Amaç: Sayısı her geçen gün giderek artan maraton etkinlikleri, son yılların popüler rekreasyonel spor alternatifleri arasında yer almaktadır. Bu tarz etkinlikler, her zaman aynı destinasyonda düzenlendiğinde ev sahibi topluma ekonomik, kültürel ve toplumsal anlamda önemli katkılar sağlamakta, ayrıca sadık etkinlik katılımcıları ile sürdürülebilir hâle gelmektedir. Sadık katılımcıların oluşmasında farklı yapıların etkisi bilinse de kaynak değişimi gibi farklı kuramların etkisi pek fazla incelenmemiştir. Dolayısıyla bu araştırmada, kaynak değişim kuramına göre organizasyonun algılanan kaynak yatırımı, katılımcı kaynak yatırımı ve sadakat arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Araştırmaya, uygun örnekleme yöntemi ile seçilen 12. Uluslararası Runatolia Antalya Maratonuna katılan 228 kişi dahil edilmiştir. Veriler katılımcı bakış açısından kaynak yatırımını değerlendiren, Organizasyonun Algılanan Kaynak Yatırımı Ölçeği (OAKYÖ) ve Katılımcı Kaynak Yatırımı Ölçeği (KKYÖ) ile sadakat ve demografik sorulardan oluşan anket aracılığı ile toplanmıştır. Veriler yapısal eşitlik modelinin temel metodolojik ilkeleri doğrultusunda analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular: Analiz sonucunda, kaynak değişim modeli Uluslararası Antalya Maratonu katılımcılarında geçerli ve güvenilir sonuçlar ortaya koymuştur. Bununla birlikte organizasyonun algılanan kaynak yatırımı, katılımcı kaynak yatırımı üzerinde anlamlı bir etki göstermiştir. Katılımcı kaynak yatırımı ise sadakat üzerinde anlamlı ve doğrudan bir etki ortaya koymuştur. Sonuç: Maraton etkinliklerinin devamlılığında katılımcılar önemli rol oynamaktadır. Katılımcılar ile kurulan bağ, etkinliğin ve etkinlik ile ilişkili etkilerin sürdürülebilir olmasına katkı sağlamaktadır. Bu bağın kurulması veya güçlendirilmesine organizatör ve katılımcı arasında değiştirilen kaynaklar etki etmektedir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Rekreasyon; etkinlik, kaynak yatırımı, sadakat
Objective: The number of marathon events are increasing day by day. These events are among the popular recreational sports alternatives of recent years. When such events are always organized in the same destination, they make significant contributions to the host society in economic, cultural and social terms. These contributions become sustainable with loyal event participants. Although the effect of different structures on the formation of loyal participants is known, the effect of different theories such as resource exchange has not been studied much. Therefore, in this study, it is aimed to investigate the relationship between organizers' received resource investments and participants' resource investments, and loyalty, according to the resource exchange theory. Material and Methods: A total of 228 persons participated in the 12th International Runatolia Antalya Marathon selected by convenience sampling method were included to the study. The data were collected by Organizers' Perceived Resource Investments (OPRI), Participants Resource Investments (PRRI) and consumer loyalty scales. The data were analyzed in line with the main methodological principles of the structural equation model. Results: As a result of the analysis, the source exchange model has shown valid and reliable results in the International Antalya Marathon participants. However, the perceived resource investment of the organization showed a significant effect on the participant resource investment. On the other hand, participant resource investment has a significant and direct bit effect on loyalty. Conclusion: Participants have an important role in the continuousness of marathon events. The bond established with the participants contributes to the sustainability of the event and its associated impacts. The exchange of resources between the organizer and the participant is influenced by the establishment or strengthening of this bond.
Keywords: Recreation; event, resource investment, loyalty
- Alexandris K, Theodorakis ND, Kaplanidou K, Papadimitriou D. Event quality and loyalty among runners with different running involvement levels: the case of "The Alexander the Great" International Marathon. International Journal of Event and Festival Management. 2017;8(3):292-307. [Crossref]
- Wei X, Zhang J. [Analysis of urban marathon development in China]. Sports Culture Guide. 2014; 1: 16-19. [Crossref]
- Okayasu I, Nogawa H, Casper JM, Morais DB. Recreational sports event participants' attitudes and satisfaction: cross-cultural comparisons between runners in Japan and the USA. Managing Sport and Leisure. 2016;21(3):164-80. [Crossref]
- Kapan K, Timor AN. [City of Antalya for tourism development modelling]. urkish Geographical Review. 2018;71:53-61.
- Dikolli SS, Kinney WR, Sedatole KL. Measuring customer relationship value: the role of switching cost. Contemporary Accounting Research. 2007;24(1):93-132. [Crossref]
- Brinberg D, Wood R. A resource exchange theory analysis of consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Research. 1983;10(3):330-8. [Crossref]
- Morais DB, Backman SJ, Dorsch MJ. oward the operationalization of resource investments made between customers and providers of a tourism service. Journal of Travel Research. 2003;41(4):362-74. [Crossref]
- Okayasu I, Nogawa H, Morais DB. Resource investments and loyalty to recreational sport tourism event. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing. 2010;27(6):565-78. [Crossref]
- Foa EB, Foa UG. Resource theory of social exchange. In: Törnblom K, Kazemi A, eds. Handbook of Social Resource Theory: heoretical Extensions, Empirical Insights, and Social Applications. 1st ed. New York: Springer; 2012. p.15-32. [Crossref]
- Foa UG, Foa EB. Societal Structures of the Mind. 1st ed. Springfield, III: Thomas; 1974. p.452.
- Morais DB, Dorsch MJ, Backman SJ. Can tourism providers buy their customers' loyalty? Examining the influence of customer-provider investments on loyalty. Journal of Travel Research. 2004;42(3):235-43. [Crossref]
- Choo H, Petrick JF. Resource exchanges for agritourism service encounters. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management. 2013;22(7):770-80. [Crossref]
- Berg JH, McQuinn RD. Attraction and exchange in continuing and noncontinuing dating relationships. J Pers Soc Psychol.1986;50(5):942-52. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Zeithaml VA, Berry LL, Parasuraman A. The behavioral consequences of service quality. Journal of Marketing, 1996;60(2):31-46. [Crossref]
- Çoban S. Using database marketing for getting consumer loyalty. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi. 2005;19:295-307.
- Foa EB, Foa UG. Resource theory of social exchange. In: Törnblom K, Kazemi A, eds. Handbook of Social Resource Theory heoretical Extensions, Empirical Insights, and Social Applications. 1st ed. London: Springer; 2012. p.15-32. [Crossref]
- Törnblom KY, Fredholm EM. Attribution of friendship: the influence of the nature and comparability of resources given and received. Social Psychology Quarterly. 1984;47(1):50-61. [Crossref]
- Caruana A. Service loyalty: the effects of service quality and the mediating role of customer satisfaction]. European Journal of Marketing. 2002;36(7-8):811-28. [Crossref]
- Okayasu I, Nogawa H, Morais BD. Operationalization of the resource investments construct of recreational sport event. Event Management. 2009;12(3-4):209-23. [Crossref]
- Pritchard MP, Havitz ME, Howard DR. Analyzing the commitment-loyalty link in service contexts. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 1999;27(3):333-48. [Crossref]
- Çevik H, Şimşek KY. [Applicability of resource theory on leisure sport events: validity and reliability study]. Journal of Human Sciences. 2018;15(2):970-83. [Crossref]
- Anderson JC, Gerbing DW. Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin. 1988;103(3)411-23. [Crossref]
- Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate Data Analysis: Pearson New International Edition. 7th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson; 2013. p.618-30.
- Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. A Practical Approach to Using Multivariate Analyses. 6th ed. Harlow: Pearson; 2013. p.1056.
- Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal. 1999;6(1):1-55. [Crossref]
- Kline RB. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. 3rd ed. New York: Guilford Press; 2011. p.427.
- Baumgartner H, Homburg C. Applications of structural equation modeling in marketing and consumer research: a review. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 1996;13(2):139-61. [Crossref]
- Marsh HW, Hau KT, Artelt C, Baumert J, Peschar JL. OECD's brief self-report measure of educational psychology's most useful affective constructs: cross-cultural, psychometric comparisons across 25 countries]. International Journal of Testing. 2006;6(4):311-60. [Crossref]
- Browne MW, Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: Bollen KA, Long JS, eds. Testing Structural Equation Models. 1st ed. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage; 1993 p.136-62.
- Taber KS. The use of Cronbach's alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Res Sci Educ. 2018;48(6):1273-96. [Crossref]
- Srivastava M, Kaul D. Exploring he link between customer experience-loyalty-consumer spend. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services. 2016;31:277-86. [Crossref]
- Kuusik A. Affecting Customer Loyalty: Do Different Factors Have Various İnfluences in Different Loyalty Levels? Tartu: Faculty of Economic and Business Administration Working Paper Series No:58. Tartu: Tartu University Press: 2007. p.28. [Crossref]
- Grønholdt L, Martensen A, Kristensen K. The relationship between customer satisfaction and loyalty: cross-industry differences. Total Quality Management. 2000;11(4-6):509-14. [Crossref]
- Gratton C, Shibli S, Coleman R. he economic impact of major sports events: a review of ten events in the UK. Sociological Review. 2006;54(2):41-58. [Crossref]
- Agrusa J, Tanner J, Lema D. Japanese runners in the Honolulu marathon and their economic benefits to Hawaii. Tourism Review International. 2006;9(3):261-70. [Crossref]
- Higham J. Commentary-sport as an avenue of tourism development: an analysis of the positive and negative impacts of sport ourism. Current Issues in Tourism. 1999;2(1):82-90. [Crossref]
- Gaines SO, Henderson MC. On the limits of generalizability: applying resource exchange theory to gay relationship processes. Journal of Homosexuality. 2004;48(1):79-102. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Dorsch MJ, Brooks CL. Initiating customer loyalty to a retailer: a resource theory perspective. In: Törnblom K, Kazemi A, eds. Handbook of Social Resource Theory: Theoretical Extensions, Empirical Insights, and Social Applications. 1st ed. New York: Springer; 2012. p.311-32. [Crossref]
- Doherty AJ, Chelladurai P. Managing cultural diversity in sport organizations: A theoretical perspective. Journal of Sport Management. 1999;13(4):280-97. [Crossref]
.: Process List