Rethinking Sponsorship Recognition: An Abstract

Abstract

Shortly after almost any large-scale sporting event, reports are posted showing that most of the event viewers have little idea about who the sponsors were. For example, following the 2012 Olympics in London, research conducted by the Toluna Global Omnibus Survey showed sponsorship recall to be poor for many “true” partners, sponsors, and supporters. Adidas a “true” sponsor garnered only 24% correct recall, whereas Nike, a brand aligned with athletes but not the event, was recalled by 37% of participants as an Olympic sponsor (Wentz 2012). Given the importance of these communication investments, it is curious that we know so little about the measurement instruments that produce these results. For example, when direct competitor foils are included in the recall instrument, are they randomized? Would the results change if a different competitor foils were included in the list of possible sponsors? What is the role of non-sponsor foils when this foil is perceived to be a sponsor, and when it is not? These questions are addressed using a theory from psychology, but this is not included here due to space limitations.