Does Fit Matter in Event SponsorshipLinked Marketing?
Angeline Close, University of Texas, Austin
Russell Lacey, Xavier University, Cincinnati
2012 American Marketing Association Summer Educators’ Conference
Consumer Behavior and Sports & Special Event Marketing SIG Session
August 18, 2012
Role of Fit
• Over 40,000 sponsored events annually take place in
US (IEG 2011)
• Managers keenly interested in how event
sponsorship strengthen their brands; event
marketers depend on sponsors to raise revenues and
help absorb costs
• Event marketers provide value to sponsors by looking
for ways to enhance fit between their hosted
experience and sponsor
• Does fit matter to event and sponsor?
Affect Transfer
• Sponsorship may act as conduit to transfer affect
associated with sponsored event to sponsor brand
• Keller’s (1993) theory on brand linkages--this link
influences consumers’ brand associations
• Such extant associations regarding an event become
linked in memory with sponsoring brand and its
image
• Event experience transfers to sponsoring brand; for
affect transfer to occur, there should be a sponsorevent-consumer fit (Close et al. 2009)
Congruity Theory
• Extent to which consumers’ perceive event and
sponsor having similar image, values, and logical
connection (Simmons & Becker-Olsen 2006)
• Helps explain attitudes when event and sponsor
connect; event-sponsor congruity leads to positive
attitudes toward sponsor (e.g., Ellen et al. 2000; Rifon et al. 2004)
• Congruity routinely assesses impact on sponsor,
rather than simultaneously considering its respective
impact on sponsored event (Coppetti et al. 2009)
Conceptual Model
Moderating Impact of Event-Sponsor Congruity
H5
H2
H4
H3
H1
H6
H7
Event-Sponsor Congruity
H8
Event Entertainment
• Social events are hedonic, with intangible features
producing personal pleasure or enjoyment (Holbrook &
Hirchman 1982)
• Consumers exposed to promotional messages under
favorable conditions where there is enthusiasm,
excitement, and enjoyment (Nicholls et al. 1999)
• Congruity between sponsor and event favorably
influences attitudes toward event (Ruth & Simonin 2003)
H1: Higher congruity sponsorships intensify positive association between
event entertainment and favorable attitude toward event
Activeness in Event Domain
• Consumers drawn to events congruent with their
lifestyles (Kahle et al. 1996)
• Attendees who feel passion about domain of event
are more likely to hold favorable attitudes toward
event (Close et al. 2006)
• Congruity influences relationship between attendee’s
familiarity with event and thoughts about it (Roy &
Cornwell 2004)
H2: Higher congruity sponsorships intensify positive association between
activeness in event domain and attitude toward event
Attitude Toward Event
• Attitudes are relatively stable internal evaluations;
once attitudes toward event formed, they can have
strong impact on sponsor (Dean 2002)
• Consumers more likely to perceive congruity if they
perceive sponsor doing what is right (Becker-Olsen & Hill
2006)
• Positive sentiments about sponsorship play valuable
role in strengthening sponsor’s CSR (Geue & Plewa 2010)
H3: Higher congruity sponsorships intensify positive association between
attitude toward event and perceived CSR of sponsor
Sponsor’s Perceived CSR
• CSR refers to firm’s activities and status relative to its
societal or stakeholder obligations (Sen & Bhattacharya
2001)
• Knowledgeable consumers more engaged with brand
and its CSR activities (Algeshheimer et al. 2005); congruity
studies should relate to varying brand knowledge
conditions (Sen & Bhattacharya 2001)
H4: Higher congruity sponsorships intensify positive association between
brand knowledge of sponsor and perceived CSR of sponsor
Brand Knowledge
• Brand knowledge in sponsorship terms relates to
more abstract and intangible brand associations held
in minds of consumers about sponsor (Roy & Cornwell 2003)
• Consumers need brand knowledge to establish
commitment to sponsor’s brands (Keller 1993)
• Consumers’ familiarity with sponsor impacts what
they think about sponsor’s brand when they link
brand to sponsored events (Carrillat et al. 2010)
H5: Higher congruity sponsorships intensify positive association between brand
knowledge and brand commitment
Brand Commitment
• Brand commitment entails preference and reluctance
to seek competing brands (Raju et al. 2009)
• Sponsored events with a CSR benefactor strengthens
brand commitment driven by favorable affective
association consumers make about sponsor
• Strong CSR perceptions by strengthening consumer’s
emotional attachment to brand (Lichtenstein et al. 2004);
consumers may transfer impressions of sponsor’s CSR
efforts to commitment to sponsor’s brands
H6: Higher congruity sponsorships intensify positive association between
perceived CSR of sponsor and brand commitment
Purchase Intent
• In addition to brand commitment, companies sponsor
events to increase consumers’ willingness to buy the
sponsor’s products; CSR initiatives create context for
purchase decisions (Pirsch et al. 2007)
• Perceived congruity influences whether consumers
reward sponsor for its community activities; higher fit
between entities contribute to higher purchase intent
(Roth & Romeo 2000)
H7: Higher congruity sponsorships intensify positive association between
perceptions of CSR and purchase intent
H8: Higher congruity sponsorships intensify positive association between brand
commitment and purchase intent
Field Study Research Context
• Context to examine: fit, CSR,
consumer attitudes and
purchase intent
• Event: fifth annual Tour de
Georgia (TDG)
• Presenting sponsor: AT&T
• Beneficiary: GA Cancer
Coalition
• As one of the premier
cycling races in North
America, drew an estimated
515,000 spectators
• Generated $27.6 million in
direct economic impact to
the State of Georgia
• AT&T received branding at
all venues during race week,
pre-event promotions, TDG
website, and leader jersey
Field Study Method & Sample
• Intercept survey conducted by field-research team;
surveys were distributed throughout all 12 TDG host
venues (n=1,615)
• 44% are 20-39 years old, 59% male
• 53% reported annual household incomes exceeding
$60,000; 27% > $100,000
• 41% traveled from another state or country to attend
TDG
Measurement & Scale Items
All constructs used 5-point Likert-type scales, anchored by 1=strongly
disagree/ 5=strongly agree:
• Modified 5-item scale tapping Event-Sponsor Congruity from Speed &
Thompson (2000)
• Adapted Lichtenstein et al.’s (2004) 5-item scale to measure CSR
perceptions
• Lumpkin & Darden (1989) provided 3 measures of Activeness in Event
Domain
• Chandon et al. (2000) developed separate 3-item scales to measure Event
Entertainment and Attitude toward the Event
• Adapted Bloch et al.’s (1989) 3-item scale to measure Brand Knowledge
• Yoo et al. (2000) provided 3-item scale to measure Brand Commitment
• Adapted Baker & Churchill (1977) 4-item scale to measure Purchase Intent
Structural Model Results
Estimate
t-value
Event Entertainment  Attitude toward Event
.89
42.11
Activeness in Event Domain Attitude toward Event
.10
6.33
Attitude toward Event  Sponsor’s CSR
.25
12.41
Brand Knowledge Sponsor’s CSR
.66
27.65
Brand Knowledge Brand Commitment
.49
17.63
Sponsor’s CSR  Brand Commitment
.41
14.72
Sponsor’s CSR Purchase Intent
.28
14.58
Brand Commitment to Sponsor  Purchase Intent
.72
33.43
Structural model results: NFI=.99; NNFI=.99, CFI=.99; IFI=.99, RMSEA=.071; and SRMR=.035
Multi-group Results
Chi-square Difference Results Among Fit Categories
High Fit vs. Med Fit vs. High Fit vs.
Med Fit
Low Fit
Low Fit
H1: Event Entertainment  Attitude toward Event
2.65
0.09
1.04
H2: Activeness in Event Domain Attitude toward Event
0.33
0.01
0.07
H3: Attitude toward Event  Sponsor’s CSR
0.11
1.59
2.00
H4: Brand Knowledge Sponsor’s CSR
0.35
10.87**
16.85**
H5: Brand Knowledge Brand Commitment
19.21**
0.90
31.38**
H6: Sponsor’s CSR  Brand Commitment
18.15*
3.20
29.07**
H7: Sponsor’s CSR Purchase Intent
17.49**
0.01
9.64*
H8: Brand Commitment to Sponsor  Purchase Intent
30.04**
0.37
16.31**
High Fit mean=4.81, n=649; Med Fit mean=3.51, n=613; Low Fit mean=1.78, n=353
1 degree of freedom comparison *p<.01; **p<.001
Discussion
• Real-world evidence that event-sponsor fit promotes
positive marketing outcomes to sponsor
• Model illustrates how CSR serves as mediator for
transcending favorable attitudes towards event to
enhancing attitudes and preferences for sponsor
• We uncovered asymmetrical impact of fit on sponsor
and event
– Results show congruity plays role in consumers’ perceptions
of sponsor brand and purchase intentions
– Fit did not influence consumers’ evaluation of event