Decision-making Processes Surrounding Sponsorship Activities

Thjømøe, Hans Mathias; Olson, Erik L.; Brønn, Peggy Simcic

doi:10.2501/jar.42.6.6

Cited by 47 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Quester and Thompson (2001) also note that cultural sponsorships are seen as less commercial, lucrative, and accessible than sports sponsorships, which suggests that audiences might view them differently. This untested speculation, however, does not discuss how or why construct relationships might differ in sports versus cultural contexts although this is an important issue for sponsorship managers that are under increasing pressure to choose objects and manage sponsorships in a manner that will maximize returns on investment (Currie, 2004;Fahy et al, 2004;Polansky and Wood, 2001;Thjømøe et al, 2002;Verity, 2002). Figure 1 displays the direct effects and mediated indirect effects sponsorship models that will be compared.…”

Section: Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This further suggests that sponsorship managers working in cultural contexts can be fairly confident that the research findings in sports contexts are also relevant to their own situation. Since the measurement of sponsorship effects has been found to be of interest to managers (Thjømøe et al, 2002), the use of a common model for all sponsorship contexts provides a good starting point for the better allocation of resources to various sponsorships.…”

Section: Managerial Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although sponsorship and cause-related-marketing managers frequently have high-level goals for their programs that can include favorable image transfer, attitude enhancement, higher sales, and improved brand equity (Cornwell et al, 2001a;Gwinner & Eaton, 1999;Miyazaki and Morgan, 2001;Polonsky and Speed, 2001), recent surveys of major sponsors have found that large portions spend little or nothing on the measurement of effects and/or use measures that are inappropriate to their communication goals (Thjømøe et al, 2002;Crompton, 2004). …”

Section: Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The increased media coverage is also one reason that approximately two-thirds of all sponsorship spending is directed at sporting events, leagues, teams, and players (Crompton, 2004;Verity, 2002), although there is also increasing interest in cultural sponsorships (Irwin et al, 2003;Menon and Kahn, 2003;Polonsky and Wood, 2001;Quester and Thompson, 2001;Rifon et al, 2004;Ruth and Simonin, 2003;Simmons and Becker-Olsen, 2006). While sponsoring is an increasingly important communication tool, relatively few attempts have been made to measure and understand the effects of sponsorship (Cornwell, et al, 2005;Meenaghan, 2001;Quester and Thompson, 2001;Thjømøe et al, 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed the most common type of sponsorship effects research is the simple measurement of sponsor logo exposure time during coverage of a sponsored event (Cornwell et al, 2005;Meenaghan, 2001), which is clearly inappropriate for evaluating high-level sponsorship effects such as attitude and/or behavioral change (Currie, 2004;Speed and Thompson, 2000;Thjømøe et al, 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Does sponsorship work in the same way in different sponsorship contexts?

Olson

2010

European Journal of Marketing

Self Cite

150

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research Paper PurposeThe development of a comprehensive model of high-level sponsorship effects that works well in both sports and cultural sponsorship contexts. Design/Methodology/ApproachThe sponsorship model is tested using survey data from target market representative samples in two professional sports contexts and two cultural contexts. FindingsThe model works almost equally well in both contexts. Furthermore, a more parsimonious mediated effects model provides virtually the same results as the full model. Improving attitude towards the sponsorship and object equity are found to be the most important factors for improving sponsor equity. The model also confirms earlier research on the importance of sponsor sincerity and sponsor-object fit in determining sponsorship effects. Research LimitationThe explained variance of the sincerity and object equity constructs was not as high as for other constructs in the model. Practical ImplicationsSponsorship managers should pre-test potential objects and sponsorship communications to make sure that constructs in the model such as fit, sincerity, sponsorship attitudes, and object equity are maximized to provide optimal sponsor equity. ValueThe model combines constructs from various literatures into a comprehensive model of highlevel sponsorship effects. Furthermore, while most previous sponsorship research have used convenience samples and/or fictional and/or single sponsorship contexts, the comprehensive model tested here is shown to have high external validity by its consistently good performance in predicting sponsorship effects using four real sponsorships and representative samples.

show abstract

Section: Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Managerial Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Does sponsorship work in the same way in different sponsorship contexts?

Olson

2010

European Journal of Marketing

Self Cite

150

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Understanding the decision‐making processes for arts sponsorship

Daellenbach

2012

J of Philanthropy and Mktg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Corporate support is a significant revenue stream for non-profit organisations, yet little is known of the actual decision paths companies take when making these decisions and what characterises these paths. This study seeks to develop a greater understanding of decision processes for companies considering sponsorship of the arts. A multiple-case study approach was taken, with participants from arts organisations and paired sponsoring companies, resulting in the finding of three decision paths: one characterised as high-level and intuitive, one as driven at a lower-level, and a third initially instigated by a third party. Analysis of these paths highlights the importance of existing relationships as well as a 'fit' between both parties. In addition, the company's orientation towards more commercial or philanthropic goals is found to be a key element determining the path taken, and the role of individual informed intuition is highlighted as crucial in moving decisions forward. This study extends knowledge in sponsorship and corporate philanthropy, into a decision making and arts sponsorship context. The findings also offer a useful perspective for non-profit arts managers as they pitch their event to the business sector.

show abstract