Innovations in global sports brand management: the case of FC Barcelona’s Barça Museum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Ongoing improvements in sports management, marketing, fan experience, as well as corporate social responsibility (CSR) must be implemented by professional team sport organisations (PTSO). Yet, little is known about how and why PTSOs account for the impacts of their CSR initiatives.Design This case study analyses a one-of-a-kind sport for development museum. Curated by FC Barcelona’s Barça foundation, this innovative museum was designed to showcase, and account for, Barça’s social impacts.Findings Four main sections of the Museum are leveraged to translate the claim that Barça programs provide positive social impact.Research Contribution This paper illustrates how a museum becomes a significant asset for convincing and activating both fans of a PTSO as well as sponsors of a sport-related foundation.Practical Implications This study invites CSR practitioners to reflect about innovations in how they account for the impact of their programs.Value How this unique SfD museum contributes to FC Barcelona’s efforts of becoming més que un club, or more than a club – and therefore allowing FC Barcelona to escape market logic on a planetary scale – is also discussed.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".