Resource Dependency,Costs and Revenues of a Street Festival

Abstract

The financial position of a tourism-oriented street festival in Sweden is examined within the context of resource dependency and stakeholder management theory, focused on testing two hypotheses derived from this theoretical base. Data from a five-year period revealed how costs associated with the strongest stakeholders (that is, with the greatest bargaining power) greatly increased relative to costs associated with weak stakeholders. The festival was also more able to increase its revenues from weak stakeholders than from those in strong bargaining positions. Conclusions are drawn on how this case confirms and elaborates upon theory, particularly by applying it to the festival sector. Management implications are also drawn on how festival organizations should manage relationships when they hold strong or weak positions relative to stakeholders.

Keywords

festival costs and revenues resource dependency stakeholder management

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Agresti

(1992), ‘A survey of exact inference for contingency tables’, Statistical Science, Vol 7, pp 131–153.

Allen

Harris

Jago

Veal

(2000), ‘Events beyond 2000: Setting the agenda’, Proceedings of Conference on Event Evaluation, Research and Education, Sydney, Australian Centre for Event Management at the University of Technology, Sydney, July 2000.

Crane

Matten

(2004), Business Ethics: A European Perspective, Oxford University Press, Chippenham.

Eisenhardt

(1989), ‘Building theories from case study research’, Academy of Management Review, Vol 14, No 4, pp 522–550.

Freeman

R.E.

(1984), Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach, Pitman Publishing, Boston, MA.

Getz

(2002), ‘Why festivals fail’, Event Management, Vol 7, No 4, pp 209–219.

Goodpastor

(1991), ‘Business ethics and stakeholder analysis’, Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol 1, pp. 53–71.

Jensen

M.C.

Meckling

W.H.

(1976), ‘Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure’, Journal of Financial Economics, Vol 3, pp 305–360.

Jones

T.M.

(1995), ‘Instrument stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and econometrics’, Academy of Management Review, Vol 20, pp 404–437.

10.

Larson

(2002), ‘A political approach to relationship marketing: Case study of the Storsjoyran festival’, International Journal of Tourism Research, Vol 4, pp 119–143.

11.

Larson

Wikstrom

(2001), ‘Organising events: Managing conflict and consensus in a political market square’, Event Management, Vol 7, pp 51–65.

12.

Merrilees

Getz

O'Brien

(2005), ‘Marketing stakeholder analysis: Branding the Brisbane Goodwill Games’, European Journal of Marketing, Vol 39, No 9/10, pp 1060–1077.

13.

Mitchell

Agle

Wood

(1997), ‘Towards a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts’, Academy of Management Review, Vol 22, No 4, pp 853–886.

14.

Pfeffer

Salanick

(1978), The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective, Harper and Row, New York.

15.

Reid

Arcodia

(N.D.), Understanding the Role of the Stakeholder in Event Management, School of Tourism and Leisure Management, University of Queensland, Australia.

16.

Rowley

T.J.

(1997), ‘Moving beyond dyadic ties: A network theory of stakeholder influences’, Academy of Management Review, Vol 22, pp 887–910.

17.

Ryan

(2002), ‘Equity, management, power sharing and sustainability – issues of the’ new tourism”, Tourism Management, Vol 23, pp 17–26.

18.

Sandoff

(2002), Resursbaserad Konkurrenskraft, BAS, Göteborg.

19.

Savage

Nix

Whitehead

Blair

(1991), ‘Strategies for assessing and managing organizational stakeholders’, Academy of Management Executive, Vol 5, No 2, pp 51–75.

20.

Williamson

O.E.

(1984), ‘Corporate governance’, The Yale Law Journal, Vol 93, pp 1197–1230.