Assignment type: EssayWord limit: 3,000 wordsTopic: Evaluation of primary and secondary stakeholders for an event are crucial for effective management. Discuss comparing two different types of events giving applied examples.

IntroductionThis essay examines the significance of stakeholder management for successful event project management, drawing from the two types of event, which are festival and convention. According to Reid and Arcodia (2002), stakeholder theory has been developed since 1960s in the business management field, and then applied in the event management field. Although Young (2010) acknowledges a fundamental complexity of stakeholder management, O’Toole (2011) asserts that events involves more stakeholders than other types of projects. Therefore, scrutinising the case studies would be reasonable to explore more insights into stakeholder management. The two different types of event comes from the categorisation by Bowdin, et al (2011). Regarding convention, this essays draws from wider literature since the convention industry embraces meeting, incentive travel, conference and exhibition (MICE) (Nadkarni and Leong Man Wai, 2007), and convention and visitor bureau (CVB) (Sheehan and Ritchie, 2005; Ford and Peeper, 2008; Ford, et al, 2009; Woo and Ladkin, 2011), moreover congress and seminar (Rogers, 2003). Hence, this essay will firstly review the development of the concept of stakeholder management, and then will examine festival and convention cases in stakeholder management point of view, then finally will conclude with insights.

BackgroundStakeholder Management in the Business and Project Management FieldsStakeholder management has been developed in the business management field, and then the project management field. Applying the first ever conceptualisation of stakeholder by Stanford Research Institute in 1963, Freeman (1984) defines stakeholder as “any group or individual who can affect or is affected by achievement of the organization’s objectives” (p. 46). In the stakeholder theory, managing confliction with stakeholders is essential for business development, and also the success of business is measured based on various perspectives of stakeholders (Reid and Arcodia, 2002). Also, only companies that are able to attain loyalty from stakeholders can survive in the competitive business environment (Campbell, 1997). Underpinning this view, succeeding scholars have developed the theory in the project management field. Stakeholders exist inside as well as outside an organisation, and also in the peripheral business environment at large (Keeling, 2000). Further, they have objectives to be involved in the project with particular views and opinions (Nokes, et al, 2003). Moreover, have power and influence that impact on the project (Young, 2010). In addition, they measure the success of the project from multiple aspects other than time, performance and cost, which are fundamental requirements of the successful project (Lock, 2007). However, Campbell (1997) claims that it is difficult to explicitly mention who are stakeholders and who are not, and what they expect regarding the project. This is because their objectives may be closed or hidden (Young, 2010). Keeling (2000) explains the characteristics of stakeholders as internal stakeholders are easily identified and their expectation is clear, and external stakeholders are also easily identified, but their expectations are various and less obvious, whilst peripheral stakeholders are difficult to be identified. This complexity of the stakeholder environment necessitates appropriate stakeholder management (Young, 2010). For effective management, Keeling (2000) suggests identifying, grouping, and communicating as approaches. In terms of identification and grouping, Wheeler and

19 January 2015, (c) Yusskei, http://yusskei.net/

1

Sillanpää (1998) provide the framework of primary and secondary stakeholders. Primary stakeholders are directly involved in the organisation, which might include customers, employees, invester, supplier, local community and other business partners, whilst secondary stakeholders are indirectly involved, which might include civil society and interest groups (Wheeler and Sillanpää, 1998). Nokes, et al (2003) believe effective communication with identified stakeholders allows the organisation to gain support from them, which consequently becomes the significant factor of the successful project.

Stakeholder Management in the Event Management FieldFollowing the development in the business and project management studies, stakeholder theory has been applied in the event management field. This would be because project management approach is deemed to be transferable to event management field since they have significant similarities in their principles (Williams, 2012). Also, as its nature, establishment of an event necessitates cooperation with others. Moreover, as the event has grown, it has involved wider sectors from public to private, which consequently require the event to address wider objectives (Bowdin, et al, 2011). Therefore, the development of stakeholder theory in event management field would be spontaneous. Amidst the development of the theory, argument has embraced the concept of the event lifecycle. Although Bowdin, et al (2011) explain that the cycle consists of initiation, planning, implementation, staging and shutdown stages, Van der Wagen and White (2010) highlight that stakeholder management can shape event planning and implementation, whilst O’Toole (2011) stresses that stakeholders affect the entire cycle. When it comes to the stakeholder management approach, Bowdin, et al (2011) define identification, classification and communication as a process. In this regard, Reid and Arcodia (2002) suggest categorisation of primary and secondary stakeholders based on directness of involvement. Primary stakeholders are directly involved individuals or groups in the event, which the event necessitates for implementation. This includes employees, volunteers, sponsors, suppliers, spectators, attendees and participants. Secondary stakeholders are indirectly involved ones, which might impact on the event. It includes government, host community, media and tourism organisations (Reid and Arcodia, 2002). Regarding this management approach, O’Toole (2011) states that appropriate classification of stakeholders allows the event organisation to communicate and manage stakeholders efficiently.

Festival TypeThe first case of festival type is the study by Spiropoulos, et al (2006) regarding an ethnic festival 20th Greek Festival of Sydney (GFS) in 2002, which examined stakeholder identification and categorisation, and assessed the festival in stakeholders management perspective. Based on the interview to eight key members of GFS organisation, observation of the organisation and festival visitors, and organisation’s document analysis, the study identified stakeholders and classified them into three main groups as follows. The first group is the marketing stakeholders which include contents, venue and promotion stakeholders and visitors. The second group is the administration stakeholders that include human, financial and infrastructural resource providers. The third group is the production stakeholders which include local authority and event-production suppliers. When it comes to the assessment, in marketing stakeholders perspective, significant cooperation of Greek government enhanced contents quality, particularly in terms of artists provision. Also, endorsement from Australian government allowed the festival to be highly profiled, as the government acknowledges that the festival is one of the official cultural events in Sydney. Furthermore, the venue, which is not relevant to Greece, was preferred by visitors owing to highly accessible location. In addition, wider media involvement, not only Greek community media, but also city-wide media, contributed to attract further visitors. In terms of administrative stakeholders

19 January 2015, (c) Yusskei, http://yusskei.net/

2

perspective, the festival benefited from considerable support from a voluntary ethnic community Greek Orthodox for resources provision, which includes festival bord member, office and equipment, and finance. As the case of multiple festivals, Getz, et al (2007) investigated 13 festivals, from music and party to multiculture, film and performing arts themes, in Canada and Sweden regarding stakeholders identification, classification and relationship between the festival organisations and their stakeholders. Having conducted the survey to festival managers, the study identified seven stakeholder roles as follows. Festival organisation is a central position as it includes event owner, director, employees and volunteers. Co-producers are voluntary participating organisations. Facilitators are organisations that assist resource provision. Suppliers and venues are resource providers. The audiences and the impacted are festival visitors and anyone who is affected by the event or the organisation. Allies and collaborators are organisations that provide intangible cooperative support. Regulators are the bodies that authorise any regulations related to the event. When it comes to the relationship between the organisers and their stakeholders, some key issues were described as follows. Firstly, cities are likely involved in as the one of key stakeholders since the most of festivals rely on public funding. However, it was also indicated that the cities play the multiple roles other than financier, such as collaborator for promotion and regulator of safety requirement. Secondly, sponsor development, such as from supplier to partner, was indicated, which could be important aspect for resource securement. Finally, although conflicting group against the event might exists in local communities, majority of event visitors come from the community. This would imply carefull management with the city is required. Subsequently, developing the earlier study, Getz and Andersson (2010) examined 193 festivals across Sweden, Norway, Australia and the UK specifically concerning the relationship between festival organisation and stakeholders. Based on the survey to festival managers, the study conceptualised four stakeholder relationship patterns as follows. Firstly, venue-first is the case that event depends on specific venue, which is the most popular pattern among Norway, Australia and the UK. However, it was pointed out that this tendency might deteriorate visitor experience in the event, such as accessibility. Secondly, government-first is that the event pursues local policy as a community social institution rather than profitable organisation in market mechanism. Thirdly, customer-first is the case that the event takes visitors into account the most, which is particularly popular in Sweden. This type of event likely largely depends on ticket sales, which indicates potential financial risk that comes from insufficiency in sponsors. Finally sponsors-first is the type that the event relies on sponsors, which is the least popular pattern in the study. This would be explained because most festivals are not profit-oriented and also also might avoid reliance on sponsors since they position themselves as a community-serve organisation. Overall, festivals tend to be venue first and government first, therefore, customer as well as sponsor are likely secondary objectives, which implies potential unbalance of resourcing. This would be improved by adopting more market-purposed strategy such as customer and supporter development such as attracting new segment of consumers and turning supplier to supporter. These attempts can also carry sustainability to the event.

Convention Type The first case of the convention type is the study by Sheehan and Ritchie (2005) regarding CVB through International Association of Convention and Visitor Bureaus (IACVB), which examined stakeholders identification, evaluation and management approach. Having conduct the survey to 91 executives registered in IACVB, the study revealed the diversity of stakeholders identifications and management strategies. Firstly, regarding identification, the executives listed 32 different stakeholders in total. Secondly, regarding recognition and perception, the executives acknowledged that the most important stakeholder is hotel, which 63% of the executives mentioned, followed by local government, and regional and national government. This would highlight importance of hotel as a key supplier of conference, and of governments as significant finance

19 January 2015, (c) Yusskei, http://yusskei.net/

3

providers. In fact, the executives expressed that the most important role of stakeholders is to provide and to assist finance, and also that the most crucial threat is withdrawal of finance. Thirdly, concerning stakeholder management strategy, the tendency were shown as follows. The most common strategy is collaboration and involvement, which include cooperative activities and solicitation of opinion for decision making. It was also revealed that the reasons of the previous least successful projects are derived from insufficient communication, over reliance on a few stakeholder’s voice, and exclusion of some stakeholders from decision making. This would clearly indicate salience of appropriate stakeholders management. Also convention is examined in CVB context by the Ford and Peeper (2008) and Ford, et al (2009). Firstly, Ford and Peeper (2008) investigated CVB industry in the US through the interviews to 18 CVB executives, and concluded that successful executives are aware of importance of managing stakeholders. Subsequently, Ford, et al (2009) examined stakeholders classification and management approach. The categories are divided into 6 according following conditions; Firstly, resource allocation to CVB is direct or indirect, and secondly, overall stance is supportive, neutral or conflicting. The study specifically highlighted the importance of taking neutral stakeholders into account since they can become positive as well as negative. Although it is crucial to manage direct but negative stakeholders, it is also important to involve indirect but positive stakeholders because CVB can gain more resources from them. The study concluded that the framework enables CVBs to efficiently allocate their time and effort to manage key stakeholders with priority, and in turn to secure resources to operate. Also it was stressed that it is necessary not only to identify the stakeholders, but also to maximise and benefit from the relationship with stakeholders. This argument was evidenced by the example in the study as follows. Although an executive experienced criticism from a TV station, the executive pointed out its sponsors predominantly consist of local car dealers. Subsequently, to explain how much the CVB can contribute car industry, the executive gave presentations to the dealers. As a result, since the dealers recognised the importance of the CVB, the TV station ceased the criticism. This case would implicitly show the executive transformed the neutral stakeholder, the car dealers, into the supportive stakeholder. Unlike the earlier two studies, Morla and Ladkin (2007) examined successful factors of the convention industry in Santiago de Compostela in Galicia, Spain from stakeholders perspective, and the study indicated that the stakeholders have consensus on the competency of the industry. The survey was conducted to 12 representatives of public and private sectors in the city, which include department of congresses, conventions, and incentive travel in Galicia, PALEXCO, the convention and exhibition centre in Galicia, Santiago de Compostela Convention Bureau, and Turgalicia, Galician tourism agency as public, and European Federation of the Association of Professional Congress Organisers, conference and exhibition centers, travel agencies, hotel organisations, and a research consultant as private. The findings indicated mostly the stakeholders acknowledge the excellence of the convention industry, and agree the quality of infrastructure, transportation, human resource and marketing, which menas that the stakeholders have positive consensus regarding the industry. Also, the study concluded with suggestion of further cooperation for continuous success of the industry since strong consensus and integrated strategy among stakeholders can generate competitive advantage. In fact, cooperation with stakeholders was exemplified by Woo and Ladkin (2011) regarding the CVB industry in Busan, South Korea. The study reported that executives of CVB in Busan identify more then 100 stakeholders locally, such as accommodation suppliers, professional conference and event organisers, advertising firms, travel companies, transportations, media, local government and its agencies, and subsequently made the MICE alliance with them, which encourages stakeholders to participate in MICE related conference, oversea advertisement, MICE packaging and other marketing activities.

19 January 2015, (c) Yusskei, http://yusskei.net/

4

The evaluation study from stakeholders perception was also undertaken by Nadkarni and Leong Man Wai (2007) regarding MICE industry in Macao, China. Based on the survey to 76 domestic and oversea, public and private stakeholders, such as Macao Government Tourist Office and Macao Institute of Trade and Investment Promotion, the study showed stakeholders evaluation to the industry. As a result, service quality and government support were highly praised, which are derives from the establishment of Macao Business Tourism Centre by the Macao government, while MICE facilities and lodging was evaluated relatively low, which likely come from under development of accommodation by private sector.

DiscussionExamining the two types of event above, firstly, diversity in stakeholders would be explicitly demonstrated both in festival and convention. In the festival cases, Spiropoulos, et al (2006) classified the stakeholders into marketing, administration and production stakeholders. Also Getz, et al (2007) categorised them in festival organisation, co-producers, facilitators, suppliers and venues, the audiences and the impacted, allies and collaborators and regulators. In convention cases, Sheehan and Ritchie (2005) identified 32 stakeholders from private as well as public sectors. This would be the evidence that the events locate in the business environment in which numerous stakeholders exist. Hence, managing stakeholder could be inevitable. Secondly, resource mangement point of view is given in festival as well as convention. In festival cases, Getz, et al (2007) stated that stakeholder management allows the organisation to secure resources. This view was then evidenced by the development of the dependence patterns by Getz and Andersson (2010), which consists of venue-first, government-first, customer-first, and sponsor-first. In festival cases, Sheehan and Ritchie (2005) revealed that the CVB executives pay attention to stakeholder relationship especially in terms of venue and finance provision. Further, Ford, et al (2009) developed the management approach to stakeholders who provide resources. Moreover, Getz and Andersson (2010) acknowledged that appropriate resource management enables the event to be sustainable in longer-term. Finally, particularly in convention cases, competency perspective was described. Morla and Ladkin (2007) suggested that further collaboration of stakeholders can develop the convention industry in Santiago de Compostella. Also, Nadkarni and Leong Man Wai (2007) revealed that competitiveness of Macao CVB industry comes from collaboration of private and public sectors. This view was exemplified by Woo and Ladkin (2011), as the study reports competitive advantage of CVB industry in Busan is derived from MICE alliance of wider stakeholders. These perspective would clearly show importance of stakeholder management for competitive advantage.

ConclusionTo be concluded, stakeholder theory has been developed in business management and project management fields, then in event management field. Freeman (1984) defined stakeholders as any individual and groups that affect on or are affected by the organisation, and successive scholars have developed salience and approach of stakeholder management. Especially in event management context, O’Toole (2011) explains that appropriate stakeholders classification allows an event organisation to communicate with and manage stakeholders efficiently. Following the review of the preceding literatures, significance of stakeholder management was examined from the two types of event; festival and convention. The examination firstly evidenced that event might involve various stakeholders. Secondly it is also demonstrated that stakeholder management is important to maintain resources, and to gain competitive advantage. Hence, this essay concludes stressing the uniqueness of the business environment of the event, and the significance of stakeholder management especially in resource securement and competency points of view.

19 January 2015, (c) Yusskei, http://yusskei.net/

5

ReferencesBowdin, G., Allen, J., O’Toole, W., Harris, R., McDonnell, I. (2011). Event Management, 3rd ed. Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.

Campbell, A. (1997). Stakeholder: The Case in Favour. Long Range Planning, 30(3), pp. 446-449.

Ford, R. C., Peeper,W. C. (2008). Managing Destination Marketing Organizations: The Tasks, Roles and Responsibilities of the Convention and Visitors Bureau Executive. Orlando: ForPer Publications.

Ford, R. C., Peeper, W. C., Gresock, A. (2009). Friends to Grow and Foes to Know: Using a Stakeholder Matrix to Identify Management Strategies for Convention and Visitors Bureaus. Journal of Convention & Event Tourism, 10(3), pp. 166-184.

Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Getz, D., Andersson, T. (2010). Festival Stakeholders: Exploring Relationships and Dependency Through a Four-Country Comparison. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 34(4), pp. 531-556.

Getz, D., Andersson, T., Larson, M. (2007). Festival Stakeholder Roles: Concepts and Case Studies. Event Management, 10(2), pp. 103-122.

Keeling, R. (2000). Project Management: An International Perspective. Hampshire: Palgrave.

Lock, D. (2007). Project Management, 9th ed. Aldershot: Gower Publishing.

Morla, D. M., Ladkin, A. (2007). The Convention Industry in Galicia and Santiago de Compostela: Stakeholder Perceptions of Its Success and Potential for Growth. Event Management, 10(4), pp. 241-251.

Nadkarni, S., Leong Man Wai, A. (2007). Macao's MICE Dreams: Opportunities and Challenges. International Journal of Event Management Research, 3(2), pp. 47-57.

Nokes, S., Major, I., Greenwood, A., Allen, D., Goodman, M. (2003). The Definitive Guide to Project Management: The Fast Track to Getting the Job Done on Time and on Budget. Harlow: Pearson Educations.

O’Toole, W. (2011). Event Feasibility and Development: From Strategy to Operations. Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.

Reid, S., Arcodia, C. (2002). Understanding the Role of the Stakeholder in Event Management. In Jago, L., Deery, M., Harris, R., Hede, A., Allen, J. (eds). Events and Place Marketing: Proceedings of International Event Research Conference Held in Sydney July 2002. Sydney: Australian Centre for Event Management, pp. 479-515.

19 January 2015, (c) Yusskei, http://yusskei.net/

6

Rogers, T. (2003). Conferences and Conventions: A Global Industry. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Sheehan, L. R., Ritchie, J. R. B. (2005). Destination Stakeholders Exploring Identity and Salience. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(3), pp. 711-734.

Spiropoulos, S., Gargalianos, D., Sotiriadou, K. (2006). The 20th Greek Festival of Sydney: A Stakeholder Analysis. Event Management, 9(4), pp. 169-183.

Van der Wagen, L., White, L. (2010). Events Management: For Tourism, Cultural, Business and Sporting Events, 4th ed. Frenchs Forest: Pearson Australia.

Wheeler, D., Sillanpää, M. (1998). Including Stakeholders: The Business Case. Long Range Planning, 31(2), pp. 201-210.

Williams, N. L. (2012). Event Project Management. In Ferdinand, N., Kitchin, P. J. (eds). Events Management: An International Approach. London: Sage Publications, pp. 70-93.

Woo, G., Ladkin, A. (2011). How to Best Identify Influential Stakeholders: Developing a Case Study of Busan as a MICE Destination. In 9th APacCHRIE Conference, 2-5 June, Hong Kong. Available at: http://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/18965/ (Accessed: 25 December 2014)

Young, T. L. (2010). Successful Project Management, 3rd ed. London: Kogan Page.

19 January 2015, (c) Yusskei, http://yusskei.net/

7