Publication:

台灣飲料業參與運動贊助之研究─以三個典型個案為例

本研究目的為探討現今台灣飲料製造業參與運動贊助之動機、考量因素、決策模式及贊助行為的相關性。研究範圍以近三年曾參與國內運動贊助之飲料企業，並以其負責運動行銷之單位主管為受訪對象，透過深度訪談方式，並採用典型個案抽樣法來選取樣本，經過聯繫後，接受訪談的企業分別有金車大塚股份有限公司（寶礦力水得）、美商安海斯布希亞洲股份有限公司（百威啤酒）、名牌食品股份有限公司（悅氏礦泉水）。

透過歸納比較分析，發現三家企業在參與運動贊助之動機上，金車大塚為提升企業形象；安海斯布希為增加銷售量；而名牌食品則為增加銷售量及增進品牌知名度。在考量因素上，金車大塚為企業目標的考量；安海斯布希與名牌食品皆以產品與商標目標作為考量。三家企業在參與運動贊助之決策模式，金車大塚為理性模式；安海斯布希為卡內基模式；而名牌食品則為垃圾桶模式。贊助行為上，三家企業皆贊助過籃球運動；受益對象多為運動賽事和運動組織團體；贊助資源僅安海斯布希為提供產品，金車大塚及名牌食品皆提供金錢和產品；三家受訪企業中，金車大塚與名牌食品贊助國內運動皆是長期耕耘的心態，而安海斯布希則限於資源因素，僅能短期個案投入；企業參與程度方面，僅金車大塚是採主動與主辦單位聯繫，安海斯布希及名牌食品則透過行銷公司聯繫。

The purpose of this research was to examine the motivation, consideration, decision model and behaviors of the beverage industry involvement in sport sponsorship in Taiwan. The results will offer an insight and as a guideline for marketers and sport organizations to generate a better and reciprocal sponsorship projects in the future.

In this study, the in-depth interview was used to collect the data. After selecting and contacting, three major beverage manufacturers who have been taking part in sport sponsorship in the past three years were willing to participate in the study. The three subjects were the King Car Otsuka Co., Ltd.(KCO), Anheuser-Busch Cos., Ltd.(A-B) and Young Energy Source Co., Ltd.(YES). Upon data collection, induction was utilized to analyze the data. The findings are in the followings:

1)Sponsorship motivation: The major sponsorship motivation for KCO was to improve the corporate image, A-B wanted to increase sales records, and YES sought for sales and brand awareness.

2)Consideration factors: KCO considered corporate image improvement. Sales volume was the main factor for A-B and YES.

3)The decision making model: according to Draft(1992)’s contingency decision making model, KCO belonged to Rational model, A-B was Carnegie model and YES had a Garbage Can model.

4)Sponsorship behavior: Three manufacturers sponsored basketball tournaments. They sponsored sport organizations and events mostly. KCO and YES provided cash and products. Unlike its parent company in U.S., the A-B in Taiwan preferred to provide products only due to limited budget. KCO and YES have been involving in sport sponsorship for years. However, because of the inadequate resources, A-B can only exercise short-term plans. KCO contacts sport organization directly, while A-B and YES solicit sport organization through marketing firms.