Journal of Sport & Tourism Creating a memorable

This article was downloaded by: [North West University] On: 07 September 2015, At: 01:45 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG

Journal of Sport & Tourism Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjto20

Creating a memorable spectator experience at the Two Oceans Marathon a

Martinette Kruger & Melville Saayman

a

a

Tourism Focus Area, TREES (Tourism Research in Economic Environs and Society) , North West University , Potchefstroom Campus, Private Bag x6001, Potchefstroom , North West Province , 2520 , South Africa Published online: 27 Feb 2012.

To cite this article: Martinette Kruger & Melville Saayman (2012) Creating a memorable spectator experience at the Two Oceans Marathon, Journal of Sport & Tourism, 17:1, 63-77, DOI: 10.1080/14775085.2012.662391 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14775085.2012.662391

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions

Journal of Sport & Tourism Vol. 17, No. 1, February 2012, pp. 63 –77

Downloaded by [North West University] at 01:45 07 September 2015

Creating a memorable spectator experience at the Two Oceans Marathon Martinette Kruger∗ & Melville Saayman Spectators spend a considerable amount of money to actively follow a sport, team and/or athlete, and this makes them a valuable and profitable niche market segment, which should be understood. Creating a memorable visitor experience for spectators at sport events is crucial in order to retain and grow this market. The purpose of this research was to determine the critical success factors (CSFs) in creating a memorable spectator experience at the Two Oceans Marathon in South Africa. A survey was conducted on the day of the race, and a total of 207 questionnaires were administered. A factor analysis identified four factors: Amenities, Comfort and visibility, Marketing and Personnel and provisions. Of these factors, Amenities and Marketing were considered the most important CSFs that contribute to a memorable spectator experience at the event. The results further confirm that the CSFs differ according to the event and the sport tourism product, and so sport organisers need to identify the CSFs specific to the event, especially from the demand side. Keywords: Spectator experience; Marathon spectators; Critical success factors; Two Oceans Marathon; South Africa Introduction Spectators around the world have a considerable economic impact and benefits and their value lies in the fact that these individuals are interested in sports and as a result spend a substantial amount of money to actively follow a sport, team and/or athlete (Gibson, 1998; Bull & Weed, 1999; Wann et al., 2001; Cannon & Ford, 2002). This makes them a valuable and profitable niche market segment, which should be understood (Standeven & De Knop, 1999; Wann et al., 2001). To attract and retain spectators, sport events should create a memorable visitor experience,

Martinette Kruger and Melville Saayman are at the Tourism Focus Area, TREES (Tourism Research in Economic Environs and Society), North West University, Potchefstroom Campus, Private Bag x6001, Potchefstroom, North West Province 2520, South Africa. ∗ Corresponding author: Martinette Kruger: e-mail: [email protected] ISSN 1477-5085 (print)/ISSN 1029-5399 (online) # 2012 Taylor & Francis http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14775085.2012.662391


64

Kruger & Saayman

using the ‘wow factor’ as a guiding principle when designing events (Standeven & De Knopp, 1999). However, creating an unforgettable experience for spectators at sport events such as the Two Oceans is no easy task. Not all supporters are equally passionate and fanatical, nor are they all totally loyal or engrossed in sport history (Redden & Steiner, 2000; Stewart et al., 2003). Furthermore, some spectators attend events on a regular basis, while others attend only on special occasions, and some spend money to attend an event, while others prefer to watch paid television sport channels (Stewart et al., 2003). Travelling to watch a sport event is not merely about viewing the event, which can be done through the many forms of media available without having to travel anywhere (Fairley, 2006). Indeed, attending a sport event may be motivated by a desire for entertainment and spectacle (that is simple diversion), a desire for emotional stimulation, curiosity or a desire to have a social outing (Getz, 2007). Moreover, in the case of individual endurance sport events such as marathons, spectators may primarily be motivated to support a participant. Both the event and the tourism experience are furthermore central to sport tourists. Indeed, these distinct experiences may be enhanced by a sense of identity that sport tourists attach to their chosen activity (Shipway & Kirkup, 2011). When creating a memorable experience, many aspects need to be considered, and the starting point is the spectators and what they consider as critical factors. Critical success factors (CSFs) are necessary and important for the success of any business endeavour such as an event, including sport events (Thompson & Strickland, 1999; Aaker, 2005). CSFs are those factors that event organisers have to know how to perform in order to be efficient, effective and successful in the medium and long term (Godfrey & Clarke, 2000). Slabbert and Saayman (2003, p. 8) defined CSFs as ‘those factors that most affect the ability of organisations to prosper in the marketplace – the particular strategy elements, product attributes, resources, competencies, competitive capabilities, and business outcomes that spell the difference between profit and loss’. Dickinson et al. (1984) added that CSFs derive from, or depend upon, features of an event’s both internal and external operating environments and may arise from a wide variety of events, circumstances and conditions of activities that require the special attention of the event’s organiser. CSFs are especially important when managing the spectators’ experience at a sport event. The idea of matching the spectators’ expectations with the characteristics of a sport event is the key to understanding their experiences and satisfactions (Gibson, 2005). From a practitioner’s perspective, a better understanding of the sport tourists’ experiences and behaviour and the factors influencing these experiences will allow sport tourism stakeholders to gain further knowledge of, and to cater for, the needs and wants of their clients (Shipway & Kirkup, 2011), which is vital for the future of a sporting event. The aim of this research is to determine the key management aspects, or CSFs, that spectators consider as important for a memorable visitor experience at one of South Africa’s most popular marathons, namely the Old Mutual Two Oceans Marathon, hereafter referred to as the Two Oceans. According to Kotze (2006), the race is known as the most beautiful marathon in the world and takes place during the Easter weekend, towards the end of the high tourist season in the Western Cape. It

Journal of Sport & Tourism

65

attracts over 21 000 participants each year, thereby providing a considerable economic injection for the economy of Cape Town. In 2010, the event generated approximately R223 million (approximately US$ 27 million) and the event and its associated influx of visitors contribute greatly to tourism in the province (Kruger et al., 2010).


Literature Review Event sport management is a complex process, and the type of sport event determines the managerial aspects required to host and organise a memorable event for both participants and spectators. Event sport tourism, in most cases, involves travelling to experience sporting events, where the body of spectators usually outweighs a small number of typically elite competitors (Getz, 1998; Kurtzman et al., 1998). However, in the case of marathon events, participants sometimes outnumber the spectators. Moreover, the level of spectator involvement is quite different, especially when compared with major sport events where spectators support a team or athletes. At marathon events, spectators support an individual athlete, in most cases a spouse or a family member, and have a higher level of attachment to the participant than to the sport (marathon). This is, however, not the case for all spectators. Some spectators may support the race out of curiosity, for the desire to be part of the event or even by accident while on holiday in the area. Therefore, spectators at marathon events cannot be classified as ‘fans’, which Hunt et al. (1999) defined as ‘enthusiastic devotee[s] of some particular sport consumptive object’. A fan is both an enthusiastic consumer of organised sport and attached to the sport, which manifests through specific behaviour. Based on this, spectators at marathon events can be distinguished from fans or general spectators at team sport events as illustrated in Figure 1. This distinction between two spectator types makes analysing and understanding the heterogeneity and complexity of marathon spectators’ behaviours and attitudes vital. The aspects that marathon spectators regard as critical for a memorable experience will differ significantly from those of spectators who attend major sport events (Bouchet et al., 2010). This specific knowledge is particularly crucial for sport managers and organisers, enabling them to categorise their demand accurately, which in

Figure 1.

Classification of spectators at sport events.


66

Kruger & Saayman

turn would allow them to target and satisfy the appropriate market segments (Bouchet et al., 2010). Weed (2006) suggested that the reasons why such experiences are enjoyable, and why participants and spectators would like to repeat them, are overlooked because work on experiences is primarily descriptive in the field of sport tourism. Understanding tourist behaviours and experiences requires realising not only that tourists differ in the activities that they take part in on vacation, but also that their choices need to be placed in the context of a number of factors including motivation (Crompton, 1979), age or life cycle stage (Lawson, 1991), gender (Squire, 1994), degree of risk aversion/adventurousness (Lepp & Gibson, 2003), social class (Graburn, 1983) and race (Phillips, 1993). In examining the experiences of sport spectators, many of the same concepts are relevant to understanding their behavioural choices and patterns (Gibson, 2005). According to Hinch and Higham (2004), the visitor experience must be understood in terms of the length of stay at the destination, activities pursued and general tourist behaviour. Visitor experience also combines tangible (physical attributes) and intangible (emotions and feelings) elements. In the context of sport events, visitor experiences are a function of the visitors’ motivations and desired experiences but are also influenced by the destination’s sport and tourism systems (Hinch & Higham, 2004). The time, money and energy invested in accessing a sporting event will generally influence the length of stay and, consequently, most aspects of the spectator experience (Collier, 1999). CSFs that play a fundamental role in creating a memorable and satisfying spectator experience include the distance travelled, the standard and capacity of transport and stadium infrastructure, the duration, location and scheduling of the sport event, the standard of a team or individual performance, the competitive outcome of a contest, layout of the sport ground/terrain, information signs, ancillary activities and entertainment, effective marketing, atmosphere, spatial distribution and accessibility of sport facilities and venues (Hinch & Higham, 2004; Yoshida & James, 2010). The following CSFs were identified for a sport tourism destination: quality sport and training facilities, variety and affordable accommodation, available transportation, favourable climate, image and location, favourable political situation, effective marketing, management and services, favourable media and broadcasting and accessibility of destination (Saayman, 2004). Other important aspects to consider are memorabilia of the experience along with promotional activities such as in-game activities and fan –player interactions in spectator sport settings (Kahle et al., 1996). Successful sport marketing campaigns and event organisation rely on the type of supporter, the product expectations and how marketing affects future sport consumption (Quick, 2000). Therefore, sport managers need to understand the expectations that define distinct sport tourism market segments (in this case sport spectators) and their influence on all aspects of the visitor experience (Gammon & Robinson, 1997). While the outcome of a sporting event is often unpredictable and not under the control of sport managers (Yoshida & James, 2010), organisers of sport events should focus on the critical factors that they can control. Enhancing the spectator experience at sporting events brings many benefits, which include satisfied and loyal visitors resulting in higher return visits, increased visitor spending, longer length of



67

stay and positive word-of-mouth recommendations. Therefore, enhancing the visitor experience can contribute to the sustainability of sport tourism development and sport events (Hinch & Higham, 2004). Despite their importance in managing the spectator experience, CSFs at sporting events, and specifically at marathon events such as the Two Oceans, have not been researched. Previous research has focused on the attributes of spectators to major sport events that attract thousands of sport fans coming to support a team or athletes, such as football events (Hill & Green, 2000; Giulianotti, 2002; Tapp & Clowes, 2002; Boen, Vanbeelaere, & Swinnen, 2005), ice hockey games (Bodet & Bernace-Assollant, 2009), basketball matches (Pan et al., 1997; Boen et al., 2008), professional golf tours (Crosset, 1995; McDonald et al., 2002; Robinson et al., 2004) and athletic tournaments (Trail et al., 2003). To date, numerous South African studies have focused on the CSFs of different tourism operations from the supply as well as the demand side. With regard to the supply-side analyses, Van der Westhuizen (2003), Kruger (2009) and Appel (2010) found similar CSFs in managing, respectively, a guesthouse, a conference centre and a hotel, while De Witt (2006) investigated the CSFs for managing special events such as weddings. Collectively, their results emphasised the importance of CSFs such as general and operational management, human resource management, marketing management, financial management and quality and customer satisfaction. To date, four studies have focused on determining the CSFs from the demand side, that of a wine festival (Marais, 2009), a national arts festival (Erasmus, 2011), a live music performance (concert) (Manners, 2011) and a national park (Engelbrecht, 2011). All the four studies focused on specifically determining the CSFs to enhance or create a memorable visitor experience at the respective ventures. The results of these studies vary significantly and the nature of the venture greatly determines the CSFs needed to effectively manage the visitor experience. Marais (2009) focused on a wine festival and her results revealed a high importance on the availability of entertainment, route development, wine farm attributes, accessibility of the wine farms and effective marketing. Erasmus’ (2011) study focused on a national arts festival and his results revealed quality shows and stalls, safety and personnel, venues, activities and community, parking and restaurants, marketing and accessibility and accommodation and ablutions as CSFs. Manners (2011) investigated a live music performance in South Africa and found (in the order of importance) that general management, venue and technical aspects, marketing, accessibility and parking, amenities and catering as well as souvenirs were important CSFs. Engelbrecht (2011) devoted his attention to determine the CSFs of a national park and found general management, wildlife experience, facilities, green management, leisure hospitality facilities, interpretation, variety activities, accommodation facilities and luxury as CSFs for a memorable visitor experience at a nature-based destination. These authors have collectively found that CSFs differ from one tourism venture to the next and it is, therefore, important to identify the needs of visitors and determine the aspects they consider as important for a quality visitor experience, as management directly controls these factors. Each tourism segment has unique CSFs that need to be


68

Kruger & Saayman

identified in order to create a memorable and satisfactory visitor experience. There are also clear differences between the CSFs found from a supply-side analysis and those identified from a demand-side analysis. The only generic CSFs found in all the studies are aspects pertaining to marketing and general management. Based on the results of the aforementioned studies, it can be assumed that a sport event, such as the Two Oceans, will require different CSFs to ensure a memorable visitor experience. Surely the nature of the event (two races, a half and a full marathon on the same day), the fact that this event is, to many spectators, very personal (following a family member, friend or colleague) and the ability for spectators to follow the participants along the route at different spectator ‘hot spots’ will influence what visitors regard as important for a memorable experience. Therefore, in the context of sport events, identifying the CSFs from a spectator’s perspective is crucial for retaining and increasing the number of spectators at events such as the Two Oceans, especially since support from spectators plays a fundamental role in the participants’ decision to compete in and finish the race. Method The overall aim of this study was to determine the CSFs that spectators at the Two Oceans regard as important for a memorable visitor experience. Study Design The data were collected using a structured self-completion questionnaire and it consisted of three sections: Sections A and B captured demographic details (gender, home language, age, occupation, home province, marital status and preferred accommodation) as well as spending behaviour (number of persons paid for, length of stay and expenditure), while Section C measured the motivational factors for supporting the race. In Section C, 15 items were measured on a five-point Likert scale, with respondents being asked to indicate the importance of each item on the scale (1 ¼ not at all important; 2 ¼ less important; 3 ¼ neither important nor less important; 4 ¼ very important and 5 ¼ extremely important). The demographic questions and items included in the motivation section were based on the research done by Carmack and Martens (1979), Summers et al. (1983), Ogles and Masters (2003), Kotze (2006), LaChausse (2006), and Streicher and Saayman (2010) as well as Kruger and Saayman (2011) at two endurance sport events in South Africa, respectively, the Cape Argus Cycle Tour and the Comrades Marathon. Also, in this section, 29 CSFs were measured, with the respondents indicating the importance of each factor for a quality visitor experience (1 ¼ not at all important; 2 ¼ less important; 3 ¼ important; 4 ¼ very important and 5 ¼ extremely important). The critical success aspects included in this section were adapted from previous studies including those of Hinch and Higham (2004), Yoshida and James (2010), and Saayman (2004) as well as Kahle et al. (2003). Examples of the statements included were ‘Adequate parking arrangements’, ‘Accessibility of entry points to the sport grounds’, ‘Good visibility of the athletes from all viewpoints at the sport grounds’ and ‘Affordable food and beverage at the sport grounds’.


69


Survey Implementation A total of 207 completed spectator questionnaires were analysed. According to Israel (2009, p. 6), from a population of 25,000 (N), 204 respondents (n) are considered to be representative and result in a 95% level of confidence with a +7% sampling error. Since approximately 12,000 spectators supported the Two Oceans in 2011 (Kruger et al., 2011), the number of completed questionnaires is greater than the number required. An onsite intercept survey was undertaken, with field workers handing out questionnaires onsite at the University of Cape Town Sports Grounds in Cape Town on the day of the race, April 2011. The field workers were trained to ensure that they understood the aim of the study as well as the questionnaire. Spectators were approached while they were watching the athletes enter the sport grounds. The respondents were briefed about the purpose of the research beforehand to ensure that they participated willingly and responded openly and honestly. Research Limitations One potential limitation of this research included the concern for not reaching spectators who were supporting the race along the route. This approach only included spectators at the finish line and therefore does not take into account that the spectators along the route may have different CSFs compared with those at the finish line. The reasons for including other spectators in this analysis were the logistical difficulties in reaching these spectators as many roads are closed. Accessibility and mobility are, therefore, major constraints. Many spectators supporting along the route also live near the route and only support for a while – some of these spectators just support the race and not a participant and so many of them rarely go to the finish line to see the end of the race. Future research should try to include spectators both at the finish line and along the route. Profile of Respondents Over one half of the respondents at the race were females (56%), with an average age of 38 years, English-speaking (58%) and originate from the Western Cape Province (54%). These respondents travel in groups of five persons to the race and are financially responsible for only two persons. Spectators stay an average of five nights in Cape Town and have supported the race an average of four times. During the event, spectators spend an average of R3,300.00 (approximately US$ 400) per group. Data Analysis The data were captured using Microsoft# Excel# and analysed using SPSS (2009). Using an Oblimin rotation with Kaiser normalisation, a principal component factor analysis was performed on the 29 CSFs to explain the variance –covariance structure of the set of variables through a few linear combinations of these variables. The


70

Kruger & Saayman

Kaiser–Meyer –Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was used to determine whether the covariance matrix is suitable for the factor analysis. Kaiser’s criteria for the extraction of all factors with eigenvalues greater than one were used. All items with a factor loading above 0.3 were considered as contributing to a factor, whereas those with loadings below 0.3 were considered as not correlating significantly with this factor (Steyn, 2000; Pallant, 2007). In addition, any item that cross-loaded on two factors, with factor loadings greater than 0.3, was categorised in the factors where interpretability was best. A reliability coefficient (Cronbach’s alpha) was computed to estimate the internal consistency of each factor. All factors with a reliability coefficient above 0.6 were considered as acceptable in this study. The average inter-item correlations were also computed as another measure of reliability, which should lie between 0.15 and 0.55 (Clark & Watson, 1995). The pattern matrix of the principal component factor analysis using an Oblimin rotation with Kaiser normalisation identified four CSFs for a quality spectator experience. These factors were labelled according to similar characteristics (Table 1) and accounted for 71% of the total variance. All had relatively high reliability coefficients, ranging from 0.84 (the lowest) to 0.95 (the highest). The average inter-item correlation coefficients (with values between 0.56 and 0.70) implied internal consistency for all factors. Moreover, all items loaded on a factor with a loading greater than 0.3, and the relatively high factor loadings indicated a reasonably high correlation between the factors and their component items. The Kaiser – Meyer – Olkin measure of sampling adequacy of 0.94 also indicated that patterns of correlation are relatively compact and yield distinct and reliable factors (Field, 2005). Barlett’s test of sphericity also reached statistical significance (p , 0.001), supporting the factorability of the correlation matrix (Pallant, 2007). Factor scores were calculated as the average of all items contributing to a specific factor in order to interpret them on the original five-point Likert scale of measurement. As Table 1 shows, the following four CSFs were identified as necessary for a memorable spectator experience at the Two Oceans: Amenities (Factor 1), Comfort and visibility (Factor 2), Marketing (Factor 3) and Personnel and provisions (Factor 4). With the highest mean value (4.23), a reliability coefficient of 0.95 and an inter-item correlation of 0.70, Amenities was the most important CSF for a memorable spectator experience. This was followed by Marketing, with a mean value of 4.03, a reliability coefficient of 0.93 and an inter-item correlation of 0.62. Spectators at the Two Oceans regarded Personnel and provisions as the third most important CSF (3.94), with a reliability coefficient of 0.93 and an inter-item correlation of 0.56. Although Amenities obtained the lowest mean value (3.81), it is an important CSF to consider especially at sport events. Discussion Four CSFs were identified (in the order of importance): Amenities, Marketing, Personnel and provisions and Comfort and visibility. With the exception of Comfort and visibility, the other three CSFs have been identified in the literature, although not


71

Table 1. The results of factor analysis of the CSFs for a memorable visitor experience at the Two Oceans.


CSFs and items Factor 1: Amenities Adequate parking arrangements Accessibility of entry points to the sport grounds Adequate security at parking areas Adequate information boards on the terrain and effective signage and directions of the sport grounds Clean and hygienic ablution facilities Effective signage and directions to the sport grounds Adequate amount of rubbish bins at the sport grounds Adequate ablution facilities inside/outside the sport grounds Factor 2: Comfort and visibility Comfortable seating Adequate seats in the sport grounds Good visibility of the athletes from all viewpoints at the sport grounds Factor 3: Marketing User-friendly website and adequate information Adequate information regarding the race Correct information given through marketing (e.g. date, time, venue, etc.) Adequate safety measures/precautions in place during the race Adequate supporter ‘hot spots’ along the route Effective marketing prior to the race regarding date, time, venue, etc. Good layout of sport grounds Effective technical aspects during the event (sound, announcements, etc.) Factor 4: Personnel and provisions Friendly and professional personnel in and around the sport grounds Personnel who are trained to handle any race enquiries Race personnel who are easily noticeable Affordable food and beverages at the sport grounds Variety of food and beverages available (e.g. Halaal, vegetarian) Good-quality viewing of the race on a big screen Affordable and variety of souvenirs (e.g. caps, T-shirts, etc.) Accessibility for the disabled Visibility of emergency personnel Visibility of security on the sport grounds Total variance explained Reliability coefficient Average inter-item correlation Mean value

1

2

3

4

0.68 0.56 0.56 0.51 0.47 0.42 0.41 0.38 0.94 0.81 0.34 0.94 0.86 0.72 0.66 0.65 0.60 0.51 0.31 0.87 0.82 0.72 0.71 0.65 0.47 0.41 0.37 0.34 0.34 71% 0.95 0.70 4.23

0.84 0.64 3.81

0.93 0.62 4.03

0.93 0.56 3.94

necessarily for sport events. Manners (2011) identified Amenities as a CSF for creating a memorable visitor experience at major music events, whereas Erasmus (2011) and Manners (2011) identified parking and ablution. Marais (2009), Hinch and Higham (2004), Yoshida and James (2010) and Saayman (2004) found accessibility to be a


72

Kruger & Saayman

key aspect for a memorable visitor experience at an arts festival and wine festival, respectively, while Erasmus (2011), Marais (2009), Hinch and Higham (2004), Yoshida and James (2010), De Witt (2006), Kruger (2009), Appel (2010), Manners (2011) and Saayman (2004) also identified marketing as a CSF in their respective research. Van der Westhuizen (2003), De Witt (2006), Kruger (2009), Appel (2010) and Erasmus (2011) also identified personnel (human resource management) as a CSF. Similarly, with regard to provisions, Van der Westhuizen (2003), Kruger (2009), Manners (2011) and Erasmus (2011) indicated that providing a variety of services, facilities and restaurants is a key aspect for a memorable visitor experience. Although the literature review does not identify comfort and visibility as a CSF, this factor (like amenities) plays an important role in creating a memorable experience for spectators at a sport event. The three key aspects related to amenities are related to parking and accessibility, dissemination of information and hygienic ablution facilities. These are aspects that spectators are especially confronted with as they are the ones transporting the participants to and from the start and finish points. Taking the unique nature of this race (two races in one), the length of the event and the role of the spectators into account, it is to be expected that these aspects are important for spectators. These aspects, therefore, need to be a priority for the race organisers and marketers to ensure that spectators have a memorable experience at the event. These findings, therefore, support previous studies and confirm the notion that CSFs differ from one tourism product to the next. In addition, the results show that the type of tourism product, in this case a sport event, determines the importance and strength of each CSF, which implies that one CSF may be important for product A, but will be less important for product B. The study also identified a CSF that has not been found previously in the literature: Comfort and visibility is an important factor in creating a memorable visitor experience at a marathon sport event. An explanation for this factor could be the unique nature of the Two Oceans and its two races. The cut-off times for the half- and ultra-marathons are, respectively, 3 and 7 h, which is the waiting period or ‘dead time’ for spectators while the participants are competing. Taking the extended time of the race into consideration, it is unsurprising that this factor is important for these marathon spectators. From a research methodology and planning point of view, both researchers and organisers must have sufficient knowledge of the various aspects involved in organising a particular event, since these aspects affect the outcome of the research. As events differ considerably, the more specific the knowledge, the better the results. This research supports the notion of Yoshida and James (2010) that while sport event organisers may not know the outcome of the race, they can influence visitor experience, as management can directly control the aspects identified in this study – event organisers have control over the internal environment, which creates a memorable experience. This is also vital especially in the context of marathons, since even though the runner determines which races he/she will participate in, their associated spectator(s), albeit a family member, a friend or an affiliated club, is usually responsible for arranging logistical aspects, for example, accommodation and transport of the participants to the starting point. Ensuring a memorable spectator experience is,


73

therefore, essential and resulting benefits include visitor or spectator satisfaction, loyalty and an increase in attendance, which is especially important because of the considerable economic impact of spectators (Gibson, 1998; Bull & Weed, 1999; Cannon & Ford, 2002). Lastly, event organisers’ knowledge of the CSFs is critical; as indicated in the literature review, the CSFs that spectators and participants consider to be important may different from those that the organisers (supply side) feel are essential.


Implications Based on the results, this research has the following implications: first, Amenities was rated as the most important CSF for a memorable spectator experience at the Two Oceans, which implies that organisers of marathon events should ensure that adequate directions to the sport grounds be communicated prior to, as well as on the day of, the race. Communication sources that organisers can use include radio stations, newspapers, newsletters and roadside information boards, billboards and posters. Sufficient parking should be available to the spectators together with adequate security at the parking areas. This is an important aspect since finding parking at the starting point and at the sport ground is the spectators’ problem. Information concerning these aspects can also be distributed at the expo during registration and included in the participants’ welcome packs to give to their supporters. A ‘supporter information desk’ can also be introduced at the expo where the spectators can obtain any information regarding the race, especially since it is mostly the participants who receive all the information and not the spectators. Adequate, clean and hygienic ablution facilities should be a priority, as well as ample and visible dustbins along the route of the race and at the sport grounds. Second, spectators regard Marketing and Personnel and provisions as the second and third most important CSFs. Marketing is considerably more important for spectators at marathon events than at other tourism operations. One explanation is that marathon spectators are reliant much more on information about, for example, accommodation, race dates, venue and times and transport especially since they are mostly responsible for arranging the logistical aspects prior to and during the race. The implication is that the race organisers need to provide adequate information about the event through marketing media including a user-friendly website with regular event updates, especially spectator hot spots (allocated areas for spectators) along the route. Although not measured in this research, the role of social media such as Facebook and Twitter as potential marketing tools should be investigated more intensively, as these networks are playing an increasing role in visitors’ decision-making processes and could be useful marketing tools for event organisers. Greater cooperation between event organisers and destination marketers is also required so that information, such as a list of possible accommodation establishments in the vicinity of the race and things to see and do in the area, can be provided, which will help influence the decisions made by the spectators. Organisers should also focus on human resources and regular training of personnel on aspects of the events,

74

Kruger & Saayman

friendliness and duties prior to and after the race. Organisers should also ensure the availability and affordability of a variety of food and beverages to provide for different tastes. Lastly, Comfort and visibility is another aspect that should be managed, which implies that the venue should have comfortable and adequate seats. Spectators should also have good visibility of the athletes from all viewpoints at the sport grounds. This is important taking into consideration the extended time that spectators have to wait for the participants to finish the race.


Conclusion This research, which determined the CSFs of a memorable spectator experience at the Two Oceans Marathon, greatly contributes to the understanding of sport spectators at a marathon race – an area that receives limited attention. Moreover, this was the first time that research has been conducted among spectators at a marathon event that included two races, a half- and an ultra-marathon. Based on the results, it is clear that spectators are a complex market and the classification of spectators at marathon sport events (as illustrated in Figure 1) can be further refined to, for example, spectators who support an individual participant, those who support the race out of curiosity and those who support the event as a secondary reason. This research identified four CSFs, of which Amenities and Marketing was the most important one. This study contributes by providing research on spectators at individual sport events compared with team sports, which is important as spectators play such an important role in sport tourism. This study highlights the fact that research on sporting events should address spectators’ needs in order to create memorable experiences and that marathon spectators can be distinguished from fans (general spectators), which implies a lack of understanding of the needs of fans versus spectators. Therefore, a study comparing spectators at team sporting events and at individual sporting events is recommended. Research that focuses on the CSFs identified by event organisers is also needed. Taking the unique nature of this race into consideration, another interesting study would be to distinguish spectators based on who they support at the race and to examine whether there are different CSFs for different types of spectators. The fact that this marathon consists of two types of races should also be taken into consideration and two separate approaches should be considered to distinguish between half- and ultra-marathon supporters and the CSFs they require for a memorable experience.

Acknowledgements The authors thank the NRF for providing financial support for this project. The authors also thank the marketing manager of the Old Mutual Two Oceans Marathon, Stefanie Schultzen, for allowing this research to be conducted at the race as well as all the fieldworkers and respondents who participated in the survey.


75


References Aaker, D. (2005) Strategic Market Management, 7th ed. (Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons). Appel, C. P. (2010) Critical success factors in managing hotels in South Africa, Mini-dissertation B.Com Honours, North West University, Potchefstroom, 2010. Bodet, C., & Bernace-Assollant, I. (2009) Do fans care about hot dogs? A satisfaction analysis of French ice hockey spectators, International Journal of Sport Management and Marketing, 5(1/2), pp. 15– 37. Boen, F., Vanbeselaere, N., Pandelaere, M., Shutters, K. & Rowe, P. (2008) When your team is not really your team anymore: Identification with a merged basketball club, Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 20(2), pp. 165–183. Boen, F., Vanbeselaere, N., & Swinnen, H. (2005) Predicting fan support in a merge between soccer teams: A social-psychological perspective, International Journal of Psychology, 36, pp. 65– 85. Bouchet, P., Bodet, G., Bernache-Assollant, I. & Kada, F. (2010) Segmenting sport spectators: Constructing and preliminary validation of the Sporting Event Experience Search (SEES) scale, Sport Management Review, 1(1), pp. 1–12. Bull, C. J. & Weed, M. E. (1999) Niche markets and small island tourism: The development of sports tourism in Malta, Managing Leisure, 4(2), pp. 142–155. Cannon, T. F. & Ford, J. (2002) Relationship of demographic and trip characteristics to visitor spending: An analysis of sports travel across time, Tourism Economics, 8(3), pp. 263–271. Carmack, M. A. & Martens, R. (1979) Measuring commitment to running: A survey of runners attitudes and mental states, Journal of Sport Psychology, 1(1), pp. 25–42. Clark, L. A. & Watson, D. (1995) Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development, Psychological Assessment, 7(3), pp. 309–319. Collier, A. (1999) Principles of Tourism: A New Zealand Perspective, 5th ed. (Auckland: Longman). Crompton, J. L. (1979) Motivations for pleasure vacation, Annals of Tourism Research, 6(1), pp. 408–424. Crosset, T. (1995) Toward an understanding of on-site fan-athlete relations: A case study of the LPGA, Sport Marketing Quaterly, 4(2), pp. 31–38. De Witt, L. (2006) Key success factors for managing special events: The case of wedding tourism, Dissertation – MCom, North-West University, Potchefstroom. Dickinson, R. A., Ferguson, C. R. & Sircar, S. (1984) Critical success factors and small business, American Journal of Small Business, 8(3), pp. 49–57. Engelbrecht, W. H. (2011) Critical success factors for managing the visitor experience at the Kruger National Park, Dissertation – MA Tourism, North-West University, Potchefstroom. Erasmus, L. J. (2011) Key success factors in managing the visitors’ experience at the Klein Karoo National Arts Festival, Dissertation – MCom, North-West University, Potchefstroom. Fairley, S. (2006) Sport fan tourism: Understanding those who travel to follow sport teams, Unpublished PhD thesis, Griffith Business School, Griffith University, Brisbane. Field, A. (2005) Discovering Statistics Using SPSS, 2nd ed. (London: SAGE Publications). Gammon, S. & Robinson, T. (1997) Sport and tourism: A conceptual framework, Journal of Sport Tourism, 4(3), pp. 8–24. Getz, D. (1998) Trends, strategies and issues in sport-event tourism, Sport Marketing Quarterly, 7(2), pp. 8–13. Getz, D. (2007) Event studies. Theory, research and policy for planned events (Oxford: Butterworth Heineman). Gibson, H. J. (1998) Sport tourism: A critical analysis of research, Sport Management Review, 1(1), pp. 45–76. Gibson, H. (2005) Understanding sport tourism experiences, in: J. Higham (Ed.) Sport Tourism Destinations: Issues, Opportunities and Analysis, pp. 360–373 (Oxford: Butterworth Heineman). Giulianotti, R. (2002) Supporters, followers, fans and flaneurs: A taxonomy of spectator identities in football, Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 26(1), pp. 25–46.


76

Kruger & Saayman

Godfrey, K. & Clarke, J. (2000) The Tourism Development Handbook – A Practical Approach to Planning and Marketing (London and New York: Continuum). Graburn, N. H. H. (1983) The antropology of tourism, Annals of Tourism Research, 10(1), pp. 9– 33. Hill, B. & Green, B. C. (2000) Repeat attendance as a function of loyalty and the sportscape across three football contexts, Sport Management Review, 3(2), pp. 145–162. Hinch, T. & Higham, J. (2004) Sport Tourism Development, p. 254 (Clevedon: Channel View Publications). Hunt, K., Bristol, T. & Bashaw, R. (1999) A conceptual approach to classifying sport fans, Journal of Services Marketing, 13(6), pp. 439–452. Israel, G. D. (2009) Determining sample size. Available at http://www.edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/pd/ pd00600.pdf (accessed 22 March 2010). Kahle, L. R., Kambara, K. M., & Rose, G. M. (1996) A functional model of fan attendance motivations for college football, Sport Marketing Quarterly, 5(4), pp. 51 –60. Kotze, N. (2006) Cape Town and the Two Oceans Marathon: The impact of sport tourism, Urban Forum, 17(3), pp. 282–293. Kruger, M. (2009) Spending behaviour of visitors to the Klein Karoo National Arts Festival, Dissertation – MA Tourism, North-West University. Kruger, M. & Saayman, M. (2012) Who are the real comrades of the Comrades Marathon? South African Journal for research in sport, physical education and recreation (under review). Kruger, M., Saayman, M., Saayman, A. & Rossouw, R. (2010) A Marketing Analysis and Economic Impact of the Old Mutual Two Oceans Marathon (Potchefstroom: Institute for Tourism and Leisure Studies). Kruger, M., Saayman, M., Saayman, A. & Rossouw, R. (2011) A Marketing Analysis and Economic Impact of the Old Mutual Two Oceans Marathon (Potchefstroom: Institute for Tourism and Leisure Studies). Kurtzman, J., Zauhar, J., Ahn, J. & Choi, S. (1998) Global understanding, appreciation and peace through sports tourism. Paper presented at the 18th International Congress of Applied Psychology: Man and Sport: The Psychology of Physical Activity, Montreal, Canada, July 28 –August 2. LaChausse, R. G. (2006) Motives of competitive and non-competitive cyclists, Journal of Sports Behaviour, 29(4), pp. 304–314. Lawson, R. (1991) Patterns of tourist expenditure and types of vacation across the family life cycle, Journal of Tourism Researh, 29(4), pp. 14 –18. Lepp, A., & Gibson H. (2003) Tourist Roles, Perceived Risk and International Tourism, Annals of Tourism Research, 30(3), pp. 606 –624. Manners, B. (2011) Critical success factors in managing the visitor experience at a major musical event, Dissertation – MA Tourism, North-West University, Potchefstroom. Marais, M. (2009) Key success factors in managing the Wacky Wine Festival, Dissertation – MCom, North-West University, Potchefstroom. Mcdonald, M. A., Milne, R. G. & Hong, J. (2002) Motivational factors for evaluating sport spectator and participant markets, Sport Marketing Quarterly, 11(2), pp. 100–113. Ogles, B. J. & Masters, K. S. (2003) A typology of marathon runners based on cluster analysis of motivations, Journal of sport behaviour, 26(1), pp. 69–85. Pallant, J. (2007) SPSS Survival Manual: A Step-By-Step Guide to Data Analysis using SPSS Version 15, 3rd ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill). Pan, D. W., Gabert, T. E., McGaugh, E. C. & Branvoid, S. E. (1997) Factors contributing to the purchase of season tickets for intercollegiate basketball games, Journal of Sport Behavior, 20(4), pp. 447–464. Phillips, B. D. (1993) Cultural Diversity in Disasters: Sheltering, Housing, and Long-Term Recovery, International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 11(1), pp. 99– 110.



77

Quick, S. (2000) Contemporary sport consumers: Some implications of linking fan typology with key spectator variables, Sport Marketing Quaterly, 9(3), pp. 149–156. Redden, J. & Steiner, C. J. (2000) Fanatical consumers: Towards a framework for research, Journal of Consumer Marketing, 17(4), pp. 322–337. Robinson, M. J., Trail, G. T. & Kwon, H. (2004) Motives and points of attachment of professional golf spectators, Sport Management Review, 7(2), pp. 187–192. Saayman, M. (2004) An Introduction to Sports Tourism and Event Management, 2nd ed. (Potchefstroom: Leisure Consultants and Publications). Shipway, R. & Kirkup, N. (2011) Understanding sport tourism experiences: Exploring the participant-spectator nexus, in: R. Sharpley & P. R. Stone (Eds.) Tourist Experience: Contemporary Perspectives, pp. 127–139 (London: Routledge). Slabbert, E. & Saayman, M. (2003) Guesthouse Management in South Africa, 2nd ed. (Potchefstroom: Institute for Tourism and Leisure Studies). SPSS (2009) SPSSw 17.0 for Windows, Release 16.0.0, Copyright# by SPSS inc., Chicago, IL. Available at www.spss.com (accessed 12 June 2011). Squire, S. J. (1994) Gender and tourist experiences: Assessing women’s shared meaning for Beatrix Potter, Leisure Studies, 13(3), pp. 159 –209. Standeven, J. & De Knopp, P. (1999) Sport Tourism (Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics). Stewart, B., Smith, A. C. T. & Nicholson, M. (2003) Sport consumer typologies: A critical review, Sport Marketing Quarterly, 12(4), pp. 206–216. Steyn, H. S. (2000) Practical significance of the difference in means, South African Journal of Industrial Psychology, 26(3), pp. 1–3. Streicher, H. & Saayman, M. (2010) Travel motives of participants in the Pick n Pay Cape Argus Cycle Tour, South African Journal for Sport, Physical Education and Recreation, 32(1), pp. 121–131. Summers, J. J., Machin, V. J. & Sargent, G. I. (1983) Psychosocial factors related to marathon running, Journal of Sport Psychology, 5(1), pp. 314–331. Tapp, A. & Clowes, J. (2002) From ‘care-free casuals’ to ‘professional wanderers’: Segmentation possibilities for football supporters, European Journal of Marketing, 36(11/12), pp. 1248–1269. Thompson, A. A. & Strickland, A. J. (1999) Strategic Management: Concepts and Cases, 11th ed. (Boston: Irwin McGraw Hill). Trail, G. T., Robinson, M. J., Dick, R. J. & Gillentine, A. J. (2003) Motives and points of attachment: Fans versus spectators in intercollegiate athletics, Sport Marketing Quarterly, 12(4), pp. 217–227. Van der Westhuizen, T. (2003) Key success factors for developing and managing a guesthouse, Dissertation – MCom, North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus. Wann, D. L., Melnick, M. J., Russel, G. W. & Pease, D. G. (2001) Sports Fans: The Psychology and Social Impact of Spectators (New York: Routledge). Weed, M. (2006) Sports tourism research 2000–2004: A systematic review of knowledge and a metainterpretation of methods, Journal of Sport and Tourism, 11(1), pp. 5–30. Yoshida, M. & James, J. D. (2010) Customer satisfaction with tame and service experiences: Antecendents and consequences, Journal of Sport Management, 24(1), pp. 338–361.