MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1516847715 · doi:10.9876/sim.v16i2.333

Information Technologies and the Management of Mega-Events: the Case of the UEFA European Football Championship â an Institutional Approach

2011· article· en· W1516847715 on OpenAlexaff
Muriel Mignerat, Luc K. Audebrand

Bibliographic record

VenueSystèmes d information & management · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSport and Mega-Event Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MonctonUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChampionshipOrder (exchange)Work (physics)InstitutionFootballPublic relationsEmerging technologiesBroadcasting (networking)Mega-Knowledge managementBusinessSociologyMarketingPolitical scienceAdvertisingComputer scienceEngineeringSocial scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study adopts an institutional approach to analyze the introduction of new information technologies (IT) in the management of mega-events. More specifically, it focuses on the last three UEFA European Football Championship (2000, 2004, 2008), a period during which the nature of technologies used has changed dramatically. A qualitative approach is adopted and the two main technologies identified (e-ticketing and online broadcasting of results) are compared to each other and over time. We suggest that actors purposefully adopted these technologies in order to influence the institution to which they belong (the UEFA). Actors perform institutional work with the objective to create, maintain or disrupt this institution. Our results unveil several strategies enacted to use IT in order to adopt new practices. The adoption of e-ticketing, inspired by established practices in other tournaments, was supported by technical work that aimed at defining this new way of doing things and at educating users. The online broadcasting of results is based on technical and cultural work: actors also made an effort of theorization and education; it was also an opportunity for reinforcing the mission and the central values of the UEFA. Overall, this study is, to our knowledge, a first effort in the literature to understand the role of IT in the management of mega-events, and it provides a new angle to the study of IT actors as change agents, that of an institutional actor.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.809
Threshold uncertainty score0.549

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSystèmes d information & managementSame topicSport and Mega-Event ImpactsFrench-language works237,207