In pursuit of satisfaction & fortification:
Download
1 / 17

In pursuit of satisfaction & fortification: Stakeholder Perceptions of NCAA Wrestling Entertainment Value - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 107 Views
  • Uploaded on

In pursuit of satisfaction & fortification: Stakeholder Perceptions of NCAA Wrestling Entertainment Value. Coyte G. Cooper, Ph.D. West Virginia University Erianne Weight, Ph.D. Bowling Green State University. Introduction to Research. Introduction Review of Related Literature

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' In pursuit of satisfaction & fortification: Stakeholder Perceptions of NCAA Wrestling Entertainment Value' - ebony


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

In pursuit of satisfaction & fortification:

Stakeholder Perceptions of NCAA Wrestling

Entertainment Value

Coyte G. Cooper, Ph.D.

West Virginia University

Erianne Weight, Ph.D.

Bowling Green State University


Introduction to Research

  • Introduction

  • Review of Related Literature

  • Methodology

  • Purpose of Research

  • Results

  • Discussion

  • Conclusion/Questions

NCAA Wrestling Entertainment (i)


I. Introduction to Research

  • The dire situation facing amateur wrestling

    • Program eliminations: 363 in 1981 to 234 in

    • 2005 (Student-athlete, 2006)

    • Recent eliminations: Four college programs in first

    • month of 2009 (Moyer, personal interview, January

    • 26, 2009)

    • Blaming Title IX?

  • How to improve sustainability?

    • Improve revenues realized at local level

    • Enhancement of marketing efforts

    • Critical: Analysis of core product

NCAA Wrestling Entertainment (1)


II. Review of Literature

(Theoretical Framework)

  • Customer Satisfaction Theory:

  • “A judgment that a product or service feature, or the product

  • or service itself, provided (or is providing) a pleasurable level

  • of consumption-related fulfillment” (Oliver, 1997).

  • Implications:

    • Enhancement of loyalty levels (Trail, Anderson, & Fink, 2005; Oliver, 1977; Oliver, Rust, & Varki, 1997)

    • Increased revenues through repeat purchases (Anderson, Fornell, & Lehmann, 1994; Anderson & Mittal, 2000; Laverie & Arnett, 2000)

    • Increase in positive word-of-mouth advertising (Kotlar, 1994)

NCAA Wrestling Entertainment (2)


Review of Literature

(Importance of Entertainment)

  • Core product is made up of the following elements (Mullin, Hardy, & Sutton, 2007):

    • Game form (rules/techniques)

    • Players (athletes/coaches)

    • Equipment and apparel

    • Venue

  • “In game” rules have a significant impact on the

  • entertainment value offered at sport events (Aylott &

  • Aylott, 2007; Partori & Corredoira)

  • Must implement rules that increase action and

  • scoring to maximize consumer interest (Paul &

  • Weinbach, 2007)

NCAA Wrestling Entertainment (3)


III. Purpose of Research

  • Purpose: To survey stakeholders of college wrestling to identify their level of satisfaction with the core wrestling product being offered in intercollegiate athletics

  • Implications

    • Gain base understanding of fan’s perceptions of core product being offered

    • Understanding of fan’s perceptions based on segmentation

    • Suggestions for improvements

    • Improve core product to maximize consumer appeal

NCAA Wrestling Entertainment (4)


IV. Methodology

  • Survey Instrument:

    • Wrestling Consumer Satisfaction Scale (WCSS):

    • based on past similar scales (Tsuji et al., 2007)

    • Construct validity: Four collegiate wrestling

    • coaches, four collegiate wrestlers, four

    • professors, and one survey compilation specialists

  • Survey Distribution:

    • Stratified: national message board; regional

    • message boards

    • Test-Retest reliability (Correlation; Spearman-

    • Brown Coefficient)

NCAA Wrestling Entertainment (5)


V. Results

  • Surveys returned (n=1095); Usable surveys

  • (n=1023 [93.4%])

  • Demographics:

    • Gender (Male = 95.1%; Female = 4.9%)

    • Age (Mean = 26-34)

    • Background

      • Fan (n = 583; 53.6%)

        • High School Coach (n =475; 43.7%)

      • College Coach (n = 112; 10.3%)

NCAA Wrestling Entertainment (6)


Fan Satisfaction: Core Product

NCAA Wrestling Entertainment (7)


Fan Satisfaction: Rules & Regulations

NCAA Wrestling Entertainment (8)


Fan Segmentation

(ANOVA’s – Age)

NCAA Wrestling Entertainment (9)


Fan Segmentation

(ANOVA’s – Affiliation)

NCAA Wrestling Entertainment (10)


Suggestions for Change

(Open-Ended Responses)

NCAA Wrestling Entertainment (11)


Summary of Key Points

NCAA Wrestling Entertainment (12)


VI. Discussion

  • Attempt to cease the elimination of college

  • wrestling programs (Cooper, 2008)

  • Importance of marketing effectively at all levels

  • in the future (emphasis: grassroots level)

  • Build your foundation first: You must have a

  • strong core product to build fan base effectively

  • in future years

    • Rules dictate action and level of entertainment

    • experienced at wrestling events (Paul &

    • Weinbach, 2007)

  • Continue to adapt as industry changes

NCAA Wrestling Entertainment (13)


VII. Conclusions

  • Limitations of study:

    • Sample limited to loyal wrestling fans (online)

    • Broad analysis of rules and regulations

  • Future research:

    • More specific analysis of rules (casual and loyal fans)

    • Marketing based assessment

    • Changes to college wrestling schedule

      • Academic progress

      • Athletic competition enhancement

      • Consumer interest

NCAA Wrestling Entertainment (14)


Thanks for your time!

Any Questions?


ad