sponsorship portfolio brand spillover effects
DESCRIPTION
Presented at the 2010 American Marketing Association Winter Educators' Conference.TRANSCRIPT
The Spillover of Brand Equity within a Corporate
Sponsorship Portfolio
Joe Cobbs
Northern Kentucky University
Mark Groza
University of Massachusetts - Amherst
Outline
Research Motivation
Theoretical Background
Hypotheses
Experimental Study
Discussion and Implications
Research Motivation
Corporate Sponsorship
“Provision of assistance either financial or in kind to an activity by a commercial organization for the purpose of achieving commercial objectives” – Meenaghan ’83
Top objective: Brand awareness & image enhancement through association (Thjømøe et al. 2002; Meenaghan & Shipley 1999)
Do not exist in isolation (Farrelly & Quester 2003; Ruth & Simonin 2003)
Literature & Theory
Brand Associations
Image transfer (Gwinner & Eaton, 1999; McCracken, 1989; Meenaghan 2001)
◦ Celebrity Endorser Endorsed firm◦ Sponsored event Sponsoring firm◦ Sponsored organization Sponsoring firm
Brand Alliances
(Lebar et al. 2005; Rao et al. 1999)
Associative Network Model
?
Hypotheses
H1: Perceptions of BE of particular sponsor are positively influenced by BE of other brands within common portfolio
H2: Consumers’ purchase intentions (PI) for a particular sponsoring brand are positively influenced by BE of other brands within common portfolio
Experimental Design
160 subjects at two universities
2 sponsorship portfolio conditions ◦HIGH brand equity◦LOW brand equity
4 product categories
Low High
Lodging: MarriottMarriott
Auto: Dodge ToyotaDiscount Retailer: K-Mart Target Credit Card: Discover Visa
Experimental Stimuli
Results
Validated Likert scale questionnaire◦Brand equity◦Purchase intentions◦Identification
Manipulation checks
No main effect of sport league
ANOVA compared Marriott’s BE/PI between HIGH and LOW conditions
Results
AVOVA Results
H1: Brand Equityα = .891
H2: Purchase Intentα = .941
High Brand Equity Portfolio Condition
31.64(5.52)
15.19(3.59)
Low Brand Equity Portfolio Condition
29.51(5.63)
14.37(3.65)
F(1,159)=5.87P=.017
F(1,159)=2.04P=.155
Limitations & Future Research
Context specific
Field experiments
Holistic perspective of sponsorship portfolio◦Map primary and secondary
associations◦Potential network effects