Compare methods

	Sport Sponsorship Effectiveness Analysis	Sport Event Economic Impact Analysis
Field	Sport Leisure Studies	Sport Leisure Studies
Family	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Year of origin	2000	1995
Originator	Richard Speed & Peter Thompson; T. Bettina Cornwell & Isabelle Maignan	John L. Crompton
Type	Applied measurement pipeline for sponsorship outcomes	Input-output multiplier pipeline for event-attributable spending
Seminal source	Speed, R., & Thompson, P. (2000). Determinants of Sports Sponsorship Response. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(2), 226-238.	Crompton, J. L. (1995). Economic impact analysis of sports facilities and events: Eleven sources of misapplication. Journal of Sport Management, 9(1), 14-35.
Aliases	Sponsorship Response Analysis, Sponsor-Event Congruence Analysis, Sponsorship Recall and Image Transfer Measurement, Sports Sponsorship Evaluation	Event Economic Impact Study, Visitor Spending Multiplier Analysis, Sport Tourism Impact Assessment, Input-Output Event Analysis
Related	4	3
Summary	Sport sponsorship effectiveness analysis measures whether and how a sponsor's investment in a team, event, or athlete pays off in consumer awareness, attitudes, and behavior. Cornwell and Maignan's 1998 international review organized the field around the measurement of sponsorship effects, distinguishing awareness outcomes such as sponsor recall and recognition from attitudinal outcomes such as image transfer and purchase intention. Speed and Thompson's 2000 study identified the determinants of sponsorship response within a classical-conditioning framework, showing that consumers' attitude toward the event, their perception of how well the sponsor fits the event, the sponsor's perceived sincerity and ubiquity, and their own involvement jointly shape favorable responses. The analysis combines outcome measures (recall, image transfer, favorability) with the key explanatory construct of sponsor-event fit or congruence, allowing sponsors to evaluate and predict the return on a sponsorship rather than assume that exposure alone produces value.	Sport event economic impact analysis estimates the economic activity a region gains from hosting an event by tracing the new spending that visitors inject and propagating it through the local economy with input-output multipliers. John Crompton's foundational 1995 paper in the Journal of Sport Management is as much a warning as a method: it catalogued eleven recurring sources of misapplication — counting local residents' spending, using sales rather than income multipliers, ignoring time-switchers and casuals, omitting costs and opportunity costs — that systematically inflate headline numbers. His 2006 follow-up was blunter still, framing many impact studies as instruments for political shenanigans designed to justify subsidies rather than to find economic truth. Done correctly, the method isolates genuinely new, event-attributable spending by non-locals, applies an appropriate income multiplier, and nets out the public costs and displacement that boosters routinely ignore.