Cuestionario de Reactividad Subjetiva a los Sonidos

The fourth case study features several sponsorship agreements signed between a variety of local football clubs and a local oil company dealing with a wide range of petroleum operations. The company is the largest Cypriot oil company operating a nationwide retail network of 95 service stations. It supplies and markets motor, industrial, domestic, marine, and aviation fuels. The company was founded more than 50 years ago as a private company, but during the last few years the company became public and it is listed on the Cyprus Stock Exchange.

The company has a long-term sponsorship involvement and experience, since it has been sponsoring football clubs for the last 30 years and it is also involved in basketball and sailing sponsorship. With regard to football sponsorship, the company sponsors 5 different football clubs competing in the first division and various other smaller clubs competing in the second and third division.

Interestingly, this case study has depicted a totally different approach to sport sponsorship as compared to the preceding case studies explored in this research.

Specifically, in this case study sponsorship was regarded as being more about patronage and philanthropy rather than a professional, mutually beneficial arrangement between two parties. This conceptualisation of sponsorship was strongly depicted throughout the several sponsorship activities and stages discussed throughout the interview, such as the motives guiding sponsorship decisions as well as the various sponsorship management and evaluation practices.

Starting with the factors mobilising the company to invest in sport sponsorship, it is of interest to observe that past, as well as more recent decisions to get involved in sponsorship arrangements relied almost exclusively on personal interest that was strongly connected, according to the interviewee, to philanthropic motives. As indicated by the respondent, some of the company’s board members were actively involved in the administration of some of the clubs sponsored, with two of them serving as presidents, and thus there was a strong personal relationship with the sponsored properties. In addition, it is of interest to mention that the same

162 applies to the other two sports the company sponsors, namely sailing and basketball. In both cases, the presidents of the clubs were also members of the top-level management or the board of the company. Personal interest had often been cited by authors as a factor fuelling sponsorship engagement (e.g. Burton et al., 1998; Shanklin & Kuzma, 1992; Thwaites & Carruthers, 1998), especially in less developed sponsorship contexts (e.g. Apostolopoulou & Papadimitriou, 2004;

Constantinescu & Szekely, 2009), but according to Cornwell, Pruitt & Van Ness (2001b), personal motives are less prevalent today than in the past. With regard to the particular case study, it could be the case that sponsorship was used as the means for promoting personal agendas and interests, such as acquiring a prestigious position within a very popular sport sector such as football. Indeed, Cornwell (2008) and Cornwell et al. (2001b) argued that personal motives sometimes represent managers’ egos or the advancement of the personal agendas of executives.

According to the marketing assistant manager of the company, however, the personal interest demonstrated by the members of the board was clearly connected to altruistic and philanthropic factors. As she commented, “the motivation to engage is our interest, our passion our personal interest” and she added “the interest of the family has always been pure, sheer… this is why even now, 50 years after the establishment of the company we say that sport is within our DNA”. At this point it is probably important to consider that the vast majority of the board members of the company come from a single family, as does the majority of the top-level management as well. Therefore, throughout the whole interview the respondent, who was also a member of the family, tended to identify the actions of the family with the actions of the company. As she stated, “we loved football… our club. Our team was the specific club [the name of the club]. So, it was natural that, as a well-known business family in the city [name of the city], we would help the local club”. Additionally, the respondent indicated that, apart from the main clubs competing in the first division, they also “help other clubs that lack resources”.

163 The philanthropic nature of sponsorship in this case study is also strongly emphasised by the fact that at the early stages of sport sponsorship the company did not appear as the sponsor, but rather, it was simply providing the club with money in order to survive and grow. According to the interviewee, “it was natural that we would sponsor… unofficially… because at that time there was no exposure”, and she added “it was the love they had for the team… the sheer, pure love… without expecting to get a benefit”. It is clear from the above statements that sponsorship was not regarded as a commercial activity able to provide the organisation with tangible benefits. This conceptualisation of sponsorship is congruent with early sponsorship trends that regarded sponsorship as one of the many philanthropic actions or charitable activities to be undertaken by a company (Gratton & Taylor, 1985; Mescon & Tilson, 1987), but they do not coincide with professional, market-driven approaches to sport sponsorship that are prevalent today (Cornwell, 2008). As Meerabeau et al. (1991) and Arthur et al. (1997) argued, sponsorship has evolved through time to more professional and legitimate business activity.

It is helpful to mention, however, that as the systematic review of the literature revealed, there is a different conceptualisation of sport sponsorship in differently developed contexts, with a more philanthropic orientation in less developed markets such as China (Geng et al., 2002), Greece (Apostolopoulou &

Papadimitriou, 2004; Asimakopoulos, 1993), or Romania (Constantinescu &

Szekely, 2009) as compared to more developed markets such as Canada (Copeland et al., 1996; Thwaites et al., 1998). Therefore, it is not that surprising that sponsorship in a clearly less developed context such as Cyprus seems to be characterised by purely philanthropic intentions, especially when considering that the sponsor is a local business. As the interviewee stated:

We were supporting because we felt that we are a Cypriot company, and we are one of the few large companies in the particular city [name of the city].

The city always been one of the poorest cities in Cyprus, and there were not

164 many companies able to support. And this is why we were not able to move forward [as a city], from a sports perspective. There were no individuals able to support the clubs. Only two or three families were able to do it, and one of them was my family. So this is why it was natural… logical… it was expected that the more financially powerful would help the rest.

In order to understand the “local” factor and the importance it placed upon organisational decisions in this case study, it is essential to consider the broader cultural context in Cyprus in which “localism” has a central and highly influential role. According to Peristianis et al. (2002), the central role of localism is a phenomenon observed in many countries and it is regarded as being the outcome of globalisation and its various effects, namely the decreasing authority of the state and the resulting channelling of this authority to both larger multinational organisations (e.g. the European Union) or smaller, local authorities (e.g. local self-governments). Especially with regard to Cypriot sports, localisation, together with politicisation, are regarded as being today the two main forces highly impacting the football sector (Peristianis et al., 2002), and subsequently the sport sponsorship-related decisions of potential sponsors. Geographical representation of clubs and associated feelings of localism are very well depicted in the particular case study. In addition, local identification featured among the primary motivating factors for sponsoring a particular club in a second city in Cyprus, since according to the respondent, “half of the family lives there, and thus it was logical”.

Although the prevalence of social and community-related motives was clearly depicted throughout the interview, in more recent sponsorship decisions there were also some signs of marketing related factors influencing the decision-making process:

Another reason was that, the different regions and villages, they have their own clubs in the first or second division (…). If the municipality, or the president of the community for example will ask us to [to support them], and because of the nature of the business we are in… we have petrol stations…

when the station is owned, or it is supported by a certain individual within the certain community or municipality, then we say that we will help [financially], and this is part of your marketing activity. We have moved from the

165 philanthropic… not philanthropic… it is not charity… but it is not simply a social aid. It is not simply help.

Additional arguments declaring a marketing orientation were also made throughout the interview:

Yes, it was marketing… and this is how many of them [the clubs] understand it today… and it has to be done in the right way. When clubs apply today for sponsorship, when they ask us to help them, I advise them to expose the sponsorship (…). Because it is not charity anymore. It used to be charity, it’s not charity anymore.

Despite the claims for the existence of marketing related motives in more recent sponsorship-related decisions, it was vividly demonstrated that, the main driving forces were social and community related factors, triggered by an obligation of the company towards the community in which they live and operate. As the respondent reiterated, “we were helping, and we will continue to help, because we feel that we have to”, and, referring to sponsorship, she added, “it is our social offering”.

Even the language used to describe the sponsorship activity throughout the interview, such as the words “help”, “offer” and “support” instead of “invest” for example in sponsorship, portrayed a social orientation which clearly suggested that sponsorship was perceived as a corporate social responsibility action.

With regard to the rationale behind the company’s decision to sponsor several clubs, it seems that, similar to the preceding cases, examining the actions of companies being involved in multiple sponsorships, rivalry between the clubs and subsequently between the fans is the main reason underpinning this decision. As already mentioned, rivalry between the fans continues to the present day, and it is mainly due to the politicisation of football as well as to the growing localisation that is recently regarded as replacing the dominant role of politics in the fans’

culture (Peristianis et al., 2002). As the respondent indicated, the company was

166 actually “forced” by the particular social and cultural factors to get involved in multiple sponsorships:

Unfortunately, when you are a big company and you sponsor two or three clubs, you are obliged to expand… because there are dangers associated with being a single sponsor (…). You may be treated with hostility from the other clubs. From the clubs, and eventually form their fans. When they ask you to sponsor and you refuse, then they become negative towards your products. And we have seen that (…). But, it was also a decision… policy of the company to help many of them, so that there are no negative implications. Many sponsors that have connected their name to certain clubs, they had been faced negatively (…). So, we had to be very careful, and subtle.

As was probably to be expected, the company did not appear to be influenced by the actions of its competitors, and this is indeed the case since the company is the only one from the specific industry serving as football sponsor. As the respondent indicated, the competitors’ actions had nothing to do with their decision to sponsor the clubs, but instead, “it was clearly because of our passion, our love for football”. In a similar vein, it was not a surprise that the decision to become involved in sport sponsorship was taken at the highest level by the board of directors which consisted of members of the same family, since according to evidence cited earlier, concentration of decision-making authority at the top-level is a characteristic of less developed sponsorship contexts (Burton et al., 1998;

Farrelly et al., 1997; Walliser, 2003).

The lack of strategic direction when making sponsorship-related decisions was also demonstrated by the fact that, although the respondent indicated several times throughout the interview that as a “humanistic company” they had to support several clubs, it is interesting that there was no effort towards using sponsorship to shape the specific corporate identity and corporate image, despite the heavily recognised potential of sponsorship to do that (Garry et al., 2008;

Hickman et al., 2005; Pichot et al., 2009). Specifically, the company seemed to believe that sponsorship was an outcome of its humanistic and altruistic culture, and not as a means towards building or enhancing this culture. As the interviewee

167 indicated “It is a humanistic company, and thus, it helps” and she added “we tried again, in the past, to see why we do it… but it was simply logical”.

In line with the broader sponsorship approach demonstrated above, the criteria used for choosing sponsorship partners were neither sophisticated, nor numerous.

Interestingly, the respondent admitted that the personal as well as business relationships they had with particular clubs served not only as motivating factors but also as selection criteria. As the interviewee noted, “if it is a club that we have to support… if there is a personal relationship… we are in Cyprus and we know each other… those are pressures to do it [sponsorship]”. It is indeed surprising that the role of demographic fit with the fan base “was minor” in choosing the clubs to be sponsored. In contrast, the size of the fan base of the club featured among the most important factors, along with the loyalty of the fans towards the club. To them, fan identification with the club was regarded an important factor since they first decided to sponsor one of the left-wing clubs basically due to the capacity of the club to influence and guide the behaviour of their fans. As the interviewee stated, “the club’s followers are disciplined” and she added “the more devoted the fans, the higher the appreciation they demonstrate towards the sponsor”. Interestingly, identification was not mentioned as a criterion for selection in the systematic review of the literature, but there is much evidence in the literature indicating that fan identification is an important determinant of sponsorship effectiveness (Barez et al., 2007; Cornwell & Coote, 2005; Gwinner &

Swanson, 2003; Levin, Beasley & Gamble, 2004; Madrigal, 2000, 2001), and thus it is probably helpful to regard this as a criterion for selection.

Another interesting finding of this case study is that, because of the rivalry mentioned earlier between the right and left-wing clubs, the company used the so called “need for a balance” as another criterion for selecting the sponsorship properties. Specifically, they felt that because of the dangers associated with sponsoring only one of the two major opposing clubs, they decided to proceed with a sponsorship agreement with the right-wing club as well, despite the fact

168 that the fans of this club were regarded as “sceptical”, “intolerant”, and “difficult”. It should be mentioned, however, that research indicated that these right-wing fans were very strongly identified with their club (Charalambous-Papamiltiades, 2011b), but there is a strongly embedded belief in Cyprus that the fans of the left-wing club are more easily influenced and even manipulated by the left-wing party and subsequently by the administration of the club, since the two are regarded as strongly interconnected.

The less professional approach of the company towards sport sponsorship was also evidenced by the fact that, according to the interviewee, until recently the company did not have a written agreement with their sponsored properties featuring details of their sponsorship arrangement. Although today there is a contract that is signed between the two parties, the respondent indicated that this contract was developed by the club to be sponsored, although the final draft was a result of negotiations between the two. The main components secured by the company were exposure through the internet site of the club and the social media, the provision of free tickets, and signage within the stadiums. The size and prominence of logos were factors not discussed prior to signing the contract.

Interestingly, although the interviewee argued that the partners discussed exclusivity issues, when she was asked whether exclusivity was a component of the contract she replied that “ohm… it is a given… this is how it happens”, signifying that exclusivity is not actually included in the contract. In fact, the respondent said that in a specific case, the company had been tolerant as,

“sometimes, another petrol station, of another company is also supporting [sponsoring]”. This is hardly surprising when considering that the nature of the sponsorship agreement signed by the particular company is more a matter of patronage than of purely commercial action. This is further supported by the emphasis placed during the interview upon components that are related to philanthropic and social responsibility issues, since one of the important provisions of the contract was “[the club] to provide us with players, so that we visit together hospitals… for philanthropic purposes”.

169 Congruent with the above social approach to sponsorship, the responsibility for managing the sponsorship arrangement was assigned solely upon the PR department, and this was an action that was based upon the company’s conceptualisation of sponsorship. As the respondent indicated:

Let me tell you why sponsorships should be under the PR department.

Because, one of my responsibilities and duties [as the PR manager] is social offering. And, football… sport in general… is a cultural thing. It is for the welfare of the society. And this is depicted in the messages of sport…

against racism, against violence, against drugs… Sport actually helps…

those are the messages.

Therefore, the unrefined management activities adopted by the company were not unexpected in this case study, especially when considering the broader trend identified in the systematic review indicating that unprofessional and inadequate management practices are employed even by sponsors investing in mature sponsorship markets (Chadwick & Thwaites, 2004, 2005; Thwaites, 1994,1995).

Specifically, as the respondent pointed out, the company did not spend any additional money on leveraging its sponsorships. In addition, the management of sponsorships signed with small clubs lacking resources and expertise, as well as the management of sponsorship agreements signed a few years ago, were at primitive stages since the main discussions with the clubs were limited to signage placement within the stadiums. With regard to the agreements signed with bigger and more experienced clubs, the company has been mainly directed towards the organisation of events of social and philanthropic character together with the clubs. In addition, the company appeared willing to provide smaller clubs with advice on how to manage the sponsorship, but this advice was provided “on a friendly basis and it mainly concerned direction on how the clubs could communicate with their fans and the development of messages encouraging the fans to support the sponsor. What is clear from the above statement as well as

Specifically, as the respondent pointed out, the company did not spend any additional money on leveraging its sponsorships. In addition, the management of sponsorships signed with small clubs lacking resources and expertise, as well as the management of sponsorship agreements signed a few years ago, were at primitive stages since the main discussions with the clubs were limited to signage placement within the stadiums. With regard to the agreements signed with bigger and more experienced clubs, the company has been mainly directed towards the organisation of events of social and philanthropic character together with the clubs. In addition, the company appeared willing to provide smaller clubs with advice on how to manage the sponsorship, but this advice was provided “on a friendly basis and it mainly concerned direction on how the clubs could communicate with their fans and the development of messages encouraging the fans to support the sponsor. What is clear from the above statement as well as