is the part about the values,
because I know that’s the thing where we can make the difference. Afterwards there are other
things. Maybe a little bit cynical is that the value thing is most of the times the first thing companies
talk about, but also something that disappears a little bit in their mind afterwards and then when
they talk about visibility and money and then values are little less important. So, that’s what we see
and also one of my jobs is to remind those sponsors do not forget that we were together firstly
because of those values.
What would be two or three the most important values you pay attention the most?
The most important is respect in every area. There is a campaign about respect. The claim is just
“We respect” and we have ten the most important things about respect. And it’s about we respect or
I respect my opponents on hockey pitch, I respect the empire - those are normal things to say in
sports, I respect my own team members - that’s also important, but I respect the infrastructure - so
it’s about not throwing away everything on the ground, not breaking things on the pitch, I respect
myself - it’s about hygiene, saying to the kids take a shower after your hockey match, that’s not that
easy anymore today, that’s also respect for yourself. It’s respect for the spectators it’s also respect
of the spectators for the team and the empire, so respect in every area that you can imagine. In one
year we had a lot of moments where we tried to pass this message to all the people in the hockey
97
Continuation of Appendix 4
world and also to our sponsors. So, for me that is the number one, because almost all the other
values go in that respect. If you talking about fair play it’s respect about the rules of hockey - that’s
fair play, or respect the rules of human relationship - that’s fair play. If we are saying tolerance - it’s
respect for the other, for the other who is maybe a little different as you, but that’s also respect. So,
those other values are in that word respect and for us it’s the most important and you can put
everything in there. Trust is respect, all those big values you can put under that respect hat.
Even for sponsors you say you should respect us and we will respect you?
Yes, of course. That’s very important otherwise you can’t have a good relationship it’s like in any
relationship. If there is no mutual respect it’s it won’t work.
Even in sponsorship relationship this respect is very important?
Absolutely, otherwise your relationship won’t last long. Maybe you can have something that is
interesting, but after one year it’s gone, on side or the other will feel not happy if there is not
enough respect. Respect is also sometimes about money. When I am going to the company and say
this is what hockey is like today, this is the number of people we are reaching, these are the results
we have, this is the platform we can give with those events where you can do that or another. If on
the other side of the table the guy of the company says okay this is what hundred Euros is for me
and I am feeling that what I present is worth ten thousand Euros then I will feel that there is no
respect from the guy on the other side for me. And other way around, if I don’t respect the things
that are important for my sponsors, if I’m not careful to have good visibility for him, for example, I
use his logo, but in improper way. Or when we have events you have a board around the pitch that
we make ourselves and put ourselves, for me it’s important to do the best way possible, because the
logo of the sponsors is something that we need to show in the best possible way. So, if I’m not
doing that job correctly - I’m hiding the banners too much then this is disrespectful for the
personality of the brand of my sponsor. So, those are all things of respect and it should be in both
ways otherwise it doesn’t work.
Would you say that relationship building is long-term perspective it cannot be, for example,
created in a short-term?
Absolutely for me it’s always. Because I know people say oh, but sometimes you can have a short
relation. Of course you could have a deal with somebody saying I give you on hundred Euros and I
want to you to put my logo somewhere and to have two VIP tickets and for the rest absolutely no
involvement - no from my side and from his side. Okay, we will do that ones, we will take the
hundred Euros, but for me that’s not the relationship. Then I can go to the bakery and pay for my
98
Continuation of Appendix 4
bread and go away. But who knows, maybe tomorrow I will go to another bakery, because I don’t
know the bread was not that good and the guy was not really friendly, so it’s not interesting for me.
That’s not a good relationship and tomorrow I will be choosing another bakery. Or another way, but
maybe it’s not a very good example, because, I think, the baker won’t say I will not give you bread,
because you’re not a good guy. What I want to say is for me good sponsor is sponsor that you can
keep for long that can grow with you that can also help you in difficult times and the other way
around. Because it also happens and it happened to me or to us as a federation that a sponsor said I
am a big sponsor of yours, I pay every year that amount, it’s crisis for us now, it’s difficult for us to
keep that level, but we know that there should be better times coming would you agree to do a little
bit less or when we come and say after big success maybe it’s time to go a little up in the
sponsorship people say oh, we can’t do it the crisis is too hard for us now it’s not possible. It’s also
a way of paying respect to say okay I understand your situations even if for us that crisis is not that
present, we are going upwards, but a lot of companies are going downwards even then we can agree
you can pay a little bit less for one year or maybe for two years. If there is trust, if you have a good
relationship, those are things that should be possible. Because I know if I do that, first of all there
will be a lot of … of that sponsor and the moment that I have a problem I can also tell it to that
sponsor and he probably will say okay I understand your situation and we can do it this time or
other time too. For me that’s a heart of a good relation with a sponsor. Since the beginning of this
discussion I use a lot of times the word sponsor, and in fact that’s also because I’m talking in
English and it’s not my first language, but in my normal way and in my normal work I tend to use a
lot the word partner and lot less the word sponsor, because for me the sponsor is somebody who
gives you an envelope with money and I give him something back. Partners is a lot more than that
and it’s about helping each other, its’ about finding a win-win situation, it’s about developing
together something. And develop not only hockey, but for me it’s also help developing their
business, so that’s a partnership. For me it’s more about partnership then about sponsorship.
If you need to say what sponsorship is or to describe the meaning, how would you describe it?
Sponsorship relationship is…
First of all, maybe I will give very theoretically sounding answer, but I think first of all, it’s a way
to exchange it’s all about the win-win situation. Changing means that it can be money or it can be
services it can be other things, but exchanging something to make each other better. For me that’s
sponsoring, they are giving me something, but makes me better, because I need money or I need
services, or I need cars, or I need sports drink for my players, so he’s helping me, but in that kind of
99
Continuation of Appendix 4
relationship I have to help him also otherwise it doesn’t work. So, for me a mutual exchange of the
same value or the same valeur percy pier that’s difficult to explain. That’s not always about the
value that is written on the paper or on the bank note and that you can see this is the hundred Euros,
it’s about what’s the value for me. So, sometimes something is worth five Euros, but at that
particular time when I get it for me it’s worth a lot more, because I don’t care about stationary value
at that time I needed very hardly or at that time it’s really a thing I need and that is worth more. It’s
value that you give. For, example, if I’m organising a big event, a big hockey event, I’m inviting a
lot of our partners and a lot of people and I organise VIP reception that costs me fifty Euros per
person, so that’s the value that’s really costing. But when, for example, I am inviting that
Volkswagen guy together with the BDO guy at the end of the day those fifty Euros or two time fifty
Euros, because I need to invite both of them is that what it costs for me, but for them it’s worth a lot
more than hundred Euros, because they made a big deal afterwards. So, the guy sold eighty cars to
the other guy and the other guy is happy, because he had those cars at a really interesting client. So,
therefore, that invitation, that VIP invitation they get, is worth a lot more than just what I paid for it,
that’s what I mean. We need to find the ways what we make to give to them… When a sponsor
pays one hundred Euros, it’s just an example, because it pays a higher amount then that, fortunately
for us, I invite him at the big tournament where the Belgian team earns this qualification for
Olympic Games of London and that sponsor is in the stadium at the moment that it happened the
sponsor thought that sponsorship cost me one hundred Euros, it think at that moment he says this is
worth every cent of it and maybe it’s worth ten times more, because for this moment you can’t pay.
So, this is what I mean, we need to give added value what we give for each other.
Do you classify somehow your sponsors?
Yes, because like I said it’s all about the win-win situation. So, that means for us it’s all about
return of investments we give them, to the sponsors, therefore, it’s really important to know that one
sponsor gives you one hundred Euros and another one gives you twenty Euros and you can’t guy
the same back to the guys who pays twenty as for the guy who pays one hundred, because they
know from each other or they will feel quickly form each other the level of investment of both
companies. And the sponsor who pays one hundred and if he feels that another guy paid less then I
paid, but he gets the same or almost the same then you won’t have a happy sponsor. So, for me my
truth is, it’s important to have classification, because you need to know what you have to give back
in return on investments to each of the sponsors. And if you know what they are giving you, you
can give something back that is in his feeling worth the same.
100
Continuation of Appendix 4
How do you classify them?
The first classification is just about the value that they bring to us, so the amount of money or the
value of the services they give us - the value that is worth. That’s simple mathematical classification
where we have the biggest sponsors. It’s a pyramid, we have “Fintro” - the biggest sponsor, the
main sponsor, and then we have one level underneath with the other one, and then there is another
level and then you go to official suppliers. Those are companies who don’t give money, but they
give, like I said, sports drinks, so, we give them in return some visibility and some hospitality. But
they don’t give money, for me the biggest sponsors need to give at least a part in cash and a part can
be in services or in products. So, that’s the classification about the value that they represent for us.
Afterwards maybe you could other classification you be just the ones with who you have good
relationship or the other that is more difficult, but that’s not interesting classification. So, I would
stay with the first one. For me the classification is important to determine the right return on
investment that you need to give them.
If you need to say three or four most important sponsors what they would be? You said the
first is “Fintro”.
Yes “Fintro”. That’s a bank. Then we have the second level, we have the national lottery “Lotto”.
“Athlon Car Lease” car leasing company and now we have shortly a Dutch company “Sligro”, so
this is the second level and then now we will also have a new car manufacturer “Audi” who will
become a new sponsor. It’s not completely official yet, but, I think, I can say it already. And then
the next level, we had “BDO”, but that will be finished, we will replace them with 51:13 who will
become a partner. We have “Delhaize”, you know probably. We have “Adidas” who is the
equipment supplier. So, those are the most important ones.
We talked about the sponsors, but you also have other stakeholders related to your
federation. What would be the other main stakeholders?
The two main would be Olympic Committee, Belgian Olympic Committee, BOIC, BOICB,
depends in which language you’re talking, but the Belgian Olympic Committee is one of the
important ones that’s more on the sports side. They help us to develop our sports, they help us to get
better results and at the end better results at the Olympic Games, so that’s their purpose of being
there. So, they help us a lot with money and with other services that they can give us. So, that’s an
important one. There is another important one that even became more important since last year
June, because we were one of the last national federation, so Belgian Hockey Federation completely
national, now since June we structured everything a little bit, so we have the national federation
101
Continuation of Appendix 4
with two leagues underneath - the Flemish league and the French speaking league. The reason we
did that is just to get some subsidies or money from the governments. The Flemish government says
we can help sports federation or other organisation, cause we can help them, but they need to be
structured in the way that there is a Flemish part, so we give the money for the Flemish part and
French speaking. In Belgium we have that structure where you have a country divided in two parts
and I do not know who invented the theory that sports should be regionalised, so there is one
minister of sports in French speaking part and one minister of sports in Dutch speaking part, they
both want to do their thing and they are not interested in what the other guy does at the other side.
Everything should be separated, so we try to structure our federation in the way it’s acceptable for
them and that they give us money, but still we are working together to have the Belgian hockey
evolving. So, it’s not about the Flemish hockey for us, but we need to structure it like that just to
have the money. Therefore, I would say that political guys and the governments are really important
stakeholders. Today we can’t make hockey grow anymore without their help. Like I explained, we
have more visibility in the media, more people talking about hockey, so more people coming to
hockey and want to play and if we have more people who want to play we need to have more
pitches, like you’ve seen, hockey pitch something that costs between 400000 - 90000 Euros for one
pitch. If there is no help from the government, club can’t do that. Until now it was possible to have
finances to do that without our own members, but now it is becoming too big, it’s not possible
anymore, so we need help from outside and the political guys are really important for that. So, I
would say it’s a very important stakeholder also. The most important stakeholders are the members
of course, I think, that’s the reason why we exist. The federation only exist, because some members
started with clubs and some clubs said we can’t organise everything anymore by ourselves, because
in the beginning maybe there were two teams playing together in Belgium and then more people
came to hockey, but that they could do themselves they didn’t need a federation, but when it is
becoming too big then there is a need for organisations who organises the sports and that’s the
reason why federation is created. So, the most important stakeholders are the members. Without
members there is no clubs, without clubs no federation.
Are spectators involved in those hockey members?
There is something that I sometimes say, but that is not something that I can prove. We always say
that there are 31000 hockey players and we think that it represents, if you take everybody who is
involved with those players, I think, it represents 100000 and 120000 people in total who are in one
102
Continuation of Appendix 4
way or another involved in hockey. There are a lot of people who don’t play anymore, but come as
a spectator or as somebody interested in sports. I don’t know if it’s a good answer to your question.
But would you say that spectators are those stakeholders that are very important for you?
(After a little break) Yes, I think I would say that, because the most spectators come to the sports
the bigger the event becomes, the matches, so that gives more important to it and maybe also the
media will see it and say this is becoming more important, so we need to pay more attention. Yes,
of course.
Those relationships with other stakeholders do you see also as network?
Absolutely, I think, it’s quite simple to understand about the stakeholders, the members, there is
automatically the relationship, because they are member of stakeholders’ group of the public. It’s
the same we have a lot of communication to try to get more people come and see the game, so that’s
real relationship we have built also a kind of support of club - “Red Tribe”, that’s the name we
gave, we try to make more people enthusiastic for the national teams come to watch the games,
shout for the teams, because that helps in obtaining better results, of course, there is a relationship
with the supporter. There is very important relationship that has to be built and we are in the middle
of it now and it is not easy at all for the reasons that I named before with different governments.
Because of the different policies the French speaking wants to go one way and the other wants to go
in another way, so you need to go there also in relationship, but it’s not the same in both parts of the
country. In one part you need to do things in a certain way and in other part you need to do in
another way, but for us it’s still about Belgian hockey and it’s difficult to keep, but is it’s also a
relationship. And it is most difficult for us now, because we are not used that kind of political way
of looking at things. We need to learn a lot about that, but it’s very important relationship.
So you have a network of stakeholders, then what would be in the centre of this network? Or
what is the initiative which starts those relationships?
I never thought about that in that way, so it’s question that is a little bit disarming me, but I would
say the first reaction I have, cause I looked to different stakeholders that we named, what would be
the element that is common to all, my first answer would have been the sports of hockey, but then I
don’t think that’s it. I think that’s sporting success I would say. Because the only reason, I think,
way governments are trying to support sports is to have good results with their Belgian sports and
then, therefore, have successful image towards the other countries. That’s I think one of the most
important things for those governments, because we see when we had Kim Clijsters and Justine
Henin winning big tennis tournaments, all those political guys always wanted
103
Continuation of Appendix 4
to be there when there was a final, because then they could be seen with the Belgian champion and
then could give the image of Belgium and of themselves, because it’s all about egos there for
politicians. I think the most important thing for them to support the sports is sporting success. If I
look to the sponsors, I think they want to be partner of the sports that is successful. If hockey wasn’t
successful I don’t think they would have been there. So I think there also the sportive success is the
most important thing. The supporter, people coming and watching games, they also come to see the
team winning, so for me that’s again the same element. And for the Olympic Committee the same
thing, they help us, because they want the level of the sports going up. So, I think success is the
common driving element. It’s really something the first time that I thought about it in that way. And
that would be my conclusion I don’t know if tomorrow I would think like that again, maybe I would
have another one.
But if you put in the centre not success, but some kind of organisation in this network, what
would be in the centre? Or not organisation, but looking from the stakeholders’ perspective,
what would be in the centre?
The 31000 members, because if you don’t have the members, you don’t have national teams who
have success, as a sponsor you don’t have the public where you can send your messages too,
because sponsor wants to reach the target group represented by hockey in this situation, but if you
don’t have the members you don’t have the target group, so that’s not interesting to them to come in
that world. The members are the central thing.
What do you mean member, can you become a member even if you don’t play it?
For me a member is indeed somebody who is affiliated to a hockey club and normally player, but in
all the clubs you have also non-playing members, so let’s take them also in that group and probably
it’s not 31000, it’s the 100000 or 120000 what I talked about before, so the people who are in one
way or another involved in hockey. Because I think that’s the target group for the sponsors, that’s
the target group for the Olympic Committee, because that’s a group where the elite players will
come from and then we will make the national team with the best players of that group and that
national team will eventually go to Olympics and maybe win the medal. So, for them it’s most
important. For the politicians, I think, it’s the same they also want to show that they are partnering
with different organisations, because at the end of the day they want people to vote for them, so
they are trying there for the people. So, for me that would be the most important group of whole the
thing is people who play or who are involved personally with hockey.
And talking about sponsors, what sponsors position would in that network?
104
Continuation of Appendix 4
It’s difficult to say, I think, like I said in the beginning, we need money to function, the money
comes from different parts, so like I said, the governments give us money, the Olympic Committee
gives us money, the members also, because you have to pay a membership in a club and the club
have to give us small part of the membership that people pay I the club come to the federation
helping us to organise the sport in Belgium. And sponsors are also a source of revenue. If you ask
me what is the most important or what would be the place for the ranking is difficult. I think if we
just looking at who gives the most of the money, then first we would have government, because
their giving the biggest amount and then the members, because 31000 members times, I don’t know
how much it is depends on the person, I don’t know the numbers by heart, but it’s a big amount and
at the end of the day you have all those 31000 paying certain fees, so it makes a big amount. For me
sponsors come in third or fourth place for that.
How would you describe fan or spectator, who is this person who comes to see hockey?
That’s also is evolving. In the past it was a hockey player himself who plays in another division or
comes to watch a game of the first team of his club, or comes to watch a game of the national team
of Belgium, or comes to watch a game of provincial team. So, in the beginning, I think, only were
people of the hockey family itself. Due to the Olympic Games and then whole the media around it
and the whole visibility that we generated from that, more and more there are just people who are
sports fans, who like team sports and saw on TV or in another way saw it’s an interesting game
different form the football, played with the stick, it’ very quick and can be also very spectacular
with the goal keeper, with the helmets. So, more and more people from outside come and say it’s a
nice game maybe will have the reaction afterwards and would like to try or would like to my son or
my daughter to try, because it’s nice sports. So a lot of people who are themselves a hockey players
or were hockey players and stopped for one reason or another, but now more and more people also
from outside.
Is it older or younger auditory?
It’s really a family sports. In some clubs you have four generation of hockey players, so you see old
people and young people, but hockey is really involving in the younger area and mostly with the
girls. The younger girls are the segment that is growing the most.
105
Appendix 5
The primary data used in the analysis of the online survey
Table 1
Are you a fan of any team or national team of field hockey?
Answer option
Yes
No
Partly
Total:
Number of choices
72
12
16
100
Ratio, %
72 %
12 %
16 %
100 %
Table 2
Do you visit field hockey games?
Answer option
Yes
No
Total:
Number of choices
78
22
100
Ratio, %
78 %
22 %
100 %
Table 3
How often do you attend to field hockey games?
Answer option
Randomly participate in games
1–2 times a week
More than two times a week
1–2 a month
More than two times a month
Total:
Number of choices
26
44
2
4
2
78
106
Ratio, %
33 %
56 %
3%
5%
3%
100 %
Continuation of Appendix 5
Table 4
Do you know who are the sponsors of field hockey teams?
Answer option
Yes
Some of them
No
Total:
Number of choices
12
62
26
100
Ratio, %
12 %
62 %
26 %
100 %
Table 5
How would you assess the impact of field hockey sponsors for you?
Express your answer by assessing your degree of agreement or disagreement with the following
statements.
Numerical
evaluation
Claim/ Factor
I had started to
buy more
products/services
of sponsors
I had become
more aware of
sponsors’ brands
I had become
more involved in
field hockey
I had started to
attend to more
field hockey
games
I feel respect for
the sponsors,
because they
support my
favourite field
hockey
team(s)/sports
5
Number of
respondents
Sum of
numerical
evaluation
Average of
numerical
evaluation
22 30 10 10
2
74
162
2,19
12 10 16 32
4
74
228
3,08
30 18 14 10
2
74
158
2,14
32 22 10 10
0
74
146
1,97
12 12 14 24 12
74
234
3,16
1
2
3
4
107
Continuation of Appendix 5
Continuation of Table 5
Numerical
evaluation
Claim/ Factor
I had started to
trust more in
sponsors or/and
their
products/services
My perception of
sponsors’
brand/corporate
image had
changed to more
positive
My perception of
sponsors’
brand/corporate
image had not
changed
I see the
sponsors as an
integral part of
field hockey
I had become
more loyal for
sponsors’ brands
I have always
liked field
hockey, no
matter of
sponsors’
support
I buy sponsors’
products/services
to support my
favourite team
(s)/sports
5
Number of
respondents
Sum of
numerical
evaluation
Average of
numerical
evaluation
20 20 12 16
6
74
190
2,57
10 12 22 26
4
74
224
3,03
6
26 16 20
6
74
216
2,92
6
22 10 28
8
74
232
3,14
18 22 22 12
0
74
176
2,38
12 50
74
330
4,46
6
74
150
2,03
1
0
2
4
3
8
20 38 10
4
0
108
Continuation of Appendix 5
Table 6
What is your age?
Answer option
18–25
26–30
31–35
36–40
Over 40
Total
Number of choices
84
4
2
4
6
100
Ratio, %
84
4%
2%
4%
6%
100 %
Table 7
What is your income per month (EUR)?
Answer option
Up to 1500
1501–2000
2001–2500
2501–3000
Over 3000
Total
Number of choices
82
4
4
4
6
100
109
Ratio, %
82 %
4%
4%
4%
6%
100 %