Commercial practice – and pressure – tend to frame fans as revenue opportunities. But even when commercialisation of a fanbase is written into the business plan, simply equating a fan to a customer will be counter-productive, because it simply doesn’t equip the rightsholder (or sponsor) to understand the true nature of the fan-rightsholder value exchange – or manage it for the best.
The Fan and the Consumer
In the post Adding value to fans, we looked at Bain’s Elements of value framework, which is intended as a tool to manage the product – value equation, helping businesses to engineer value into a product.
Our first reaction was that it’s not directly applicable to rightsholders. Although it identifies a sub-set of emotional benefits which are highly relevant to fans (such as hope and affiliation), it makes the mistake of viewing emotion as a discrete layer of value. In reality, the entire value exchange equation between a club and its fanbase is based on emotion.
Now we’re doubling down on that position. Through the lens of psychology, the relationship between consumer and product bears very little resemblance to the relationship between fan and team. And the nature and quality of that relationship filter every perception of product value. (This piece is mainly considering the question from the team – fan perspective.)
So we would argue that sports fans deserve their own model. But where to begin? Especially when the term fan is used to refer to supporters, members, customers, viewers and a whole load more. Between those many valances, relationship permutations are endless.
Psychological contract
The starting point for us has to be the idea of psychological contract. It’s an idea that first emerged in the workplace to express a concept which is re-emerging now with a vengeance in the dimension of psychological safety.
The underlying idea is that it’s not the employment contract in itself that keeps people at work – it’s the emotional contract. (Assuming of course that the employment contract is honoured…)
The psychological contract represents the employee’s expectations of how s/he will be treated at work – the levels of trust, respect, community and opportunity that s/he will be shown. Exceeding expectations is usually matched by a greater level of ‘discretionary goodwill’: we all know of examples where employees continue to work without payment, such is the strength of the psychological contract. On the other hand, when treatment falls below expectations, it’s an opportunity for rupture.
Historically, going back 30, 40 years, the fan:team relationship felt quite one-directional, with fans investing heavily in the relationship with their support and little visible communication coming back – at least, not by today’s standards. But even then, there were implicit expectations from the fans’ side. Expectations of basic honesty : do I trust the management? Does the club’s commitment to winning match the commitment I feel to support it? Does it value the support I offer? The relational integrity of the emotional contract, expressed here in these leading questions, has long been critical.
For today’s sporting corporation, the situation is almost flipped and the changes of the last 40 years have made management of the psychological contract extremely challenging.
The ownership of many clubs calls into question the fundamental focus on winning and performance. Meanwhile, the ubiquity of digital media can easily lay bare discrepancies between words and action – seen recently in the case of MUFC and Mason Greenwood.
But a strong psychological contract has to be the foundation for any model of value exchange between fan and team.
Every transaction is emotional
In our earlier post, we explored how social exchange theory offers a useful framework for the tone and content of fan communications. But social exchange theory also applies to other sorts of exchange and, as we intuitively know, the emotion felt by all parties to an interaction will impact their future exchanges and relationships. Positive exchanges will strengthen, and negative transactions weaken or ultimately destroy a relationship.
In our earlier post, we explored how social exchange theory offers a useful framework for the tone and content of fan communications. But social exchange theory also applies to other sorts of value exchange and, as we intuitively know, the emotion felt by all parties to an interaction will impact their future exchanges and relationships. Positive exchanges will strengthen, and negative transactions weaken or ultimately destroy a relationship.
During my NGO time I came to realise that every transaction was emotional. Nearly every spend or commitment to the charity was discretional so goodwill was a far greater factor than for any purely commercial brand.
The same is true for most rights-holders. Products and services are judged (leniently, for the most part) against traditional criteria: the real measure is against the emotional contract. Is this transaction aligned with the emotional contract I feel? Is my commitment (financial, time, emotional) applied to serving what I believe are the interests of the Club? This, if you like, is benchmark value.
To strengthen the psychological contract, and ultimately to strengthen fan revenues, clubs and their sponsors need to be aware of the other psychological value fans are getting – and how to deliver it.
There are a number of academically validated motivational models for sports fans, of which the Sport Fan Motivation Scale is one of the best known. Research has validated the dimensions of the scale and its accuracy across fans – from casual to fanatical. The SFMS offers a macro framework to cover a huge range of interactions with sport – from buying a shirt to joining the Barmy Army. But the SFMS is weakened by its breadth: it lacks the specific focus of the fan relationship.
Social identity
A more helpful framework is offered by the concept of social identity and the connection between identity and community.
Social identity theory specifies three stages of group belonging: broad social categorisation (I’m a football fan`), social identification (I’m a Spurs fan) and finally social comparison Spurs fans are better. (Purely hypothetical example.)
And because social identification goes hand in hand with emotional investment, self-esteem is directly linked to the status of the group. This is normally viewed through the lens of on the pitch performance, so the sustained poor or underperformance of a team challenges self-esteem, a state that Eric Simons articulates brilliantly in The Secret Lives of Sports Fans, as he dissects the relationship of fans with the chronic failure of Cleveland’s MBA, NFL and MLB teams.
Social identity theory offers two simple but profound insights for clubs and sponsors.
Focus on fans as a community
The first is that the primary function of the club is to coalesce a community. As academic research has repeatedly shown, feeling connected to other people via community fulfils fundamental psychological needs for acceptance and social connection. The size and visibility of fan communities make this feel like a platitude, but its implications are vast.
Communities can just ‘happen’ – around a particular point of fascination; but they can also be consciously nurtured. Looking to positive communities beyond the worlds of football or sport, we see a strong sense of shared values (in environmental organisations, for example), a clear and shared purpose (in many NGOs), a thriving ecosystem of micro-communities (in real world communities); and broad platforms for participation and self-expression and individual initiative (in self-organising communities such as community clubs.
Clubs often appear to feel that their fan community can be satisfied with info, content and promotions – as consumers, in other words. Club Foundations and Trusts engage with civic community but there is a clear separation between the two. Activations which leverage the characteristics of positive communities have untapped potential both for clubs and sponsors.
Factor in fan feelgood
The second is the direct link between affiliation and self-esteem, again the subject of extensive research. The greater the intensity of fandom, the greater the impact of the team’s performance on self-esteem, especially when a team is struggling and social comparison is hard.
But although on pitch performance will always be the ultimate metric of performance, leadership or innovation in other areas provide an alternative basis for comparison. Environmental or social performance offer a strong platform, but so does any intelligent initiative by the Club. So Wolves’ creativity around branding, Luton’s statement of values, Huddersfield’s ‘Up the town’ and Spurs’ stadium rank alongside Liverpool’s environmental standards, Southampton’s Halo Effect or for that matter, the soft toy bonanza of Real Betis.
None of these can truly offset the match day performance, but they build community and give fans another reason for pride.
Real Betis has built brand fame and fan self-esteem with a simple matchday initiative. which transcends its on pitch performance.
Kevin Naigle, the Huddersfield owner, is building the HUFC brand with its self-funded reality series, Up the Town.
Liverpool leads the pack with its BSI ISO 20121 for sustainable event delivery.
The emotional model
So the Club model for elements of value looks a little like this.
At the bottom, we have Trust – the psychological contract, without which the rest of the model is swiftly irrelevant.
Above Trust, Innovation, Leadership and Community are all pre-requisites of a stable and engaged fanbase.
Bain’s heirarchy, which still needs detailed reworking sits on top.
If you’re looking at growing fan revenue, please just consider the holistic nature of the value exchange.
