Predicting Recommendation Of Sporting Events: A Study Of Satisfaction Levels Among Tennis Event Promoters And Non-Promoters

Abstract

How satisfied are the promoters and non-promoters of sporting events? How related are their satisfaction and their likelihood of recommending the event? This work aims: a) to determine the differences in the degree of satisfaction between promoters and non-promoters of the event, and b) to establish a predictive model identifying the variables that provide a greater probability of not recommending the event.

Full text

EASM BELFAST 2023
EASM BELFAST 2023
1
1
EASM BELFAST 2023 CONFERENCE ABSTRACTS
31st European Association for Sport Management Conference
September 12-15, 2023
Belfast, Northern Ireland

EASM BELFAST 2023
EASM BELFAST 2023
2
2
EASM BELFAST 2023 LOCAL ORGANISING COMMITTEE
Paul Donnelly: Co-Chair
Rachael Telford: Co-Chair
Paul Kitchin: Finance Chair
Kyle Paradis: Scientific Committee Chair
Tandy Haughey: Volunteer Lead
Carmel Fyfe: Administrative Lead

EASM BELFAST 2023
EASM BELFAST 2023
3
3
TRACK CHAIRS
Diversity and Inclusion Issues in Sport Management: Inge Derom
Sustainability and Sport Management: Pascal Stegmann
Broader, New, and Critical Aspectcs of Sport Management: Matthew Dowling
Public Health and Physical Activity Management: Tim Ströbel
Sport Marketing and Sponsorship: Tim Ströbel
Sport Consumer Behaviour: Daniel Lock
Sport Events: Rui Biscaia
Sport Media and Communication: Argyro Elisavet Manoli
Esport, Innovation, and Technology: Anna Gerke
Sport Funding and Finance: Christopher Huth
Sport Law and Ethics: Mark Andersson
Sport Development and Socio-Cultural Perspectives: Claire Jenkin
Sport Tourism and Leisure Management: Olga Polyakova
Sport Management Education: Anna-Maria Stirrmatter
Sport Governance and Policy: Johan Norberg
Strategy, Leadership, and Stakeholder Management in Sport: Géraldine Zeimers
ESMQ New Researcher Award: Simon Shibli
Best Conference Paper Award: Kostas Alexandris

EASM BELFAST 2023
EASM BELFAST 2023
4
4
Diversity and Inclusion Issues in Sport Management .......................................................... 5
Sustainability and Sport Management ................................................................................ 68
Broader, New, and Critical Aspects of Sport Management ............................................. 127
Public Health and Physical Activity Management ........................................................... 158
Sport Marketing and Sponsorship ..................................................................................... 171
Sport Consumer Behaviour ................................................................................................ 198
Sport Events ......................................................................................................................... 253
Sport Media and Communication ...................................................................................... 302
Esport, Innovation, and Technology .................................................................................. 323
Sport Funding and Finance ................................................................................................ 348
Sport Law and Ethics .......................................................................................................... 365
Sport Development and Socio-Cultural Perspectives ....................................................... 383
Sport Tourism and Leisure Management.......................................................................... 418
Sport Management Education ............................................................................................ 429
Sport Governance and Policy ............................................................................................. 458
Strategy, Leadership, and Stakeholder Management in Sport ....................................... 531
ESMQ New Researcher Award .......................................................................................... 565
Best Conference Paper Award ............................................................................................ 572
Workshop A: Innovation in Sport for Development and Peace ...................................... 585
Workshop D: Sport and the Metaverse ............................................................................. 613
Workshop E: Women’s Football Development in Europe ............................................... 618
Workshop G: Online Hate and Sport ................................................................................ 627
Workshop J: Anti-doping Interventions: Policies, Implementation and Evaluation .... 630
POSTERS ............................................................................................................................. 637

Sport Events
Sport Events
288
288
ID: 1422
Sport Events - Revised Version
Topics: Sport Events
Predicting Recommendation Of Sporting Events: A Study Of Satisfaction Levels
Among Tennis Event Promoters And Non-Promoters
Fernández-Luna, Álvaro; León-Quismondo, Jairo; Bonal, José; del Arco, Javier; Iván-
Baragaño, Iyán; Blanco, Pablo; Leguina, Mercedes; Herraiz, Marta; Macías, Ricardo;
Burillo, Pablo
Faculty of Sport Sciences. Universidad Europea de Madrid, Spain;
jairo.leon@universidadeuropea.es
Aim and Research Questions
How satisfied are the promoters and non-promoters of sporting events? How related are their
satisfaction and their likelihood of recommending the event? This work aims: a) to determine
the differences in the degree of satisfaction between promoters and non-promoters of the event,
and b) to establish a predictive model identifying the variables that provide a greater
probability of not recommending the event.
Theoretical Background and Literature Review
Net Promoter Score (NPS) is an indicator created by Reichheld (2003). To calculate the NPS,
a threshold of responses is established which classifies customers into promoters (scores
between 10-9), passives (scores between 8-7), and detractors (scores between 6-0).
The NPS is a popular metric in various market sectors, including sports (Dalmau-Torres et al.,
2022). This simple tool measures promoters and non-promoters through a single question,
having gained popularity in managerial practice, but with some concerns among academics
(Baehre et al., 2022). Its limitations are mainly related to the cut-off points adopted,
questionable effect on sales, and the one-single question (Baehre et al., 2022). Some authors
also defend the continuity to use NPS and identify it as part of the academic research agenda
(Bendle et al., 2019), since NPS could be a valid predictor of future sales growth under certain
conditions, including short-time application and interpreted as brand health metric and not as
customer loyalty metric (Baehre et al., 2022).
Research Design, Methodology, and Data Analysis
A convenience sampling of 1372 spectators (1% of the total) (average age=39.47±13.72;
women=35.7%; men=65.3%) of an international tennis tournament held in Madrid, Spain in
early May 2022 were surveyed face to face during their stay in the tournament. A Likert scale
1 to 5 was used to evaluate the degree of satisfaction with different attributes of the tournament:
tournament environment, tournament security, comfort on the courts, shopping area, activities
within the complex, food stalls, variety of food, price of the food, waiting time (queues) in the
food stalls, sustainability of the tournament, ticket prices, level of the matches and level of the
players. The NPS variable was measured on a Likert Scale from 0 (very unlikely) to 10
(extremely likely). For that purpose, the question ‘How likely are you to recommend this
tournament to a friend or colleague?’ was asked.
Two types of analyses were carried out. First, the difference between promoters (n=1038) and
non-promoters (i.e., detractors and passives; n=334) was explored. Due to the size of the
sample, the central limit theorem was applied and the comparison between both groups was
performed through parametric Student's T test for independent samples. To measure the
magnitude of the difference between the means of the groups, Cohen’s d Statistic was used.
Based on Cohen’s d, the effect size was classified as: trivial (<0.20), small (<0.50), moderate
(<0.80), large (>0.80) (Batterham & Hopkins, 2006).

Sport Events
Sport Events
289
289
After the initial analysis, a binary logistic regression model followed. NPS was recoded as a
dichotomous variable (0=non-promoter; 1=promoter) and used as the dependent variable. All
satisfaction variables were included as independent variables. Two preliminary logistic
regression models were performed using the forward and backward procedures with the Wald
Statistic. Collinearity issues were assessed through the correlation matrix. The final model
included ‘tournament security’, ‘level of the matches’, and ‘ticket price’. The cut-off point for
this model was set at 0.7 to improve its specificity. SPSS 26.0 was utilized for the statistical
analysis.
Results/Findings and Discussion
The comparison between the satisfaction of non-promoter and promoter groups was analyzed.
Each of the analyzed variables showed statistically significant differences (p<0.05) with a
moderate effect size (ES=0.50 to 0.79), except for the variable ‘waiting time in the food court’
(ES=0.41) and ‘level of players’ (ES=0.45), which exhibited small effect sizes.
According to the binary logistic regression model, the ‘tournament security’ showed a
statistically significant increase in the odds ratio of being a promoter of the event by a factor
of 1.7 for each unit of growth in this variable. Additionally, for each unit of growth for the
variable ‘satisfaction in the food court’, the odds ratio in favor of the promoter category was
increased by 1.396. Finally, the odds ratio of being a promoter of the event was multiplied by
1.642 for each unit of increase in the variable ‘satisfaction with the ticket price’.
These results align with prior research that identifies that satisfaction plays a critical role in
word-of-mouth behavior (Kim et al., 2014), but contributes to understanding the event’s
attributes that contribute the most to the event brand health.
Conclusion, Contribution, and Implication
This study revealed significant differences in satisfaction levels between promoters and non-
promoters of the event. Moreover, a predictive model was proposed to identify critical
variables that influence event brand health. This work has implications, enabling sports
managers to prioritize their available resources for enhancing the more critical aspects of the
events.