Erik L. Olson

Does sponsorship work in the same way in different sponsorship contexts

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to develop a comprehensive model of high‐level sponsorship effects that works well in both sports and cultural sponsorship contexts.Design/methodology/approach – The sponsorship model is tested using survey data from target market representative samples in two professional sports contexts and two cultural contexts.Findings – The 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 limitations/implications – The explained variance of the sincerity and object equity constructs was not as high as for other constructs in the model.Practical implications – Sponsorship managers should pre‐te...

Explaining and Articulating the Fit Construct in Sponsorship

The fit between a sponsor and object (i.e., sponsored organization, cause, event, or individual) has been shown to be an important construct in predicting sponsorship effects, but little research has been done to understand the basis for fit perceptions. The current research uses three studies to find and test the underlying dimensions used to judge the degree of overall fit between a sponsor and object. Starting with an exploratory study that uses qualitative cognitive mapping to uncover seven dimensions that form the basis for overall fit perceptions, a follow-up experiment determines their ability to predict overall fit and sponsorship-related attitude changes. The last study tests whether overall fit perceptions can be manipulated both positively and negatively with fit dimension-related communications about the sponsorship. The research finds that sponsor product relevance, attitude similarity, geographic similarity, audience similarity, and sponsorship duration significantly predict overall fit and/or can be used to manipulate fit perceptions positively.

The effects of peripheral exposure to information on brand preference

In this article, brand evaluations based on mere exposure to a brand name are compared to evaluations built on varying levels of cognitively processed brand information in a setting where all subjects have low involvement. Results indicate that a small but meaningfully sized group of subjects fully processed the information on brands they were exposed to, and rated those brands significantly higher than other brands where they had only seen the brand name alone. This finding was strongest for a fictional new brand, but also present for a well‐established brand. By contrast, the larger portion of low involvement subjects who did not fully process brand information, also did not rate brands significantly higher than their ratings for brands in which they saw no accompanying information. Implications for sponsors and advertisers are discussed.

Decision-making Processes Surrounding Sponsorship Activities

ABSTRACT The rationale behind sponsoring is as varied as the definitions of sponsorship itself. A logical approach to sponsorship decision making would dictate that firms should have clear targets and goals for sponsorship. They should also make some attempt to coordinate sponsorship with other communications efforts while measuring its effects or return on investment. This paper describes the findings from a sample of large Norwegian businesses on how they define sponsorship, how much they spend and where, why they sponsor, and how they manage the sponsorship activities. Large-scale sponsorship is relatively new to Norway, but this late start also has provided opportunity for learning from those who have gone before. It is possible to conclude from this research that many firms have a variety of complex goals for their sponsorship efforts but not terribly high-quality management practices when it comes to decision making surrounding sponsorship.

The implications of platform sharing on brand value

Purpose – The paper seeks to examine empirically the potential dilution and enhancement of brands that share product platforms with other brands.Design/methodology/approach – Study 1 uses two real platform‐sharing examples from the automobile and consumer electronics industries in an experimental setting. Study 2 uses conjoint analysis in the same two industries to study the impact of platform‐sharing on preference and willingness to pay for a unique brand.Findings – Study 1 finds that sharing a platform with an upscale brand is preferable to sharing with a downscale brand, although results are mixed on whether a unique‐to‐brand platform is preferred to sharing with an upscale brand. Study 2 finds that unique‐to‐brand platforms are preferred to any type of platform sharing, and calculates that this preference is worth about 6‐10 per cent of the products retail price.Research limitations/implications – Both studies use student samples, although all product classes and brands tested are popular with this d...

Mapping the strategic thinking of public relations managers in a crisis situation: An illustrative example using conjoint analysis

Abstract A great deal of anecdotal and empirical evidence indicates that the public relations function is not well integrated into the strategic decision making of most organizations. Observers suggest that to be part of the strategic decision-making process, managers must demonstrate that they are strategic thinkers, i.e., show that they have “what it takes” to be part of the dominant coalition. However, research on strategic decision making has been dominated by the case study methodology, which has led to calls for quantitative approaches that might verify and supplement these qualitative-based findings. This article illustrates the operationalization of the conjoint analysis multivariate technique for the study of the public relations function within strategic decision making in a crisis situation. Implications for theory development and testing are also discussed. Peggy Simcic Bronn is an assistant professor and Erik Olson is an associate professor in the Department of Market-Oriented Management at the Norwegian School of Management.

The relative performance of TV sponsorship versus television spot advertising

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to compare the relative performance of TV sponsorships with the industry standard 30‐second TV spot advertising on achieving common communication goals.Design/methodology/approach – The two media are tested with an experiment using realistic stimuli and target market representative samples and employing six brands as both TV sponsors and TV advertisers.Findings – Ten seconds of TV sponsoring works almost equally as well as 30‐second spots across all measures and brands. While the outright performance differs by type of brand (i.e. high fit versus lower fit, known versus unknown), the relative performance between media does not vary.Research limitations/implications – The stimuli only gave subjects a brief exposure to each medium. The six stimuli brands, four effect measures, and the Norwegian sample may also not be representative for all types of TV sponsoring/advertising contexts.Practical implications – Marketing managers can use the results to better allocate thei...

Green innovation value chain frame of comparisons: market and public policy implications

The Green Innovation Value Chain (GIVC) is a framework that compares the relative attractiveness of a green technology with conventional competitors(s) along stakeholder links representing the manufacturer, distributor, end-user, government and the environment. Previous GIVC analyses have examined hybrid car and PV solar technologies, and concluded that each provides poor financial and environmental returns across the GIVC links in comparison with the most similar gasoline-powered car and natural gas-generated electricity, respectively. The current research addresses the potential bias of using a single comparison point by including additional competing products/technologies that reflect actual marketplace or public policy-advocated technology substitution. Although some of the new comparisons provide more encouraging green technology results than the earlier analyses, the overall conclusion remains that neither technology is likely to be attractive to stakeholders and widely displace the new comparison points. The market and public policy implications of the findings are then discussed.

How bureaucrats and bean counters strangled General Motors by killing its brands

Purpose – This paper seeks to use branding literature to understand the rise and fall of GMs brands.Design/methodology/approach – The approach takes the form of presenting a case analysis using secondary sources covering GMs brands and products, managerial leadership, and market and financial performance throughout its 100‐year history.Findings – During much of its first 50 years, GM was led by engineers who pioneered professional brand management, and through intelligent allocation of resources created one of the worlds strongest portfolio of brands. Government anti‐trust hearings shifted GM to a cost‐cutting orientation during its second 50 years that had a negative impact on the GM brands and brought the current financial problems.Research limitations/implications – This is a case study of only one firm, but parallels are drawn with other firms that have had similar brand issues.Practical implications – Firms with multiple brands need top management leadership to ensure that each brand has a unique ...

The impact of intra‐brand platform sharing on brand attractiveness

Purpose – This paper aims to empirically examine the brand impact of intra‐brand platform sharing.Design/methodology/approach – The study uses two real platform‐sharing examples from the automobile and consumer electronics industries in an experimental setting.Findings – The study finds that intra‐brand platform sharing caused no damage to brand equity in either setting.Research limitations/implications – The study uses a student sample, although all product classes and brands tested are popular with this demographic which is a key target market for the tested industries. The study also tests intra‐brand platform sharing where the price differences are 20 percent between higher and lower level platform applications, and the findings may not hold for larger price gaps.Practical implications – Platform sharing has been shown to damage brand equity in inter‐brand applications, but the current findings suggest that intra‐brand platform sharing is safe for the brand, and allows managers to also benefit from th...