A burgeoning number of requests from event organizers and charities have caused companies to more carefully scrutinize and evaluate their sponsorship options. This article analyzes responses from Fortune 1000 companies, U.S. Olympic Festival-'90 sponsors, and 1991 International Special Olympic sponsors to identify the relative importance of various issues and objectives in determining sponsorship participation. Thus it should be of value to both event organizers and corporate sponsors.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamsD. (August 3, 1992). Wheeling, dealing in Ohio. The Beacon Journal, A1 and A4.
2.
De PalmaA. (June 10, 1992). Penn State got the exclusive $14 million, 10-year deal with Pepsi! Uh-huh!The New York Times, p. B8.
3.
KeyJ. (May 29, 1989). The race to be official sponsor. Chicago Tribune, Sec. 3, p. 1.
4.
KuzmaJ. R. (1990). An investigation of the role of events marketing in corporate strategy. Unpublished dissertation, Kent State University, Ohio.
5.
McCallyJ. F.Jr. (1990). Corporate sponsorship and the Olympic U.S. Festival-'90: An investigation of involvement criteria, corporate objectives and sponsorship satisfactions. Unpublished master's thesis, Mankato State University, Minnesota.
6.
MesconT. S. & TilsonD. J. (Winter 1987). Corporate philanthropy: A strategic approach to the bottom-line. California Management Review, 29(2), 49–61.
7.
MooreT. L. (January 22, 1990). Automotive marketing: Winning puts fans in the drivers' seats, Advertising Age, p. S-8.
8.
RuffenachG. (June 4, 1992). Olympic backers will pay Atlanta plenty for exclusivity and ambush protection, Wall Street Journal, pp. B1 & B8.
9.
ShanklinW. L. and KuzmaJ. R. (Spring 1992). Buying that sporting image: What senior executives need to know about corporate sports sponsorship, Marketing Management, 1(2), 58–67.
10.
Ten Kate, Nancy. (November 1992). Make it an event, American Demographics, 14(11), 40–44.
