TRANSPORT PROVISION FOR OLYMPICS

Transport provision for Olympics

Table of Content

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY3

Design of the survey instrument3

CHAPTER FOUR: DATA COLLECTION AND DISCUSSION5

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION27

Conclusion and managerial implications27

REFERENCES39

Chapter Three: Methodology

Design of the survey instrument

Criteria presented in Table I were transformed into “importance statements”, allowing for importance ratings ranging from 1 (limited importance) to 7 (vital importance). A list of 81 importance statements was sent to an international panel of experts (Australia, Canada, the UK, Malaysia). The panel consisted of academics in sport management (two), practicing sport facility managers (three), event owners (two) and event organizers (two). All panel members had either extensive experience or an academic interest (and hence knowledge) in organizing and bidding for hallmark sporting events. The panel members were first asked to decide whether the statement, in their opinion, contributed to describing the criterion and, hence, to either accept or delete the statement. When accepting the statement, they were given the opportunity to adjust the phrasing of the statement, to add other (new) statements, and finally they were asked to rank-order (from best to worst) all statements to show the researchers which of all best contributed to the criterion. The authors consequently analyzed the responses of the panel of experts pertaining to every single criterion. The majority of suggested additions, deletions and changes of phrasing were accepted, resulting in a total of 69 items being included in the final questionnaire. All items were preceded by the phrase “In your opinion, how important is the issue presented in the following statement, when aiming to attract a hallmark sporting event to a city? Importance can range from limited (1) to vital (7)”. Before respondents rated importance of items, they were asked to respond to seven demographic questions.

Chapter Four: Data collection and Discussion

Responses were collected from people who had extensive experience in relation to the bidding process for hallmark sporting events, from the perspective either of owning the event or of wanting to organize the event. To reach this group of people, a database was compiled consisting of the names and contact details of senior management of national or international sporting bodies and commercial sport management, marketing and/or event management organizations. National and international directories, a commercial database for sport organizations, and Internet searches were used as means to compile the database. This resulted in the identification of 1,200 organizations. Of these organizations, 300 were sent an invitation to participate in the research and a hard copy of the questionnaire by mail, and 900 were sent an e-mail invitation to participate. The e-mail invitation contained the URL (www address) of a purpose-designed Web site, where respondents could complete the questionnaire. Two follow-up (e)mailings were conducted, resulting in 50 valid responses received as a result of the physical mailing and 85 usable electronic submissions.

The 135 respondents represented a broad range of organizations including the Olympic Games, the Commonwealth Games, the American PGA, the Australian PGA, Formula One Grand Prix, the World Sailing championships, World Power-lifting championships, the Gay Games and Grand Prix Athletics ...