Understanding Corporate Social Irresponsibility on Sports Organizations

Jersan Hu,Tzuyi Kao,Haw Ran Wong,Chien Hsien Lee

doi:10.5539/ibr.v5n12p46

Abstract

For this study, we sought to understand the conceptualization of sports organizations in the CSR context from the customer perspective. Previous studies have mainly focused on the positive effect of CSR and neglected the negative effect of irresponsible behaviors. The associations on these entities are often treated discretely, whereas the interrelatedness of the associations are overlooked. This research employs the brand concept map (BCM) method to elucidate the complex and interconnected associations of how a sports organization is perceived, and presents these findings in a graphical network structure. The aggregated network of associations in people’s memory, consisting of performance, setting, and auxiliary elements, constitutes the core (brand) images and relevant patronage values of an organization. This research contributes to the understanding of sports brand on the association and network levels. This study identifies useful individual associations such as baseball, players, mascots, related products and corporations, CSR-related behaviors, and the interconnection patterns between elements. These identified factors are useful in detecting and developing patronage and in identifying incongruence in the conceptualization of brand and organization image. The interconnectivity and network structure of people’s associations are considered by the employed in this methodology in this study. This study identifies the framework of relevant associations, elements, values, and interconnection patterns, which not only provide comprehensive information in understanding complex conceptual perceptions, but might also be leveraged and focused on by marketers for an enhanced creative marketing and communication strategy.

Highlights

Managing sports entities such as teams, leagues, and major sports events from the perspective of brand management has received considerable attention from scholars and practitioners in the past decade
Associations for the Elephant team were the Brother Hotel (Hotel), Medicine for liver (Medicine), the mascot “Elephant,” the yellow color jersey (Yellow), and name of the players “CY” and “CW.” For the Lions team, the associations were the championship won “Champion,” the mascot “Lion,” the related “7-11” convenient stores (7-11), the discount given for champions (Discount), Uni-President food products (Food), and Uni-President-related corporations (Corporation)
Comparing the four consensus maps of fans and non-fans for both brands, certain identified associations were related to either team performance or the game, including the well-known players “CY/CW,” the achievement “Champion,” and the sport “Baseball.” We identified associations that were related directly to the team, but not directly related to performance or the game, such as the mascot “Elephant/Lion,” related to the ethics and social responsible/irresponsible behaviors of “Game-fixing” and the jersey color “Yellow.” Certain associations were indirectly related to the teams, such as related business or corporations (7-11/Hotel) and related products (Food/Medicine), and benefits from the Lions winning the championship (Discount)

Summary

Introduction

Managing sports entities such as teams, leagues, and major sports events from the perspective of brand management has received considerable attention from scholars and practitioners in the past decade. Involvement in corporate social responsibility (CSR) is an important means for sports entities to simultaneously fulfill their social goals and improve their organizational image or brand equity, building reputation, loyalty, patronage intention, and financial performance. The strategic approach of CSR in sports entity brand management may be understood from the resource-based view (RBV) and institutional theory perspectives. Reputation or image in this case is an intangible resource leading to sustained competitive advantage (Deephouse, 2000), which may be related directly to social responsibility (Fombrun, 1996). Society grants legitimacy and power to business. Those who do not use power in a manner society considers responsible tend to lose it (Porter & Kramer, 2006). The notion of legitimacy is derived from every company needing tacit or explicit permission from governments, communities, and numerous other stakeholders to do business

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion