Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation was to develop an optimal sport licensing program operational paradigm. The present study comparatively analyzed the operational protocol of selected sport and collegiate licensing programs. A high level of operational uniformity was found among the sport licensing programs surveyed. Differences were, however, found to exist between the sport and collegiate licensing programs on a majority of operational issues. Furthermore, a cluster analysis revealed that the sport and collegiate fell into two distinct clusters based on operational protocol, indicating a high degree of variation in the methods of operation relative to the factors under investigation. It was concluded that operational standardization was closely associated with the licensing program administrative structure. It was recommended that an objective, single entity governance system, similar to that employed by the professional sport leagues, be adopted by the collegiate licensing programs in an effort to achieve standardization within the industry.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Battersby

, & Grines

(1986). Merchandising revisited. The Trademark Reporter, 16(3), 271–307.

Battle

W. R.

(1984). Licensing: Consortium perspective. The College Store Journal, 51(5), 34–36.

Bikoff

J. L.

(1990). The impact of product liability law on collegiate licensing programs. Paper presented at the ACLA Fourth Annual Meeting, Santa Cruz, CA.

Fichtenbaum

(1988, December 5). Hockey comes out of the ice age. Sports, Inc., p. 26.

Gareau

R. N.

(1988). Corporate licensing-the world's fastest growing marketing discipline. Trademark World, 14,22–26.

Gaston

F. P.

(1984). Administrative decision-making: A study of collegiate trademark licensing programs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL.

Gaston

F. P.

(1989). 1988 University of Alabama public awareness and enforcement program. Proceedings of the Second Annual CCI / ICE Licensing Seminar. Atlanta, GA: The Collegiate Licensing Company.

Glass

G. V.

, & Hopkins

K. D.

(1984). Statistical methods in education and psychology (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Grassmuck

(1990, February 21). Colleges fight bootleggers as sales boom for goods that bear logos and emblems. The Chronicle of Higher Education, pp. A32–33, 36.

10.

Harrison

, & Revoyr

J. R.

(1985). Drafting royalty provisions in licensing agreements. The Merchandising Reporter, 4(6), 12–14.

11.

Jones

C. B.

(1984). Champions of confusion in trademark Law: Champion Products, Inc. vs. University of Pittsburgh, Journal of Law and Commerce, 4, 493–516.

12.

Kennedy

K. E.

, & Geist

(1990). ACLA licensee handbook. East Lansing, MI: Association of College Licensing Administration.

13.

Kikulas

L. M.

, Slack

, Hinings

, & Zimmerman

(1989). A structural taxonomy of amateur sport organizations. Journal of Sport Management, 3(2), 129–151.

14.

Klemm

(1991). Maturation or saturation, has collegiate licensing gone overboard? Team Licensing Business, Vol. 3(5), 16–17.

15.

Krupa

(1988, December 5). Big bucks on campus. Sports, Inc., pp. 24–25.

16.

Lutzker

A. P.

(1989, October). Protection of collegiate trademarks under the Trademark Revision Act of 1988. Proceedings of ACLA Collegiate Licensing Seminar. East Lansing, MI: Association of Collegiate Licensing Administrators.

17.

Macnow

(1988, December). Takin’ it to the bank. Sports, Inc., pp. 22–23.

18.

Moran-Germ

(1989). Collegiate licensing: “Change is good” (isn't it?). The College Store Journal, 56(4), 82–88.

19.

Revoyr

J. R.

(1984). Licensing: Historical perspective. The College Store Journal, 51(5), 1–3.

20.

Revoyr

J. R.

(1987). Some royalty problems looking for solutions. The Merchandising Reporter, 6(6), 8–10.

21.

Revoyr

J. R.

(1989). Some royalty problems looking for solutions. The Merchandising Reporter, 6(6), 8–10.

22.

Revoyr

J. R.

(1990, April). Licensing 101. A symposium conducted at the ACLA Fourth Annual Meeting, Santa Cruz, CA.

23.

Romesburg

H. C.

(1979). Use of cluster analysis in leisure studies. Journal of Leisure Research, 11, 144–153.

24.

Rosenblatt

(1988, December 5). The profit motive. Sports, Inc., pp. 18–21.

25.

Rosner

(1989, February). School's “in”. Gift Reporter, pp. 31–34.

26.

Sandomir

(1988, December 5). Baseball comes from behind. Sports, Inc., pp. 16–17.

27.

Schinner

(1989). Establishing a collegiate trademark licensing program: To what extent does an institution have an exclusive right in its name? Journal of College and University Law, 15(4), 405–429.

28.

Sports Licensing (1990). Licensing Book, 2(10), 16–17.

29.

Stone

M. J.

(1986). How to administer a licensing program. The Merchandising Reporter, 5(6), 3–4.

30.

Sykes

W. D.

(1985, March). The three p's of licensing. The Canadian Bookseller, pp. 8–11.

31.

Sykes

W. D.

(1988). Sports marketing in Canada: A focus on the rapid growth of Olympic and university licensing programs. The Merchandising Reporter, 7(1), 9–11.

32.

Wong

G. M.

(1988). The essentials of amateur sports law. Dover, MA: Auburn House.

Operational Protocol Analysis of Sport and Collegiate Licensing Programs

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References