College Sports Marketing as a Catalyst to Connecting Social and Management Theory/Practice

1. College Sports Marketing as a Catalyst to Connecting Social and Management Theory/Practice Dr. Eric C. Schwarz, Saint Leo University Dr. Dallas Branch, Jr., West Virginia University

2. Presentation Overview • Summary of roundtable from inaugural CSRI Conference in Memphis. • Finding and results – the over-aching dilemma for practitioners and academicians to overcome • The connection issues as related to social and managerial theory/practice • Recommendations for moving forward

3. Purpose • Present conclusions from the findings of last year’s roundtable, which show that there is a need for further analysis of theoretical research and application methods related to this interaction of sociological theory and management science. • College sports have a significant opportunity to serve as the catalyst for this analysis because they are simultaneously in a business environment and the academic environment.

4. Purpose • If college sports can address these issues, there is a real possibility the results can be effectively utilized by the rest of the sport marketing industry segment, and hence enhance the entire sport industry by articulating the connection between social and financial concepts.

5. CSRI 2008 - Memphis • Roundtable of academicians and college sport administrators discussed the interaction of sociological theory and management sciences to identify the trends and issues in college sports that will affect the future of sport marketing.

6. Generic Finding • There is fragmentation within the sport industry between academicians and practitioners, resulting in a large intellectual gap. Specific Findings • Communication/conceptualization gap – as practitioners and academicians do not converse or think in the same way. • Conflict between the intellectual nature of the effort from an academicians perspective and the realities of the practitioner.

7. Specific Findings •  The fundamental differences in "product outcomes" (value systems?) between academicians and practitioners. • The inability to "change"--The notion that "we've always done it this way" inhibits paradigm shifts--stifling creative solution generation to problems • Mutual respect--lack of it. • Problem resolution processes--different.

8. Resulting Problems in College Sports Management • Connections Social and Management Theory/Practice • The inability to quantify and sell the benefits of social capital to the practitioner • The complexities of "multiple goals“ • Athletics vs. Academics • The inability to define and agree on social "goodness".

9. Recommendations • How can management and sociological theory and practice enhance college sports marketing efforts? • Explore the “rules of engagement” • Engage in mutually beneficial practices • Emphasize common ground • Become a student first--teacher second

10. Recommendations • Support for these recommendations through • Collaborative, practical research • Promote and publicize industry best practices • Needs analysis of the sport industry, with specific focus on intercollegiate athletics • Academic-Athletic Partnerships

11. Conclusions Who Benefits Most? This IS NOT central question! Social goodness does not lend itself to keeping score Social marketing can be profitable Social marketing is “value added”—competitive advantage Social marketing is active, not passive Social marketing can differentiate marketing mix