1 / 21

Kakyom Kim, & Bill Weber Johnson & Wales University Greg Greenawalt Hilton Charlotte Center City Jonggab Sun K

Understanding the Roles of a Sports Event and Destination Competitiveness Factors in Predicting Satisfaction and Future Intentions: A case of the 2008 Charlotte Thunder Road Marathon. Kakyom Kim, & Bill Weber Johnson & Wales University Greg Greenawalt Hilton Charlotte Center City

lillian
Télécharger la présentation

Kakyom Kim, & Bill Weber Johnson & Wales University Greg Greenawalt Hilton Charlotte Center City Jonggab Sun K

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Understanding the Roles of a Sports Event and Destination Competitiveness Factors in Predicting Satisfaction and Future Intentions: A case of the2008 Charlotte Thunder Road Marathon Kakyom Kim, & Bill Weber Johnson & Wales University Greg Greenawalt Hilton Charlotte Center City Jonggab Sun Kyungnam University Michael Applegate Charlotte Regional Visitors Authority

  2. The Sports Market Q. What types of sports event have you attended for the past years?

  3. Benefits from hosting Sports Events • Financial benefits • Strengthening community traditions and values • Developing infrastructure • Thus helping build more competitive destinations

  4. A Sports Tourism Destination • Charlotte, NC

  5. A need of research in this market Destination directors and event promoters are constantly designing and positioning a variety of sports/entertainment events as an effective way to attract and retain visitors while creating a competitive tourism destination. To attain such goals, it is essential to scientifically understand consumers’ specific behavior towards related events.

  6. Study Objectives Assesses two different models: 1) the effects of destination competitiveness factorson satisfactionwith the visit and future intentions of visitors who participated in a sports event and 2) the effects of attributes of a sports eventon satisfaction with the event and future intention of visitors who participated in a sports event.

  7. Proposed Model 1 Proposed Model 2

  8. Methods: Data A secondary data set was provided by the Charlotte Regional Visitors Authority (CRVA), Charlotte, NC. What does the CRVA do? Sample: Each of the 5,379 race registrants were sent an email message requesting their feedback along with a link to the web based survey. 1,393 completed surveys

  9. Methods: The Event Venue Charlotte, NC

  10. Methods: Survey Instrument Three Sections for Model 1 1) registration, expo, race course, crowd support, cost, and value. 2) Overall satisfaction with the event. 3) Future intention to participate in the event again. Three Sections for Model 2 1) affordability, airport, attractions, cleanliness, entertainment, hospitality, hotels, local transportation, night life, parking, restaurants, safety, shopping, traffic, and visitor information. 2) Overall satisfaction with the destination. 3) Future intentions (revisit and recommendation). (A five-point Likert-type scale: ‘1 = Poor’ to ‘5 = Excellent’)

  11. Methods: Analysis Steps Step 1: Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) to test the measurement model of the constructs linked with AMOS (16.0) Step 2: Structural Equation Model (SEM) using the Maximum-likelihood estimation procedure

  12. Methods: Assessment of the goodness of fit X2statistic: to be acceptable non-significant p-values are desirable; NFI (normed fit index): to be acceptable values should be greater than 0.90; GFI (goodness-of-fit index): to be acceptable values should be greater than 0.90; CFI (comparative fit index): to be acceptable values greater than 0.90 are acceptable fit; RMSEA (root mean square error of approximation): to be acceptable values less than 0.10 are favorable.

  13. Why SEM? SEM is a technique used to determine the relationships between or among a set of latent constructs and the MLE method simultaneously calculates estimates of all model parameters by maximizing the probability of the data drawn from the population (Kline, 1998).

  14. Results of the CFA Model 1: the elimination of two attributes including “Transportation” and “Visitor information” since they were too closely interrelated to other attributes. Model 2: the elimination of one attribute, “overall value for the money paid”, which was too closely interrelated to other attributes

  15. Results of the Proposed Model 1

  16. Results of the Proposed Model 2

  17. Results of the Proposed Model 1

  18. Results of the Proposed Model 2

  19. Descriptive Results: N=1,393

  20. Implications What does the study imply to the sports tourism market? Develop products/services by focusing on the significant relationships among the constructs for each model. Model 2 (the sports event) seems better than Model 1 A focus: Visitor satisfaction & Future Intentions

  21. Questionsor Suggestions?

More Related