Brand and Value Co-Creation: A Stakeholder Approach to Ottawa's CFL Expansion Franchise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study intended to advance the understanding of brand and value co-creation in sport management. A single exploratory case study of the Ottawa REDBLACKS, the CFL expansion franchise launching in 2014, was conducted. The purpose of the research was to unveil the practices that could lead to brand and value co-creation in the relationships between the Ottawa REDBLACKS and their stakeholders. Semi-structured interviews were performed with 20 participants from the focal organization’s network of stakeholders. The sample was built through a purposeful and snowball sampling method that added to stakeholders identified from the literature. Archival data of media publications, organizational online content, and radio podcasts were also gathered in order to complement the data from the interviews. The deductive and inductive data analysis highlighted five main practices that could lead to brand or value co-creation in the stakeholder-firm relationship performance in a unique sport context: establishing relationships, supporting public relations, sharing resources, enhancing the experience, and driving brand image. The findings explained that joint actions between stakeholders and the REDBLACKS can lead to increases in brand equity and value creation. In the end, the study suggested that future research should investigate the threat of co-destruction.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".