External Stakeholder Management in Sporting Events

- 1 -
Individual Submission – PM Research Report
Student Name: Cian Nelson
Student Number: 04377559
E-Mail: cian.nelson@ucdconnect.ie
Tel: 083 4395777
Supervisor: Gearóid Hardy
Date: 15.08.2014
Module: Semester 2, BMGT 43770 PM Research Report
Cohort: Delta 1 – Full-Time Evening
Exact Word Count: 11,458 Words (excluding Table of Contents, Appendices, and
Bibliography)
Plagiarism and Participation Statement:
“I, the undersigned confirm that the work submitted here is entirely my own work, and that
any work of others which is included has been properly referenced and acknowledged
according to normal academic guidelines.”
Student Name: _________________ Cian Nelson Student Number: 04377559

- 2 -
Individual Submission – PM Research Report
External Stakeholder involvement in the Sporting Event process
Table of Contents Page
1. Abstract 3
2. Executive Summary 4
3. Introduction 5
4. Literature Review 6
4.1 Sporting Events 6
4.2 Stakeholders and Stakeholder Management 8
4.3 Best Practice for Stakeholder Management 10
4.4 Stakeholder Management for Sporting Events 13
5. Data Collection and Research Methodology 18
5.1 Research Methodology – Literature Review 18
5.2 Primary Research 18
5.3 Research Methodology – Primary Research 20
5.4 Research Methodology – Combination of Data Sources 21
6. Analysis of Data and Findings 22
6.1 Analysis of Data 22
6.2 Analysis of Data – Literature Review 22
6.3 Analysis of Data – Primary Research 24
6.4 Findings 27
7. Conclusions and Recommendations 30
7.1 Conclusions 30
7.2 Recommendations 31
7.3 Concluding Summary 34
8. Appendices 36
8.1 Appendix A – Primary Research 36
8.2 Appendix B – Primary Research Results 38
9. Bibliography 48

- 3 -
1. Abstract
The involvement of external stakeholders in the Sporting Event process can be identified as
being an area of key importance within the overall process of successfully organising
(bidding, planning etc.) and managing (operational aspects etc.) sporting events.
Sporting events are widely seen as increasingly important events to host for a wide number of
reasons, which vary between different stakeholders. Such reasons can include the prestige of
hosting such events for sporting governing bodies, the economic impact of hosting such
events to local businesses and residents, and the political value to governments and local
councils by pleasing various benefiting stakeholders by hosting such events. Ultimately, the
sports industry, and in particular hosting sporting events, is now big business, involving large
sums of money – potentially billions of Euro depending upon the scale of the event.
Therefore hosting sporting events must be treated as professionally as any other business
venture, whilst also remembering that they are not just a normal business scenario, but a very
niche type of business scenario with their own set of often subtle and unique challenges.
In order to successfully host such important, complex, and often high profile events given the
very nature of sporting events, successful stakeholder management is of utmost importance to
ensure the smooth and effective performance of the project team in organising and managing
such events by working with other key parties. In particular the management of external
stakeholders, over whom a project team may have varying degrees of control or influence if
any at all at times, is vital to the performance and ultimate success of the overall project.
Therefore, when combined with the importance of hosting sporting events to multiple
stakeholders, project teams engaged in hosting such sporting events must prioritise the
management of external stakeholders by upholding the highest standards in doing so, and by
drawing upon the most widely recognised best practice skills, tools and techniques as
undertaken within the normal business world. Furthermore, given the unique nature of the
sports industry and event management in particular, project teams must also allow for this
factor by tailoring certain aspects of their stakeholder management process to allow for the
nuances of the sports industry in the organisation and management of sporting events.
Based upon all of these facts, this ever growing area of great importance requires further,
focused research, so as to ascertain exactly how project teams should best conduct their
stakeholder management processes when hosting sporting events.

- 4 -
2. Executive Summary
The key objective of this report was to identify the extent of the involvement which external
stakeholders can have within the sporting event process and the level of impact and influence
which they can have upon this process, as well as conversely the level of impact this process
can have upon external stakeholders themselves. This report also aimed to establish how
common best practices in general stakeholder management from the business world may
apply to the unique context of sporting events, looking specifically at external stakeholders.
This report looked to achieve these objectives by drawing upon various research sources in
order to construct a balanced and objective analysis of this subject area.
This balanced and objective analysis was achieved by firstly reviewing the key academic
literature within the subject area so as to establish the current schools of thought into the
involvement of external stakeholders within the sporting event process. This process also
identified the most common and widely accepted best practices from general business theory,
regarding the management of external stakeholders in particular.
In order to assist in applying these general business theories of best practice to the practical
context of sporting events, fresh, primary research was undertaken so as to gain the unique,
insider, expert opinion of sports industry professionals who are actively involved in
organising and managing sporting events on a regular basis, and who have first-hand
experience of dealing with such external stakeholders.
The outcomes of these two research sources were then combined and analysed so as to
identify their combined key findings, from which final conclusions, and ultimately
recommendations could be formed regarding the subject area. Therefore, the resulting key
conclusions and recommendations of this report are as follows:
Conclusions:
1) Recognising the Role of External Stakeholders
2) Best Practices in Stakeholder Management
Recommendations:
1) Identify, Analyse and Prioritise Key External Stakeholders
2) Implement Key Best Practices

- 5 -
3. Introduction
3.1 Definitions
The below is a not exhaustive list of brief descriptions of key terms of reference used
regularly throughout this report:
Author – The writer of this report.
Bidding – The process of applying or tendering to host a sporting event, often involving
competing with rival bids ordinarily through submitting a project plan based upon a range of
criteria within a number of areas of reference.
Event Management – The process of managing live events which are usually aimed at the
general public and within that, specific target audiences.
Hosting – The actual process of staging the sporting event.
Project – This refers to the organisation and management of specific sporting events over a
defined period of time.
Project Manager – The individual designated by the project sponsor with leading the project
strategically as well as leading the project team in organising and managing the project.
Project Sponsor – The individuals, group or organisation who task the project manager and
project team with undertaking the project.
Project Team – The individuals who form the working team that undertake the strategic and
day-to-day work in organising and managing the project under the direction of the project
manager.
Sporting Event – The specific event which is the culmination of the project, which is a form
of entertainment event combined with a competitive or recreational, sporting ethos.
Sports Industry – The industry which involves the business element of sporting organisations
and sporting events.
Stakeholder – The individuals, groups or organisations who are involved within the
project/sporting event to the extent that they either influence the project or are influenced by
the project.

- 6 -
4. Literature Review
4.1 Sporting Events
Erickson and Kushner (1999) define sporting events as being part of the wider area of public
events, which they see as being entertainment events which are normally performed before a
live audience. Given the unpredictable nature of the sporting world, they highlight how
sporting events tend to have unique networks involved in organising such events as well as a
unique mixture of stakeholders involved with the events. They also describe sporting events
as often being one-off type events or performed intermittently, therefore again highlighting
the unique nature of such events – that no two events are likely to be the same.
Roche (2002) describes sporting events as being a sort of social phenomenon given their
unique nature in falling between the three differing areas of sporting competitions or
recreational activities, entertainment events, and major business undertakings.
Mules (1998) outlines how sporting events can range from small scale, often recreational and
volunteer led events, to major, complex international events involving major commercial and
political forces, and the requirement for sports industry professionals to lead and manage
such projects.
Matheson (2006) highlights how sporting events are nowadays viewed as big business and
are therefore hugely important to a wide range of stakeholders. He states that sporting events
can potentially have a huge economic impact upon the local or event national area in which
they take place. Similarly, Emery (2002) also alludes to the growing importance of hosting
sporting events and how they are increasingly being viewed as big business by pointing out
that hosting a sporting event is no longer viewed as a one-off ambition. Rather, he states that
hosting such events is now being increasingly seen by cities, regions etc. as a strategic
opportunity for sustainable growth and a chance to achieve major corporate objectives.
Barget and Gouguet (2007) continue upon this theme, and they capture the transformation
which has occurred of sporting events into big business, by stating how sporting events have
moved from the public domain, where they were once hosted as acts of public service for the
general good of the wider population, into the cut-throat world of private business which is
driven by the market and the constant striving for profitability. They do however point out
how paradoxically public bodies are still heavily involved in the organisation of sporting

- 7 -
events in many forms, siding with Roche’s (2002) deduction of sporting events as a social
phenomenon caught between the worlds of public and private industry.
Westerbeek et al. (2001) highlight the growing trend for cities, regions etc. to utilise the
hosting of sporting events as an opportunity to attract business and attention to their
respective area. They state that cities, regions etc, are now even using the bidding process
alone for hosting sporting events, as the strategic foundations for long-term plans to stimulate
the general economic growth of cities and entire regions. They highlight that given the great
potential for economic stimulus as well as the limited number of sporting events in general,
and in particular the extremely limited number of major marquee sporting events, that this
has led to intense rivalry between cities, regions etc. when competing to secure the rights to
host sporting events in general, let alone the rights to host the most prestigious of sporting
events.
Diaey et al. (2011) highlight several of the reasons why cities, regions etc. bid to host
sporting events, amongst them vanity, economic reasons, prestige etc. Similar to the thoughts
of Westerbeek et al. (2001) they also highlight the enormity of the sporting event industry, by
stating that there is a growing trend that bidding alone, even without success can still be used
to achieve certain objectives. Diaey et al. (2011) state that the bidding process can be used to
achieve political objectives, to boost the profile of an area etc., regardless of whether or not
the bid is ultimately successful. Similarly, Cochrane et al. (1996) echo how the bidding
process alone for sporting events can be a source of great growth for cities, regions etc. in
economic terms, and also in terms of how they conduct their business activities in general by
setting new precedents for mobilising people, and for encouraging different stakeholders to
work together.
Bull and Lovell (2007) discuss the growing trend for cities to host sporting events as a tool
for economic stimulus, urban regeneration and as a source of international prestige,
ultimately with an aim of benefiting the local economy as well as other objectives
surrounding social and cultural development.
In contrast Matheson (2006) however does caution this claim by pointing out that the
potential for positive economic impact is often a perceived impact, and that often the equally
large costs involved in planning and hosting such events can end up negating the initial lofty
and often highly optimistic claims of the project sponsor. Ultimately he concludes that
hosting such events, although often of little ultimate economic impact can still be seen as

- 8 -
being worthwhile for cities, regions etc. to host provided that they are cautious with their
approach towards spending etc., and provided that they ensure to maximise the benefits and
opportunities which hosting such sporting events can present. In essence, he states that there
is still great potential for real economic stimulus provided that cities are realistic in their
approach towards organising and managing such events, and that they are prudent in how
they conduct their business as well as seizing the opportunities presented by hosting such
sporting events.
Sterken (2006) echoes this point, that it is a misconception of popular opinion that sporting
events necessarily boost economic growth. His study of several major international sporting
events over a large period of time shows no definitive evidence that sporting events can be
categorically proven to be beneficial to economic growth, and rather at best points to the
conclusion that any such benefits are purely circumstantial at best depending on the nature,
location etc. of a specific event.
Similarly, Hall (2006) is also keen to emphasise that not all projects surrounding hosting
sporting events may prove beneficial to the local economy etc. He states that in spite of initial
short-term gains, the hosting of such events can prove to leave an expensive legacy which
may ultimately prove detrimental to the economy of the area in the long-term.
Overall Emery (2002) sums up the conundrum of the impact of hosting sporting events.
Although keen to discuss the potential economic impacts of sporting events, many of which
he believes may not always be positive, he is also eager to highlight the general social impact
which sporting events can have upon local areas. He states that local areas can stand to gain
significantly from the positive contribution which hosting such events can have upon the
social and cultural character of the area and the residents within it. Such intangible benefits
are unquantifiable, but can be equally as important reasons for hosting sporting events as the
economic reasons for doing so. He concludes that there is great potential involved in hosting
sporting events, both tangible and intangible and that for this reason their potential for
positive impacts is almost unquantifiable. He states that these points alone, are justification
for the overall great importance for cities, regions etc. in hosting sporting events.
4.2 Stakeholders and Stakeholder Management
Reed et al. (2009) define stakeholders as those individuals, groups, organisations etc. which
are affected by the decisions and actions which are undertaken by a project or activity, and

- 9 -
who can have varying degrees of influence over the outcome of such decisions and actions,
and over such projects and activities. Similarly El-Gohary et al. (2006) state that stakeholders
are either individuals or organisations which either affect or are affected themselves by the
process of a particular project or activity.
Harrison and St. John (1996) concur with the above assessments of stakeholders as those who
can significantly affect or be affected by a project. They continue by defining how external
stakeholders are those individuals or groups who are outside of the core boundaries of, and
who are not under control of the project or organisation. They also state that external
stakeholders are still subject to the same general principles of general stakeholder
management theory, although unique in some areas.
Similarly, Key (1999) when identifying various groups of stakeholders, divides them into
internal and external groupings. She does this based upon the interest of these stakeholder
groupings, by which she suggests that external stakeholders will inherently have an ulterior
set of objectives from that of the project team, either entirely different or different in some
manner.
Harrison and St. John (1996) state that there is an often held assumption that external
stakeholders by virtue of the facts that they are separate from the main project team and may
possess differing objectives from the main project team, are therefore not manageable as they
are outside of the control of the project team. However this is an assumption which they
dismiss as being increasingly untrue as the lines between internal and external stakeholders
are continuously becoming more and more blurred through proactive stakeholder
management practices involving increased interaction and collaboration with external
stakeholders.
Based upon the ability of stakeholders (either internal or external) to influence or to be
influenced by a project, El-Gohary et al. (2006) therefore emphasise the importance of
ensuring that the input of stakeholders is acknowledged and incorporated into the planning
process by assessing the opinions and concerns of such stakeholders so as to assist with the
smooth performance of the project. In looking at the role of stakeholders in the case of their
interaction with governmental control, Bingham and O’Leary (2005) similarly highlight the
importance of stakeholder influence within projects.

- 10 -
Reed et al. (2009) note how the participation of stakeholders within projects is growing in
ever greater importance, as the scale of their influence is being given more attention and
recognition in how it can affect the performance of an overall project. In a similar vein,
Delmas and Toffel (2004) highlight the significant degrees to which stakeholders, focusing
upon external stakeholders in particular, can influence projects, by using a wide range of
examples from the modern business world.
Savage et al. (1991) also recognise that there is a growing recognition of the importance of
managing external stakeholders, and how this recognition is in turn leading to greater
acceptance that such stakeholders can indeed be successfully managed, and that it is indeed
vital that they are in fact successfully managed given their potential to influence projects.
Toor and Ogunlana (2010) note that not only do stakeholders have varying degrees of
influence upon a project, but that crucially stakeholders will also quite often have varying
perceptions as to the aims and objectives of a project based upon their own vested interests.
They state that this point is significant in that it means that not only does a project manager
need to be conscious of the influence of all stakeholders, but that they also need to be aware
that each stakeholder may be approaching the project from various angles that may affect
their interaction with the project team.
Savage et al. (1991) state how there is a common misconception that stakeholder
management is a natural process that simply occurs without any influence of management
activities. Rather, they state that stakeholder management is an integral process of any
business activity, given that it revolves around overseeing the relationships between the key
players within a project.
Similarly, Morsing (2006) ultimately encapsulated many of the above points which champion
the promotion of stakeholder management, by highlighting that without the support and
loyalty of stakeholders then a project is destined to struggle and unlikely to achieve its
objectives.
4.3 Best Practice for Stakeholder Management
There are numerous opinions throughout the literature reviewed regarding the key best
practices and approaches towards stakeholder management. Delmas and Toffel (2004) offer
many insights into best practices for stakeholder management, which are based upon the
many real world examples which they discuss throughout their paper. Amongst the best

- 11 -
practices which they identify is the importance of collaborating with stakeholders throughout
projects, and in particular to ensure that such interaction occurs in particular when it comes to
problem solving should issues arise.
Similarly, Bingham and O’Leary (2005) emphasise the importance of enabling and
promoting collaboration and true participation with stakeholders so as to best coordinate and
engage with such stakeholders. However, they do also take care to caution this point, by
adding the caveat that it is also essential to ensure that collaboration is achieved with all
stakeholders, and not only those which actively seek such interaction – therefore an extra
effort must be made to ensure that the involvement of all stakeholders is captured within this
process. They therefore emphasises the significance that must be placed in stakeholder
identification within the stakeholder management process so as to capture all possible
stakeholders, as well as recognising the important role of stakeholder analysis in order to
classify various groups of stakeholders within the project in terms of their place and
significance within the project.
Mitchell et al. (1997) define stakeholder identification and analysis very simply as the
process of establishing who all of the stakeholders involved with the project are, and from the
results of this question, the process of then establishing which of those stakeholders actually
matter, or which are most important to the project.
Brugha and Varvasovkszky (2000) define stakeholder identification and analysis as the
process of trying to evaluate and understand stakeholders from the point of view of the
project team. They state that such evaluation is done surrounding the areas of stakeholders’
positon, motives, interdependencies, relationships etc., from which decisions can then be
made in terms of prioritising certain stakeholders over others.
Morsing (2006) also highlights the importance of conducting successful stakeholder
identification and analysis by stating that successfully identifying and analysing all
stakeholders involved with a project is an unnegotiable pre-requisite in order to then
successfully perform effective stakeholder management through prioritising stakeholders, and
then fine-tuning the approach which is adopted towards each stakeholder.
Dunham et al. (2006) again focus heavily upon the area of stakeholder identification and
analysis, and in particular upon the subject of ensuring to successfully identify all
stakeholders, and then emphasising that it is crucial having analysed and prioritised all

- 12 -
stakeholders to subsequently ensure that all stakeholders, particularly those ranked as being
of little importance, still receive an appropriate minimum level of attention and consideration
and that they are not merely dismissed as insignificant. They state that such attention to all
stakeholders is crucial in creating an appropriate and positive environment as well as a sense
of community in which stakeholders can work towards the overall objectives of the project.
This echoes the sentiments of Savage et al. (1991) in ensuring that a minimum level of
attention is at least paid to all stakeholders regardless of how small their role within the
project is.
Delmas and Toffel (2004) emphasise the importance of building solid and mutually beneficial
relationships with stakeholders by championing the ability of being able to often go above
and beyond the minimum required, or minimum expected, requirements of the relationship –
going the extra mile to gain the trust and cooperation of stakeholders.
Harrison and St. John (1996) also highlight the importance of winning over the trust of
stakeholders through positive actions, however they temper this point somewhat by
acknowledging that such efforts should only be made dependent upon the according strategic
importance of a particular stakeholder group. They do so by emphasising the importance of
stakeholder identification and analysis, so as that this effort should not be wasted on
unimportant stakeholders that will provide little or no value to the performance of the project.
Delmas and Toffel (2004) note the importance of establishing structured communication
channels and procedures with stakeholders, so as to keep them fully informed at all times and
in order to allow a two-way flow of communication between both parties. They suggest
several practical methods of achieving this, such as establishing stakeholder forums,
introducing stakeholder advisory panels around key, specific issues etc.
Reed (2008) echoes this point, and even goes further so as to suggest that this process of
improving communication channels and procedures with key stakeholders can even result in
great learnings for project teams regarding issues which may not otherwise have been on their
radar, or which they may have dismissed as not being of any great significance. In this way
project teams can look to be more proactive in dealing and liaising with stakeholders, rather
than waiting to be reactive towards issues which ultimately may occur. He continues by
stating that such an approach can derive many benefits for both parties through creating a
sense of equity and trust, as well as enabling stakeholders to feel a sense of empowerment in
their role within the project.

- 13 -
Harrison and St. John (1996) summarise many of the above best practices in their own
summary of how best to deal with external stakeholders. They highlight the areas of
performing natural, informal communication so as to avoid conflict and distrust and in
focusing upon developing a collaborative and interactive relationship with stakeholders
involving partnership and shared objectives. They only temper this by cautioning that it is
also important to bear in mind not to place too much trust in other parties as such an
overreliance can lead to poor performance or conflicts and issues arising, and can provide the
opportunity for stakeholders to take advantage of certain situations.
Savage et al. (1991) go as far as to state that involving external stakeholders within various
parts of a project can yield many benefits to the project by highlighting examples from the
business world where such collaboration has proven mutually beneficial to all parties
involved. They conclude that there is ultimately a need to satisfy the minimum expectations
of all stakeholders, but that however within this requirement it is important to identify the
stakeholders who require the most attention – not just those that are the most obvious, and to
then satisfy further the needs of those stakeholders who have been analysed as requiring the
greatest priority.
Reed (2008) encompass many of the above points regarding best practices for successful
stakeholder management. He outlines what he believes to be the key facets towards
approaching this subject with an aim to maximising stakeholder participation as well as the
quality of such participation. He outlines the role which many of the above best practices
such as communication, trust and collaboration can play in creating an environment which is
conducive towards producing positive relationships with stakeholders, and ultimately imrove
the performance of the overall project. He concludes by highlighting the importance which
aspects such as creating the appropriate philosophy towards stakeholder participation,
successful stakeholder identification and analysis, as well as establishing clear, common
objectives between various stakeholders can play in creating such a fruitful environment.
4.4 Stakeholder Management for Sporting Events
Given that stakeholders are those parties who either influence or are influenced by a project
(Reed et al., 2009, El-Gohary er al., 2006), Hautbois et al. (2012) therefore detail how within
the context of sporting events stakeholders can by extension be seen as individuals, groups or
organisations who can influence or be influenced by the hosting of a sporting event, and that

- 14 -
external stakeholders are those stakeholders who are not under the direct control of the
project team charged with hosting a sporting event.
Erickson and Kushner (1999) recognise how sporting events are an entirely unique
phenomenon, and that although they include many of the traits of normal projects,
particularly around the area of stakeholder networks, they also quite often prove to require an
extension of the traits and theory surrounding normal projects due to their unique nature.
They highlight how sporting events are an extreme form of virtual networks for stakeholders,
where stakeholders, who may not normally deal with each other on a regular basis come
together on a one-off, often informal basis surrounding a sporting event. Such unique and
unfamiliar networks and relationships can therefore pose many challenges to all parties
concerned, the project team in particular, due to the added and unfamiliar pressures placed
upon all of the stakeholders involved as a result of the new and substantial unfamiliar
interdependencies which they face within such scenarios.
In terms of the varying perceptions regarding the aims and objectives of a project as
discussed by Toor and Ogunlana (2010), Erickson and Kuschner (1999) highlight how within
the context of sporting events many stakeholders will often have a common overarching
perspective regarding many key objectives of the project – a functional alliance to provide an
entertainment spectacle to the public etc. However, within such overarching objectives some
of these stakeholders will normally have their own agenda which complements this general
objective – such as to draw a profit from the event (venue owner, suppliers, tv/media etc.), to
support the sporting element itself of the event (governing body, athletes, supporters etc.) etc.
Similarly Misener and Mason (2006) highlight how sporting events are important to various
stakeholders for a variety of different reasons by acknowledging the often conflicting
perspectives between various stakeholders such as project sponsors (governments, cities,
regions etc.) in looking to use sporting events as a tool to market or develop the local area,
versus the objectives of grassroots stakeholders such as local residents and communities who
may view such events as a social capital tool to promote community development etc. They
focus heavily on the use of sporting events as a political tool to showcase the performance of
political powers by successfully bidding and hosting eye-catching, hallmark sporting events
but with the added objective of using such events to provide an economic impact through
tourism and business development to the local area as well in order to again further their
political cause and secure future political victories.

- 15 -
Hall (2006) encapsulates this point by stating that the end outcome of many sporting events
can often lead to scenarios where any short-term gains accrued are often to the benefit of
major, powerful stakeholders such as political or corporate parties, and that in the long-term
the burden and legacy of many such sporting events is often felt by the smaller, public
stakeholders who may end up losing out from the hosting of such events from a negative
economic and financial point of view, amongst many other impacts.
Mules (1998) supports this point by concluding that although many sporting events may on
the surface appear to be largely beneficial, quite often any benefits accrued are reaped by the
event organisers and other commercial stakeholders, whilst other stakeholders such as the
general public may not reap any reward, and very often lose out from the hosting of such
sporting events.
Collins et al. (2007) further develop upon the subject of the often forgotten or overlooked,
potential negative impacts of hosting sporting events. They approach this area not only from
an economic point of view of overspending and hidden costs emerging both during and after
the hosting of sporting events, but they also look at several other factors that may affect the
host city. They include negative impacts such as increases in crime rates, noise pollution and
general pollution issues in terms of the carbon footprint left behind from hosting such events.
In a follow-up study by several of the same authors, Collins et al. (2009) highlight the
importance of assessing such potential negative impacts when hosting sporting events by
stating that several major stakeholder groups such as sporting organisations, teams, sponsors
etc. are now paying much greater attention to this area as an area of greater concern to them.
Regarding the potential negative environmental impacts of hosting sporting events in
particular, they allude to several international environmental agreements as well as the
increased pressure being applied upon the organisers of sporting events by government
agencies etc. as evidence of this fact. Although they suggest that all of the potential impact
areas of sporting events can be either positive or negative impacts, they stress that greater
analysis is required when considering whether to host a sporting event or not so as to avoid
the many negative pitfalls which can potentially occur as a result of hosting a sporting event,
including social, economic, cultural and environmental impacts. They suggest that ultimately,
an improvement in such analysis will assist project teams in organising and managing
sporting events in a more positive manner by improving their stakeholder management

- 16 -
process through gaining the trust and support of stakeholders having planned appropriately in
an inclusive and collaborative manner, for the potential outcomes of hosting their event.
Preuss and Solberg (2006) also discuss this clash of perspectives between cities, regions etc.
and local residents, communities etc. when bidding for, and hosting sporting events. They
state that cities, regions etc. often choose to bid for, and host sporting events based upon the
economic benefits etc. that they may bring, as well as the prestige of hosting such events –
often for purely political reasons. However, they suggest that local residents and communities
will only be supportive of such grand objectives once they also simultaneously satisfy their
own specific, and often smaller, parochial needs. They suggest that these grassroot
stakeholders can be somewhat fickle by nature, in generally supporting such events on a
conditional basis, but that this support can quickly evaporate once their own needs are no
longer being met, and that therefore careful management of this important group of
stakeholders must be conducted so as to keep their needs satisfied whilst still maintaining and
promoting to them the overall benefits which hosting such events can provide to the wider
community and economy etc.
Bull and Lovell (2007) allude to possible solutions as to how the successful management of
external stakeholder groups can be achieved as well as outlining why such importance is
attached to this process. They explain that factors such as communication and transparency
are vital within the stakeholder management process so as to ensure that external stakeholders
are fully aware of the wider picture of hosting sporting events and the benefits which it can
bring to all parties involved in the project. In this way the support of external stakeholders
can be garnered and maintained by avoiding any misconceptions from being formed
regarding the project. They suggest that consultation during the planning process as well as
pro-active communication activities such as media campaigns, information seminars etc. can
help to achieve this ambition.
Hautbois et al. (2012) state that the successful management of stakeholders and the various
interactions between all stakeholders is vital to the successful bidding process and hosting of
any sporting event. They focus heavily on the importance of building strong relationships
with stakeholders so as to enable the project to work in a collaborative manner and to avoid
poor relationships from developing that may hamper the performance and success of the
project. Within the relationships that exist between stakeholders, they identified different
types of relationships based upon their importance, ranging from minor, informal practical

- 17 -
relationships to major, strategic relationships. Ultimately, regardless of the nature of the
relationship, they state that the appropriate management of all stakeholders is critical to the
successful hosting of any sporting event.

- 18 -
5. Data Collection and Research Methodology
5.1 Research Methodology – Literature Review
In order to establish the current status of the subject area, a thorough literature review was
conducted. This literature review focused upon a wide range of academic sources within both
general business and management literature, as well as sport specific literature.
The overall literature review which was conducted was handled by performing a qualitative
analysis of its findings so as to determine the most common key points highlighted
throughout the combined literature review sources, whilst ensuring to review all of the
literature review sources in an objective manner when ascertaining the most common key
points throughout the various sources.
5.2 Primary Research
In order to gain an insider perspective and expert opinion into the subject area, an online
survey of an intentionally limited and specific participant pool relevant to the subject area
was chosen as a primary research method (See Appendix A). It was envisaged that this
process would provide true added value to this report’s research by drawing upon the first-
hand experiences of the participant pool.
To ensure the quality of this research the survey participant pool was intentionally limited to
only include sports industry professionals with relevant experience in organising and
managing sporting events. This was done by drawing upon the author’s connections within
the sports industry as a result of his significant professional experience within the sports
industry. It was estimated that by focusing the research upon this limited pool of participants
that it would ensure a higher standard of data from this expert group, rather than opening the
survey up to a wider pool of potentially less experienced participants, which may have in turn
adversely affected the relevance and quality of the data collected, and in turn the overall
report. It was also hoped that this process would allow for opportunities for the research to
provide unique, first-hand insights into the subject area.
To allow the participants of the survey to respond as openly and as honestly as possible to the
research questions, the survey was conducted via a simple online questionnaire of 9
questions, and all of the participants were assured that all of their responses were entirely
anonymous. This anonymity was achieved through using the online ‘SurveyMonkey’ tool

- 19 -
from which the author could only retrieve anonymous, summary information of each
participant’s completed survey responses.
The participants were asked a series of questions which ascertained a gauge of the level of
their experience within the subject area, their empirical views of specific areas of the subject
area based upon their own personal experience, as well as seeking any relevant, additional
information regarding the subject area which the participants wished to highlight.
The design of the survey was largely devised and guided based upon the key findings of the
aforementioned literature review which was conducted. The information uncovered by the
literature review assisted in providing direction for the key questions which the survey would
seek to garnish further, first-hand knowledge about.
The final design of the survey established 5 key areas which it sought to examine:
1) Screening Questions (Questions 1 – 2): Firstly, the survey looked to screen all
participants with two standard questions regarding their background so as to establish
a baseline for their experience with organising and managing sporting events. The
intention of this was so as to justify the targeting of the participant pool, and to ensure
that they possessed a relevant level of experience within the subject area.
2) External Stakeholder Types (Question 3): The survey also looked to establish a
picture of the types of external stakeholders with whom the participants had
experience in dealing with, and therefore experience in practicing stakeholder
management with, when organising and managing sporting events. This information
would help to establish the key external stakeholders which are unique to the process
of hosting sporting events.
3) Stakeholder Relationships (Questions 4 – 6): In order to ascertain facts surrounding
the nature of the relationships experienced with external stakeholders, several
questions sought to probe the participants for their general opinions surrounding their
experience of the quality of their relationships with external stakeholders when
organising and managing sporting events. The objective of these questions was to
help to understand the quality and importance of the interactions between
stakeholders when hosting sporting events.

- 20 -
4) Skills, Tools and Techniques (Questions 7 – 8): The survey also sought to establish
the most important key skills, tool and techniques utilised by the participants when
dealing with external stakeholders when organising and managing sporting events.
This information would help to establish the key facets of the stakeholder
management process in practice, within the context of organising and managing
sporting events.
5) Expert Insights (Question 9): Finally, the survey sought to provide the participants
with the opportunity to express any additional comments regarding the subject area
which they may have had which had not been covered by the initial questions within
the survey. This additional information was sought so as to add real added value to
the primary research by tapping into the great experience and expertise within the
subject area which the participants possess. It was hoped that this may garnish some
real insights into the subject area which the standard questions of the survey may
otherwise be unable to ascertain.
This survey was distributed to a total of 33 sports industry professionals who were deemed to
potentially be suitable candidates to participate in this primary research process, of whom 20
people subsequently completed the survey. Any person who wished to learn more about this
research, ask any questions, or receive a copy of the final, submitted report were afforded the
opportunity to do so by contacting the author via e-mail.
5.3 Research Methodology – Primary Research
The data of the results produced from the primary research which was conducted was handled
in two ways so as to produce meaningful results (See Appendix B):
1) Firstly, for the responses which could be calculated statistically, this information was
calculated and recorded in order to provide quantitative, statistical totals in the form
of percentages for each response option to each particular research question.
2) For any responses where the participants entered their own unique responses, this
information was also collated and added to the statistical percentage totals where
practical. For some responses which provided the opportunity for participants to
provide additional information, this information was treated separately for further

- 21 -
qualitative analysis which could then be considered when establishing the overall
findings of this report’s research.
5.4 Research Methodology – Combination of Data Sources
Finally, having reviewed both the quantitative and qualitative results of the primary research
data, as well as the qualitative results of the literature review which was conducted, the key
points of these two research sources were combined so as to establish overall qualitative, key
findings for the research conducted within this report.

- 22 -
6. Analysis of Data and Findings
6.1 Analysis of Data
Based upon the research methodology methods utilised as outlined above, the analysis of all
of the available research data was undertaken with the aim of firstly producing the relevant
results for all of the research conducted. Secondly, this methodology allowed for the data to
be analysed in a constructive manner, with the ultimate objective that these results could
highlight the key findings from within all of the research which was conducted, so as to
enable the final conclusions and recommendations of this report to be formed.
6.2 Analysis of Data – Literature Review
The literature review which was undertaken uncovered numerous common points
surrounding the involvement of external stakeholders in the sporting event process:
1) Nature of Sporting Events: The literature review highlighted the great, and indeed
growing importance of the role which hosting sporting events can play for host cities
etc. It defined sporting events as being unique, one-off entertainment type events
which fall between the worlds of the public and private industries, which can have a
large impact upon numerous stakeholders in many different ways – economic, social,
cultural, environmental etc. It also highlighted how hosting sporting events is now
firmly established as being big business and how the bidding process alone is seen as
a key strategic tool for many cities, regions etc. to use as a platform for economic
regeneration as well as other political motives. The literature review however did also
highlight the caution which there is surrounding many of the perceived benefits of
hosting sporting events, particularly from an economic point of view, and how such
benefits are not always accrued, and are sometimes only be accrued by certain
stakeholders, private, commercial entities in particular. On the other hand the
literature review did also establish that there can be several other, often intangible
benefits such as social and cultural benefits, which can be related to the hosting of
sporting events, which is indicative of the aforementioned unique nature of sporting
events.
2) Traits of Stakeholders: The literature review established the most commonly
accepted, comprehensive definition of stakeholders – individuals, groups or

- 23 -
organisations which either influence or are influenced by a project. It continued by
stating that external stakeholders can be identified as those stakeholders who are not
under the direct control of the organisation and are therefore by default not part of the
core of the organisation. It also recognised the great, and growing importance of the
role which stakeholders can play within a project in terms of affecting the overall
performance of the project, and ultimately the success or failure of the project. It also
stated that there is a misconception that external stakeholders in particular cannot be
controlled, by arguing that this is a fallacy, and that by simple measures such as
including external stakeholders within various aspects of the project process that they
can be successfully managed. The literature review also concluded that different
stakeholders can have different perceptions of the performance of a project, as well as
their own alternative objectives regarding the purpose of the project.
3) Best Practices: The literature review identified several common areas of best practice
which repeatedly appeared across a wide range of various academic articles. Amongst
these best practices were the use of key skills, tools and techniques common to most
stakeholder management processes such as communication, trust, interaction, sharing
objectives and collaboration. It was identified that by extension, the best practices of
overall stakeholder management by definition also apply to the management of
external stakeholders. Communication with stakeholders in particular was highlighted
as a key skill to ensure that it is successfully implemented throughout a project,
particularly given the role which communication can play in assisting many of the
other processes such as fostering trust and enabling interaction with external
stakeholders. Overall, the above key skills, tools and techniques were often discussed
in the context of creating the most appropriate and accommodating environment for
stakeholders so as to interact with the project team in a positive and constructive
manner. The literature review also identified the key role which successful
stakeholder identification and analysis plays as a type of pre-requisite to performing
and utilising the key skills, tools and techniques of stakeholder management as
mentioned above.
4) Stakeholder Management in the Sporting Event Process: The literature review
uncovered the unique nature of stakeholder management when placed within the
context of sporting events. This was as a result of the established view that

- 24 -
stakeholder management within sporting events require a unique extension of many
facets of standard stakeholder management practices as a result of the unique nature
of sporting events themselves. Several distinctive traits were highlighted, such as the
types of stakeholders who are involved in bidding for and hosting sporting events as
well as the unique nature of the networks which they form when dealing with one
another – stakeholders who may often only interact with one another for one specific
project, and who otherwise have little or no natural connections in their day-to-day
work. It was also revealed that the perspectives of the various stakeholders within
sporting events can be particularly extreme and unique, in that although several
stakeholders may be involved with and supportive of the events for a general reason,
their own real personal reasons can be entirely different, and almost in direct conflict
with one another in many ways. The literature review also underlined the potential
negative impacts which are often associated with hosting sporting events and how this
can impact upon stakeholders. It stated that many sporting events may only prove
beneficial to select groups of stakeholders. Ultimately the literature review concluded
by emphasising the greatly important role which effective stakeholder management
plays in successfully organising and managing sporting events.
6.3 Analysis of Data – Primary Research
The results of the primary research uncovered a wide range of points surrounding the
involvement of external stakeholders in the sporting event process:
1) Screening Questions: The initial screening questions established that the participant
pool represented a broad range of sports industry professionals who could be seen as
experts within the subject area of organising and managing sporting events based
upon their experience.
Over 14 key groupings of major sports were represented by the participants, with the
major sports of soccer, rugby, gaelic games, motorsports, athletics and golf being the
most heavily represented.
It was identified that the participant pool also possessed great experience of
organising and managing sporting events, with the vast majority of participants (80%)
having been involved in organising and managing over 10 such events (this was seen

- 25 -
as being of a level of great experience within the subject area), with the remainder of
the participants having at least some experience of organising and managing sporting
events.
2) External Stakeholder Types: The question relating to the external stakeholder types
established the most common groups of external stakeholders with whom the
surveyed participants had experience of dealing with when organising and managing
sporting events.
Broadly speaking, it was discovered that the participants had strong experience of
dealing with many of the key external stakeholder groups identified by the author –
suppliers (90%), television/media outlets (85%), businesses (85%), external interest
groups (60%), local residents (55%), political groups (50%). However, several other
important external stakeholder groups were also identified by the participants such as
sponsors, statutory bodies and sporting organisations.
3) Stakeholder Relationships: The questions regarding the nature of the relationships
with external stakeholders which the participants had experience of when organising
and managing sporting events established several important facets of such
relationships.
It was discovered that the participants placed great importance upon the relationships
which they established with external stakeholders, with all participants rating the
importance of such relationships as either ‘extremely important’ (55%) or ‘very
important’ (45%). There were no neutral or negative views recorded regarding the
importance of the relationships with external stakeholders.
The participants also highlighted that they felt that such relationships were of varying
degrees of closeness between themselves and external stakeholders. The majority of
participants described such relationships as being ‘very close’ (65%), and at worst
25% of participants describing the relationships as being ‘somewhat close’, yet with
some (10%) even describing them as being ‘extremely close’. No participants saw the
relationships with external stakeholders as not being close in any way.

- 26 -
Finally, the participants also stated that they felt that the quality of relationships with
external stakeholders was overwhelmingly positive, with 5% describing it as
‘extremely good’, 55% describing it as ‘very good’, and 40% describing it as ‘quite
good’. No participants had any neutral or negative opinions towards the quality of
relationships with external stakeholders.
4) Skills, Tools and Techniques: The questions regarding the skill, tools and techniques
utilised by the participants when dealing with external stakeholders when organising
and managing sporting events established many practical insights into how the
participants actually deal with external stakeholders in their everyday work.
The research participants identified a wide range of skills which they believed to be of
importance in dealing with external stakeholders when organising and managing
sporting events. The vast majority of participants (95%) stated that communication
was of great importance, followed by planning (75%), negotiation skills (60%), risk
management (50%) and stakeholder management (50%). The remaining skills of
leaderships (40%), decision making (40%) and mediation skills (15%) were also
identified as being of varying levels of importance to the participants.
Involving external stakeholders in the planning process was seen by the participants
as being the most common (63%) of the tools and techniques which they used when
dealing with external stakeholders. This was followed closely by using media
campaigns (53%), setting shared objectives (47%), and by appointing designated
liaison personnel (37%). The allocation of places on organising committees etc.
(32%), market research (32%) and townhall meetings (11%) were also identified by
the participants as being utilised to certain degrees. Additionally, some participants
pointed out other tools and techniques which they had utilised in dealing with external
stakeholders, such as training, workshops and assigning clear responsibilities.
5) Expert Insights: The final question which afforded the research participants with the
opportunity to express their overall or any additional opinions regarding the subject
area, succeeded in attaining several such responses which added an additional insight
and perspective into how they deal with external stakeholders when organising and

- 27 -
managing sporting events so as to provide real ‘added value to the research
conducted.
5 participants chose to provide additional, qualitative information regarding their
experience of organising and managing sporting events which provided many insights
into the subject area. A common theme amongst this additional information was in
highlighting the importance of building trust with external stakeholders – “building
trust with the local community is essential” and in including external stakeholders
throughout the entire process of the project – “external stakeholders need to feel
included and important in the decision making process”, “it’s vital to include them in
the journey” via a collaborative approach – “try to facilitate cooperation”.
The importance of establishing clear roles and responsibilities with external
stakeholders was also highlighted by many participants – “setting out roles and
responsibilities are essential”, “manage expectations and clearly define the status of
their involvement” particularly given the varying perspectives of different
stakeholders – “each stakeholder has a different objective and it is important to
recognise that”.
Several other, more practical insights were also discovered, such as potential issues
around language barriers, political manoeuvres as well as the motivational challenges
which can occur within such projects of convincing reluctant groups of stakeholders
to get on board with the project.
6.4 Findings
Based upon the above information uncovered by the two research sources utilised within this
report into the subject of external stakeholder involvement in the sporting event process, the
following key findings were established having analysed these two researches sources in
tandem by comparing and contrasting the respective results which they produced:
1) Importance of External Stakeholders: External stakeholders were identified by
both research sources as being central to the organisation and management of sporting
events. This was based upon the high number, and the nature of the references to
external stakeholders within the academic articles reviewed, as well as the high

- 28 -
importance which the survey participants placed upon external stakeholder
management when organising and managing sporting events.
The research sources alone, the literature review in particular, emphasised how all
stakeholders in general are of great importance to the successful performance of any
project, but also revealed how particular focus is shifting towards external
stakeholders as it is becoming increasingly accepted that they can be successfully
managed, dismissing the common misconception that this is not possible, even though
they are by definition outside of the direct control of the project team. This point was
strengthened by the real-world, practical examples identified by the primary research
participants of skills, tools and techniques which can be utilised in order to
successfully engage with and manage external stakeholders.
The research sources also identified the wide range of external stakeholders involved
in organising and managing sporting events, which again adds to the importance of
appropriately and effectively analysing and identifying all such stakeholders so as to
ascertain their roles within the overall project. This in turn was highlighted as
accentuating the need to carefully and thoroughly conduct successful stakeholder
identification and analysis so as to capture all relevant stakeholders so as that they can
then be classified and prioritised as part of the overall stakeholder management
process.
This point was emphasised further by highlighting the potential negative impacts of
sporting events upon external stakeholders, which in turn emphasised the need to
appropriately assess the potential impact of sporting events upon all stakeholders from
many different viewpoints – economic, social, cultural, environmental etc. as part of a
pro-active stakeholder management process when planning or bidding for sporting
events.
2) Best Practices: The results of both the literature review and the primary research
conducted complemented one another in many cases regarding the subject of best
practices in managing external stakeholders when organising and managing sporting
events.

- 29 -
Amongst the many best practices to be heavily highlighted in both research sources
were communication, setting shared objectives, collaboration and trust. Included in
these best practices was also the aforementioned assessment of impacts which should
be conducted during the planning stages of a sporting event.
The research sources also stressed the importance of utilising such skills as well as
other general themes such as promoting greater interaction, collaboration and trust to
create an overall environment which is conducive to optimising the relationships with
external stakeholders.
The research sources also placed a great emphasis and importance upon the area of
stakeholder identification and analysis. The research sources indicated that this phase
of the stakeholder management process was paramount to the overall process as it
acted as a precondition without which the remaining skills, tools and techniques of the
stakeholder process may not be worthwhile or as effective as possible if they were not
focused upon the key stakeholders involved, or if they missed important stakeholders
altogether.

- 30 -
7. Conclusions and Recommendations
7.1 Conclusions
As is evident based upon all of the above research which has been conducted into the subject
area within this report, there are several key conclusions which can be drawn into the
involvement of external stakeholders within the sporting event process:
1) Recognising the Role of External Stakeholders
Given the key finding regarding the importance of external stakeholders when organising and
managing sporting events, it is clear that external stakeholders can play a huge role within a
sporting event project in determining whether the project will perform smoothly, and
ultimately whether the project will be successful or not.
As a result of the nature of sporting events in involving a wide and unique network of
stakeholders, as well as the extent to which these stakeholders are often largely made up of
external stakeholders given that sporting events are essentially an extension of public,
entertainment events, external stakeholders therefore tend to be of greater importance to
sporting events than many other business ventures.
This is supported by the importance which the sports industry professionals who were
canvassed as part of this report place upon their relationships with external stakeholders when
organising and managing sporting events. One of the common themes amongst the responses
of the survey participants was in recognising the important role which external stakeholders
can play in the sporting event process, and that it is therefore crucial to maintain strong and
positive relationships with such external stakeholders to ensure the success of the overall
project.
Therefore it is crucial to recognise the vitally important role which external stakeholders play
within the sporting event process. Such recognition must then be acted upon by treating this
vital group of stakeholders with the according respect, time and attention which their ability
to effect the performance of a project deserves. This can be achieved through effective
stakeholder management by utilising the key best practices as discussed throughout this
report when dealing with external stakeholders within a project. By being pro-active in this
regard, such successful stakeholder management can result in the creation of positive
relationships between stakeholders and the creation of an environment which is conducive

- 31 -
towards collaboration and problem solving, which in turn can allow for great benefits to be
accrued by all parties.
2) Best Practices in Stakeholder Management
In light of the key finding regarding the significance associated with several key best
practices in dealing with external stakeholders when organising and managing sporting
events, it is clear that there are numerous commonly utilised best practices which can be
incorporated into the stakeholder management process in order to improve the process, and
ultimately to improve the performance of the overall project when organising and managing
sporting events.
Central to many of the best practices identified is in creating the correct environment of trust
and cooperation through the building of strong, genuine, mutually beneficial relationships
with external stakeholders. By focusing on creating and maintaining such relationships it is
widely believed that this will foster a positive working environment in order to allow all
parties to work together in a collaborative manner towards shared objectives. Importantly, it
is felt that by adopting such an open and honest approach towards dealing with external
stakeholders, that this will help to avoid issues from occurring that may otherwise lead to
problems for the project and therefore adversely affect the performance, or ultimately the
overall success of the project.
Similarly, many of the relatively standard skills, tools and techniques of communication,
planning and setting shared objectives when dealing with external stakeholders can also have
an extremely positive influence upon the performance of organising and managing a sporting
event.
7.2 Recommendations
Based upon the above key conclusions of this subject area, the following key
recommendations can be made in order to assist future project teams in managing their
external stakeholders when organising and managing sporting events:
1) Identify, Analyse and Prioritise Key External Stakeholders
Based upon the conclusion that external stakeholders play a vital role when organising and
managing sporting events, it is therefore of paramount importance that such stakeholders are
managed in the correct manner and with the according levels of attention.

- 32 -
In order to achieve this correct approach towards stakeholder management it is therefore
critical that all stakeholders, external stakeholders in particular, are appropriately identified
and assessed as to the role which they will play within the project. Crucially this should be
achieved by approaching such assessment from the perspective of the stakeholders
themselves and how they may also be influenced, rather than simply how they will influence
the project.
There are many practical methods which can be used to assist in the process of stakeholder
identification and analysis. Frameworks such as the PESTEL Analysis Framework (Political,
Economic, Social, Technological, Environmental, Legal), amongst other frameworks can be
used as guides to identify potential stakeholders, and can then be combined with frameworks
such as the SWOT Analysis Framework (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats), to
then help to analyse the influence and interdependencies with each stakeholder. In reality, the
more frameworks and methods such as the above utilised, then the more thorough the
stakeholder identification and analysis process will be. It is therefore recommended that an
appropriate combination of such frameworks is utilised to ensure a thorough identification
and analysis of all potential stakeholders is carried out.
From the results of the stakeholder identification and analysis process, this information can
then be utilised to prioritise all stakeholders so as to enable a hierarchy of stakeholders to be
established. Such stakeholder prioritisation requires careful and balanced consideration based
upon the findings of the stakeholder identification and analysis processes, as it will ultimately
rely upon the subjective analysis of which stakeholders are perceived of being of the most
importance to the project. The involvement of as many experienced and capable personnel
from within the project team as possible when prioritising stakeholders is recommended so as
to draw upon their combined levels of experience as well as their own perspectives upon
various stakeholders based upon their own positions within the project team.
In spite of all of the above recommendations regarding the ultimate prioritising of
stakeholders, it is still always critical to bear in mind that all stakeholders, external
stakeholders in particular and even those of lower priority must still be managed accordingly
so as to provide the project with the best possible platform to perform successfully and to
attain its end goals given that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Such consideration
for all stakeholders can lead to a smoother project process and help to avoid unnecessary

- 33 -
issues from occurring and therefore help to maximise the potential positive influence of all
stakeholders which will ultimately be of benefit to the overall project.
Additionally, it is important to step into the shoes of the stakeholder themselves so as to
identify their respective perspectives upon the project as well as their respective objectives
regarding the project, which may differ greatly from those of the project team as well as from
those of other stakeholders. In doing so, a greater understanding of each stakeholder group
can be established, which in turn can assist in managing them accordingly.
2) Implement Key Best Practices
Given the conclusion which identified the most common and widely practiced best practices
within the stakeholder management of external stakeholders when organising and managing
sporting events, it would therefore be wise to incorporate the most important of these best
practices into any external stakeholder management process within the context of sporting
events.
Utilising many of these best practices also works hand in hand with the important point
mentioned throughout this report of creating the appropriate environment in which to deal
with external stakeholders which is conducive to promoting increased teamwork, integration
and collaboration with, and amongst external stakeholders.
Therefore, so as to create the appropriate environment for all parties to work with one
another, positive, proactive steps should be taken to ensure that strong, genuine relationships
are established with all external stakeholders, particularly those who are prioritised as being
of most importance to the overall performance of the project. This can be achieved through
many fundamental and practical methods by ensuring to interact and collaborate with external
stakeholders so as that genuine bonds can be made so as to create trust between all parties.
This can be ensured in part by the aforementioned identification and analysis of all
stakeholders and the subsequent appropriate management of all stakeholders.
Further fundamental best practices should also be adopted which will complement and
enhance this process. Best practices such as practicing good communication methods that
ensure to allow the flow of open, honest, two-way communication between all stakeholders,
can help to foster trusting relationships between stakeholders given the transparency which
these practices can help to promote. Crucially, practicing good communication with external
stakeholders can also help to prevent issues from occurring, or where they do occur can allow

- 34 -
them to be raised promptly or even in advance, and to then be handled in a pro-active and
professional manner ultimately with the aim of minimising their effect or ideally resolving
them altogether. At the very least, good communication will avoid such issues from being
exacerbated and from damaging relationships between stakeholders which may prove
difficult to remedy once the damage has been done.
Similarly by liaising with and involving external stakeholders throughout the planning
process this can help to improve the relationships with them as well as helping to motivate all
parties through making them feel fully involved within the project. As part of this process,
the vital task of appropriately assessing the potential impacts of hosting a sporting event, both
positive and negative, needs to be thoroughly carried out, ideally in collaboration with
external stakeholders. This process can help with several of the other areas of best practice by
allowing for collaboration and creating trust with external stakeholders. By proving that all
elements of a sporting events’ planning as well as its impacts have been fully investigated
and shared with all external stakeholders, this can help to convince external stakeholders to
trust and engage with the project team as a result of such precautionary measures and
transparency being undertaken by the project team.
The establishment of shared objectives with external stakeholders can again help to motivate
all parties and to create a sense of teamwork and collaboration by all stakeholders by working
towards both an overall goal for the project, as well as secondary objectives which may be of
huge importance to certain stakeholders even if they are not of great significance to the
project team itself. Crucially, setting such shared objectives can help to dispel any
misunderstandings regarding the expectations of any parties and in this way it can help to
foster trust and avoid issues from occurring as a result of misunderstandings over conflicting
objectives etc.
7.3 Concluding Summary
In summary, it can be concluded that external stakeholders at an absolute minimum, play a
significant role in the sporting event process, and often a very significant role, a role which at
the very least demands that appropriate stakeholder management tools and techniques are
implemented so as to ensure that the role of external stakeholders impacts upon the project in
a positive manner, or at the very least mitigates against any negative aspects of their role.

- 35 -
Depending upon the extent of the degree of the influence which particular external
stakeholders can have within particular sporting events, even greater focus upon stakeholder
management may be required in order to accordingly allow for such strong levels of influence
from external stakeholders which if left insufficiently addressed, may lead to significant
problems for the smooth running of the project.
Based upon this factor, one potential area for future research so as to further strengthen the
understanding of this subject area, would be to investigate the exact impact which each of the
above highlighted best practices can have upon avoiding and resolving external stakeholder
management issues as well as their impact upon positively improving the performance of the
stakeholder management process as well as the overall project’s process. Such a study could
look to be heavily researched based, and draw upon current or even historical sporting event
projects so as to form a toolbox of sorts, of the best practices implemented, and to quantify
the relative impact of each of these best practices. It would be useful for sports industry
professionals as well as project managers and project teams to have a better understanding of
which best practices are most important and most effective when implementing them into the
external stakeholder management process so as that they can then fine-tune and prioritise
their planning in order to best manage their external stakeholders.
In addition, given that the primary research element of this research was conducted amongst a
limited pool of participants, albeit a pool of highly experienced subject area experts, there is
the potential to conduct this primary research on a wider scale amongst sports professionals
who may not be quite as experienced as this group but who may be able to offer further, or
different insights into the subject area. Indeed if such further research was conducted, the
research questions could be modified so as to reflect the learnings already gained from this
report so as to focus upon the key research points such as those mentioned above surrounding
identifying the most important and effective of the best practices highlighted in this report.
Ultimately if a project team can be successful in how they acquit themselves from a
stakeholder management perspective regarding external stakeholders in particular, then they
stand to have a greater chance of successfully organising and managing their sporting events
so as to achieve their overall aims and objectives of hosting such important events. By
incorporating proven methods and best practices such as those outlined in the above
recommendations into their stakeholder management process, then a project team should
stand an even greater chance of attaining this objective.

- 36 -
8. Appendices
8.1 Appendix A – Primary Research

- 38 -
8.2 Appendix B – Primary Research Results

- 48 -
9. Bibliography
Barget, E. and Gouguet, J. 2007. The Total Economic Value of Sporting Events Theory and
Practice. Journal of Sports Economics, Vol. 8, No. 7, April 2007
Bingham, L.B. and O’Leary, R. 2005. The New Governance: Practices and Processes for
Stakeholder and Citizen Participation in the Work of Government. Public Administration
Review, Vol. 65, No. 5, September – October 2005
Brugha, R. and Varvasovszky. Z. 2000. Stakeholder analysis: a review. Health Policy and
Planning, Vol. 15, No. 3, September 2000
Bull, C. and Lovell, J. 2007. The Impact of Hosting Major Sporting Events on Local
Residents: an Analysis of the Views and Perceptions of Canterbury Residents in Relation to
the Tour de France 2007. Journal of Sport and Tourism, Vol. 12, No. 3-4, August –
November 2007
Cochrane, A., Peck, J. and Tickell, A. 1996. Manchester Plays Games: Exploring the Local
Politics of Globalisation. Urban Studies, Vol. 33, No. 8, October 1996
Collins, A., Jones, C., and Munday, M. 2009. Assessing the environmental impacts of mega
sporting events: Two options? Tourism Management, Vol. 30, No. 6, December 2009
Collins, A., Flynn, A., Munday, M. and Roberts, A. 2007. Assessing the Environmental
Consequences of Major Sporting Events: The 2003/04 FA Cup Final. Urban Studies, Vol. 44,
No. 3, March 2007
Delmas, M. and Toffel, M.W. 2004. Stakeholders and Environmental Practices: An
Institutional Framework. Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 13, No.4, July –
August 2004
Diaey, T., Dufourg, J.J., Tjusevs, P. and Zamboni Garavelli, A. 2011. Bidding: How can you
win even if you lose? Identifying the legacies of lost bids to host a sports mage event.
International Centre for Sports Studies, 2011
Dunham, L., Freeman. R.E. and Liedtka, J. 2006. Enhancing Stakeholder Practice: A
Particularized Exploration of Community. Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 16, No. 1, January
2006

- 49 -
El-Gohary, N.M, Osman, H. and El-Diraby, T.E. 2006. Stakeholder Management for Public
Private Partnerships. International Journal f Project Management, Vol. 24, No. 7, October
2006
Emery, P.R. 2002. Bidding to host a major sports event. The local organising committee
perspective. The International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 15 No. 4, 2002
Erickson, G.S. and Kushner,R.J. 1999. Public event networks: an application of marketing
theory to sporting events. European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 33, No. 3/4, 1999
Hall, C.M. 2006. Urban entrepreneurship, corporate interests and sports mega-events: the thin
policies of competitiveness within the hard outcomes of neoliberalism. The Editorial Board
of the Sociological Review, 2006
Harrison, J.S. and St. John, C.H. 1996. Managing and Partnering with External Stakeholders.
The Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 10, No.2, May 1996
Hautbois, C., Parent, M.M. and Seguin, B. 2012. How to win a bid for major sporting events?
A stakeholder analysis of the 2018 Olympic Winter Games French bid. Sport Management
Review, Vol. 15, No.3, August 2012
Matheson, V.A. 2006. Mega-Events: The effect of the world’s biggest sporting events on
local, regional and national economies. College of the Holy Cross, Department of Economics,
Faculty Research Series, Paper No. 06-10, 2006
Misener, L. and Mason, D.S. 2006. Creating community networks: Can sporting events offer
meaningful sources of social capital? Managing Leisure, Vol. 11, No. 1, January 2006
Mitchell, R.K., Agle, B.R. and Wood. D.J. 1997. Toward a Theory of Stakeholder
Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts. The
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 22, No. 4, October 1997
Morsing, M. 2006. Corporate social responsibility as strategic auto-communication: on the
role of external stakeholders for member identification. Business Ethics: A European Review,
Vol. 15, No. 2, April 2006
Mules, T. 1998. Taxpayer Subsidies for Major Sporting Events. Sport Management Review,
Vol. 1, No. 1, November 1998

- 50 -
Preuss, H. and Solberg, H.A. 2006. Attracting Major Sporting Events: The Role of Local
Residents. European Sport Management Quarterly, Vol. 6, No.4, December 2006
Reed, M.S. 2008. Stakeholder participation for environmental management: A literature
review. Biological Conservation, Vol. 141, No. 10, October 2008
Reed, M.S., Graves, A., Dandy, N., Posthumus, H., Hubacek, K., Morris, J., Prell, C., Quinn,
C.H. and Stringer, L.C. 2009. Who’s in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis
methods for natural resource management. Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 90,
No. 5, April 2009
Roche, M. 2002. Mega-events and modernity: Olympics and expos in the growth of global
culture. Routledge, London, 2002
Savage, G.T., Nix, T.W., Whitehead, C.J. and Blair, J.D. 1991. Strategies for assessing and
managing organizational stakeholders. Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 5, No. 2,
May 1991
Sterken, E. 2006. Growth Impact of Major Sporting Events. European Sport Management
Quarterly, Vol.6, No. 4, December 2006
Toor, S. and Ogunlana, S.O. 2010. Beyond the ‘iron triangle’: Stakeholder perception of key
performance indicators (KPIs) for large-scale public sector development projects.
International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 28, No. 3, April 2010
Westerbeek, H. M., Turner, P. and Ingerson, L. 2001. Key success factors in bidding for
hallmark sporting events. International Marketing Review, Vol. 19, No.3, 2002

External Stakeholder Management in Sporting Events

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Ähnlich wie External Stakeholder Management in Sporting Events

Ähnlich wie External Stakeholder Management in Sporting Events (20)

External Stakeholder Management in Sporting Events