PurposeThis paper aims to examine the effect of innovation-driven polices on innovation efficiency of sport firms listed on the new Third Board in China.Design/methodology/approachFirm innovation efficiency, including comprehensive innovation efficiency, pure technical efficiency and scale innovation efficiency were calculated by using data envelopment analysis (DEA) models. The input variables and output variable in the DEA model were selected through correlation analysis. The effects of several innovation-driven policies on the innovation efficiency of sport firms were analyzed by a series of multiple regression analyses.FindingsRegarding the innovation efficiency evaluation of sport firms, total research and development (R&D) investment and total R&D staff are two suitable input variables, and total profit, sales revenue and new effective patent are three suitable output variables. Income tax relief for high-tech enterprise has a positive effect on comprehensive innovation efficiency and pure technical efficiency, and governmental subsidies have a negative effect on comprehensive innovation efficiency and pure technical efficiency. However, pretax deduction of R&D expenses does not have a significant effect on comprehensive innovation efficiency, pure technical efficiency and scale innovation efficiency, and income tax relief for high-tech enterprise and pretax deduction of R&D expenses also have no effect on scale innovation efficiency. For a large-scale sport firm, the negative effect of “governmental subsidies” and the positive effect of “income tax relief for high-tech enterprise” on its pure technical efficiency are more significant. For a sport firm with more R&D staff, governmental subsides and “income tax relief for high-tech enterprise” have more positive effect on its innovation efficiency.Practical implicationsThe study findings could potentially provide practical guidance to both managers and government-industry policymakers in the sports industry.Originality/valueFirstly, this paper focused on Chinese sport firms from a rising industry in a developing country (China). The related conclusions are conducive to the governmental management of new industries and the innovation management of new enterprises. Second, this paper analyzed the effect of three special innovation-driven policies on three types of innovation efficiency and explored enterprise innovation development in more detail. Third, this paper not only discusses the effect of innovation-driven policies on innovation efficiency, but also the heterogeneity of their effects.
As a biennial event, the Ryder Cup is a men’s golf competition between teams from Europe and the United States. Ernst & Young (EY) and Standard Life Investments (SLI), who are in same business category (i.e., financial services), have served as official partners of the event in recent years. While the two firms are willing to move away from the traditional sponsorship practices of category exclusivity deals, both have been able to achieve significant success through their collaborative efforts in activating their sponsorships. This is a new, fascinating phenomenon in both sponsorship concept and practice. Through an exploratory inductive inquiry process, in this study we conduct a case analysis by examining the sponsorship activations of EY and SLI at the 2014 Ryder Cup event held in the UK. The findings demonstrate that social media plays an impactful role in the companies’ ability to engage target audiences. EY used the Ryder Cup captain as a brand ambassador, who embodied its sponsorship theme of leadership and teamwork. SLI focused on running advertising campaigns to build company image and increase brand awareness.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.