See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/220398815

Management of Multi-Purpose Stadiums: Importance and Performance

Measurement of Service Interfaces

Article  in  International Journal of Services Technology and Management · August 2010

DOI: 10.1504/IJSTM.2010.034327 · Source: DBLP

CITATIONS READS

69 2,208

3 authors, including:

Christian M. Ringle Marko Sarstedt

Technische Universität Hamburg Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg
163 PUBLICATIONS   17,861 CITATIONS    132 PUBLICATIONS   13,586 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

InnoAge View project

Book Project: Advanced Issues in Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Marko Sarstedt on 10 September 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

188 Int. J. Services Technology and Management, Vol. 14, Nos. 2/3, 2010

Management of multi-purpose stadiums: importance

and performance measurement of service interfaces

Claudia Höck*
Institute for Marketing and Media,
University of Hamburg,
Von-Melle-Park 5, 20146 Hamburg, Germany
E-mail: claudiahoeck@econ.uni-hamburg.de
*Corresponding author

Christian M. Ringle
Institute for Industrial Management and Organisations,
University of Hamburg,
Von-Melle-Park 5, 20146 Hamburg, Germany
and
Centre for Management and Organisation Studies (CMOS),
University of Technology Sydney (UTS), Sydney, Australia
E-mail: cringle@econ.uni-hamburg.de

Marko Sarstedt
Institute for Market-Based Management,
University of Munich, Kaulbachstr. 45 / I,
80539 Munich, Germany
E-mail: sarstedt@bwl.lmu.de

Abstract: Maintaining and increasing visitor satisfaction is a crucial success

factor in managing modern, multi-functional stadiums for sports, concerts,
shows and other kinds of events. Based on a typical service delivery process
when attending an event, this study identifies the relevant factors that influence
visitor satisfaction with stadiums. An analysis of this process and its service
interfaces by means of direct observation allows us to establish relationships in
a structural equation model. Using data from almost 2,500 visitors of a
major German multi-purpose stadium, the hypothesised relationships are
subsequently tested by means of the partial least squares (PLS) path modelling
approach. An importance-performance map-based assessment is used to derive
recommendations for improving service interface performance and hence,
visitor satisfaction.

Keywords: multi-purpose stadiums; service interfaces; visitor satisfaction;

importance-performance measurement; arena management; PLS path
modelling; index values.

Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Höck, C., Ringle, C.M. and
Sarstedt, M. (2010) ‘Management of multi-purpose stadiums: importance and
performance measurement of service interfaces’, Int. J. Services Technology
and Management, Vol. 14, Nos. 2/3, pp.188–207.

Copyright © 2010 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

 Management of multi-purpose stadiums 189

Biographical notes: Claudia Höck is an Assistant Professor at the Institute of

Marketing and Media Management of the University of Hamburg (Germany)
where she earned her Diploma in a combined program in Business
Administration and Mathematics. She also holds a Doctorate degree
(University of Hamburg). Her research focuses on the application of
multivariate analysis methodologies in the field of marketing.

Christian M. Ringle is Full Professor and the Acting Head of the Institute for
Industrial Management and Organisations at the Faculty of Business,
Economics and Social Sciences of the University of Hamburg and is a Senior
Research Fellow at the Centre for Management and Organisation Studies
(CMOS) of the University of Technology Sydney (UTS). His researches mainly
focus on strategic management and related fields such as production
management, organisations and marketing. He focuses specifically on the
success factors of strategic alliances, (local) enterprise networks and virtual
organisations. Moreover, he is the Managing Director of the SmartPLS
software (www.smartpls.de).

Marko Sarstedt is an Assistant Professor at the Institute for Market-Based

Management of the Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich (Germany). He
has published several books on research methodology and its applications as
well as multiple articles in refereed journals and proceedings. His research
interests are in the areas of identifying and treating heterogeneity in PLS path
modelling, scale development and measurement theory.

1 Introduction

With the ever increasing growth of the sport business sector’s importance over the last
few years, the need has emerged to urgently turn professional sports clubs into corporate
businesses (Desbores, 2007). Consequently, sport clubs pay increasing attention to the
range of service they can offer with regard to the best business development
opportunities. Arenas or stadiums play a major role in such potential development
opportunities. The optimisation of this resource started with soccer clubs offering
business customers targeted services. Since then, mass customers have also been
addressed by means of new services designed to encourage them to visit the stadium
more often and to make use of the related facilities (Guenzi, 2007). By enlarging the
range of services provided in and outside the stadium, sport clubs have become multi-
service companies. In the course of this development, the last few decades have seen
traditional sports venues, such as indoor sports sites, replaced with modern event centres
in numerous cities worldwide (Siegfried and Zimbalist, 2000). These multi-purpose
stadiums provide room for large events of any kind. By offering a comprehensive food
and beverage service as well as an expanded collateral program, they evoke the character
of leisure-oriented venues.
In contrast to soccer stadiums, which are primarily supported by municipal or local
governments, the majority of these multi-purpose stadiums are privately financed.
Consequently, it is imperative for the operating and marketing concept to be designed and
implemented in a profit-oriented manner. Frequent and continuous utilisation by the
primary tenant (e.g., a sport association) and an offer of top events in the fields of culture,
sports, music and entertainment constitute the essential parameters of a stadium’s
190 C. Höck et al.

economic success. From the stadium operator’s viewpoint, visitor potential can only be
exploited if the stadium offers a large number and broad variety of events which
increases proceeds from ticket sales or advertisements or the allocation of broadcasting
rights. Furthermore, utilisation is affected by the attendance figures at events, as defined
by the indirect network effects concept (Katz and Shapiro, 1985). An important
determinant of attendance is customer satisfaction (Greenwell et al., 2006), which
mediates the relationship between service quality and behavioural intentions (e.g.,
Anderson and Sullivan, 1993). Specifically, customers’ evaluations of service quality
have influenced emotional satisfaction assessments and in turn, specific behaviours such
as customer loyalty (e.g., Fornell et al., 1996), customer retention (e.g., Garbarino and
Johnson, 1999), willingness to pay (Homburg et al., 2005) and price tolerance (Anderson,
1996). Stadium operators’ primary interest should therefore be to increase attendees’
satisfaction by improving the perceived service value (Gudergan and Ellis, 2007) so that
visitors are willing to attend events regularly and recommend visiting the stadium to
other persons.
Knowledge about visitor satisfaction and its determining factors is consequently of
fundamental significance for operating companies. Despite its apparent importance,
research literature on this subject is very scarce. There are only a few studies in the sport
management research field that assess a sports facility’s ability to influence customers’
attendance or attendance intentions. Wakefield et al. (1996), for example, show that a
stadium’s physical characteristics can influence attendees’ desire to frequent it. This
study’s result is in line with a wide array of marketing literature that investigates the
physical environment’s effects on consumers’ cognitive and affective reactions and in
turn, their influence on consumer behaviour (e.g., Donovan and Rossiter, 1982; Spies et
al., 1997). Wakefield and Sloan (1995) and Hill and Green (2000) reveal that attendees’
perceptions of the sportscape significantly affect their desire to attend events.
Whereas these studies solely aim at evaluating attendance effects, Greenwell et al.
(2006) present a first evaluation of the influence of a sports facility’s characteristics on
customer satisfaction. In their study, the authors show that both the perceptions of service
personnel and the physical facility contribute to minor league ice hockey spectators’
satisfaction. However, Greenwell et al. (2006) limit their analysis to ‘traditional’ sport
stadiums, which differ materially from leisure-oriented multi-purpose stadiums in terms
of physical appearance and services offered. In addition, the authors’ approach to
measuring the perceptions of the physical facility and the service personnel suffers from
methodological flaws, as they disregard the epistemic nature of the relationships
between constructs and their measures. These constructs are specified according to
Churchill’s (1979) domain-sampling paradigm, in which an original item pool is
purified using different techniques (such as Cronbach’s α) to verify the reliability and
validity of the measures. Even though this approach is consistent with numerous scale
development approaches in marketing (e.g., Kohli and Jaworski, 1990), it is only valid
for reflectively measured constructs. In a reflective measurement approach, indicators are
regarded as functions of the latent variable, whereby changes in the latent variable are
reflected in changes in all associated manifest variables. Conversely, formative indicators
are assumed to cause a latent variable. That is, changes in the indicators evoke changes in
the latent variable’s value (Bollen, 1989; Bollen, and Lennox, 1991). The choice
of a measurement perspective leads to multi-item measures that differ materially in
terms of content, parsimony and criterion validity (Diamantopoulos and Siguaw,
2006) and is therefore critical when measuring a complex construct with multi-item
 Management of multi-purpose stadiums 191

measures. Moreover, a misspecification of measurement models can result in incorrect

assessments of path relationships in structural equation models (Gudergan, 2005; Jarvis et
al., 2003).
Different from Greenwell et al.’s (2006) approach, visitor satisfaction’s driver
constructs should be measured in a formative way. This can be justified by examining
typical items used in this study. We can easily imagine a visitor being satisfied with the
quality of food and beverages, while not necessarily being satisfied with the availability
and friendliness of the food and beverage services personnel and the cleanliness of the
service facilities. This would become obvious through low correlations between these
indicators, so that a reliability analysis based on Cronbach’s α could winnow out
important items and decrease the scale’s validity. In other words, “omitting an indicator is
omitting a part of the construct” [Bollen and Lennox (1991), p.308]. Measuring visitor
satisfaction in a formative manner, instead, meets the study’s objective, which is to assess
the influence of various service factors’ contribution to visitors’ overall satisfaction
assessment. Furthermore, in the context of this study, this theoretic rationale is confirmed
by the results of a confirmatory tetrad analysis, which allows us to empirically test the
directionality of relationships in each measurement model (Gudergan et al., 2008). The
results of this statistical analysis do not provide new insights that cast doubt on the
theoretically established formative indexes used.
To summarise, the aim of this paper is to develop a formative measurement model for
visitor satisfaction of the service interfaces in multi-purpose stadiums. By explicitly
considering the epistemic nature of the constructs, we take up the recent discussion on
formative measurement approaches (Diamantopoulos et al., 2008) and ensure a valid
measurement of visitor satisfaction and its antecedent constructs. Our analysis therefore
comprises the visitors’ assessment of the physical facility as well as of the service
experience.
Satisfaction with the services arises within the scope of multiple interactions with the
service provider (Bitner, 1993; Bitner et al., 1990). The initial task within this context is
to identify the phases of the consumer experience and to analyse the items that determine
the quality characteristics of each phase. Hence, this study focuses on evaluating specific
characteristics or phases which exert the greatest influence on visitor satisfaction. This
allows for the development of specific management activities to improve the performance
of service interfaces and thereby, increase visitor satisfaction. The latter goal is the key to
sustainably improving attendance of events in multi-purpose stadiums.
This study proceeds as follows: after defining the term ‘visitor satisfaction’,
we derive factors that potentially exhibit an impact on visitor satisfaction from the
service interfaces during a typical visitor route through the venue. In the next section, we
formulate a path model, which is subsequently tested using the partial least squares
(PLS) path modelling procedure on data collected from a multi-purpose stadium in
Germany. This is followed by a detailed analysis of the results, using an
importance-performance analysis-oriented model assessment (e.g., Kristensen et al.,
2000; Slack, 1994) adopted from PLS-based success factor research (e.g., Albers, 2009;
Sarstedt et al., 2009). Consequently, this part of our study conveys essential discoveries
regarding the service interface performance and stadium visitor satisfaction. These
findings provide stadium managers with specific information about measures they
need to take to increase customer satisfaction and corporate success. The study concludes
with a summary of results and potential limitations as well as implications for further
research.
192 C. Höck et al.

2 Visitor satisfaction and the service delivery process

Multi-purpose stadiums have many different types of customers, including sponsors,

employees, suppliers and the communities in which they operate (Leeuwen et al., 2002).
The facility’s visitors are the key customers in this study. Despite this focus on one
particular type of customer, knowledge from general customer satisfaction research,
which focuses on the purchase of products, can be transferred to the satisfaction of
consumers as event visitors. Analogous to the understanding of customer satisfaction,
visitor satisfaction may be defined as the result of a cognitive and affective process of
comparison between the expectations of an offered service (targeted performance) and
the subjectively perceived benefit after use of the service (actual performance)
(Anderson, 1973; Gudergan and Ellis, 2007; Homburg et al., 2006; Oliver, 1980). The
confirmation/disconfirmation (CD) paradigm forms the basis of the target/actual
experience and serves as an integrative framework for customer satisfaction (Woodruff et
al., 1991; Zeithaml et al., 1993). Accordingly, visitor satisfaction arises in conjunction
with the services offered by multi-purpose stadiums whenever the perceived benefit of
services meets the visitor’s expectations prior to use of the service (moderate
satisfaction), or exceeds them (high satisfaction) (Homburg et al., 2002; Oliver, 1980;
Rapp, 1997).
There are various theories within the scope of this method which, for example, focus
on the subsequent adaptation of service perceptions (Anderson, 1973) or the (temporal)
adaptation of expectations (Sheth et al., 1998). The multi-factor model deserves attention
for analysing satisfaction with the attendance of events held in multi-purpose stadiums.
This method assumes that the comparative process refers to all of the partial services
(factors) that relate to the product or service (Homburg et al., 2002) and underscores that
not all factors contribute to visitor satisfaction to the same extent (Oliver, 1997). A
comparable frame of reference is found in the study by de Ruyter et al. (1997) who
analyse satisfaction with a museum visit.
Following their approach of modelling the dynamics of service delivery, our study
considers the sequence of service encounters during a typical visitor route through a
multi-purpose stadium. This approach fits the general notion that satisfaction also
develops through a multi-stage process (Danaher and Mattsson, 1994) and that each stage
is characterised by specific factors. The perceived quality of each factor influences the
satisfaction with a stage in the process. The perception of a factor’s quality is therefore
not consistent with satisfaction; however, the general opinion is that, quality is a
significant determinant of satisfaction (Caruana, 2002; Spreng and MacKoy, 1996). The
transaction-specific overall satisfaction with the attendance of a particular event results
from the aggregated satisfaction assessments of the partial processes and ultimately
influences global satisfaction with the service provider, i.e., the stadium’s operating
company (Olsen and Johnson, 2003; Shankar et al., 2003).
This notion has been investigated and verified in various research works in different
industrial sectors and has proven to be of fundamental importance for a company’s
economic success (Anderson et al., 2004; Festge and Schwaiger, 2007; Homburg et al.,
2006; Kamakura et al., 2002; Kristensen et al., 2000; Srivastava et al., 1998). In the
context of the present study, visitor satisfaction is specifically expressed by repeated
visits to the stadium as well as by the increased time spent at the facility. The latter
deserves special mention in terms of the consumption of food and beverages and the
purchase of merchandise items. A further result of (high) satisfaction with the frequented
 Management of multi-purpose stadiums 193

service offer could be visitors telling their friends about their experience (in this case, a
positive experience at the stadium) which, in turn, leads to the stadium acquiring new
visitors (Anderson et al., 1994).

3 Development of a measurement tool for satisfaction of stadium visitors

Several approaches that are generally divided into objective and subjective procedures –
have been advanced for measuring satisfaction during the last few years. Objective
measuring procedures use indicators such as the number of units sold and/or a company’s
market share to draw conclusions regarding customers’ satisfaction with services. These
kinds of criteria are often difficult to obtain in particular analytical settings and do not
allow for precise conclusions due to such indicators’ numerous determinants. Therefore,
subjective measuring procedures are generally used for satisfaction studies. This study
draws on an explicit feature-oriented type of subjective measuring procedure which is
based on individual satisfaction assessments rated on a ranking scale. In accordance with
service delivery’s multi-stage process, respondents rate different service encounters in the
course of an ex-post analysis.
Consequently, a detailed analysis is required of the service delivery process in
multi-purpose stadiums for a subsequent evaluation of the satisfaction with each service
element. The aim of such studies is to extract and analyse all potential contact points and
related activities that the customer experiences over the course of the encounter (Bitner,
1993). This approach considers the aforementioned service delivery’s multi-stage
character adequately (Danaher and Mattsson, 1994). Using a direct observation technique
(Aaker et al., 2007), we were able to trace a typical stadium visitor’s encounters with
service delivery. We did not, however, limit the observation to the time the visitor spends
in the stadium (‘attendance in the more narrow sense’). Rather, this research analyses the
upstream and downstream of partial service interface interactions that accompany
attendance.
Figure 1 indicates the sequence of typical visitor’s service encounters when attending
an event. This kind of systematic approach includes all relevant processes and
interactions with service interfaces that occur during the experience including travel to
and return from the stadium. The processes of searching for information and purchasing
tickets are not considered because these activities frequently occur long before the visit to
the stadium. It may also be assumed that, at best, they have a minimum impact on the
satisfaction assessment after the event. We also need to underline that in the sense of
‘attendance in the more narrow sense’, the three encounters may be traversed several
times in some instances and not always in a specific sequence. It is possible, for example,
to use food and beverage services before, during and after the event.
Even though the analysis of the service delivery process allows the potential drivers
of overall satisfaction to be identified, the definition of these drivers is much too abstract
to allow for a suitable measurement. Consequently, we needed to identify relevant
indicators to operationalise visitor satisfaction with the different stages of the process (de
Ruyter et al., 1997). These indicators would then be integrated into a structural equation
model’s measurement models in order to analyse each service’s influence on satisfaction
with the stadium. An elementary requirement for conducting such an analysis is
formulating a consistent set of hypotheses. The process of formulating hypotheses means
including both the cause-effect relationships between non-observable (latent) variables
194 C. Höck et al.

and between latent variables and observable indicators. Formulating these relationships
allows a particular latent variable to be measured sensibly and logically in terms of the
issue under investigation.
In line with de Ruyter et al. (1997) and Danaher and Mattsson (1994), indicators were
selected, each referring to emotional (E), practical (P), and logical (L) aspects of the visit.
Emotional criteria refer to visitors’ feelings during the various service encounters.
Conversely, the rational aspects of a partial process cover practical features as well as
technical/functional and logical criteria. Given the multiple layer nature of individual
encounters, several practical and logical indicators will be considered case by case.

Figure 1 Typical visitor route during an event

1 Travel to stadium

2 Arrival at stadium

3 Stay in the stadium

more narrow sense
Attendance in the

4 Use of food and beverage services

5 Attending the event

6 Leaving the stadium

7 Departure from the stadium

Our study addresses the two primary means of transportation (arrival via public
transportation and arrival via car) to measure satisfaction with travel to and departure
from the stadium (phases 1 and 7). The two modes of transportation therefore needed to
be evaluated separately in terms of (L) accessibility. We also captured satisfaction with
direction signs (L) and the availability of parking spaces (P). In this respect, we waived
capturing an emotional component as there is no contact with the companies providing
the service or with other visitors.
H1 The indicators ‘direction signs to stadium’ [SSIGNS], ‘availability of parking spaces’
[PARK], ‘accessibility via car’ [CAR] and ‘accessibility via public transportation’
[PTRAN] have a positive influence on satisfaction with conditions related to
transportation to and from the stadium [accessibility].
We recorded visitor contact with security personnel during periods of arrival at and
leaving, the stadium (phases 2 and 6), i.e., their presence, in terms of an emotional value
 Management of multi-purpose stadiums 195

contribution. We likewise evaluated satisfaction with the direction signs that provide
orientation outside the stadium (L), the general physical external appearance and the
external facilities (P):
H2 The indicators ‘appearance of the stadium’ [S_APPEAR], ‘quality of exterior
facilities’ [S_EXTFAC], ‘external direction signs’ [S_EXTSIG,] and ‘availability of
security services’ [S_SECURI] have a positive influence on satisfaction with
conditions related to arrival at and departure from the stadium [stadium (exterior)].
The atmosphere and emotional components come into play again inside the stadium
(phase 3). This phase is characterised by several heterogeneous service features. We
consequently considered three logical and practical/functional criteria related to the
temperature in the concourses, the number of cloakrooms and restrooms (L) as well as
interior design, cleanliness and seating comfort (P):
H3 The indicators ‘atmosphere in the stadium’ [S_ATMOSP], ‘temperature in the
concourses’ [S_CONCOU], ‘number of wardrobes’ [S_WARDRO], ‘number of
restrooms’ [S_RESTRM], ‘interior design’ [S_INTER], ‘cleanliness’ [S_CLEAN]
and ‘seating comfort’ [S_SEAT] have a positive influence on the stay in the stadium
[stadium (interior)].
The quality features friendliness of personnel (E), selection of food and beverages (L)
and their quality (P) operationalise food and beverage services (phase 4). We likewise
considered cleanliness as an additional practical/functional aspect.
H4 The indicators ‘selection of food and beverages’ [FB_SELECT], ‘quality of food and
beverages’ [FB_QUAL], ‘cleanliness’ [FB_CLEAN] and ‘availability and
friendliness of food and beverage services personnel’ [FB_PERSO] have a positive
impact on visitor satisfaction with food and beverage services [food & beverage
services].
The event itself (phase 5) is just as important as the stay in the stadium. The event is
evaluated by means of the atmosphere (E). Acoustics and view, two logical criteria, are
considered the core service, i.e., the actual presented event:
H5 The indicators ‘acoustics’ [EV_ACOUST], ‘atmosphere of the event’ [EV_ATMO],
‘presentation’ [EV_PRESEN] and ‘view” [EV_VIEW] have a positive impact on
visitor satisfaction with the event [event].
In accordance with our research approach, we assume that satisfaction with individual
phases determines the transaction-specific overall satisfaction with attendance of an
event.
H6 The exogenous latent variables transportation to and from the stadium [accessibility],
arrival at and departure from the stadium [stadium (exterior)], stay in the stadium
[stadium (interior)], food and beverage services [food and beverage services] and
event [event] have a positive impact on visitor satisfaction [visitor satisfaction].
Statements by interviewees regarding their overall satisfaction with their visit to the
stadium, their intention to recommend the venue to friends and their intention to visit the
stadium again serve as indicators to determine the construct ‘visitor satisfaction’. This
operationalisation allows for a simultaneous assessment of visitor satisfaction and
reaction by means of their behavioural intentions.
196 C. Höck et al.

H7 Visitor satisfaction [visitor satisfaction] is positively related to ‘overall satisfaction’

[OV_STAD], the ‘intention to recommend the stadium to friends’ [OV_RECOM],
and visitors’ ‘intention to visit the stadium again’ [OV_AGAIN].
The hypotheses clearly reflect the multi-stage structure of the service delivery process as
well as the various facets of the construct ‘visitor satisfaction’ in this study’s context.
Each encounter comprises a number of determining factors that influence overall
satisfaction. It needs to be emphasised that the operator of an event is only contingently
responsible for some partial processes. The most critical element in this regard is
primarily that the core service of a visit – the performance presented at the event – does
not fall within the stadium operator’s scope of responsibility and influence; however, it
may possibly have a major influence on overall satisfaction. The stadium operator can
only influence spatial features (acoustics, etc.) during this period.

4 PLS path model analysis of the satisfaction of stadium visitors

4.1 Design and implementation of the empirical survey

To test the hypotheses, an online survey was conducted of persons who had attended at
least one event at a specific multi-purpose stadium located in Northern Germany.
Potential participants were addressed by means of a popup window that appeared on the
website of the stadium used for this study. The popup window appeared on the PC
screens of randomly selected persons who visited the stadium’s home page, requesting
their participation in the questionnaire-based survey. A raffle of various non-cash prizes
was offered as an incentive.
The questionnaire’s content was largely based on the structure of the hypotheses
formulated above. The questionnaire first requested socio-demographic information on
the participants as well as other information on the attended event(s) to extract additional
data for the subsequent segmentation of the participants. To achieve a better overview, the
information on satisfaction with the components was assigned to the appropriate phases
along the visitor’s route through the stadium (Figure 1). The participants were requested
to base the assessment of each phase on their experiences during their last visit to the
stadium. All items were recorded on a one to five-point rating scale with higher scores
denoting higher levels of satisfaction. Individual indicators were not rated directly
regarding their importance due to validity problems associated with this assessment
(Doyle et al., 1997; Gustafsson and Johnson, 2004).
A total of 3,240 persons participated in the survey. Since only fully completed
questionnaires were considered in our analysis, the final dataset comprised 2,453
observations. Contingency tests in respect of the different socio-demographic
characteristics and non-response (Morton-Williams, 1993) did not indicate any
significant relationships. Consequently, we did not regard the omitted questionnaires as a
debilitating factor.

4.2 Path model estimation and results assessment

To estimate structural equation models, researchers can revert to covariance-based
methods (Bollen, 1989; Jöreskog, 1977) or the variance-based PLS approach (Henseler et
 Management of multi-purpose stadiums 197

al., 2009; Lohmöller, 1989). Drawing on the findings of comparisons of both approaches
by, for example, Lohmöller (1989), we chose to apply the PLS approach to model
estimation because its formal premises embody a greater range of flexible applications.
Moreover, the objective of our analysis was to determine the impact of latent success
factors that can be measured by formative measurement models. The PLS approach
emerged as more suitable in this regard.

Figure 2 Path model

S_ATMOSP S_CONCOU S_WARDRO S_INTER S_CLEAN S_SEAT S_RESTRM

0.605 0.055 0.130 0.016 0.224 0.176 0.161

0.343
FB_SELECT
0.270
FB_PERSO food & stadium
beverage (interior)
FB_QUAL 0.083
services

FB_CLEAN 0.518
0.120 0.333

0.286
EV_ACOUST
0.899 OV_RECOM
0.501
EV_ATMO 0.154 visitor
0.834
event satisfaction OV_STAD
EV_PRESEN R²=0.485
0.125
0.842 OV_AGAIN
EV_VIEW 0.381
0.189
0.095
0.313
SSIGNS
0.285 stadium
PTRAN
accessibility (exterior)
PARK 0.293

CAR 0,173 0.456 0.258 0.465

0.468

S_EXTFAC S_APPEAR S_EXTSIG S_SECURI

The statistical software application SmartPLS 2.0 (Ringle et al., 2005) was used to
compute the PLS path model. Figure 2 illustrates the path model under consideration, the
path coefficients’ values as well as the R² value of the endogenous latent variable ‘visitor
satisfaction’. Based on the rationale presented above, the exogenous latent variables are
operationalised formatively. In contrast, the three indicators gained in respect of ‘visitor
satisfaction’ were identified as exchangeable indications of their underlying construct and
were thus treated reflectively.
Within the scope of structural equation modelling, model assessment requires
researchers to assess the reliability and validity of the measures used. Given the lack of
global goodness-of-fit measures in PLS path modelling, Chin (1998) put forward a
catalogue of non-parametric criteria to assess partial model structures. A systematic
198 C. Höck et al.

application of these criteria requires a two-step process (Henseler et al., 2009). First of
all, model assessment focuses on the measurement models. A systematic evaluation of the
PLS estimates reveals the measurement reliability and validity based on certain decisive
factors which are specifically associated with the formative or reflective outer mode.
Only if the computed latent variable scores show evidence of sufficient reliability and
validity is it worth pursuing the evaluation of inner path model estimates. This
assessment also includes the predictive power of the PLS path model. The PLS path
model evaluation steps are:
1 outer model (measurement model) evaluation with regard to the reflective constructs’
reliability and validity or the reflective constructs’ validity
2 inner model (structural model) evaluation in respect of variance accounted for, path
estimates and the predictive relevance of the inner model’s explanatory variables for
the endogenous latent variable.

Assessment of the reflective measurement model

All the requirements with regard to the reflective measurement model for the endogenous
latent variable ‘visitor satisfaction’ have been clearly met. All factor loadings lie well
above the suggested threshold value of 0.7. With a value of 0.738, the average variance
extracted (AVE) is highly satisfactory. Internal consistency ρc is at 0.894. Accordingly, a
high level of reliability can be ascertained in respect of the reflective measurement
model.

Assessment of formative measurement models

Nearly all weights in the exogenous latent variables’ measurement models are significant
[p < 0.10, two-sided test; the results were obtained by applying a bootstrapping procedure
(Henseler et al., 2009)]. The only exceptions are ‘temperature in the concourses’, ‘interior
design’, ‘quality of food and beverages’ and ‘presentation’. We also needed to check if
the level of multi-collinearity is a critical issue. In the formative measurement models,
the highest variance inflation factor (VIF) has a value of 2.289. Hence, multi-collinearity
is relatively low and does not pose a problem in this study.
The manifest variables’ weights indicate how important each variable is for
determining the associated latent variable. With regard to the latent variable ‘stadium
(interior)’, for example, with a weight of 0.605, the variable ‘atmosphere in the stadium’
is regarded as of major importance. By contrast, with weights of 0.016 and 0.055
respectively, ‘interior design’ and ‘temperature in the concourses’ are hardly relevant. The
other formatively measured constructs were assessed in a similar manner. The analysis
reveals that for each associated latent variable, the following manifest variables can be
regarded as of the highest importance:

• accessibility: ‘accessibility via car’ (weight: 0.468)

• stadium (exterior): ‘availability of security services’ (weight: 0.465) and ‘appearance

of the stadium’ (weight: 0.456)

• stadium (interior): ‘atmosphere in the stadium’ (weight: 0.605)

 Management of multi-purpose stadiums 199

• food and beverage services: ‘cleanliness’ (weight: 0.518)

• event: ‘atmosphere of the event’ (weight: 0.501).

A comparative evaluation of the manifest variables’ relevance reveals that emotional

aspects dominate when the exogenous latent variables are determined.

Assessment of the structural model

The central criterion for the assessment of the structural model is the coefficient of
determination R². With a value of 0.485 the R² of the endogenous latent variable ‘visitor
satisfaction’ lies at a very satisfactory level. The Stone-Geisser criterion Q2 is established
using the blindfolding procedure to compute cross-validated redundancy (Henseler et al.,
2009). In our analysis, all Q2 values range above the threshold value of zero, thus
indicating the overall model’s predictive relevance.
An analysis of the inner model path coefficients shows that the exogenous latent
variable ‘stadium (interior)’ exerts the strongest influence on ‘visitor satisfaction’ (path
coefficient: 0.333). This is followed by ‘stadium (exterior)’, ‘event’, ‘food and beverage
services’ and ‘accessibility’ which exhibit noticeably lower path coefficients, ranging
between 0.189 and 0.095. The results of a bootstrapping analysis show that all of the
relationships within the structural model are significant (p < 0.10, two-sided test; the
results were obtained by applying a bootstrapping procedure; Henseler et al., 2009). An
evaluation of effect size ƒ2 and of the relative impact of latent variables on the predictive
relevance (here: q2; see Henseler et al., 2009) confirms the key role of the latent variable
‘stadium (interior)’.
The process of verifying relevant assessment criteria in respect of the PLS approach
concludes at this point. Our analysis indicates that all measures used are reliable and
valid. Consequently, appropriate implications to explain and increase the satisfaction of
stadium visitors can be derived from the analysis results.

4.3 Importance-performance map analysis of path modelling results

The index value-based model assessment procedure (Fornell et al., 1996; Kristensen et
al., 2000) is appropriate for a sound interpretation and further analysis of PLS results.
The importance-performance analysis of path modelling results permits the identification
of areas of improvement that can subsequently be addressed with marketing or
management activities. The assessment builds on the PLS estimates for the path model
relationships and adds an additional dimension to the analysis that considers the latent
variables’ values (performances). For a particular endogenous latent variable, this
analysis results in a priority map for management-oriented presentation and for assigning
priority to different areas of management activities for their improvement. To increase the
analysed endogenous latent variables’ performance level in future, actions should be
taken along lines that have a relatively high importance (i.e., a high path coefficient) and
a relatively low performance.
The impact of latent variables on an endogenous construct, as analysed by means of a
priority map, emerges from their total effects (Slack, 1994). The computation of index
values is carried out by means of rescaling the latent variable scores to a range of zero
and 100 (Anderson and Fornell, 2000), using the formula:
200 C. Höck et al.

E [ξi ] − min [ξi ]

ξirescaled = ⋅100 (1)
max [ξi ] − min [ξ i ]

where ξi is the specific exogenous latent variable i in the inner model; E[.], min[.] and
max[.] representing these variables’ expected minimum and maximum value. The
minimum and the maximum values are determined using the associated measurement
model’s manifest variables:
ni
min [ξi ] = ∑w
j =1
ij ⋅ min ⎡⎣ xij ⎤⎦ , (2)

or
ni
max [ξi ] = ∑w
j =1
ij ⋅ max ⎡⎣ xij ⎤⎦ , (3)

where xij represents the j-th (j = 1,…,ni) manifest variable in the measurement model of a
specific latent variable ξi and wij indicates the associated estimate of the non-standardised
formative weights in the measurement model (Fornell et al., 1996). The mean value of all
latent variable values, readjusted as indicated above, finally results in the index value of
their performance expressed on a scale between 0 and 100 with the higher values
indicating a better result. Corresponding importance-performance analysis-related PLS
path model computations are integrated into the SmartPLS 2.0 software application
(Ringle et al., 2005), which was used for this study. Table 1 presents the index values of
the latent variables in the inner model and the exogenous latent variables’ total
effects (denoting direct effects in this specific case) on the endogenous latent variable
‘visitor satisfaction’.
Table 1 Index values and total effects

Total effect of the latent variable

Latent variable Index value
on ‘visitor satisfaction’
stadium (exterior) 77.853 0.189
stadium (interior) 80.650 0.333
visitor satisfaction 88.895 [target construct]
accessibility 66.987 0.095
food & beverage services 70.500 0.120
event 81.272 0.154

In keeping with this procedure, an index value of 81.272 results, for example, in respect
of the latent variable ‘event’. These additional results of the service interface performance
serve as a foundation for preparing the priority map. Figure 3 visualises the ‘performance
level’ of each exogenous latent variable along with its impact on the endogenous latent
variable. Management-oriented decisions are easily recognisable from this kind of
graphical representation. If, for example, the index value of the latent variable ‘stadium
(interior)’ increases by one unit, the index value of the endogenous latent variable ‘visitor
satisfaction’ should increase by 0.33 points in a (static) ceteris-paribus assessment of
results.
 Management of multi-purpose stadiums 201

Figure 3 Importance-performance analysis (priority map) for ‘visitor satisfaction’ (see online
version for colours)

It becomes apparent that in terms of assigning priority to management-oriented measures

relative to the results in Figure 3, the factor ‘stadium (interior)’ is highly relevant for
increasing visitor satisfaction due to its major impact. However, this area already
has a high index value so that there is relatively minor potential for a further increase.
Efforts should be directed at maintaining this area’s performance level, or even
expanding it. Nearly the same applies to performance in the ‘event’ and
‘stadium (exterior)’ areas, although their total effects are significantly lower. Future
maintenance of the performance level should at least be ensured with respect to the
‘event’ area and steps ought to be taken to improve the ‘stadium (exterior)’ area.
‘food and beverage services’ and ‘accessibility’ are initially of less importance
for activities aimed at increasing visitor satisfaction, as the respective exogenous
latent variables exert a relatively low impact on ‘visitor satisfaction’. However,
these two areas offer major improvement potential in terms of the current performance
level.
The importance-performance analysis can be refined for additional analyses on the
manifest variable level. An analysis of a particular endogenous latent variable may focus
on the indicators of the exogenous latent variable with the highest relevance. The total
effect, which draws on the outer and inner model coefficients, indicates the importance of
manifest variables, while the mean value of their scores (on a scale from zero to 100)
mirrors their performance. This method is especially suitable whenever exogenous latent
variables with formative measurement models are present. All the exogenous latent
variables in our model are formatively measured and hence, their indicators have an
impact on the endogenous latent variable in the inner model. Consequently, we include
all of the manifest variables in our study on visitor satisfaction. Our findings, as
established thus far, can be supported and further differentiated by means of an extended
importance-performance map (Figure 4).
202 C. Höck et al.

Figure 4 Importance-performance analysis (priority map) of ‘visitor satisfaction’ on the manifest

variable level (see online version for colours)

The performance-level results from manifest variables’ average value in exogenous latent
variables’ formative measurement models and the relative importance of their total effect
on the endogenous latent variable ‘visitor satisfaction’. A visual inspection of the map
reveals two groups of manifest variables as well as two outliers (‘S_ATMOSP’ and
‘FB_QUAL’). Owing to their increased relative importance, the service interfaces in
Group 1 and the outlier ‘S_ATMOSP’ have special relevance for the selection of
measures to increase visitor satisfaction. This result also reveals the emotional indicators’
dominance in respect of the service interfaces. The manifest variable ‘S_ATMOSP’ is by
far the most important performance measure of visitor satisfaction, already having a very
high performance value. Activities for increasing visitor satisfaction should nevertheless
aim at improving satisfaction, or at least at all costs avoiding a decline of the performance
dimension. The manifest variables ‘S_SECURI’, ‘S_CLEAN’, ‘S_APPEAR’ and
‘EV_ATMO’ are likewise of greater importance. All the remaining manifest variables are
still negligible in terms of their influence. Based on these analytical results, it is clear that
the atmosphere in the stadium itself is the most important driver of visitor satisfaction
with multi-purpose stadiums, followed by several criteria that, for example, relate to the
security personnel and/or the cleanliness of the stadium.

5 Findings and conclusions

Orientation towards service interface performance and perceived service value leads to
visitor satisfaction and constitutes the central requirement for modern multi-purpose
stadiums’ long-term success. Our study identifies the relevant service factors that
influence visitor satisfaction with stadiums as based on a typical service delivery process
when attending an event. An analysis of this process by means of direct observation
allowed us to identify relevant relationships for a structural equation model analysis.
 Management of multi-purpose stadiums 203

Using data from almost 2,500 visitors to a major German multi-purpose stadium, the
hypothesised relationships were subsequently tested by means of the PLS path modelling
approach. We identify the epistemic nature of the visitor satisfaction construct as being
formative (Gudergan et al., 2008) and, thus, find solutions for the methodological and
content-related problems in Greenwell et al.’s (2006) measurement model for visitor
satisfaction.
The model assessment substantiates the reliability and validity of the PLS path
modelling results. The empirical analysis provides support for our hypothesised
cause-effect relationships in the model. The presented theoretical concept explains
approximately 50% of visitor satisfaction with the analysed stadium. We enlisted the
importance-performance analysis procedure in order to extract differentiated information
in addition to the results obtained through a standard PLS analysis. Even though we have
been able to empirically confirm the hypothesised structural model, four relationships in
formative measurement models (‘temperature in the concourses’, ‘interior design’,
‘quality of food and beverages’ and ‘presentation’) do not exhibit empirical significance
for the particular stadium in this study.
The stadium’s interior design is the most important area of influence for visitor
satisfaction. Upon closer scrutiny of the pertinent indicators, it becomes evident that for
visitors to experience their chosen event in an atmosphere that appeals to them is of
predominant importance. In a similar manner, areas of lesser importance, i.e., ‘stadium
(exterior)’, ‘accessibility’, ‘food and beverage services’ and ‘event’, are dominated by
one or two indicator(s), with emotional criteria primarily having a major influence on
partial satisfactions. Surprisingly the stadium’s ‘accessibility’ as well as ‘food and
beverage services’ exert a comparatively low impact on visitor satisfaction. Apparently,
visitor needs in terms of traffic infrastructure and culinary preferences barely play a role
in visitor satisfaction with an event in the analysed multi-purpose stadium. The influence
of the event on visitor satisfaction is also rather low. The interviewees were apparently
aware that the quality of the actual performance did not fall within the stadium operator’s
scope of responsibility and consequently, did not consider this matter at all, or only to a
minor extent when evaluating their satisfaction with the venue. These results were further
scrutinised by investigating the impact of the measurement models’ manifest variables on
visitor satisfaction. According to our analysis, visitor satisfaction is primarily determined
by the atmosphere in the venue and the actual event itself, by the stadium’s exterior
appearance and cleanliness as well as the availability of security personnel.
Visitor satisfaction is a central element of the leisure industry’s success in general and
particularly of the management of event stadiums. The empirical analysis of our
theoretically deduced model helps to provide a first of a kind derivation of strategically
significant recommendations for stadium managers as based on a service performance
analysis. Linkage of the PLS path analysis method with the importance-performance
mapping technique clearly points to significant areas for improvement of management
activities. Given the exogenous latent variables’ formative operationalisation, this
technique for the management-oriented processing of a PLS analysis’s results is
particularly informative in the presented model set-up.
As in any empirical research, the results of this study cannot be interpreted without
taking the limitations of the study into account. Firstly, the study was restricted to the
evaluation of visitor satisfaction with regard to one multi-purpose stadium. Consequently,
future research should conduct similarly designed studies in cooperation with other
arenas and stadiums to generalise and deepen the results of our study for multi-purpose
204 C. Höck et al.

stadiums’ operating companies. This would allow for testing the measures’ test-retest
reliability and assess whether the few non-significant effects in the formative
measurement models only hold for the particular sample used. Secondly, the present
study did not account for the interviewees’ different usage rates, which would allow the
segmentation of the attendees’ behaviour. It is perfectly possible that the importance of
the various factors differ with regard to infrequent and frequent visitors to the stadium
due to, for example, habituation effects. Future research should therefore consider this
issue by segmenting the data along such behavioural variables’ values (Ringle et al.,
2010; Sarstedt and Ringle, 2010). Lastly, there is a general need for empirical research on
the leisure industry’s various sectors in which success factor research on service features
is assuming an important role. However, little attention has been paid to these sectors to
date in terms of the subject matter of our study. In this respect, the PLS methodology in
conjunction with index-oriented analyses will play an imperative role due to its flexible
applicability. Further research will provide managers with a clearer understanding of the
service experience components that have the greatest impact on customer satisfaction and
ultimately, on profitability.

References
Aaker, D.A., Kumar, V. and Day, G.S. (2007) Marketing Research, 9th ed., John Wiley & Sons,
New York.
Albers, S. (2009) ‘PLS and success factor studies in marketing’, in Esposito Vinzi, V., Chin, W.W.,
Henseler, J. and Wang, H-F. (Eds.): Handbook of Partial Least Squares: Concepts, Methods
and Applications in Marketing and Related Fields, Springer, Berlin, forthcoming.
Anderson, E.W. (1996) ‘Customer satisfaction and price tolerance’, Marketing Letters, Vol. 7,
No. 3, pp.265–274.
Anderson, E.W. and Fornell, C. (2000) ‘Foundations of the American customer satisfaction index’,
Total Quality Management, Vol. 11, No. 7, pp.869–882.
Anderson, E.W. and Sullivan, M.W. (1993) ‘The antecedents and consequences of customer
satisfaction for firms’, Marketing Science, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp.125–143.
Anderson, E.W., Fornell, C. and Lehmann, D.R. (1994) ‘Customer satisfaction, market share, and
profitability: findings from Sweden’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58, No. 3, pp.53–66.
Anderson, E.W., Fornell, C., Lehmann, D.R. and Mazvancheryl, S.K. (2004) ‘Customer satisfaction
and shareholder value’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 68, No. 3, pp.172–185.
Anderson, R.E. (1973) ‘Consumer dissatisfaction: the effect of disconfirmed expectancy on
perceived product performance’, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp.38–44.
Bitner, M. (1993) ‘Managing the evidence of service’, in Scheuning, E. and Christopher, W.A.
(Eds.): The Service Quality Handbook, pp.358–370, AMACOM, San Francisco.
Bitner, M.J., Booms, B.H. and Tetreault, M.S. (1990) ‘The service encounter: diagnosing favorable
and unfavorable incidents’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, No. 1, pp.71–84.
Bollen, K.A. (1989) Structural Equations with Latent Variables, Wiley-Interscience, New York.
Bollen, K.A. and Lennox, R. (1991) ‘Conventional wisdom on measurement: a structural equation
perspective’, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 110, No. 2, pp.305–314.
Caruana, A. (2002) ‘Service loyalty: the effects of service quality and the mediating role of
customer satisfaction’, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 36, Nos. 7/8, pp.811–826.
Chin, W.W. (1998) ‘The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling’, in
Marcoulides, G.A. (Ed.): Modern Methods for Business Research, pp.295–358, Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah.
 Management of multi-purpose stadiums 205

Churchill, G.A. (1979) ‘A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs’,
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp.64–73.
Danaher, P.J. and Mattsson, J. (1994) ‘Customer satisfaction during the service delivery process’,
European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 28, No. 5, pp.5–16.
de Ruyter, K., Wetzels, M., Lemmink, J. and Mattsson, J. (1997) ‘The dynamics of the service
delivery process: a value-based approach’, International Journal of Research in Marketing,
Vol. 14, No. 3, pp.231–243.
Desbores, M. (2007) ‘Introduction: new directions for marketing football’ in Desbores, M. (Ed.):
Marketing and Football An International Perspective, pp.1–15, Butterworth-Heineman,
Oxford.
Diamantopoulos, A. and Siguaw, J.A. (2006) ‘Formative versus reflective indicators in
organisational measure development: a comparison and empirical illustration’, British Journal
of Management, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp.263–282.
Diamantopoulos, A., Riefler, P. and Roth. K.P. (2008) ‘Advancing formative measurement models’,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 61, No. 12, pp.1203–1218.
Donovan, R. and Rossiter, J. (1982) ‘Store atmosphere: an experimental psychology. approach’,
Journal of Retailing, Vol. 58, No. 1, pp.34–57.
Doyle, J.R., Green, R.H. and Bottomley, P.A. (1997) ‘Judging relative importance: direct rating and
point allocation are not equivalent’, Organisational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,
Vol. 70, No. 1, pp.65–72.
Festge, F. and Schwaiger, M. (2007) ‘The drivers of customer satisfaction with industrial goods: an
international study’, Advances in International Marketing, Vol. 18, pp.179–207.
Fornell, C., Johnson, M.D., Anderson, E.W., Cha, J. and Bryant, B. E. (1996) ‘The American
customer satisfaction index: nature, purpose, and findings’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60,
No. 4, pp.7–18.
Garbarino, E. and Johnson, M.S. (1999) ‘The different roles of satisfaction, trust, and commitment
in customer relationships’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63, No. 2, pp.70–87.
Greenwell, C.T., Fink, J.S. and Pastore, D.L. (2006) ‘Assessing the influence of the physical sports
facility on customer satisfaction within the context of the service experience’, Sport
Management Review, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp.29–148.
Gudergan, S.P. (2005) ‘PLS and confirmatory tetrad testing for formative measurement scales in
marketing’, in Aluja, T., Casanovas, J., Esposito Vinzi, V., Morineau, A. and Tenenhaus, M.
(Eds.): PLS and Related Methods: Proceedings of the PLS’05 International Symposium,
pp.103–108, Decisia, Paris.
Gudergan, S.P. and Ellis, R.S. (2007) ‘The link between perceived service value and customer
satisfaction’, Journal of Customer Behaviour, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp.249–267.
Gudergan, S.P., Ringle, C.M., Wende, S. and Will, A. (2008) ‘Confirmatory tetrad analysis in PLS
path modeling’, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 61, No. 12, pp.1238–1249.
Guenzi, P. (2007) ‘Sport marketing and facility management: from stadiums to customer-based
multipurpose leisure centres’, in Desbores, M. (Ed.): Marketing and Football An International
Perspective, pp.130–162, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.
Gustafsson, A. and Johnson, M.D. (2004) ‘Determining attribute importance in a service
satisfaction model’, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp.124–141.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. and Sinkovics, R.R. (2009) ‘The use of partial least squares path
modeling in international marketing’, in Sinkovics, R.R. and Ghauri, P.N. (Eds.): Advances in
International Marketing, Vol. 20, pp.277–319, Emerald, Bingley.
Hill, B. and Green, B.C. (2000) ‘Repeat attendance as a function of involvement, loyalty, and the
sportscape across three football contexts’, Sport Management Review, Vol. 3, No. 2,
pp.145–162.
Homburg, C., Koschate, N. and Hoyer, W.D. (2005) ‘Do satisfied customers really pay more? A
study of the relationship between customer satisfaction and willingness to pay’, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 69, No. 2, pp.84–96.
206 C. Höck et al.

Homburg, C., Koschate, N. and Hoyer, W.D. (2006) ‘The role of cognition and affect in the
formation of customer satisfaction: a dynamic perspective’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 70,
No. 3, pp.21–31.
Homburg, C., Krohmer, H., Cannon, J.P. and Kiedaisch, I. (2002) ‘Customer satisfaction in
transnational buyer-supplier relationships’, Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 10, No. 4,
pp.1–29.
Jarvis, C.B., MacKenzie, S.B. and Podsakoff, P.M. (2003) ‘A critical review of construct indicators
and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research’, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp.199–218.
Jöreskog, K.G. (1977) ‘Structural equation models in social sciences: specification, estimation and
testing’, in Krishnaiah, P.R. (Ed.): Applications of Statistics, pp.265–287, North-Holland,
Amsterdam.
Kamakura, W.A., Mittal, V., de Rosa, F. and Mazzon, J.A. (2002) ‘Assessing the service-profit
chain’, Marketing Science, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp.294–317.
Katz, M.L. and Shapiro, C. (1985) ‘Network externalities, competition and compatibility’, The
American Economic Review, Vol. 75, No. 3, pp.424–440.
Kohli, A.K. and Jaworski, N.J. (1990) ‘Market orientation: the construct, research propositions and
managerial implications’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, No. 2, pp.1–18.
Kristensen, K., Martensen, A. and Grønholdt, L. (2000) ‘Customer satisfaction measurement at post
Denmark: results of application of the European customer satisfaction index methodology’,
Total Quality Management, Vol. 11, No. 7, pp.1007–1015.
Leeuwen, L.V., Quick, S. and Daniel, K. (2002) ‘The sport spectator satisfaction model: a
conceptual framework for understanding the satisfaction of spectators’, Sport Management
Review, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp.99–128.
Lohmöller, J-B. (1989) Latent Variable Path Modeling with Partial Least Squares, Physica,
Heidelberg.
Morton-Williams, J. (1993) Interviewer Approaches, Dartmouth Publishing, Cambridge.
Oliver, R.L. (1980) ‘A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction
decisions’, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp.460–469.
Oliver, R.L. (1997) Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perspective on the Consumer, McGraw-Hill,
New York.
Olsen, L.L. and Johnson, M.D. (2003) ‘Service equity, satisfaction, and loyalty: from transaction-
specific to cumulative evaluations’, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp.184–195.
Rapp, R. (1997) Kundenzufriedenheit durch Servicequalität: Konzeption - Messung - Umsetzung,
DUV, Wiesbaden.
Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M. and Mooi, E.A. (2010) ‘Response-based segmentation using finite
mixture partial least squares. theoretical foundations and an application to American customer
satisfaction index data’, Annals of Information Systems, Vol. 8, pp.19–49.
Ringle, C.M., Wende, S. and Will, A. (2005) SmartPLS 2.0 (Beta), Hamburg, available at
http://www.smartpls.de (accessed on 29/05/2009).
Sarstedt, M. and Ringle, C.M. (2010) ‘Treating unobserved heterogeneity in PLS path modelling: a
comparison of FIMIX-PLS with different data analysis strategies’, Journal of Applied
Statistics, forthcoming.
Sarstedt, M., Schwaiger, M. and Ringle, C.M. (2009) ‘Do we fully understand the critical success
factors of customer satisfaction with industrial goods? – Extending Festge and Schwaiger’s
model to account for unobserved heterogeneity’, Journal of Business Market Management,
Vol. 2009, No. 3, pp.185–206.
Shankar, V., Smith, A.K. and Rangaswamy, A. (2003) ‘Customer satisfaction and loyalty in online
and offline environments’, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 20, No. 2,
pp.153–175.
 Management of multi-purpose stadiums 207

Sheth, J., Mittal, B. and Newman, B. (1998) Customer Behavior: Consumer Behavior and Beyond,
Harcourt Brace College Publishers, Orlando.
Siegfried, J. and Zimbalist, A. (2000) ‘The economics of sports facilities and their communities’,
Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp.95–114.
Slack, N. (1994) ‘The importance-performance matrix as a determinant of improvement priority’,
International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 44, No. 5, pp.59–75.
Spies, K., Hesse, F. and Loesch, K. (1997) ‘Store atmosphere, mood and purchasing behavior’,
International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp.1–17.
Spreng, R.A. and MacKoy, R.D. (1996) ‘An empirical examination of a model of perceived service
quality and satisfaction’, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 72, No. 2, pp.210–214.
Srivastava, R.K., Shervani, T.A. and Fahey, L. (1998) ‘Market-based assets and shareholder value:
a framework for analysis’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 62, No. 1, pp.2–18.
Wakefield, K.L. and Sloan, H.J. (1995) ‘The effects of team loyalty and selected stadium factors on
spectators attendance’, Journal of Sport Management, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp.153–172.
Wakefield, K.L., Blodgett, J.G. and Sloan, H.J. (1996) ‘Measurement and management of the
sportscape’, Journal of Sport Management, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp.15–31.
Woodruff, R.B., Clemons, D.S., Schumann, D.W., Gardial, S.F. and Burns, M.J. (1991) ‘The
standards issue in CS/D research: a historical perspective’, Journal of Consumer Satisfaction,
Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior, Vol. 4, pp.103–109.
Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L. and Parasuraman, A. (1993) ‘The nature and determinants of customer
expectations of service’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 21, No. 1,
pp.1–12.

View publication stats