1. 2014
David Zane Zwemke
Vega Student
1400313
Athlete Endorsement
the good, the bad & the ugly
Case study: Nike using Tiger woods and Lance Armstrong as athlete endorsers
2. 1
Table of Contents
1. CHAPTER 1- INTRODUCTION
- Field of specialization
- Rationale
- Delimitation/ demarcation of the field of study
2. CHAPTER 2 – LITERATURE REVIEW
3. CHAPTER 3 – METHODOLOGY
4. CHAPTER 4 – RESEARCH FINDINGS
- 4.1 Introduction
- 4.2 Survey Findings
- 4.2.1 Demographics
- 4.2.2 The perceptions of Survey Participants
- 4.3 Interviews
5. CHAPTER 5 – RECOMMENDATIONS & CONCLUSION
- 5.1 Introductions
- 5.2 Insights
- 5.3 Activation
- 5.3.1 Activation Concept
- 5.3.2 Activation Execution
- 5.4 Conclusion
6. BIBLIOGRAPHY
7. Appendices
3. 2
CHAPTER 1- INTRODUCTION
1.1 FIELD OF SPECIALISATION:
Athlete endorsement the good, the bad and the ugly.
Case Study: Nike, using Tiger Woods and Lance Armstrong as Nike endorsers
1.2 RATIONALE:
The perceptions that brands create within the minds of consumers directly
impacts the success or failure of a brand. In today’s competitive market,
landscape brands need to differentiate themselves from the rest by showcasing
a unique selling point and ‘hook’ that will essentially capture the consumer
audience. Some brands chose to publicize their brand by attaching the value
to a particular individual that best encompasses what the brand stands for. This
is known as endorsement (Aaker & Joachimsthaler, 2009). The problem with
endorsing individuals and making them brand ambassadors is that the brand
has no control over the individual’s actions. This may affect the brands image
and thereby hinder revenue. This impact may be positive or drastically negative
for the brand and these influences. The impacts could be measured by sales or
profit, but what about the everlasting impression a negative impact has on the
brand image.
The focus of this research paper will be on Tiger Woods and Lance Armstrong as
examples of brand personalities endorsed by Nike. We will be looking at the
relationship between Tiger Woods, Lance Armstrong and Nike. The influence
these athletes have on consumers indicates that athlete endorsements are
financially profitable and certainly worth the risk (Miletsky, 2009). The question
has been asked why Nike chose to stick with Woods and not Armstrong after
they participated in their individual undesirable behavior. The ‘tipping point’ for
a brand comes when they decide it is no longer financially viable for them to
continue in a contract with the said endorsed athlete.
4. 3
Woods and Armstrong were my role models when I was younger and I was
devastated when Woods’s ‘sex scandal’ came to light as well as Armstrong’s
doping allegations & lifetime ban. I felt like I was ‘cheated’ by my older
brother/friend whom I looked up to but this did not stop me from buying Nike’s
products nor did it others. I was disappointed with Woods, despite this I still
looked up to him and admired him as a golfer. Armstrong on the other hand,
sparked anger and I felt ashamed of him. I could not continue looking up to him
as a role model.
The aim of this paper will be to investigate Nike’s strategic rationale behind the
athletes they choose to endorse. The question investigated will be, “How does
Nike choose the athletes they endorse?” Do they only go for the best sportsmen
or do they look at individuals’ personalities and subsequently attempt to fit them
to the Nike Brand? Are they looking for role models or trending athletes that are
the flavour of the month? In order to answer these questions, the study will
consider both the positive and negative effects of endorsing sportsmen.
The preliminary goal of this study is to understand Nike’s brand values and brand
image. From this we can then further investigation into Nike and uncover the
reasons why they choose the athletes they do. This will be done by looking into
different literature and proposed theories, that may then be applied to the Nike
brand. By looking into the reasons why Nike choose the athletes they do this will
give insight into the next objective which is to identify the impact these
endorsed athletes have on the consumer. By doing so the study will identify the
relationship between the consumer, the endorsed athlete and the brand.
There is a key difference in Woods’s ‘sex scandal’ and Armstrongs ‘doping’
incidences that may be the reason Nike continued to endorse and support
Woods while they abandoned Armstrong. This is what this thesis hopes to
uncover. By uncovering deeper detail about the ethical choices and
behaviours of both Woods and Armstrong and the direct impact t his would
have on the consumer, the evidence will be substantial to justifyNikes decision
with regards to both athletes.
1.3 DELIMITATION/ DEMARCATION OF THE FIELD OF STUDY:
5. 4
Nike’s Malaysian ‘sweat shop’ accusations will be excluded from the study as
the study does not focus on product production process or suppliers. The study
will not be looking into the negative effects brands have on the endorsed
athletes personal lives and sporting performance that may lead them to
participate in undesirable behavior. The study will be looking at local endorsed
sportsmen’s contracts but only at their termination clauses and code of conduct
and nothing further as it is not necessary for the purpose of this study.
CHAPTER 2 – LITERATURE REVIEW
In order to build a foundation on which to base this study, the opinions of a
variety of authors and professionals have been considered. Tim McGhee, a
professional in sports marketing, considers sponsorship and branding in his
journal article “The rise and rise of athlete brand endorsements” (McGhee,
2012). He takes a brief look at the history of athlete endorsements and states
that for as long as there has been professional athletes there have been athlete
endorsements. McGhee’s journal article only focusses on major league baseball
players as to emphasize the points he makes. He explains that only the top
baseball players in the 20th Century were endorsed and this indicates that
sponsorship may have been solely based on sports performance on the field
and the personality and EQ traits may have been overlooked because the
degree of value placed on this was unappreciated. The significance is that it
proves the massive financial threats that endorsement has today were not fully
understood. Due to globalization and the pace at which information travels
means brands have to monitor, the access the public has to endorsed athletes
to ensure that the brand’s name is not tarnished. The best athletes were the
athletes who’s on field performance was considered the best in the baseball
league by either hitting the most home runs or getting the most strike outs. This
provides evidence that performance and success are a key motivator for
brands when selecting endorsers. I agree with McGhee when he says that
brands are constantly looking for ways to connect to consumers and athlete
endorsement is a way to achieve this connection (McGhee, 2012). The
connection could be for various reason for the brand it could be for brand
awareness, lead to trial and usage, or convert buyers to loyal, longer t erm
consumers, whatever the reason may be athletes are being used to achieve
these outcomes (McGhee, 2012).
6. 5
Tim McGhee believes that it is not necessary for an athlete to embody and
represent the attributes of a brand he/she endorses. He looks back at history to
back up his belief, by saying “From the earliest days of endorsements, it seems
as often as not that the endorser is simply selling his or her services to the top
bidder, without regard for any fit between spokesperson and brand.” (McGhee,
2012). He backs up this statement with reference to a few major league
baseball players from yester year. For example, he makes use of the famous
baseball player Babe Ruth who use to endorse any brand that would pay him to
do so (McGhee, 2012). Ruth was not worried about the brand or product he
had put his name on or how it would reflect on him as an athlete and the
possible affect it would have on his credibility and likeability towards consumers
(McGhee, 2012). For example, Ruth would endorse cigarette brands, alcohol
brands or candy bar brands without a care about what putting his name on
that brand/product would say about him as an athlete and a person (McGhee,
2012). However it may have been possible for athletes to firstly endorse as many
brands as they like and secondly endorse anything they like but today that is not
possible. Athletes legally are not able to endorse as many brands as they like.
The legal clauses of today’s endorsements limit athletes to certain brand’s so
there is no conflict of interests (Fizel, et al., 2008). Athlete’s contracts with a
particular brand that may prevent an athlete from endorsing a similar or in the
eyes of the current brand endorses undesirable (Fizel, et al., 2008). Athletes will
also not endorse any brand they like that offers them money, this is because
consumers are more aware and the transparency in today’s agreements is a
reality (Gray, 2003). Endorsing the wrong brand may shed a negative light on an
athlete and make him/her less desirable and may affect other brands that the
athlete endorses (Gray, 2003). For example, Lance Armstrong was an extremely
fit and strong athlete who displayed a disciplined and hardworking persona that
endorsed Nike. If Armstrong was to endorse a beer brand like Castle Light, the
impression it would give us of Armstrong is not that of a hardworking disciplined,
healthy athlete because he would be promoting an unhealthy image, creating
a conflict of interest. Another concern would see the public questioning the
credibility of the chosen endorsee. It says something about who Nike chooses to
endorse and reflects on the Nike brand image in a negative way.
Over the last few decades, athlete endorsement deals have matured in the
criteria and the manner of selection. The best endorsement deals are the ones
where the athletes ‘brand essence’ shines through and is consistent with the
brand he or she is endorsing (McGhee, 2012). Brand essence is a single thought
7. 6
that captures the sole of the brand. It can be viewed as the glue that holds the
core identity elements together (Aaker & Joachimsthaler, 2009). An example of
such an athlete is Tiger Woods who encompasses the Nike essence, which is
‘excelling’ (Nike, 2014;Aaker & Joachimsthaler, 2009). So much so that Nike
have created a standalone golfing brand called TW (Tiger Woods) that
manufactures, golf apparel. The Nike brand essence ‘excelling’ encompasses
diverse components of Nike identity as technology, top athletes, aggressive
personalities, the track shoe heritage, as well as customers who strive t o excel
and subbrands like the TW. This is the ultimate level of endorsement and is known
as co-branding (Aaker & Joachimsthaler, 2009). The athlete not only lends his
name to the product but his name is the product (McGhee, 2012). Nike is an
example of a brand who has co-branded with a number of major stars. Other
examples of co-branding are Michael Jordon and Air Jordan shoes, Lance
Armstrong and Nike Live Strong Range as well as Rodger Federer and RF tennis
clothing and shoes range co-branded with Nike.
McGhee is aware of the risk involved with athlete endorsement, ranging from
personal off the field to injury or even being benched due to poor on-field
performance. Whatever the reason any negative impacts this has, it lowers the
athlete’s credibility and likability among consumers (McGhee, 2012).All of these
issues have one thing in common; it reflects poorly on the brand. McGhee goes
onto say that although there may be financial cost for brands when dealing
with various personal issues there is little evidence that these issues cause
sustained damage to a brand perception and consumer attitudes (McGhee,
2012). This is a very interesting thought as the first reaction of the public is shock
at their hero’s actions. Secondly, the tabloids and public. The question is almost,
who did the public love first. In the case of Tiger Wood’s scandal, did Woods
make people love Nike? Or did Nike make the public love Tiger? An interesting
question… The impact that endorsed athlete’s actions have on the public may
be based on the relationship that individual consumer initially had with either the
endorsed or the endorsee. When an athlete makes a mistake, the brand is then
put in a predicament. Is the mishap bad enough to have a financial impact on
the brand and if so what does the affected brand do? The statement McGhee
makes about an athlete’s actions not having sustained damage to the brand
would need to be further investigated as McGhee does little to back the
statement up with any concrete evidence. This is something that will not be
accepted without more evidence and further investigation. Although that being
said if further investigation reveals evidence that agrees with McGhee then it
does provide some new insight into reasons that Nike stuck with Tiger Woods.
8. 7
After the athlete’s sex scandal and drop to number 50 in the world golf rankings
(PGA , 1995-2014) the assumption can be made that Nike believed that Woods
infidelity would not have a long lasting negative affect on the athlete’s
credibility and the Nike brand.
The question that stems to mind about athlete endorsement and considering
huge risk involved is why then do brands continue to use athlete endorsement?
It must be said that athlete endorsements can be seen as somewhat of a luxury
for brands as they are not a requirement for an effective marketing strategy or
campaign (McGhee, 2012). Parker and Fink state that many athletes make
more money from their endorsement deals than they do from their player salary
or from their winnings (Carlson & Donavan, 2013). The example used in their
journal article is of professional golfer Phil Mickelson who earned $52,000,000
from his endorsement deals from July 2009 to July 2010 and only managed to
earn $9,660,757 from winnings (Carlson & Donavan, 2013). This point further
emphasizes that athlete endorsement is a sheer luxury and may be unnecessary.
Although, this being said, McGhee does provide an answer to the question
posed in the beginning of this paragraph that will help to understand why
brands pay athletes ridiculous amounts of money to endorse their brand. In
McGhee’s journal, he makes use of research done from a team from the
Erasmus University in the Netherlands who conducted research around the topic
and had some interesting insights. They found that athlete endorsement evoke
positive responses in a certain area of the brain. The research team came to this
finding by using brain-scan technology. The conclusion of their study was that
positive emotions that consumers have about the endorser are transferred from
the personality to the product, resulting in a more positive impression of the
endorsed product (McGhee, 2012). This is a significant discovery as it provides
evidence that endorsed athletes do have influence over the consumer and the
consumer is perhaps unaware of this influence the athlete has on them. For
example, people want to have the golf clubs that Tiger Woods uses because he
is the best player in the world (PGA , 1995-2014) and consumers believe that, if
they use the clubs he uses they will be able to perform like Woods. To quote
“Linking a brand to a particular athlete or celebrity allows the product to bask in
the so-called halo effect of the endorser” (McGhee, 2012, p. 84). The halo effect
is the current success of the athlete rubbing off onto the brand and product
resulting in both the brand and product being more desirable to the consumer
(McGhee, 2012).
9. 8
Building on McGhee’s research according to Carlson & Donavan, once a
consumer identifies with an athlete, they are more likely to have an emotional
connection with that athlete. This in turn will create a connection to the brand
that the athlete endorses and the consumer will therefore buy products
endorsed by that athlete (Carlson & Donavan, 2013). The consumer has faith
that the product will perform efficiently. Their study does not assume that
consumers will gain an emotional connection but rather evaluates social identity
theory and conclude that by associating themselves with a brand
personality/athlete that they perceive to be desirable by the majority of others
as self-enhancing. People are attracted to brand personalities due to the
psychological benefits of being associated to that athlete (Carlson & Donavan,
2013). This finding further adds to who and why brands choose to endorse
certain athletes and personality traits that play a role in what influences
consumers.
This literature accompanies the strategic choice Nike made in endorsing Woods
and Armstrong. They are both model athletes, role models to all and the best at
what they do in their respective sports which appealed to the image Nike
wanted to create for their brand. This all changed for both athletes after
Woods’s ‘sex scandal’ and Armstrong’s ‘doping charges & cycling ban for life’
and this is why endorsing people is such risky business for a brand.
In the article “Arrest Record or Openly Gay: The Impact of Athletes’ Personal
Lives on Endorser Effectiveness” by Parker & Fink, 2012, Parker and Fink look at
the positive and negative effects of endorsing athletes. The main argument of
the study is how knowledge of an athlete’s history will impact the brands image,
trustworthiness and therefore the perception for the consumer. This thesis will
explore the effect of Woods’s sexual scandal and Armstrongs doping ban on
Nikes brand image.
Parker and Fink explore three terms related to a successful and effective
endorsement when there is a natural fit between the product and the endorser
(Parker & Fink, 2012). These terms being trustworthiness, expertise and
attractiveness, which has shown to have the most positive influence on endorser
effectiveness (Parker & Fink, 2012). Trustworthiness is viewed as a key component
in persuasive communication (Ohanian, 1991). Expertise refers to knowledge,
experience, competence or skill that the endorser poses (Parker & Fink, 2012).
10. 9
Attractiveness has been shown to increase the persuasiveness of the
communicator as well (Ohanian, 1991). The three of these terms combined will
result in credibility (Parker & Fink, 2012). Each of these three characteristics
provides an important component of the overall credibility of the athlete. The
more credible the athlete is seen to be the more influential and persuasive the
athlete’s message will be (Parker & Fink, 2012). The ideal endorser we can then
say is simultaneously attractive, trustworthy and an expert. Parker and Fink do
however state that an athlete may still be an effective endorser if they do fall
short of one of these characteristics.
Consumers saw Tiger Woods prior to numerous accounts of infidelity as a model
athlete and family man, a brand image he had carefully created for himself
(Parker & Fink, 2012). His family man image was viewed as a trustworthy
individual who appealed to a large number and variety of consumers which
made him attractive. He was the world’s best golfer making him an expert in his
field (PGA , 1995-2014). Tiger Woods was an ideal brand ambassador before he
partook in undesirable behavior according to the criteria Parker and Fink
proposed. If we were to categorize Woods after partaking in undesirable
behavior into the three criteria suggested by Parker and Fink, we would have to
say that Woods now only meets two of the three criteria. Woods is still an expert
at what he does and despite his undesirable behavior he is still admired by
many proving that he is still attractive (Golf Today, 2005). Evidence of the Woods
appeal can be seen on the following Woods has on the PGA tour and an
indication of this may be seen from Television viewership when Woods plays and
when he doesn’t play or when he is in contention to win or when he is not (Golf
Today, 2005). When Woods is present there is a larger following, Neal Pilson the
head of sports TV consulting company CBS and former president of CBS sports
said this "When Tiger Woods enters a tournament and when he is in contention in
the final round, we see a 30 to 50 percent increase over what is the 'normal'
rating," (Golf Today, 2005). Despite this, Woods has broken consumers trust and
is no longer deemed trustworthy from the romantically moral perception, but it
does not detract from his performance on the sports field. Woods is an example
of an endorser who does not meet all three criteria but is still an effective
endorser as Fink and Parker proposed was possible. The suggestion made is not
implying that Nike used Parker and Finks theory on effective endorser criteria
when Nike made the decision to continue their endorsement with Woods
despite his infidelity. Yet the theory put forward by Parker and Fink does provide
some understanding as to why Nike chose to continue their endorsement with
Woods. Nike believed that Woods would still appeal to consumers after
11. 10
everything had settled down and they must have believed in Woods golfing
ability to bounce back from his personal life setback to retain his world number
one ranking (Blitz, 2010).
If we applied the criteria to Lance Armstrong prior to his doping allegations and
lifetime ban from cycling, we can then gain a clearer view as to why Nike cut
ties with the athlete. Armstrong too, prior to undertaking in undesirable behavior,
would have met all three criteria making him trustworthy, attractive and an
expert that he was indeed. Yet after partaking in undesirable behavior, he was
no longer seen as trustworthy and because of his undesirable behavior having
to do with his cycling performance by taking performance enhancing drugs he
was too no longer attractive to consumers as he essentially had been cheating.
As a result of him taking these drugs to help him win this also put doubt in
consumers minds as to whether he was truly an expert as he needed to take
performance enhancing drugs to achieve his success. Armstrong today would
not meet any of the three criteria as a result of his undesirable behavior. This is a
significant discovery which Parker and fink have helped to come across by
applying the proposed theory to Armstrong. It now appears more clearly as to
why Nike terminated Armstrongs contract yet continued endorsing Woods.
There is a key difference between Woods and Armstrong’s undesirable behavior
that may have helped influence Nike decisions with regards to the future
relationship between athlete and brand. Woods undesirable behavior was ‘off
the field of play’, it had more to do with his personal life and did not in any way
assist Woods in achieving his success on the golf course. Parker & Fink shed
some interesting and surprising outcomes on the issue in their study using their
own examples that can be applied to Woods and Armstrong’s case. Parker and
Finks study reveals that being ‘openly gay’ or having been previously ‘arrested’
has no impact on the brand image credibility when compared to
‘heterosexual/non-arrested’ athletes (Parker & Fink, 2012). This is most certainly a
significant finding as it helps to answer the question as to why Nike dropped
Armstrong and not Woods. Having a criminal record or being gay is all ‘off the
field’ away from sport, similar to Woods’s ‘sex scandal’. Issues of a personal
nature seem to be less impactful than those directly related to the means to
which an athlete achieved fame (Parker & Fink, 2012). Armstrong on the other
hand was involved in undesirable behavior that affected his ‘on the field’
performance by taking illegal performance enhancing drugs that assisted him in
achieving his success in cycling which made him famous and resulted in his
12. 11
original endorsement with Nike. The difference between the undesirable
behaviors being ‘on the field’ of play and the other being ‘off the field’ of play
not literally speaking but figuratively.
Despite this, there are examples of endorsed athletes partaking in undesirable
behavior ‘off the field’ personal issues that have resulted in their endorsement
contract being terminated. A Nike athlete who is an extreme example of this is
Oscar Pistorius who has been charged with murder of his girlfriend Reeva
Steenkamp (Durante, 2013). The day after news broke Nike publically
announced the termination of the athlete’s endorsement contract and
removed all advertising involving Pistorius the blade runner (Durante, 2013).
What this suggests is that ‘on’ or ‘off’ the field undesirable behavior is not
sufficient to be the sole reason for Nike’s decision to terminate an athlete’s
endorsement contract although it is a useful framework to use and apply for this
investigation. A further explanation will need to be investigated and answered.
Perhaps applying the criteria set by Parker and Fink using trustworthiness,
expertise and attractiveness to be an effective endorser and applying the ‘on’
and ‘off’ the field criteria simultaneously will be an adequate way to determine
why Nike terminate contracts and part ways with certain endorsers and not
others. A clearer understanding of the Nike brand is needed in order to settle on
this conclusion.
The article “Tiger Woods and Nike: Winning” (Database, 2013) sums up Nike and
brands alike in a nutshell. The article analyzes Nike’s new campaign entitled
‘Winning takes care of everything’ and how Woods reclaims his title as the best
golfer in the world (see appendix 1, figure 1). For the purpose of this study, it is
important to look into the Nike brand, their values and image. By doing so a
clearer understanding of Nike will be made clear. This will help in an assessing
who and why Nike chooses as a brand ambassador. The ad campaign by Nike
was hugely controversial, as there were a number of mixed opinions from
consumers. A quote from a consumer whom commented on the campaign
said, "This could get fans fired up. Woods is better than that. Nike is better than
that . . . .Every human being who has a heart, as well as a head, understands
that's its always about more than just winning," Mr. Paul said (Database:,
2013 ;McCarthy, 2013). The advert did not do a lot for the Nike brands image as
it sends a message to the public that Nike is only interested in winning and is not
13. 12
concerned with personal morals of their endorsed athletes (McCarthy, 2013).
What about the message this advert is sending to children, how will that affect
children’s attitudes towards sport and life in general? This advert campaign
shows Nikes true colours and is a poor reflection on the brand. The question that
needs to be asked is, ‘What does winning really take care of?’ For Nike it took
care of them endorsing the world best golfer again as the win saw Woods return
to world number one in the world golf rankings (PGA , 1995-2014). Winning by
Woods also saw an increase in sales and profit margins as consumers wanted
products that the Woods was using and endorsing (McCarthy, 2013 ; Database:,
2013), an example of the ‘halo effect’ (McGhee, 2012). Yet that is all that
winning took care of. Winning did not take away from the fact that Woods had
participated in unethical extra-marital affairs, which the advert was implying
that we now have now all forgotten about following his win. This ad campaign
needed to be re-thought, all this ad says in the opinion of the researcher is that
Nike are a profit driven organization and not concerned with morals or values. It
gives us an idea of the athletes Nike are interested in endorsing, athletes who
are the best at what they do and not worried about personality traits, values or
morals of the athletes, as long as they are winning. It seems as if profit for Nike is
the driver and not the consequence. Unfortunately, this idea has shifted in the
business world; profit needs to be the consequence and not the driver (Aaker &
Joachimsthaler, 2009). The idea of a healthy brand needs to be applied to
companies where brands add value to people lives and are sustainable by not
taking more than they give (Cook, et al., 2010). Brands that do this are brands
that are able to be powerful and effective for longer periods of time (Cook, et
al., 2010).
This chapter delved into a brief history of athlete endorsement provide by Tim
McGhee. This indicated to us who brands where endorsing and what
endorsement deals athletes were taking. As well as how the idea of endorsing
any brand and as many brands as an athlete’s wishes too has changed over
the years. Athletes now are much more careful about who they endorse as the
realization is that a brand is a reflection of the athlete and vice versa. The risks
and benefits of athlete endorsement were examined and the conclusion made
was that athlete endorsements are a luxury for branding campaigns as vast
amounts of money are spent on the endorsed athletes that is not necessary in
order to produce an engaging and effective ad campaign. Yet the consensus
was made that despite being a risky luxury that athlete endorsement are indeed
worth the risk and have proven to work. Parker and Fink developed a criteria for
athlete endorsement which involved three concepts being trustworthiness,
14. 13
expertise and attractiveness. The authors put forward that an athlete can be an
effective and engaging endorser if they meet all three criteria, yet they did
stipulate that an athlete could still be an effective endorser if they only met two
of the three criteria. This criteria was applied to the Nike endorsee’s Woods and
Armstrong and provided an explanation as to why Nike stuck by Woods and
why Nike terminated Armstrong’s contract. This was due to the fact that Woods
still met two of the three criteria after he had partook in undesirable behaviour
and Armstrong did not meet any of the three criteria after his doping and
lifetime ban. Parker and Finks study reveals that being ‘openly gay’ or having
been previously ‘arrested’ has no impact on the brand image credibility when
compared to ‘heterosexual/non-arrested’ athletes. Issues of a personal nature
seem to be less impactful than those directly related to the means to which an
athlete achieved fame. What the authors are referring to here was undesirable
behavior that takes place ‘on’ and ‘off’ the field of play.
This idea was applied to Woods and Armstrong and a conclusion was made
that Woods undesirable behavior was ‘off’ the field of play yet Armstrong’s was
‘on’ the field of play. Armstrong doping enhanced his on field performance in
helping him to win, ‘on’ the field of play whereas Woods’s undesirable
behaviour did not help Woods in achieving his success as a golfer. For the
purpose of this study it was important to look into the Nike brand, their values
and brand image to help gain a clear understanding of the brand and who
they choose to endorse and why. This was done by looking at a controversial ad
campaign that Nike released after Woods won a tournament that saw him
reclaim the title of the best golfer in the world. The controversial ad campaign
was entitled ‘Winning takes care of everything’, through a detailed examination
a conclusion was made that winning most certainly does not take care of
everything. The campaign did not do a lot for Nike’s brand image and spoke
volumes for the brand and what their priorities are. Nike seems to be a brand
that is driven by profit thereby not adding value to people’s lives and instead
taking more than it gives in an unsustainable manner.
CHAPTER 3- METHODOLOGY
By analyzing the available literature, a broad spectrum of information was
gathered to assist in determining the relationship between a brand and a
15. 14
relevant endorsed athlete. This qualitative research will help with researching the
issues and objectives that have been mentioned above. Research, according
to the Oxford English Dictionary (Oxford University Press, 2001) is defined as “the
study of materials and sources in order to establish facts and reach new
conclusions”. The definition provided is a sound description of what this thesis will
reach new and insightful conclusions regarding brands and endorsed athletes.
For the purpose of this study a mixed-method approach has been used
consisting of quantitative as well as qualitative research methods (Welman,
2005). Mixed method, qualitative and quantitative will all be defined and
discussed in more detail in the next section.
The essential goal of a mixed-method research design is to tackle a given
research question from any relevant angle (Welman, 2005). By doing so, this
thesis may make use of previous research from different perspectives. To utilize
this design effectively, an understanding of both qualitative and quantitative
research is needed as they are both used in a mixed-method approach
(Welman, 2005).
Qualitative research is about exploring issues, understanding phenomena and
answering questions by analyzing and making sense of unstructured data
(Welman, 2005). Qualitative research is about asking people for their opinions in
a structured way and by doing so the result will be findings and insights into
questions asked (Welman, 2005). The aim is to gather an in-depth understanding
of human behavior and the reasons that control such behavior. The qualitative
method investigates the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of decision-making and not only the
‘what’, ’where’ or ‘when’. Qualitative research aims to get a better
understanding from first-hand experience from truthful reporting and quotations
of actual conversations. The definition of ‘quantitative’ is “having to do with or
measured by quality” (Website, 2014), the ‘quality’ referred to in the quote
provided is people’s opinions and feelings towards a question or issue. Due to
qualitative research being aimed at people’s opinions and feelings smaller but
focused samples are often used instead of large samples as it would be difficult
to capture large number of people’s opinions and feelings accurately (Welman,
2005).
Quantitative research refers to the systematic empirical investigation of social
phenomena through statistical, mathematical or numerical data (Welman,
16. 15
2005). The objective of quantitative research is to develop and employ
mathematical models, theories and or hypotheses relating to the
phenomena .The process of measurement is central to quantitative research
and any data that is numerical in the form of statistics or percentages is
considered as quantitative (Welman, 2005). The definition provided of
‘quantitative’ emphasizes measurement and quantity that is central to
qualitative research, ‘quantitative’ defined as “relating to or measured by
quantity” (Website, 2014). Quantitative research focuses on gathering
numerical data and generalizing it across groups of people and this is done by
using an appropriate sample of people (Welman, 2005).
The ideal form of research makes use of both quantitative and qualitative
methods and this is what a mixed-method does. A mixed-method approach
provides a wide range of perspectives of the study’s processes and outcomes.
There are a number of benefits of a mixed-method (Welman, 2005). By using
both qualitative and quantitate methods the validity of findings will be more
accurate by examining the same phenomena in different ways. This will in turn
will promote a greater understanding of findings and insights (Welman, 2005).
Another relevant benefit of a mixed-method approach is that is it offers
something for everyone as different people have different needs. For example if
I was interested in the consumer behavior towards buying Nike golf balls
endorsed by Tiger Woods after winning a tournament, I would look into the
statistics of how many golf balls were bought before and after his win using
quantitative research. It would also be necessary to look into the ‘why’
consumers bought them and what may have influenced them to buy the ball
(Tiger Woods) by making use of qualitative research.
The population of a research study refers to the “complete set of events, people
of things to which the research findings are to be applied,” (Bless, Higson-Smith
& Kagee, 2006:184), while the sampling refers to the specific members within the
population that will be used to obtain data from (Travers and Cooper,2006). The
population and sample used for this research will include consumers of any age,
race or economic bracket and be focused around how consumers feel, react
and think in relation to the Nike brand. I will be able to deduce why consumers
behave in certain ways and the rationale behind these behaviours. The
demographic of the sample will affect the choices and behaviours as different
demographics have preconceived ideas about things because of the certain
influences in their personal lives. A sample of 50 people will be asked to
17. 16
complete a questionnaire, where values will be assigned to answers which will
enable a statistical comparison to be made between participants answers.
Although this study is not interested in opinions from different sexes the findings
will be more accurate if the questionnaires are answered by 50% males and 50%
females. This will avoid a bias study. The participants that will be asked to
complete these questionnaires will be predominantly from South Africa.
The data will be collected through a survey questionnaire that will address the
influence endorsed athletes have on consumers. The information provided by
the questionnaire will provide both qualitative and quantitative outcomes. The
survey will be posted on two of social media platforms; Facebook and Twitter.
The data will be collected via an online program called Survey Monkey which
translates answers into findings into graphs. All findings will then be put together
in statistical format and graphs which help with an analysis and comparison of
the findings. This will create a good foundation for the thesis because it provides
stable statistics around the topic from which reasonable conclusions can be
drawn.
Personal interviews will also be conducted with consumers whom are interested
in sport and are familiar with the Nike brand. This will help to gain a more in
depth analysis of consumers influence and feelings when endorsed athletes
behave undesirably. A sample of 10 females and 10 males whom are interested
in sport and familiar with Nike will be interviewed. Along with interviewing
consumers, it may be useful to gain insight from the endorsed athletes and ask
how they think their behaviours influence consumers. As many interviews with
local professional athletes as possible will be done as their perspective will give
insight into how brands conduct relationships with athletes. The local
professional athletes referred to are provincial and national rugby and cricket
players. The focus will be on professional athletes who are endorsed by major
brands or have previously been endorsed. The objective of the interviews will be
to try gain insight into contract clauses in terms of behavior ‘on’ and ‘off’ the
field as well as termination details and their personal experiences. How did they
feel when being endorsed by a certain brand, what brand, what attachment
did they feel to the brand and did they find it difficult to follow such instructions?
The number of local professionals that will be interviewed will be between 5-10.
This sample will be random where sex, race, age and country will be irrelevant.
The personal interviews with both consumers and local endorsed athletes is an
example of qualitative research (Welman, 2005).
18. 17
Once the data has been collected a data analysis will be conducted and
interpreted. The Oxford Dictionary defines ‘analysis’ as; “a detailed examination
of the elements or structure of something” (Oxford University Press, 2001), simply
but effectively stated. The analysis is a detailed examination of the data
collected from the questionnaires and personal interviews that will be
conducted. In view of the fact that this study makes use of qualitative as well as
quantitative research analysis it is important to understand the difference
between them.
The most obvious difference being that qualitative analysis is that data to be
analyzed is text, rather than numbers (Welman, 2005). The focus on text,
qualitative rather than on numbers is the most important feature of qualitative
analysis. The ‘text’ usually comes in the form of transcripts or recordings of
interviews or notes made during observation sessions (Welman, 2005). Text can
also refer to images or pictures that a researcher examines. Qualitative analysis
of ‘text’ can be viewed as a means to understand what participants thought,
felt or did in a situation or at one point in time. We could say that the ‘text’ is a
way to get behind the numbers that are recorded in quantitative analysis,
thereby allowing us to see the richness of real social experience (Welman, 2005).
From here, we can identify themes that may have emerged from the
information obtained and this will allow for a better understanding of the
phenomenon at hand.
Quantitative data analysis is a statistical technique used to describe and
analyze variation in quantitative measures (Welman, 2005). Such quantitative
data analysis, using numbers to discover and describe patterns in data, is the
most elementary use of social statistics (Welman, 2005). A statistic, is a numerical
description of a population, usually based on a sample of that population
(Website, 2014). A technique that could be used would be to assign values to
each answer in a questionnaire, this would allow comparisons to be made and
trends to be identified based on people’s answers (Welman, 2005).
None of the collection methods or analysis methods matter unless the data
collected is valid and reliable. Validity is defined as; “the quality of being
logically or factually sound; soundness or cogency” (Website, 2014) and
reliability define “able to be trusted; predictable or dependable” (Website,
19. 18
2014). The research done thus far in the literature review is both valid and
reliable as the data used comes from reliable sources and is written by
competent authors who have done extensive research in their respective fields
to come to the conclusions they have. Although this being said it is the duty of a
researcher not to just accept any proposed theories or ideas without deeper
research in to the topic and to compare different ideas and then come to your
own understanding and interpretations (Welman, 2005).
As this study will be conducting interviews, it will be necessary to respect the
interviewee and not ask questions that are to personal or offensive. This also
applies to the questions asked in the questionnaires. It will be made clear to the
interviewee and participants that their answers and interview will be used in this
research paper findings and be published in the thesis and that they may
remain anonymous if need be.
This chapter initially identified the research methods that will be used as well as
the reasons from making use of such methodologies. Quantitative as well as
qualitative data analysis was discussed and the importance of validity and
reliability was stressed. The data instrument was put forward in the form of an
online website that puts data in statistics and graphs that may later be
compared. Along with this the population and sample for this study were
identified and explained. Careful considerations were made in the form of
ethical considerations, with regards to the people whom this research will
question and interview and the importance of this was mentioned.
CHAPTER 4 – RESEARCH FINDINGS
4.1 INTRODUCTION:
20. 19
This chapter is based on the preliminary findings that were acquired through
secondary and primary research, which was undertaken in order to gain a
deeper understanding of the research topic. In order to gather insights about
whether or not athlete endorsement provide a successful platform for
advertisers the use of the successes of the Nike brand and two athletes who
they endorse; Tiger Woods and Lance Armstrong as a case study were used.
Through the secondary research that was gathered from existing research
made available by various authors a number of significant findings were made.
These findings included; brands are constantly looking for ways to connect to
consumers and athlete endorsement is a way to achieve this connection.
Research done by a team from the Erasmus University in the Netherlands who
conducted research around athlete endorsements and had some interesting
insights. They found that athlete endorsements evoke positive responses in a
certain area of the brain. The research team came to this finding by using brain-
scan technology. The conclusion of their study was that positive emotions that
consumers have about the endorser are transferred from the personality to the
product, resulting in a more positive impression of the endorsed product, known
as the ‘halo affect’ (McGhee, 2012). This is a significant point as it provides
evidence that consumers are excited by successful athletes and this triggers a
buying impulse that connects the consumer to the product achieved through
the success of the athlete rubbing off on the product creating the ‘halo effect’.
4.2 SURVEY FINDINGS:
4.2.1 DEMOGRAPHICS:
In order to establish the demographics of the online participants, the survey
began with questions relating to gender and age. Of the 55 respondents, 46.67%
were female and 53.33% were male. Two participants did not wish to disclose
this information. The second question required participants to identifytheir age
category: 3.13% were between the age of 18 and 20, 90.63% were between the
ages of 21 and 39, 3.13% between the age of 40 and 49 and 3.13% between the
age of 50 and 59. Most of the respondents fell within the age range of between
18 and 35. This age group has been identified as being the most excited about
athlete endorsement.
21. 20
4.2.2 THE PERCEPTIONS OF SURVEY PARTICIPANTS:
My aim in conducting primary research was to learn more about consumer’s
perceptions surrounding athlete endorsement and find out which emotions
athlete endorsements evoke in order to ascertain whether advertising via
athletes is indeed worth the risk.
In order to gather primary research, I conducted a survey, which lead to a
number of findings and insights surrounding the topic. The survey conducted
aimed at consumers of any age, race or economic bracket living
predominately in South Africa. The survey reached a sample size of 55
participants. There were a few objectives of the questionnaire the first being to
gauge the influence endorsed athletes have over consumers. Secondly, to find
out if an athlete’s actions/behavior (positive or negative)affected respondent’s
opinions/feeling towards brands. The third objective was to find out people’s
opinions concerning Nike sticking by Tiger Woods and dropping Lance
Armstrong following their participation in their different undesirable behavior.
Questions were composed relating to consumer’s perceptions surrounding
athlete endorsement and their use in advertising. From these answers, this thesis
was able to develop its argument. The survey questions as well as some of the
responses are reproduced below.
1. Do you think athlete endorsers are an effective and influential way for brands
to advertise their products?
Responses: 94% of respondents strongly agreed. This shows that brands that
make use of athlete endorsers hold a high level of interest for consumers.
2. Do adverts that make use of athlete endorsers excite you more than other
advertising?
22. 21
Responses: Advertising which has made use of athletes to endorse brands is
viewed as more exciting than other forms of advertising that do not make use of
athlete endorsers by 84% of respondents. Together the findings from questions
one and two above show that advertiser who make use of athlete endorsers are
received positively in the eyes of the consumer and can be used to influence a
market positively about a brand.
3. What in your opinion, do you think the most positive thing about using an
endorsed athlete to advertise is?
Responses: For 60% of respondents they felt that linking the brand and its
products to the athlete’s success was the most positive aspect of athlete
endorsement. This findings confirms the point made by author Tim McGhee of
the athletes success rubbing off onto a brands products known as the ‘halo
effect’ (McGhee, 2012). It further stresses the importance of the athlete’s
performance and success being an important factor in selecting an athlete to
endorse a brand. Interestingly 34% of respondents believed that the most
positive aspect of a brand putting their name on an athlete by means of
endorsement was the increased brand awareness a brand will receive. This
being significant because successful athletes create higher levels of awareness
than poor performing athletes. Further indicating the importance of
performance and success of endorsed athletes on consumer’s perceptions of
the athlete and the brand.
4. Does an athletes actions affect your choice of brand when purchasing a
product? (For example: your favorite athlete has just won the latest race, event,
tournament etc. are you more inclined to buy the brand that athletes endorses
or is that not a concern?)
Responses: 49.98% of respondents answered yes, an athlete’s success would
influence them when purchasing a desired product. Of the people interviewed
46.94% responded saying that they were influenced but wouldn’t go buy a
product specifically because the athlete had just won and only 4.08% were not
influenced at all by an athlete’s success when buying a desired product. This
was a significant finding as it illustrates the impact of an athlete’s most recent
23. 22
success on influencing consumers when purchasing products. Giving us an idea
as to who brands will choose to endorse their brands, successful athletes.
5. Does an athlete’s actions affect your choice of brand when purchasing a
product? (For example; your favorite athlete has participated in undesirable
behavior (taken illegal substances, committed adultery or behaved
unsportsmanlike) does this influence you when you next purchase a product
endorsed by that athlete?
Responses: By far the most interesting finding was the answer to this question.
The majority of respondents, 48.98% went for the option ‘I do not agree with the
undesirable behavior but I will still purchase products from the brand’ and
12.24% opted for the answer ‘I do not care at all about the athlete participating
in the undesirable behavior I still love the brand’. This means that 60.22% of
respondents would still purchase products from the brand irrespective of the
athlete participation in undesirable behavior. Another interesting find was that
32.65% answered ‘that they neither disagreed nor agree’ with the question and
indicating further that an athlete’s ‘undesirable’ actions do not directly affect
consumers purchasing actions and that the athlete’s undesirable behaviour is
ignored. This finding provides a gauge into the amount of risk involved in athlete
endorsement. The results from the question gives us insight into why brands insist
on taking a risk on athletes to endorse their brand. Signifying that there is in fact
not as much risk involved as initially perceived concerning athlete endorsement
and consumers will still purchase products from the brand even if the athlete
does participate in undesirable behaviour.
6. The question has often been asked as to why Nike stuck with Tiger Woods and
not with Lance Armstrong after they both participated in their different
undesirable behaviours. Do you think Tiger Woods endorsement contract should
have also been terminated?
Responses: An interesting theory that was investigated within the researched
literature by author’s Parker and Fink was used to ask the remaining questions.
The theory suggests a framework for brands to use when choosing whom to
endorse their brand. Parker and Fink’s theory states that in order to be an
effective and engaging endorser an athlete needs to meet a minimum of two
24. 23
of the three criteria proposed. This criteria being three terms each poised with
deeper meaning which has been explained earlier in the paper (see page). The
terms being trustworthiness, expertise and attractiveness. Trustworthiness
meaning, do we as a brand and in the eyes of the consumers see the athlete as
a trustworthy individual? Expertise, do we consider the athlete an expert in their
respective sport? Lastly attractiveness, does the athlete appeal to consumers,
does he/she have a large and loyal following of fans? The question then
followed, after participating in their individual undesirable behaviour which
boxes did the athlete tick. In order to meet the different criteria the athletes
needed to score at least above 50%. I used the following Nike athletes Tiger
Woods, Lance Armstrong and Oscar Pistorius for the question as they have all
participated in undesirable behaviour and were all endorsed by Nike.
The results for Tiger Woods were that 97,98% still considered him as an expert,
71.43% still thought he was ‘attractive’ and only 12.24% still considered Woods to
be trustworthy. These finding were expected for Woods as indicated in the
literature review. Lance Armstrong’s results were surprising as 92.11% of
consumers still considered him an expert in cycling despite taking performance-
enhancing drugs to achieve his fame, the assumption was that he would score
poorly in this category. The next two categories is where Armstrongs results differ
from Woods 39,47% of respondents still believe in his ‘attractiveness’ and only
5.26% consider him as trustworthy. Oscar Pistorius results followed a similar trend
with expertise and surprisingly ‘attractiveness’, yet Pretorius score for
‘trustworthiness’ was 0.00% which was expected due to his shocking undesirable
incident. These results provide a sound framework for Nike to assess whether or
not these athletes would be able to be an effective and engaging endorser for
the brand. Tiger Woods still strongly ticks two of the three criteria whereas
Armstrong and Pretorius only strongly tick one of the criteria being expertise.
Woods is able to be an effective endorser yet Armstrong and Pistorius
according the Parker and Finks theory will be an ineffective athlete endorsers
this confirmed by participant’s answers.
7. Based on the questions above, please would you rank the criteria from most
important to least important (trustworthiness, expertise & attractiveness) as
essential in order to be an effective endorser.
25. 24
Responses: The last question surrounding Parker and Finks three concept criteria
focused ranking the attributes in order from most important to least important.
Consumers believe that ‘expertise’ was the most important when selecting an
athlete as a brand endorser, and then narrowly with 22.45% of the votes
‘attractiveness’ was second most important and lastly ‘trustworthiness’ scoring
16.33% of the votes to be the third most important of the criteria for an athlete to
possess. This is significant as it indicates that athlete endorsement is not as risky as
it may appear regarding an athlete participating in undesirable behaviour while
being endorser by a brand. This is because consumers are less concerned with
‘trustworthiness’ and an athlete will be more attractive depending on his current
success as indicated earlier. The insight behind this is that consumers are
becoming less ethical in their buying patterns, they chose the quality of the
brand and whether they look good in a product or not, over morals. Although
they do show empathy to athletes who make mistakes in some cases, despite
athletes behaving badly, consumers still have a major respect for their attributes
and successes.
4.3 INTERVIEWS:
Personal interviews were conducted with 23 participants, 65% of whom were
males and 35% females. The age bracket of the sample ranged from 13 to 52
and the sample consisted of multiple races. The interviews were conducted in
an effort to gain a more in depth understanding of consumer feelings towards
various aspects of athlete endorsement as well as to try to gauge the influence
athlete endorsers have over consumers.
An interesting discovery was that the answers to a number of questions differed
in terms of age. For example, what is meant by this is when participants were
asked about buying products used by their personal favorite/popular athlete it
was the younger generations 13 – 19 who were more directly influenced by
what their favorite athlete was wearing or using. For example, a 13-year-old boy
Mark said, “Pat Lambie is my sporting hero and whatever brand boots he wears I
want to wear, because then I can hopefully kick like him or play like he does”.
This is a classic example of the ‘halo-effect’ where the athlete’s success rubs off
onto the products they endorse reference (McGhee, 2012). Yet for the older
generations their response indicated that they were not directly interested in
getting the boots like ‘Pat Lambie’ but instead wanted the latest model boot
26. 25
worn by a number of professional athletes. They did not assume by using the
boots their favorite/popular athlete used that they would be able to play like
them but instead acknowledged that if the boots were good enough for their
favorite athlete (professionals) then the boots were good enough for them and
could possibly improve their performance in some way according to most
respondents. For the entire sample, young and old generations it was noted that
it was a psychological influence that interviewees had created themselves in
their own minds that influenced them in using the chosen brand. It is almost as if
the consumer had created a number of reasons in their own minds to convince
themselves they needed new ‘boots’ (‘boots’ for the purpose of this example)
and the endorsing athlete was the tipping point that reassured them they
needed them. What it comes down to is good marketing and advertising by
brands who have clearly done their job to manipulate consumers into buying
products that they do not specifically need but have been made to feel like
they have to have and athlete endorsers seem to be the winning formula for
brands.
The next topic that was investigated was that of athletes partaking in
undesirable behavior. The common consensus was that respondents were not
entirely concerned with athletes participating in undesirable behavior that was
not directly related to their sport. The undesirable behavior being referred to
here is that of personal nature, off the field of play behavior like being arrested,
infidelity or drunk driving for example. Interviewees did not by any means say
that the behavior was justified but they were happy to turn a blind eye to the
behavior and continue supporting the athlete. Yet undesirable behavior related
directly to the means to which the athlete achieved their success like doping or
cheating. As well as other on field, undesirable behavior like being red carded,
being benched or swearing on the field stimulated a different reaction from
interviewees. They were less likely to continue supporting that athlete as an
individual yet the behavior did not detract from consumer’s perception of the
brand that particular athlete was endorsing according to the majority of
interviewees. To quote 23-year-old Robert “I don’t not like Nike (the brand)
because of what the athlete has done but I am less likely to like the athlete
afterwards” with reference to an athlete partaking in undesirable behavior on
the field of play or related to on field performance like doping.
The insights gained from the interviews conducted have confirmed a number of
points made by the authors in the literature review and have added more detail
27. 26
to these insights mentioned by the various authors. For example witnessed
firsthand an example of the ‘halo effect’ through an interview with 13 year old
Mark who stated his hero used a particular brand and if Mark were to use that
branded boot his hero used he too would be able to play like his hero. The
interviews and survey have complemented one another by confirming various
points and filling in the gaps where necessary. This is because interviews are
more personal and the interviewer is able to gain a more detailed answer
through body language and facial expressions that add to a participants
answer.
CHAPTER 5- RECOMMENDATIONS & CONCLUSIONS
5.1 INTRODUCTION:
The focus of this research paper has been on Tiger Woods and Lance Armstrong
as examples of brand personalities endorsed by Nike. We looked at the
relationship between Tiger Woods, Lance Armstrong and Nike. The influence
these athletes have on consumers indicates that athlete endorsements are
financially profitable and certainly worth the risk (Miletsky, 2009). The question
was asked why Nike chose to stick with Woods and not Armstrong after they
participated in their individual undesirable behavior. The ‘tipping point’ for a
brand comes when they decide it is no longer financially viable for them to
continue in a contract with the said endorsed athlete.
The aim of this paper was to investigate Nike’s strategic rationale behind the
athletes they chose to endorse and apply it to all brands. The question
investigated, “How does Nike choose the athletes they endorse?” Do they only
go for the best sportsmen or do they look at individuals’ personalities and
subsequently attempt to fit them to the Nike Brand? Are they looking for role
models or trending athletes that are the flavour of the month? By looking into
the reasons why Nike choose the athlete’s they do this provided insight into the
next objective which was to identify the impact these endorsed athletes have
on the consumer. By doing so the study identified the relationship between the
consumer, the endorsed athlete and the brand.
28. 27
This dissertation uncovered the key difference in Woods’s ‘sex scandal’ and
Armstrongs ‘doping’ incidences and the reasons Nike continued to endorse and
support Woods while they abandoned Armstrong. By uncovering deeper detail
about the ethical choices and behaviours of both Woods and Armstrong. We
were able to measure the direct impact this had on the consumer. The
evidence provided substantial reason to justify Nikes decision concerning both
athletes.
5.2 INSIGHTS:
It can therefore be concluded from the research findings the following insights:
Insights:
- Consumers are driven by image and are selfish by nature.
- Although consumers like to think they are ethical, image is bigger than
moral fiber and we find this is hard to admit.
- Brands no longer consider endorsing athletes a risk.
Core Insights:
- We have a subconscious empathy because we know in our hearts that
we like endorsed athletes are not perfect and realize that we all make
mistakes.
- Brands accept athletes will make mistakes
5.3 ACTIVATION:
5.3.1 ACTIVATION CONCEPT:
29. 28
There is ‘room’ for mistakes – ‘The Change room’
The concept that this activation delivers is based on the idea that we all make
mistakes and there is ‘room’ for mistakes, from both the brand and consumers
perspectives. For brands understanding that athletes they endorse are going to
make mistakes they are not proud of, but brands make ‘room’ for these
mistakes when endorsing athletes. From the consumers perspective we have all
made mistakes or have done something we regret in our past. Something we
wish we could change or even remove from our history. No one wants to be
defined by a past mistake. Imagine your past mistake/regret was highlighted
and everyone you knew was fully aware of your mistake, I am sure I can speak
for all of us and state that we would prefer if we could keep those type of things
to ourselves. This is why we can sympathize with endorsed athletes. Although
often perceived as not human, athletes are. Our subconscious empathy stems
from here, as we are able to look past certain undesirable behavior athletes
have committed because we are mindful that we all make mistakes similar to
them. Consumers as a result make ‘room’ for mistakes athletes are going to
make.
The Catholic Church confession booth where believers of the Catholic faith
confess their sins and are then forgiven influenced the idea for the activation.
The idea of confession, where someone admits to something, has inspired me to
create a room for athletes to confess their ‘undesirable’ behavior or mistakes
their ‘sins’ so to speak and seek forgiveness. Instead of using a Catholic
confession booth, I thought it would be fitting to provide athletes with a more
appropriate room for sportsmen/women and there is no better room for this
than the ‘change room’. A play on words here as a ‘change room’ is used by
athletes to change clothing, shower etc. and the impact of creating ‘change’
in that room by apologizing and seeking forgiveness. The ‘change’ is the
important part for brands and consumers to grant athlete’s
forgiveness/understanding. The ‘change room’ will provide ‘room’ for mistakes
as that is the underlying message of the activation.
5.3.2 ACTIVATION EXECUTION:
30. 29
The execution of the activation was done through a documentary/commercial
that best captures my concept. This medium was chosen, as it was believed the
activation concept (‘the change room’) is best illustrated. A visual and audio
representation I believe is more appealing, interesting and exciting compared
to a confession book or diary that would achieve the same concept. A
documentary/commercial also reaches a broad spectrum of people and can
therefore reach a large amount of people in a short space of time if put on the
appropriate channels (For example; TV, YouTube, Facebook, Blogs and on
brand pages).
The activation framework stems from reality TV series like Jersey Shore, The Big
Brother series and Geordie Shore. Where characters are provided with a
confession room where they are recorded revealing different secrets about
people, thoughts on a topic or anything else they wish to share with the public
(see Appendix 2, Figures 1 & 2). The activation follows the same concept except
the ‘confession’ room the athletes will use to share/apologize will be a real
‘change room’ in a sporting facility with a camera they can record an apology
on. The athletes are recognized by their name appearing on the screen when
they speak (Figure 2) as well as recognizable clothing and personality
characteristics. The change room will be recognized as there are cues within the
room like boots, dirty clothes on the floor, juice bottles, the seating, lockers and
hanger for clothes, tog bags and various pieces of sporting equipment.
The activation follows a documentary format where athletes throughout time
who have made different mistakes will come into the ‘change room’ and
apologize for their mistake. The documentary will start with the earliest mistakes
and work its way through time by recording different athletes as they apologize
in the change room. By doing so this will indicate that ‘we’ humans have been
making mistakes throughout time that we regret, emphasizing that mistakes are
a part of life.
Unfortunately, as it was impossible for these athletes themselves to come to the
‘change room’ to record their mistakes for the short film these confessions were
acted by actors who acted as if they were the ‘athlete’ in first person.
31. 30
The use of real life ‘stories’ of athletes who have made mistakes were used, they
ask for forgiveness for their mistake while being recorded in the ‘change room’.
The mistakes chosen are from athletes who have made common mistakes
anyone could have made. For example like drinking and driving and being
criminally charged. This is a very common mistake which consumers and
athletes are both victims of committing. The reason for choosing common
mistakes is to make the message relatable and effective for consumers. Once
an athlete has confessed his mistake the screen goes black and a researched
statistic appears on the screen with the amount of (for the purpose of this
example) ‘drinking and driving charges’ in white writing. Further indicating how
‘common’ the mistake is, in so doing connecting deeper with consumers by
making the athletes appear ‘normal’. Followed by the line ‘we all make
mistakes’ to reinforce the activation message.
To create a deeper impact, mistakes that have caused a controversial stir in the
media and have gained major headlines in the past were utilized. To name a
few throughout time like Diageo Maradona’s ‘hand of God act’ 1986, Hansie
Cronje’s match fixing 2000, , Tiger Woods adultery scandal in 2009, Lance
Armstrongs doping confession in 2013 and most recently Michael Phelps drinking
and driving charges. Through the athlete sharing their mistake, they are making
a ‘change’ and admitting their guilt.
Along with revealing statistics of different mistakes made by people, during
some confessions by athletes in the ‘change room’ the documentary does
switch to some of the footage of the ‘mistake’/ act they are referring to. This
happens while the athlete continues to speak and once the clip is done the
screen switches back to the athlete, who will continues on speaking.
The idea created is that all athletes can go to the ‘change room’ if they have a
mistake they want to share to make a change by moving forward and not
doing it again. The documentary concludes with the final message, “We all
make mistakes, Bounce Back!”
5.4 CONCLUSION:
32. 31
From the research findings it can therefore be concluded that that more brands
should use athletes to advertise as they not only have the ability to reach a wide
target audience but they are a sustainable tool for advertising as there are such
a wide variety of athlete personalities available to align a brand with. Initially the
assumption was made that athlete endorsement was hugely risky for brands as
athletes are inclined to behave undesirably. This behavior was believed to have
been a poor reflection of the brand and would ultimately affect consumer’s
perception towards the brand. After an in depth analysis of various literature,
surveys and personal interviews it was concluded that this was not the case. It
appears that athlete endorsement is not as risky as was assumed and that in
fact consumers do not transfer the athlete’s negative personal behavior from
the athlete to the brand. Consumers did state however that they would be less
likely to support the individual athlete following participation in undesirable
behavior but that their participation would not tarnish their perception of the
endorsed brand.
Sport does have a wide target audience because as humans we are
mesmerized and enchanted by man’s ability to break limits and push
boundaries and continuously achieve what was thought to be undoable. These
attributes of what endorsed athletes are cable of speak to all ages and to
people of all walks of life which makes athlete endorsement an effective means
to advertise.
My recommendations based on research findings are therefore that athlete
endorsements are in fact a viable platform to use to advertise. The difficult part
for brands is to align an athlete that encompasses what their brand stands for
and to ensure that the chosen athlete will be able to maintain a high level on
field performance and continue the success that they were endorsed for.
Endorsing a successful athlete is the key for brands because the success of the
athlete will rub off onto the brands products and as a result will increase sales
which is the ultimate goal for brands.
When brands are looking to endorse an athlete a useful tool that will ensure that
they endorse the right athlete would be to use authors Parker and Fink’s theory
by applying the three criteria being Expertise, Attractiveness and Trustworthiness
to select an athlete (Parker & Fink, 2012). Although it was suggested that an
athlete could be an affective endorser if they only meet two of the three criteria
33. 32
my recommendation is that the athlete needs to strongly meet all three of the
criteria to ensure he or she will be an effective and engaging endorser for a
sustainable period. I can therefore conclude by saying that athlete
endorsement is a viable platform to advertise.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aaker, D. A. & Joachimsthaler, E., 2009. In: Brand Leadership. London: Pocket Books, p.
351.
Anon., 2014. Telegraph.co.uk. [Online]
Available at: http://fashion.telegraph.co.uk/beauty/news-features/TMG3341168/Male-
order-the-rise-of-the-metrosexual.html
[Accessed 20 03 1014].
34. 33
Blitz, R., 2010. Just do it: Why Nike boos kept Tiger. Finacial Times; Tiger Sponsors Stays
True, May, pp. 2-2.
Bush, A. J., Martin, C. A. & Bush, V. D., 2004. Sports Celebrity Influenceon the Behavioral
Intentions of Generation Y. Journal of Advertising Research , 44(1), pp. 108-118.
Carlson, B. D. & Donavan, D., 2013. Human Brands in Sport: Athlete Brand Personality
and Identification. Journal of Sport Management, 27(3), pp. 193-206.
Cook, G., Erwin, K., Carmody, P. & Enslin, D. C., 2010. How healthy is your brand?. Brands
and Branding, October, pp. 12-14.
Co, W. C. S. a., 2014. Dictionary.com. [Online]
Available at: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tipping+point
[Accessed 16 March 2014].
Database:, B. S. P., 2013. Tiger Woods, Nike And Winning. Forbes.com, 27 March, pp. 41-
41.
Database, P. R., 2013. Europa.eu. [Online]
Available at: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-210_en.htm
[Accessed 15 03 2014].
Durante, T., 2013. Mail Online. [Online]
Available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2281136/Nike-Oakley-cut-ties-
Oscar-Pistorius--months-dropping-Lance-Armstrong.html
[Accessed 19 May 2014].
Fizel, J., McNeil, C. R. & Smaby, T., 2008. Athlete Endorsement Contracts; The impact of
conventional stars. International Atlantic Econoimic Society, 14(2), pp. 247-256.
Golf Today, 2005. Golf Today. [Online]
Available at: http://www.golftoday.co.uk/news/yeartodate/news00/woods13.html
[Accessed 19 May 2014].
Gray, R., 2003. Brand Athletes. Marketing (00253650), 27 November, pp. 27-27.
Jason I. Miletsky, M. H., 2009. Topic #76 Are Celebrity Endorsements Worth the Expense?.
In: Perspectives on Marketing. Boston, MA,USA: Course/Technology/Cengage Learning,
pp. 277-283 (417).
Johnson, B., 2005. No more Heroes?. Marketing Week (01419285), 12 May, 28(19), pp.
26-29 (4pages).
McCarthy, 2013. Advertising Age. [Online]
Available at: http://adage.com/article/news/nike-s-tiger-woods-ad-winning-takes-
care/240549/
[Accessed 28 June 2015].
35. 34
McGhee, T., 2012. The rise and rise of the athlete endorsements. Journal of Brand
Strategy, 1(1), pp. 79-84.
Nike, 2014. Nike.com. [Online]
Available at: http://www.nike.com/us/en_us/
[Accessed 12 April 2014].
Ohanian, R., 1991. The impact of the celebrity spokespersons' percieved image on the
intention to purchase. Journal of Advertising Research , 31(1), pp. 46-54.
Oxford University Press, 2001. Oxford English Dictionary. New York: Oxford University
Press .
Parker, H. M. & Fink, J. S., 2012. Arrest Record or Openly Gay: The Impact of Athletes'
Personal Lives on Endorser Effectiveness. Sport Marketing Qarterly, 21(2), pp. 70-79 .
PGA , 1995-2014. PGA Tour. [Online]
Available at: http://www.pgatour.com/
[Accessed 23 April 2014].
Pilson, N., 2005. Golf Today[Interview] 2005.
Smith, C., 2012. Lance Armstrong And Why Sponsors Need To Rethink Athlete
Emdorsement. Forbes.com, 18 10, pp. 30-30.
Website, 2014. Dictionary.com. [Online]
Available at: http://dictionary.reference.com/
[Accessed 1 July 2014].
Welman, K. M., 2005. Research Methodology. 3rd ed. Cape Town: Oxford University
Press Southern Africa .
Yong, K. G.-., Ruihley, B. J. & Dittmore, S. W., 2012. Impact of Perceived On-Field
Performance on Sport Celebrity Source Credibility. Sport Marketing Quarterly,
September, pp. 147-158.
Appendix 1
