Exploring the Dimensions of Fit within Sports Sponsorship

A reason for sponsoring events is to garner positive image transference from the event to the sponsor (Gwinner and Eaton 1999; Speed and Thomson 2000). This suggests that perceived fit between the event (sponsee) and the sponsor is important. But fit in sports sponsorship contexts involves more than just that between the sponsee and the sponsor. What also needs to be taken into consideration is the fit between other stakeholders: cosponsors and consumers. This exploratory research seeks to understand the dimensions encompassing fit (or relatedness: see Johar and Pham, 1999) in the sponsorship marketplace. Using semi-structured interviews with sponsorship managers, findings suggest there are six dimensions of fit within sports sponsorship: target market, product endorser image, geography, typicality, complementarity, and clash. Whilst most have received attention by marketing scholars, others, including interactions, have yet to be addressed. Each of these dimensions is identified; conclusions and implications follow.Griffith Business School, Department of MarketingFull Tex

A randomised on-line survey exploring how health condition labels affect behavioural intentions

ObjectivesWe examined the effect of 'labels' versus 'descriptions' across four asymptomatic health conditions: pre-diabetes, pre-hypertension, mild hyperlipidaemia, and chronic kidney disease stage 3A, on participants' intentions to pursue further tests. There were four secondary objectives: 1) assessing confidence and satisfaction in their intention to test further; 2) revealing psychological drivers affecting intentions; 3) exploring whether intentions, confidence and satisfaction differ by label vs. description and health condition; and 4) producing a perceptual map of illnesses by label condition.MethodsPractitioner validated health-related scenarios were used. Two variants of each condition were developed. Participants were recruited through Qualtrics from Australia, Ireland and Canada and randomly assigned two 'labelled' or two 'descriptive' scenarios.ResultsThere was no significant difference in intentions to test between label and description conditions (95% CI -0.76 to 0.33 points, p = 0.4). Confidence and satisfaction were both positively associated with intentions: regression coefficient (β) for confidence β = 0.58 points (95% CI 0.49 to 0.68, p ConclusionsUnlike studies investigating symptomatic illnesses, the disease label effect on behavioural intentions was not supported suggesting that reducing demand for medical services for borderline cases cannot be achieved by labelling. The average intention to test score was higher in this sample than previous symptomatic health-related studies and there was a positive relationship between increased intentions and confidence/satisfaction in one's decision. Exploratory insights suggested perceptions of the four labelled asymptomatic illnesses all shifted toward greater levels of dread and concern compared to their respective description condition.Trial registrationACTRN12618000392268