How to Improve Sports Fans’ Attitudes Toward the Sponsor Through Brand Management? A PLS and QCA Approach

Abstract The aim of the article is to explain attitudes towards the sponsors of a sporting event from brand management, especially considering the perceptions of congruence with the sponsor, quality, value, and two less common variables of innovation and popularity. The analysis has been carried out using two methodological approaches: a Partial Least Squares (PLS) model and aQualitativeComparativeAnalysis(QCA).PLSresultsindicatethatcongruence,innovationandpopularitysignificantlypredict attitudes towards the sponsor, explaining up to 61% of it. On the other hand, QCA analysis shows nine interactions capable of producing the expected result, where congruence, quality innovation and popularity have shown a relevant role. This study has implications at a theoretical and practical level, contributing to understanding consumer behaviour in the context of sporting events and providing marketing managers with valuable information to help improve the performance of their sponsorships. Keywords: Sporting events, sponsorship, branding, sport management, consumer behaviour Physical Culture and Sport. Studies and Research, 2023, 100, 61–74 DOI: 10.2478/pcssr-2023-0019 How to Improve Sports Fans’ Attitudes Toward the Sponsor Through Brand Management? A PLS and QCA Approach Manuel Alonso Dos-Santos1,2A-C , Mario Alguacil3CD , Carlos Pérez-Campos4B-D and Franklin Velasco-Vizcaíno5AB *Correspondence: Mario Alguacil. University of Valencia, Gascó Oliag, 3, 46010, Valencia (Spain) email: [email protected] Authors’ contribution: A) conception and design of the study B) acquisition of data C) analysis and interpretation of data D) manuscript preparation E) obtaining funding Received: 17.03.2023 Accepted: 04.06.2023 1 University of Granada, Granada, Spain 2 Universidad Católica de la Santísima Concepción, Concepción, Chile 3 University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain 4 Catholic University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain 5 Universidad San Francisco de Quito, Quito, Ecuador Introduction In recent years, the analysis of sponsorship has attracted increasing interest from researchers (Cornwell, 2019; Djohari et al., 2019; Farrelly & Quester, 2005; Tyrie & Ferguson, 2013). Globally, sponsorship spending continues to rise, from an investment in 2014 of $55.3 billion to an investment of $77.69 billion in 2022, with expectations of reaching $116 billion by the year 2027, according to the Sports Sponsorship Market Research Report (2023). According to the same report, most of this investment corresponds to the area of sports sponsorship, since this sports context groups 70% of world investment in sponsorship. In this sense, Rifon et al. (2004) explain that sponsorship could be compared to the process by which a corporation generates a link with an external element, trying toinfluencepeoplethroughthatconnection.Thelink established between the sponsored event and the sponsoringbrandisunderstoodasabenefitforthosebeingspon - sored, who receive the associations that the sponsoring brand has already won (Cornwell & Humphreys, 2013). Inaddition,thefinancialinjectionthatisarrangeditis alsoimportant.Wecanalsounderstandthatitisbeneficial forthebrandthatsponsorsit,since,inthespecificcase of sport, it has some values that could be interesting for any brand. This fact has been demonstrated, proving that there is a transference between the brand image and the sponsored event (Alonso-Dos-Santos et al., 2019). Thus, the objective of this transfer will be to generate favourable attitudes towards the sponsor, since it has been proven 62 Physical Culture and Sport. Studies and Research, 2023, 100, 61–74 that attitudes determine behaviour (Woisetschläger et al., 2017) and these positive attitudes will make those attending a sporting event more likely to engage in the desired behaviours. In order to generate these attitudes, usersmayhavedifferentreasonsandcriteria.Therefore, the same marketing action could form positive or negative attitudes, depending on this criterion, and considering the beliefs of users will be important in generating more or less favourable attitudes (Cheong et al., 2019). In this sense, every context has its peculiarities, and the sporting context certainly contains its own nuances. For this reason, generic marketing strategies do not serve asasolutionforallfields.Itisadvisabletopromoteresearchfocusedonthesportsfieldinordertoanalysehow theseprocessesoccurinsportssponsorshipandtofill thegapinspecificinformation.Therefore,itisinteresting to analyze variables related to the process of sports sponsorship. Specifically,thepurposeofthisstudyistofindoutto what extent brand-related variables like congruence with the sponsor, innovation, popularity, quality, and perceived value can explain the attitudes generated towards the sponsor by fans. Therefore, this research deals with a topic that is not so common in the sporting context, analysing classic variables and recent ones. For this purpose, two methodological approaches have been utilised that will allowustochecktheroleofthesevariablesfromdifferent viewpoints.Thesedifferentapproacheshelptoproduce more complete information about the relationships and influencesthatareproduced.Moreover,thistypeofanalysismayprovideinsightintoinfluencesthatwouldnot beverifiablefromasinglemethodologicalperspective. Therefore, the objective is not only to analyse the problem, but to do so in a more complete and varied way, allowing us to better explain the attitudes toward the sponsor in the sporting context. Theoretical background Congruence Congruence is a concept that refers to the degree of fitthatasponsorhaswiththesponsoredeventinrelation to aspects such as coherence and common sense (BeckerOlsen & Hill, 2006). Some authors indicate that congruence is essential for an image transfer to take place (Simmons & Becker-Olsen, 2006), while others argue thatafitbetweenthesponsorandthesponsoredevent is not always necessary, since sometimes a sponsorship relationshipthatinitiallyhasalowfitincreasesovertime as users get used to that association (Woisetschläger & Michaelis,2012).Intheresearchliterature,wefindseveral studiesthatspeakaboutthebenefitsofthiscongruence, establishing that if we achieve congruence in sponsorship, not only does it facilitate the aforementioned transfer, but it also improves brand recall (Johar & Pham, 1999) and the attitudes that users will have towards the sponsoring brand (Ellen et al., 2000; Olson, 2010). Zdravkovic and Till(2012)establishthatwhenwefindahighdegreeof fit,thesponsorshipprocessmakestheconnectionsofthe associations stronger in memory, which favours the transfer of associations between both entities. To achieve this congruence, it is necessary to plan sponsorship activities inordertoimprovethedesiredeffectsfortheparticipating brands (Kim & Kim, 2018). Moreover, Olson and Thjømøe (2011)statedthatseveralfactorscouldhaveaninfluence inachievingthissenseoffit,suchasthesimilaritythat our target audience at a sporting event has with the audience of the sponsoring brand, as well as attitudes and geographical similarities. Once this has been achieved, another element to consider, which has received attentioninthescientificliterature,istheeffectivenessofthe sponsorship (Alonso-Dos-Santos et al., 2019). This will be related to an assessment made by the target audience that involves linking the sponsor and the sponsored event. This leads to the transference of the positive evaluation of users to the sponsoring brand (Crimmins & Horn, 1996).Congruencehasbeenshowntobeinfluentialin consumer attitudes (Pradhan et al., 2016), where improved congruence should lead to improvements in attitudes and consequently purchase intentions (Bajac et al., 2018). This effectofcongruenceonattitudeshasalsobeentestedin the context of sports (Zhang et al., 2020), which leads us to consider H1: H1.Congruencesignificantlyinfluencesbrandattitudes Attitudes toward the sponsor The term attitude refers to a general assessments that an individual makes of an object or person (Mitchell & Olson, 1981; Wilson et al., 2003) being relatively enduringevaluations(Pettyetal.,2003).Thisdifferentiates them from emotions, which tend to be transitory (Spears & Singh, 2004). Such an internal assessment could be made of a sponsor’s brand, understanding that attitudes developedtowardsthebrandcanaffectbehaviour(Kotler & Levy, 1969, Woisetschläger et al., 2017); people tend to behave favourably towards what they like and unfavourably towards what they do not like (Petty et al., 2003). The generation of favourable attitudes towards sponsors by the target audience is a topic extensively discussed in the scientificliterature(Alonso-Dos-Santosetal.,2018;Koo & Lee, 2018) as it is considered one of the priority objectives that should be pursued by sponsoring companies. In order to achieve favourable attitudes towards the sponsor, brand positioning is fundamental, since it allowsuserstoperceivedifferencesbetweenbrandswithin a product category (Castañeda-García et al., 2019). To Physical Culture and Sport. Studies and Research, 2023, 100, 61–74 63 achieve this purpose, brands use promotion and advertising, which are actions where we could include sponsorship and which aim to unify the associations of the product with a symbolic representation of it (Torres et al., 2008). In the same way, the strategic work of variables such as congruence, innovation, popularity, quality and value would help to achieve a positioning depending on our interests as a brand. According to Keller and Lehmann (2006), how brands work on this positioning will have an impact on users’ associations with it, and this willinfluencetheirevaluationofthebrand.However,on many occasions, brands focus only on the visual aspects, without taking advantage of the role that employees may play in reinforcing the meaning of the brand and trying toinfluenceconsumerattitudes(Siriannietal.,2013). Therefore, in order to achieve a suitable positioning that promotes favourable attitudes towards the brand, we must pay attention to both the intangible aspects and the brand tangibility that workers or volunteers and the treatment of them imply. Innovation and popularity Brand innovation is a key element in making consum - ers of a service more loyal (Pappu & Quester, 2016), especially today, when there is so much competition between brands and so much similarity in certain products. We understand innovation in relation to the level of this quality that consumers perceive in a brand (Barone & Jewell, 2013). Such innovation is an aspect that, on the one hand, allows improving commitment to the brand (Eisingerich & Rubera, 2010) and, on the other hand, creates a better perception of quality for consumers (Boisvert & Ashill, 2011).Inthissense,oncethesebenefitsofintroducing innovation to our brand are known, we focus on how it canbegenerated.Inthefieldofmarketing,innovation has often been introduced in brand extensions, trying to include innovative aspects within its product category, so that the changes do not endanger the main brand (Loken et al., 2010). Among other strategies, companies have encouraged co-creation as a way of adding value and contributing to the generation of positive perceptions of brand innovation (Stam, 2009). In this regard, in recent years the concept of co-innovation (Lee et al., 2012) has alsoemerged,andisdefinedasaprocessthatarisesfrom dynamic interactions between resources, actions and participants (Russo-Spena & Mele, 2012). Therefore, it is a process that considers the collaboration of consumers and brands, and allows the generation of new value with respect to services, products or processes. Co-innovation isanelementthatisoftenusedwiththeaimofeffectively accelerating innovation by creating a collaborative network between co-creators (Vargo & Lusch, 2004). This innovation creation in brands is mainly enhanced thanks to the role of social networks (Füller et al., 2013), which allow quick and easy interaction when carrying out the process. If we manage these strategies to improve the perceived innovation of our brand, we will also improve the perceived quality of what we do (Safon, 2009), as well as brand loyalty through improved satisfaction (Kunz et al., 2011). The same can be said about the relationship between innovation and attitudes, because if we improve innovation in our product, we will improve consumers’ attitudes (Olsen et al., 2014), since brand innovation influencestheirevaluationofthebrand(Hetetetal.,2019). This allow us to propose H2: H2.Innovationsignificantlyinfluencesbrandattitudes Popularity is a concept that is understood as an intangible element that is possessed by a brand, and which influencesitsperformance(Lopez&Leenders,2019). In this sense, Kim and Chung (1997) established that popularity involves the acceptance of a brand over time, improving the perception of its performance, both in the short and long term, through allowing a more favourable perception of brand image, which has proven to be an antecedent in considering a recommendation or word-ofmouth promotion (Alguacil et al., 2018). Besides favouring this more positive brand perception, popularity is also an element that motivates social consumption, thus making consumer attitudes towards the brand more positive (Gil et al., 2017). This is why H3 is proposed: H3.Popularitysignificantlyinfluencesattitudestowards the brand. Perceived quality Perceived quality is one of the aspects that has attracted most interest in the analysis of service performance (García-Fernández et al., 2018). This concept refers to consumers’ judgment of the excellence or superiority of one product over another (Zeithaml, 1988), and is therefore logically a key aspect of brand choice. Other classic definitionsemphasizethattheconceptofperceivedquality is based on a comparison between the expectations wehaveandwhatwefinallyreceive(Grönroos,1984), so the aim must clearly be to work towards meeting the expectations that users have and not to create false expectations that we cannot subsequently meet. Obviously, this concept is particularly problematic, since the criteria ofdefiningwhetheraproductisofqualityornotare differentforeachcustomer,sowemustalsoknowtheir opinions about it. According to Reeves and Bednar (1994), quality is the excellence of a product, as a concept linked to the valueperceivedbytheuser,asafitbetweenthestandardsestablishedbythebrandandtheobjectivesitfinally achieves. Service quality, therefore, will be the judgment of superiority related to one service over others (Parasuraman et al., 1988), as well as the satisfaction of expectations that customers had about the service (Mundina 64 Physical Culture and Sport. Studies and Research, 2023, 100, 61–74 & Calabuig, 1999). Therefore, if the quality perceived by usersismorepositive,thiswillinfluencetheirattitudes towards it (Boisvert & Ashill, 2011; Carlson & O’Cass, 2010). This has also been observed in the context of sports (Alonso Dos-Santos et al., 2017), which leads us to consider H4. H4.Perceivedqualityissignificantlyrelatedtoattitudes towards the brand. Perceived value The study of perceived value has been widely dis - cussed in sports services (García-Fernández et al., 2018), as well as in other market contexts (Jones et al., 2019; Wu & Li, 2017). This topic has become more important, especiallywithinthefieldofmarketingstudiesonother aspects such as price or strategy (Gil et al., 2006) as an element for companies to maintain their importance (Sweeney & Soutar, 2001). In addition, perceived value isalsoinfluentialbecauseoftherelationshipsithaswith other important variables, such as perceived quality or satisfaction (Cronin et al., 2000). At the conceptual level, perceived value has been definedusingdifferentapproaches.Wefind,forinstance, those that focus attention on the relationship between value and price (Gil et al., 2006), or those that focus on exchange, understanding perceived value as a global assessment by consumers between what they receive and what they give (Bigné et al., 2000). On the other hand, wealsofindthosewhodefinevalueastherelationship that exists between the supply and the price the consumer perceives with respect to the prices of the competition (Kothandaraman & Wilson, 2001), or those who speak about value in terms of the exchange produced between thequalityorbenefitsperceivedandthesacrificecarried out (Wu & Hsing, 2006), who reinforces the idea of exchange of Bigné et al. (2000) in terms of value as the assessment between what consumers perceive that they contribute and what they receive. In the sports context, as in other areas, value will be an objective to be pursued, and users will not only seek value at a utilitarian or hedonic level, but also at a social level, which allows value to be related to their behavioural intentions (Gan & Wang, 2017). Regarding sponsorship, if we can make it successful, we can generate positive perceptions for the sponsoring company (Tyrie & Ferguson, 2013). To achieve this success, it is important that both the sponsoring and sponsored brands share similar objectives, so that their commitment can be greater (Johanson & Roxenhall, 2009). This commitment, generated from a common vision, will make the relationship between sponsor andsponsoredmoreprofitable(Sharmaetal.,2015)as both parties will work together and be able to generate more value. Regarding the hypotheses, over time the literature has supported the positive connection between consumers’ impressions of advertising and the formation of their attitudes (Olson & Thjømøe, 2003; Zarantonello &Schmitt,2013).Withintheseperceptions,wefindthe perceived value; therefore, if viewers perceive a cost in a favourable way, their attitudes towards the brand will also be favourable (Kumal & Kaushal, 2017). This leads us to propose H5: H5.Perceivedvaluesignificantlyinfluencesbrand attitudes. Method Sample Data collection was carried out through convenience sampling after the 2018 FIFA World Cup and lasted two days. 422 fans from 21 countries answered a survey hosted on LimeSurvey via a link on Amazon Turk, with a response incentive of 1.5 euros. Responses were processed andfilteredbasedonserverIPtoavoidduplication.Also, the total time spent to complete the survey was taken into consideration. Finally, outliers were eliminated using the Mahalanobisindicator(1936).Thefinalsampleconsisted of 409 fans with a provenance as follows: Nigeria (7%), Poland (8%), Costa Rica (12%), England (34.7%) and other countries, such as Australia, Argentina, Mexico, Spain, Italy and Ecuador, with a representation of less than 5%. This wide representation of countries helps to reduce the bias that local aspects of each country might cause (Alonso-Dos Santos, Calabuig, Prado-Gascó, and Cuevas-Lizama2020).Thefinalsamplehadameanageof 33 years, with the most frequent range being 18–48 years, and a standard deviation of 10.8. Male participation was 73% and female 27%. Instrument The Brand Leadership Scale (BLS) proposed by Chang and Ko (2014) was used to collect the information. This scale aims to measure brand leadership through the variables of perceived quality, value, innovation, and popularity of the sponsor’s products. The four variables mentioned above have been extracted from the data. Each of the scales of these variables is made up of three items, making a total of 12 statements referring to BLS. On the other hand, the variable of congruence is based on Roy (2011) and Speed and Thompson (2000), and has previously been used in the academic literature (Alonso-Dos Santos et al., 2020; Silva & Veríssimo, 2020). Finally, the attitude towards the sponsor scale was adapted from Dees, Bennett and Villegas (2008) and subsequently assessed by Dess, Bennett, and Ferreira (2010). Following, in Table 1, the items that make up the instrument and the source from which they have been obtained are shown in detail: Physical Culture and Sport. Studies and Research, 2023, 100, 61–74 65 Statistical analysis This research proposes a statistical analysis in which two methodologies are utilised. First, an analysis is carried out by creating a structural model using the SmartPLS software. This analysis allows the reliability and validity of the scales to be assessed, as well as verifying the significanceornotoftherelationshipsproposedinthis model. These relationships aim to explain the attitudes towards the sponsor. Subsequently, a comparative qualitative analysis was carried out using fuzzy sets, using the fsQCA software (fuzzy-set-QCA), which allows us to operate with both the variables (presence) and the negation (absence) of them. In other words, it allows us to include both the high values and the low values of a single variable in the analysis in order to try to achieve high values or low values of a result variable. Continuing with this comparativeanalysis,wefindthepossibilityofknowing whatvariablesarenecessaryandsufficientwithinaproposed analysis. In this sense, on the one hand, the analysis of necessity allows us to know if there is any necessary variable to explain the attitudes towards the sponsor; in other words, whether any of the variables that are part of the analysis should always be present so that high levels or low levels of the expected result are produced, and in this case of the attitudes towards the sponsor. On the otherhand,thesufficiencyanalysisallowsustoanalyze thecombinationsofsufficientconditionsthatcanachieve theexpectedresultbydifferentways,considering,aswe commented before, both the presence and the absence of the variables that are part of the analysis. In other words, the analysis considers high values and low values of each ofthevariablesinordertotrytofindcombinationsthat allow the achievement of high or low levels of attitudes towards the sponsor. Results First, regarding the assessment of the measurement model, we can see that the factorial loads were all significant(p<.001)withloadshigherthan.708(Hairetal., 2019). This indicates that the items that are part of each factorhaveasignificantweightwithinit,sothereare no items that are part of the measurement scale without being relevant. As for the rest of the criteria for convergent validity, Cronbach’s alpha values are higher than .70 (Churchill & Iacobucci, 2004; Hair et al., 2006), RHO Table 1. Measurement scales Factor Item Quality Are higher in quality standards Are superior in quality standards Offershigherqualitygolfcoursefeatures Value Are reasonably priced Have better course features for the price Offersmorebenefitsfortheprice Innovation Are more dynamic in improvements Are more creative in products and services Are more of a trendsetter Popularity Are more preferred Are more recognized Are better known Congruence There is a logical connection between the event and this sponsor The image of the event and the image of the sponsor are similar The company and the event stand for similar things Thesponsorandtheeventfittogetherwell It makes sense to me that this company sponsors this event Attitudes Sponsor I think favourably of companies that sponsor this 2018 FIFA World Cup Russia Companies that sponsor 2018 FIFA World Cup Russia are successful Companies sponsoring 2018 FIFA World Cup Russia provide quality products/services Companies that sponsor 2018 FIFA World Cup Russia are professional 66 Physical Culture and Sport. Studies and Research, 2023, 100, 61–74 values are above .70 (Wertz et al., 1974), composite reliability is above .70 (Gefen et al., 2000), and AVE values are above .50 (Fornell & Larcker 1981; Henseler et al., 2014).Thefulfilmentofthesedifferentcriteriaindicates that the scales used are reliable; therefore, the subsequent measurements made are appropriate according to the data and the sample of this study. Second, information related to the discriminant va - lidity analysis can be found. The purpose of this analysis istoconfirmthatthedifferentfactorsthatarepartof the analysis do not have very high correlations between them, so they are able to discriminate in the measurement. Otherwise,itwouldnotbepossibletoconfirmthatthefactorsarenotexcessivelysimilartobemeasuringdifferent issues. Thus, if this analysis meets the criteria discussed below, it is considered adequate. This discriminant validity was checked using the Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio of Correlations (HTMT), the Fornell-Larcker criterion and the cross-loading criterion. Table 3 shows that the HTMT coefficientsaresignificantlylowerthan0.90andthatthe correlations between the constructions are lower than the square root of the mean variance extracted (Henseler et al., 2016). In Table 4, we can see the cross-loads of each factor and it is possible to check how the mean variance that each construct shares with its indicators is greater than the variance values that one construct shares with the rest of the constructs that compose the model. Therefore, the existence of discriminant validity in the analysis performedisconfirmed. Table 2. Evaluation of the measurement model: CR - Composite reliability. AVE – Average Variance Extracted Construct Cronbach’s alpha rho_A CR AVE Factorial loads AttSponsor .762 .765 .848 .583 .733 - .805*** Congruence .800 .801 .862 .555 .723 - .769*** Innovation .773 .773 .868 .688 .817 - .842*** Popularity .759 .761 .862 .675 .805 - .847*** Quality .748 .761 .855 .663 .792 - .842*** Value .758 .759 .861 .673 .799 - .834*** Note. ***p<0.001 Table 3. Discriminant validity AttSponsor Congruence Innovation Popularity Quality Value AttSponsor .763 .894 .848 .860 .757 .754 Congruence .704 .745 .813 .698 .781 .816 Innovation .654 .639 .829 .854 .873 .819 Popularity .653 .545 .730 .822 .844 .778 Quality .582 .604 .743 .644 .814 .828 Value .578 .636 .702 .626 .759 .821 Note: Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT) above the diagonal; square root of the AVE in the diagonal (bold) and correlations between the dimensions under the diagonal (Fornell-Larcker criterion). Table 4. Discriminant validity and cross-loads AttSponsor Congruence Innovation Popularity Quality Value Innovation1 .536 .539 .817 .577 .619 .587 Innovation2 .547 .535 .842 .655 .625 .612 Innovation3 .545 .515 .828 .584 .605 .548 Popularity1 .517 .491 .629 .805 .596 .600 Popularity2 .533 .397 .595 .813 .493 .437 Physical Culture and Sport. Studies and Research, 2023, 100, 61–74 67 Regarding the assessment of the structural model, which shows us if the proposed relationships are significantandtheexplanatorycapacityofthemodel on the variable of interest, in Table 5, we can see how three of the proposed variables have shown their significantinfluenceonattitudestowardsthesponsor. In decreasing order of weight in the relationship, these variables are: congruence with a weight of .44 (p<.001);popularitywithaweightof.30(p<.001);and innovationwithaweightof.14(p<.05).Thesevariables are capable of explaining up to 61% of the variance of attitudes (R2adj= .608). On the other hand, the Stone-Geisser test indicates that the model has predictive relevance (Q2= .324) since it obtains values greater than 0 (Chin, 1998). Once we obtain the results of the structural model obtained by means of Smart PLS, we move on to show the results of the qualitative comparative analysis (QCA). First, we show the descriptive results and the calibration values (see Table 6) that were calculated using the fsQCA software, which allows the qualitative comparative analysis of fuzzy sets. Following the indications of the calibration method proposed by the author of the methodology (Ragin, 2008), and with the intention of being able to maximize the variance, the calibration values have been obtained by multiplying the items of each of the scales that form the measurement instrument. This method has been followed by most of the literature (Barton & Beynon, 2015; Rey-Martí et al., 2016; Schneider & Wagemann, 2012; Woodside, 2013). AttSponsor Congruence Innovation Popularity Quality Value Popularity3 .559 .457 .579 .847 .502 .510 Quality1 .448 .457 .552 .481 .808 .527 Quality2 .545 .524 .658 .615 .842 .689 Quality3 .413 .490 .598 .454 .792 .628 Value1 .476 .510 .572 .520 .579 .834 Value2 .452 .536 .597 .512 .645 .800 Value3 .493 .520 .562 .510 .645 .827 AttSponsor1 .755 .566 .551 .466 .500 .516 AttSponsor2 .733 .476 .432 .507 .365 .373 AttSponsor3 .805 .609 .549 .522 .487 .497 AttSponsor4 .759 .488 .455 .503 .415 .364 Congruence1 .487 .740 .495 .412 .501 .408 Congruence2 .514 .732 .491 .403 .476 .529 Congruence3 .498 .760 .463 .355 .475 .515 Congruence4 .576 .769 .504 .470 .455 .522 Congruence5 .540 .723 .426 .384 .350 .391 Table 5. Assessment of the structural model Relationship-construct Path R2f2Q2SRMR Congruence -> AttSponsor .442*** .257 Innovation -> AttSponsor .142** .016 Popularity -> AttSponsor .299*** .099 Quality ->AttSponsor .024 .000 Value -> AttSponsor -.008 .000 AttSponsor .608 .324 Estimated Model .070 Note: ***p<0.001.**p<0.05. 68 Physical Culture and Sport. Studies and Research, 2023, 100, 61–74 Subsequently, analysis has been carried out to check whether any of the variables included in the analysis are necessary. When a variable is considered necessary, it means that it must always be present for the expected result to occur. As we can see in Table 7, none of the variables can be considered necessary for the achievement of high or low levels of attitudes towards the sponsor, given that the consistency values do not exceed in any case the criterion established in .90 (Ragin, 2008). Therefore, in this study, combinations or configurationsofvariablesaregoingtobefoundthatallowtheexpectedresultwithoutaspecificvariableto always appear. Finally,asufficiencyanalysishasbeencarriedout (Table 7) in order to identify the combinations of variables that allow high levels of attitude towards the sponsor to bereached.Thevalueofthecut-offfrequencywas.80, exceeding the criterion established at .74 (Eng & Woodside, 2012), as well as the consistency values exceeding .74 (Ragin, 2008). The fsQCA yielded nine combinations orconfigurationsofsufficientconditionsthatexplainattitude towards the sponsor. The analysis of fsQCA shows thatthemostrelevantcausalconfigurationsare(based on raw coverage): congruence × quality ~ popularity ~ innovation ~ value, congruence × innovation ~ quality, and quality × popularity ~ congruence. Table 6. Descriptive analysis and calibration values AttSponsor Congruence Innovation Popularity Quality Value N Valid 411 411 411 411 411 411 N missing 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mean 262.87 907.35 60.99 67.64 57.84 56.18 SD 159.94 724.71 32.23 31.87 31.44 32.36 Min 110000 Max 625 3125 125 125 125 125 Calibration values Percentile 10 72 108 16 24 16 12 Median 240 720 720 64 60 48 Percentile 90 500 2000 100 100 100 100 Table 7. Necessary conditions from fsQCA for the occurrence (and absence) of attitude towards the sponsor AttSponsor ~ AttSponsor Consistency Coverage Consistency Coverage Congruence .814 .822 .429 .452 ~ Congruence .457 .435 .831 .823 Quality .765 .766 .452 .471 ~ Quality .472 .453 .775 .775 Popularity .824 .739 .496 .463 ~ Popularity .402 .433 .721 .809 Innovation .819 .778 .467 .462 ~ Innovation .434 .439 .776 .817 Value .799 .732 .515 .491 ~ Value .443 .467 .719 .789 Physical Culture and Sport. Studies and Research, 2023, 100, 61–74 69 Discussion The analysis of the same phenomenon from the point of view of structural models combined with comparative qualitative analysis is not a frequent methodological approachinscientificliterature.Inspiteofthis,wefind someexamplesinthefieldofsportsevents(Prado-Gascó & Calabuig, 2016) and also in relation to the functioning of sports organizations (Escamilla-Fajardo et al., 2019; García-Pascual et al., 2020, Hebles et al., 2020). The interest in improving attitudes towards the sponsor and, in general, the topic of attitudes towards a brand has attracted the attention of marketing researchers over time (Faircloth et al., 2001; Gardner, 1985; Ko et al., 2017; Wolfsteiner et al., 2019). The results of this research show that congruence with the sponsor is relevant for the creation of attitudes. Thisstatementisinlinewithfindingsinthesportscontext in other studies, such as Oshimi and Harada (2019) and Zhang et al. (2020). Continuing with the relationship of attitudeswithothervariables,wefindcontributionsthat study their relationship with variables like innovation, such as the study by Brexendorf et al. (2015), in which the relationship of innovation to improving perceptions and attitudes is sustained, with the idea that innovation can change brand awareness in the short term and have aneffectonthesuccessoffutureinnovationsinthelong term. Similarly, the relationship between popularity and attitudeshasbeenconfirmedintheliterature(Giletal., 2017). These two relationships have also been supported in the present research, where innovation and popularity notonlydirectlyinfluenceattitudesbutarealsopart of the combinations with other variables to reach the expected result. By contrast, quality and value variables havenotbeenshowntodirectlyinfluenceattitudesinthe present study. This relationship has been supported by theliteratureonotheroccasions,showingasignificant relationship between quality and attitudes (Jung & Seock, 2016) and with attitudes playing a mediating role in the relationship between value and purchase intentions (Lee et al., 2016). Thus, for future studies, it would be necessary to examine why this can happen and if there can be mediations or moderations of other variables that have not been considered. This study provides useful information to managers in general and to event organisers and marketing managers in particular, since it provides them with knowledge about therelationshipsbetweenthedifferentvariablesandthe strengthofinfluenceofsomeontheothers.Withthat information,theyknowwhichaspectshaveasignificant influenceonuserstogenerateabetterattitudetowards thesponsorand,therefore,theycantransferthisscientific knowledgetotheirbusinessreality,toeffectivelymodify theirstrategiesandtoknowwheretofocustheirefforts tobecomemoreefficient. Conclusions Theresultsallowustoconclude,firstlyinrelationto the partial least squares analysis, that for the prediction of attitudes towards the sponsor, congruence with the brand, popularityandinnovationhaveasignificantinfluence, Table 8. FsQCA results Configuration Solution Attitude towards the sponsor 123456789 Congruence • • ⊗ ⊗ • • Quality • ⊗ • • ⊗ ⊗ Popularity ⊗ • • • • Innovation ⊗ • • • • Value ⊗ • • • Raw coverage .744 .733 .725 .721 .719 .713 .709 .707 .689 Unique coverage .017 .006 .006 .007 .013 .006 .003 .005 .005 Consistency .838 .839 .811 .889 .879 .867 .831 .828 .881 Overall Solution consistency .753 Overall Solution coverage .881 Consistencycut-off .803 Note: • = presence of condition, ⊗ = absence of condition