The Myth of the Sponsorship Magic Bullet
Posted: 7/9/2010 3:53:17 PM by
Carrie Urban Kapraun | with 0 comments
It is understandable that so many organizations and brands struggle with comprehending and managing sponsorship. All things considered, sponsorship and its iterations can certainly be overwhelming. Unfortunately, there is not a single right answer or approach, there are no standard relationships and there is not a sponsorship magic bullet (is there ever?).
There is the definition of sponsorship, and then there is the interpretation of it. In theory, most organizations and brands realize that sponsorship is different from philanthropy or advertising, and they know that it is more than exhibiting or on-site or televised visibility. Yet, a sponsor relationship can include any or all of these. Additionally, there is the challenge, or perceived challenge, of balancing or choosing among sponsorship, advertising, donations, exhibiting, etc.
Whatever form it takes, the end result of a corporate relationship should be one that is empowering for both parties, not limiting, overly restrictive or unnecessarily constrained by definitions.
Sure, I would like to believe that sponsorship can have a prominent place in every organization and that given the right tools and information, every property or brand can implement a successful sponsorship program. Fortunately, many organizations are able to realize sponsorship success, although the definition of success may be different than the planned outcome. However, over the years, I’ve encountered some organizations that needed to think outside of the realm of sponsorship to consider other options. Sometimes, sponsorship isn’t the answer, or isn’t the whole answer.
For example, I worked with a new organization recently that had a really unique sponsorship offering. The sponsorship opportunity included significant brand visibility in public spaces, similar to outdoor advertising.
My role was to help the property understand through a valuation the sponsorship fair market value of the opportunity that they were proposing. Basically, I helped them to assess what a potential sponsor would pay to associate with the organization and have access to the assets that they could provide. The exercise proved that the value of the opportunity was considerable.
Although, there was still a larger question that needed to be answered – was selling a major, long-term sponsorship to the property the right approach, or would the property and its potential partners be better served by an advertising-based model? Furthermore, did the property’s approach need to be defined as advertising versus sponsorship or could the property offer both types of relationships? Armed with an understanding of the sponsorship value, the property was better equipped to decide the best approach.
Along the same lines, I’ve also seen some organizations that have less developed sponsorship programs, but have really rich advertising, exhibiting or fundraising capabilities. A common question is – can a property grow its sponsor relationships without diminishing its well established advertising/exhibiting/fundraising relationships? Also, can and how does a property provide a sponsor with meaningful recognition when it has numerous avenues for a company to become involved?
For sure, a property can grow its sponsor relationships, maintain a balance between sponsors and advertisers, and provide meaningful sponsor recognition; it is just that the path to success is different for each organization.
Overall, I want to use this blog post as a reminder to organizations and companies to approach sponsorship with an open mind and to consider all possibilities.
What approach does your organization take? How have you balanced or decided between sponsorship and other corporate relationships? What are some of the challenges?
Read more blog posts
Filed under: valuation