How did innovations
influenced the performance
of music festivals
By
Sven de Ridder
University of Groningen
Faculty of Economy and Business
MscBA, Strategy and Innovation Management
July 2014
First supervisor: R. van Eijk
Second supervisor: W. Killian McCarthy
1 Abstract
The aim of this thesis is to test the relationship between innovations and the performance of music festivals in the Netherlands. There are three types of innovation selected, namely process innovations, marketing innovations and online marketing innovations. On top of this, the effect of the economic crisis is taken into account. The economic crisis is measured in this thesis by the concept of resource scarcity. The thesis builds on existing academic literature, by diving deeper into the subject of innovation. Also, it enriches the field of music festivals. The findings of this study show that resource scarcity influences the effect of process innovation and marketing innovation on the performance of music festivals. Resource scarcity even has a direct negative effect on the performance of music festivals.
2
Executive summary
The purpose of this study is to test the relationship between innovation and the performance of music festivals in the Netherlands. Music festivals have some unique characteristics which distinguish them from other organizations in different industries. Therefore, it is interesting to test if innovations have the same effect on the performance of music festivals as in other industries. Beside the effect of innovation on the performance of music festivals, the potential impact of the economic crisis is taken into account. The economic crisis is taken into account by using the concept of resource scarcity. Innovations have been studied extensively, and there is a lot of academic literature available related to innovation. There are numerous of different classifications within the concept of innovations. For the purpose of this study, three different types of innovation are selected. The types of innovation in this study are process innovation, marketing innovation and online marketing innovation. These three types of innovation are selected based on current academic literature.
By using online questionnaires, the innovativeness of music festivals is measured. The online questionnaire is completed by music festival managers. The online questionnaire consists out of several questions related to the music festivals, as well as statements about the innovativeness of the music festival.
The relationship between innovation and the performance of music festivals is tested through a regression analysis. The regression analysis resulted in six models. At first, the control variables are entered. Secondly, the independent variables and the moderator are added. In the last model, the interactions are included. Three models are related to the occupancy of the music festivals, the other three models are related to the mission of the music festivals. The results of this study show some interesting relations.
3
Table of Contents
1. Introduction... 5
1.1 Research question ... 5
1.2 Scope and domain... 6
1.3 Reading guide ... 7
2. Theoretical Background ... 8
2.1 Introduction of festival and event management ... 8
2.2 Festival performance ... 9
2.3 Innovation ... 10
2.4 Innovation in festivals ... 11
2.5 Music festival innovations ... 12
2.5.1 Process innovation... 13
2.5.1 Marketing innovation ... 14
2.5.1 Online marketing innovation ... 15
2.6 Resource scarcity ... 16
2.7 Summary ... 16
3. Conceptual model and Hypotheses ... 19
3.1 Process innovation ... 19
3.2 Marketing innovation... 19
3.3 Online marketing innovation ... 20
4
4.4.4.4 Grants ... 27
4.4.4.5 Aim for profit ... 27
4.4.4.6 Location ... 28 4.5 Data analysis ... 30 4.6 Sample selection ... 30 4.7 Quality criteria ... 32 5. Results ... 33 5.1 Correlations ... 33 5.2 Regression analysis ... 34 6. Discussion ... 37 6.1 Control variables ... 37 6.1.1 Size ... 37 6.1.2 Grants ... 38
6.1.3 Aim for profit ... 38
6.1.4 Location ... 39
6.2 Independent variables ... 39
6.2.1 Process innovation... 39
6.2.2 Marketing innovation ... 40
6.2.3 Online marketing innovation ... 41
6.3 Moderating effects ... 41
6.3.1 Process innovation... 42
6.3.2 Marketing innovation ... 42
6.4 Additional findings ... 42
7. Conclusion, implication and limitations... 44
7.1 Conclusion ... 44
7.2 Implications ... 45
7.2.1 Implications for theory ... 45
7.2.2 Implications for practice ... 45
7.3 Limitations and future research ... 46
7.3.1 Limitations ... 46
7.3.2 Future research ... 46
8. References ... 48
5 1. Introduction
In December 2007, the economic crisis started in the United States (Devine & Devine, 2012). The economic crisis in the United States affected all other economies in the world, which led to a worldwide economic recession (Devine & Devine, 2012). The Netherlands felt the economic crisis the most in 2009 (OECD, 2013). The employment in the Netherlands dropped, household consumption dropped and the possibilities regarding credits were tight (OECD, 2013). Not only the consumers struggled with the financial restrictions, also governments and organizations experienced the consequences of the economic crisis (Smeral, 2010). Companies were more conservative regarding sponsoring, and governments were cutting grants. The financial downturn, as described above, made it hard for events and festivals to survive (Devine & Devine, 2012). Individuals and communities, especially in times of crisis, have to make choices regarding their budgets (Goldblatt & Lee, 2012). According to Goldblatt and Lee (2012), festivals and events are likely to suffer from these budget choices. Also governments tend to cancel granting festivals and events in order to balance their budgets. Because of that, managements of festivals and events are struggling to overcome these challenging periods in order to prepare themselves for the future (Goldblatt & Lee, 2012).
Despite the negative effects of the economic crisis, financial restrictions are also found to foster innovation and creativity (Devine & Devine, 2012). Festivals, beside the above described financial restrictions, always face changes and challenges that make it hard to survive. Opportunities arise in these dynamic situations, and according to Carlsen et al. (2010) innovating in different aspects of festival management practices is one of them. The different practices of festival management include programming, financial planning, marketing and service provision (Carlsen et al., 2010). The response of festival management to the opportunities will determine the viability of the festival. Carlsen et al. (2010) state that innovation is a precondition for sustainability, and innovation is directly linked to competitive performance.
According to Getz (2010), the most studied topics in the field of festival and event management are economic development and impacts of events, sponsorship and event marketing from the corporate perspective, marketing and other management topics. Innovation in the field of festival and event management has received little attention (Carlsen et al., 2010). On top of this, the influence of financial restrictions on festival and event management has not gained a lot of attention (Goldblatt & Lee, 2012). Innovation, especially in times of economic crisis, can make the festivals flourish or vanish in the festival industry.
1.1 Research question
6
of the economic crisis is taken into account. The shrinking budgets are likely to impact the innovativeness of music festivals. The main research question of this study is;
“To what extent did innovations stimulate the performance of music festivals in the Netherlands during the economic crisis?”
To help answering the main research question, several sub questions will be answered first. The sub questions that will be answered are;
1. What is festival and event management? 2. What are the characteristics of music festivals? 3. What is innovation?
4. How do innovations in festival look like? 5. What is process innovation?
6. What is marketing innovation? 7. What is online marketing innovation? 8. What is resource scarcity?
1.2 Scope and domain
The concept of innovation has received a lot of attention in academic research over the years, and there is widely consensus that innovation is one of the most important sources of competitive advantage, especially in turbulent environments (Crossan & Apaydin, 2010). Despite the consensus about the consequences of innovation, theories and types of innovation are still scattered. The different theories and types of innovation show that there is little consensus about how and which types of innovation causes these positive effects.
There are certain specific differences between the manufacturing industry and the service industry (De Jong et al., 2003). The most important characteristics of services are; intangible, simultaneous produced and consumed, heterogeneous and perishable (De Jong et al., 2003). Among other things the previous mentioned characteristics make that innovations within the manufacturing industry and service industry differ. According to De Jong et al. (2003), innovations in service firms are often non-technological, and “involve small and incremental changes in processes and procedures”. Moreover, innovations in services are not restricted to the characteristics of products. It typically results in changes in the delivery processes and client interface as well (OECD, 2000).
7 1.3 Reading guide
8
2. Theoretical Background
In this section, existing literature will be used to set the boundaries of this study. At first, the field of festival and event management is introduced. Secondly, the concept of innovation will be discussed extensively.
2.1 Introduction of festival and event management
The first step in introducing the field of festival and event management is to define festivals. The definition of festivals is not simple, and there are many definitions in the current academic literature available. Festivals and events are, according to Jaeger and Mykletun (2009), experience goods. Festivals can only be experienced in the present, and only memories will last after the festival has ended (Jaeger & Mykletun, 2009). Another characteristic that all festivals have in common is that they are temporary. As a result, Jaeger and Mykletun (2009) define festivals as “a public, themed
celebration with a formal program. It has a core activity and additional activities. The festival has a timescale, in which it accomplishes both the core activity and the additional activities.” Noordman et
al. (2005) agree with the temporal characteristic of festivals. Noordman et al. (2005) define festivals as “a yearly or at least periodically event, which is characterized by gathering shows, in which
multiple shows are programmed directly after each other and/or at the same time. So, it is a collection of single cultural expressions, which plays in a set geographical area, for a relatively short period of time.” The definition of Noordman et al. (2005) will be used for the rest of this study.
The history of festivals and event management started in the early 1990s (Yeoman et al., 2012). Since then, the awareness and the opportunities of consumers in this area increased. According to Yeoman et al. (2012) the phenomenon of festival and event management has grown, and because people spend their full careers in this area the need for management and education becomes clearer. Moreover, Getz (2008) agrees with the statement of Yeoman et al. (2012) and state that “… events are too important, satisfying numerous strategic goals – and often too risky – to be left to amateurs”. The design, the production and the management of planned events, such as festivals, are all part of the event management field (Getz, 2008). In the following figure 1, Getz (2008) provides a typology of the main categories in the field of event management.
9
To get a more comprehensive view of festival management, Getz et al. (2010) discuss the costs and revenues of festivals. The costs of a festival largely consist out of artist fees (26%) and artist expenses (10%). Light and sound (10%) and the construction (14%) are also significant costs for festival management. The wages represent 14% of the costs, and royalties represent only 2,4 % of the costs in general (Getz et al., 2010). On the other hand, the revenues of festivals are generated mainly from ticket sales (34%). Other numerable revenues for festival management are local government grants (23%) and senior government grants (15%). Furthermore, sponsors (18%) and rents (from vendors and exhibitors, 22%) are the most relevant revenue streams for festival management.
Events and festivals can, in some way, be viewed as a new form of tourism (Yeoman et al., 2012). Festivals and events have the ability to promote a destination and draw the attention of tourists and thereby supporting the economic development (Yeoman et al., 2012). Following Yeoman et al. (2012), festivals and events have some unique characteristics which make them hard to generalize. The unique characteristics of festivals and events are; intangibility, inseparability and perishability (Yeoman et al., 2012). Moreover, the purposes of the festivals and events are much disseminated. Some aim to educate, some wants to entertain, others combine the educational and entertainment aspects and another focuses on sports or music (Yeoman et al., 2012). But, even though the purposes and aims of the festivals and events differ, the management issues are much alike. An increasing competitive environment and decreasing amounts of resources characterize the festival industry (Yeoman et al., 2012).
2.2 Festival performance
There are few studies which examine the relationship between different determinants and the performance of festivals. Özdemir and Çulha (2009) identify several festival practices that determine the satisfaction of the visitors. The festival practices Özdemir and Çulha (2009) investigate are; festival area, staff, food, souvenirs, convenience and information. The performance of the festival is measured by the satisfaction of the visitors. The visitor satisfaction in turn influences the loyalty of the visitors, so whether the visitors come back to the festival (Özdemir & Çulha, 2009). The study shows that only the festival area has a direct positive effect on customer loyalty (Özdemir & Çulha, 2009).
The study of Cole and Chancellor (2009) also examine the relationship between several festival practices and the festival performance. Cole and Chancellor (2009) study three categories of festival practices and their impact on festival performance, namely programs, amenities and entertainment. The performance of the festival is measured by questioning the overall experience of the visitors (Cole & Chancellor, 2009). In turn, the visitor experience is related to the re-visit intention of the visitors. Cole and Chancellor (2009) found that programs, amenities and entertainment have a direct positive effect on the overall experience of the visitors. Also, they found that the overall experience has a positive effect on the re-visit intention of the visitors (Cole & Chancellor, 2009).
10
results of their study show that age, maximum visitor capacity and the scope of the audience have a negative effect on the performance of music festivals. The location (rural vs city) is found to have a direct positive effect on the performance of music festivals.
In all studies that are discussed before, it is clear that the intention of the visitors to come back to the festival is important in measuring the performance of festivals. Current studies clearly do examine the relationship between several festival management practices and the success of festivals (Leenders et al., 2005; Özdemir & Çulha, 2009; Cole & Chancellor, 2009). The results of these studies indicate that there are several practices which have a direct positive effect on the performance of music festivals. However, the previously discussed studies don’t take innovations into account. The potential of innovations is discussed by Carlsen et al. (2010). Innovation refers to the introduction of new or modified practices, processes, methods, products and services (Gössling et al., 2008). The focus on this study will not be on the festival management practices previously studied. Rather, the purpose of this study is to test the relationship between different types of innovations and the performance of festivals.
2.3 Innovation
The term innovation has been discussed for a long time, and since Schumpeter (1951) it has been central in the discussions about competition, entrepreneurship and organizations (Gössling et al., 2008). Especially innovation in the field of entrepreneurship has been researched extensively, however innovation in the field of festival and event management has not gain much attention (Carlsen et al., 2010). Remarkably, there is no clear consensus about the definition of innovation, which is illustrated by the definition of Kanter;
“Innovation refers to the process of bringing any new, problem solving idea into use. Ideas for reorganizing, cutting costs, putting in new budgetary systems, improving communication or assembling products in teams are also innovations. Innovation is the generation, acceptance and implementation of new ideas, processes, products or services… Acceptance and implementation are central to this definition; it involves the capacity to change and adapt.” (Gössling et al., 2008).
According to Gössling et al. (2008), there are two dimensions that are clear in this definition. On the one hand there is a dimension related to the ‘focus’, which has to do with the form of the innovation. On the other hand, the ‘impact range’ indicates that an innovation can be new to any market segment, or new to the world. The range of the innovation is not important, as long as it is new to some market segment or organization (Gössling et al., 2008).
Building on from the characteristics of innovation, the study of Hjalager (2002) makes a further distinction regarding the impact of the innovation. Hjalager (2002) provides some examples to illustrate this. According to Hjalager (2002) there are four different types of innovations; regular,
niche, revolutionary and architectural. (1) Regular innovations are incremental, but over time the
11
change structures, set new rules and remodel the concept (Hjalager, 2002). Figure 2 displays the different types of innovations, along with some examples;
Figure 2. Hjalager (2002)
Another study of Hjalager (2010) captures other classifications of innovations. Hjalager (2010) distinguishes five different categories of innovations. At first, product or service innovations refer to changes in the current product and service offerings and are immediately perceived by the customers as new (Hjalager, 2010). Secondly, process innovations are improvements in backstage activities and aim to increase efficiency and productivity. Typically, the introduction of new technologies is used to realize these improvements (Hjalager, 2010). At third, managerial innovations refer to changes in the internal collaboration, such as empowering staff and new rewarding systems (Hjalager, 2010). The fourth distinguishing Hjalager (2010) makes is management innovation. This kind of innovation is related to the relationship between the organization and the customer. The last type of innovation identified by Hjalager (2010) is institutional innovation. Institutional innovations refer to new organizational structures, such as networks and alliances (Hjalager, 2010).
2.4 Innovation in festivals
12
because festivals cooperate with many different actors to organize and market their festival. Festivals must be viewed within the network they operate, and in that way innovation becomes a multiple project process (Larson, 2009). By viewing festivals within the network they operate, the potential of innovations in festivals becomes even more promising (Larson, 2009).
The network in which festivals operate is studied by Larson (2009) and Getz, Andersson and Larson (2007). They have identified ten different actors which form the network of festivals. (1) The festival
organization consists out of management, staff and volunteers. They manage, plan and execute the
festival. (2) The audience, or the customers, is the most important stakeholder and is crucial to the survival of the festival. (3) The city/municipality is also crucial for arranging the festival, most of all because they permit the festival to take place. (4) The sector is another important stakeholder. For instance the music industry can be connected to the festival theme. (5) Restaurants, market vendors
and voluntary associations also contribute to the value creation of the festival by exhibiting their
activities. (6) The media often has a mutual dependent relationship with the festival. Newspapers, radio, television and the Internet provide their customers with information, and the customers seek for information about the festival on different media. (7) Suppliers are necessary, and have a commercial relationship with the festival. (8) Sponsors are important stakeholders. They provide the festival with certain resources, and in return they use the festival for exposure. (9) Allied festivals can cooperate on activities such as security. (10) The public consists of the people who live in the community in which the festival takes place.
The network in which festivals are active can be seen as a project network, which means that the network consists out of a web of relationships (Larson, 2009). Taking the network into consideration, Mackellar (2006) identified six types of innovations that festivals implement. (1) Social innovations refer to strengthening relationships to build social capital. (2) Marketing innovations, for example new markets identified and assessed. (3) Service innovations, for example new information services for audience. (4) Process innovations, for example new audience ticketing process. (5) Organizational innovations, for example new committee structure. And (6) product innovations, for example different usage of native food by celebrity chefs (Mackellar, 2006).
2.5 Music festival innovations
13
Especially in the industries where customers are looking for memorable and unique experiences, being creative and innovative is a prerequisite to perform well (Devine & Devine, 2012). Managers of festivals have to constantly monitor the needs of the customers, because the market demands in this industry are dynamic. According to Carlsen et al. (2010), festivals should be innovative in different management practices, such as programming, financial planning, marketing and service provision. In the field of festivals, innovation refers to “the introduction of new and useful products, services, methods, practices or processes that add value to the organization” (Carlsen et al., 2010).
In the study of Goldblatt and Lee (2012), festival and event managers ranked different practices and activities in order of importance. The practices and activities were related to the economic recession, and managers of festivals and events stated that increasing the marketing efforts was the most important practice to deal with the reduced resources (Goldblatt & Lee, 2012). Furthermore, Goldblatt and Lee (2012) found that work to reduce expenses overall and increasing the use of technologies are the most important practices for managers. Recalling the importance of innovations, the most important practices found by Goldblatt and Lee (2012) are related to process innovations and marketing innovations.
Based on the previous academic literature (Hjalager, 2002; Hjalager, 2010; Larson, 2009; Getz, Andersson and Larson, 2007; Mackellar, 2006; Goldblatt & Lee, 2012) the focus of this study will be on three different types of innovation. The three types of innovation that will be studied in this research are process innovation, marketing innovation and online marketing innovation. Hereafter, the three types of innovation will be further discussed.
2.5.1 Process innovation
According to Goldblatt and Lee (2012), one of the most important practices to deal with the scarce resources is work to reduce expenses overall. Following Wang & Ahmed (2004), introducing new methods and practices (such as new production methods, new technologies, new management approaches etcetera) to improve the production is called process innovation. In other words, process innovation refers to the introduction of new practices and methods to increase the productivity, and decrease the overall expenses. Process innovation is “an organizations ability to exploit their resources and capabilities, and most importantly, the ability to recombine and reconfigure its resources and capabilities to meet the requirement of creative production” (Wang & Ahmed, 2004). The term process refers to a bundle of activities that is comprised to produce a particular product or service. In other words, processes have to do with how the work is done, not what kind of work is done (Davenport, 2013). Within the process, the input and output is preset and constantly monitored. Also, there is a clear beginning and ending of the activities, which are set across time and place. This clear structure, that characterizes processes, is crucial to achieve the benefits of process innovations (Davenport, 2013). As previously discussed, Hjalager (2002) refers to this type of innovation as regular innovation. Also Hjalager (2010) and Mackellar (2006) describe process innovation.
14
organization to achieve reduction in the costs and time of processes. Moreover, process innovations can help organizations enhance quality, flexible service levels and other objectives (Davenport, 2013). So, according to Davenport (2013) process innovations refers to “the envisioning of new work strategies, the actual process design activity, and the implementation of the change in all its complex technological, human, and organizational dimensions” (Davenport, 2013).
2.5.2 Marketing innovation
Marketing innovation refers to “creativity in marketing needed by businesses to sustain their position, thus satisfying customer’s need with not only novel products, but also the way in which firms communicate about products in order to inform, educate and excite them” (Gupta & Malhotra, 2013). According to the study of Goldblatt and Lee (2012), the most important practice for managers of festivals is increasing the market efforts to deal with the economic recession. Festivals should have effective marketing plans in order to be successful (Devine & Devine, 2012). Marketing innovation refers to improvements in design, placement, promotion and pricing (Naidoo, 2010). Marketing can be effective to adapt quick and with low risk to decreasing demands during economic recessions (Naidoo, 2010). Naidoo (2010) states that there are numerous amounts of empirical evidence that found a positive relationship between marketing innovation and the survival of organizations during financial downturns. Mackellar (2006) also discusses this type of innovation, and uses the term marketing innovation. Hjalager (2002) refers to this type of innovation as revolutionary innovation. Marketing innovation, however, has not been the subject of much business literature (Augusto & Coelho, 2009). In contrast to marketing innovation, the concept of marketing orientation is better researched (Naidoo, 2010). Marketing orientation is defined by Augusto & Coelho (2009) as an organizational culture “that most effectively and efficiently creates the necessary behaviors for the creation of superior value for buyers and, thus, continuous superior performance for the business”. Naidoo (2010) defines marketing orientation as “understanding and satisfying customers and other relevant stakeholders”. Marketing innovation aims at developing new products or processes to improve performance, where superior performance refers to understanding and satisfying the customer needs the best (Naidoo, 2010). Looking at the concepts of marketing innovation and marketing orientation, it becomes clear that they are closely related (Naidoo, 2010). Although the link between marketing orientation and marketing innovation is not yet fully explained (Augusto & Coelho, 2009; Naidoo, 2010), the concept of marketing orientation have received a lot of attention from scholars and practitioners (Naidoo, 2010; Augusto & Coelho, 2009).
15 2.5.3 Online marketing innovation
One of the most important practices for festival managers is to increase the use of technology (Goldblatt & Lee, 2012). Social media is the most important trend regarding the use of technologies (Goldblatt & Lee, 2012). The rising popularity of social media has caused an increasing amount of users of social media, and social media can be a critical practice for festivals to improve their marketing efforts (Goldblatt & Lee, 2012). Devine and Devine (2012) confirm this potential of social media. They state that social media have changed the online marketing practices, whereby ‘normal’ websites are not sufficient anymore. With the creation of the Web 2.0 and the associated applications, the online environment is both increasing and changing (Devine & Devine, 2012). According to Kaplan and Haenlein (2010), Web 2.0 refers to the new platform where developers and users constantly modify and use the content and applications. In other words, Web 2.0 is more interactive in comparison to Web 1.0. With the online environment becoming more interactive, social networking sites (SNS) occurred (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). Social networking sites, or social media, refer to “a group of Internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0, and that allow the creation and exchange of User Generated Content” (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). People are using the internet different, for instance people are searching for people with the same interest, or using the internet to keep in touch with friends all over the world (Weber, 2009). Examples of social media are YouTube, Facebook, Wikipedia, Second Life and Twitter (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010; Devine & Devine, 2012). Moreover, Devine and Devine (2012) find the possible potential of developing applications (or “apps”) for a festival or event. Such an “app” could provide customers with festival information, maps, updates and messages.
Furthermore, increasing marketing efforts is founded to be a crucial element for festival and event management in economic challenging times. Moreover, Goldblatt and Lee (2012) state that the social media is an important tool in the festival and event industry. Especially for the increasing marketing efforts, the social media is found to be a key factor to generate higher profit margins. Social media can also strengthen the relationship with the customers, because social media makes it possible to gather the opinions and needs of the customers (Goldblatt & Lee, 2012). At last, Goldblatt and Lee (2012) state that “new levels of creativity” are required to survive the economic recession in the long run.
16 2.6 Resource scarcity
During the economic crisis, many organizations went bankrupt (Smeral, 2010). Organizations and governments were forced to take a critical look at their expenses, which resulted in many organizations stopping their sponsorships and governments stopping their grants (Smeral, 2010). Also Goldblatt and Lee (2012) support this, and argue that festivals are likely to suffer from the financial restrictions perceived by governments, organizations and customers. The economic crisis caused all governments, organizations and customers to take a critical look at their expense. Music festivals also experienced the consequences. But, these financial restrictions may not only hinder the music festivals in their performance. Devine and Devine (2012) argue innovation as being an activity for festivals that is stimulated by economic downturn. So, instead of the possible negative consequences of the economic recession, the financial restrictions might foster creativity and innovation (Devine & Devine, 2012).
Current literature in the field of resource scarcity mainly focuses on the reasons why organizations enter in mergers, acquisitions and franchising (Hillman et al., 2009). Resource scarcity is frequently related to the reasons why organizations franchise, for instance to get access to scarce resources such as capital (Castrogiovanni et al., 2006). Despite the fact that there is no clear definition, it become clear from the studies of Hillman et al. (2009) and Castrogiovanni et al. (2006) that resource scarcity concerns the absence of certain scarce resources within an organization. As a consequence of the missing scarce resources, Wicker et al. (2013) argue that those organizations tend to search for these scarce resources within other organizations.
The last economic recession undoubtedly affected music festivals in the Netherlands. Goldblatt and Lee (2012) discuss the budget choices the consumers had to make because of the recession. In their study, Goldblatt and Lee (2012) examine the impact of the economic recession from 2007-2009 in the United States on the festival and event industry. According to Goldblatt and Lee (2012), festival and event managements report decreased sponsorship, general impact of the economic recession on revenue sources, and increased service costs as the main causes for the decreasing profit margins. The findings of Goldblatt and Lee (2012) clearly underpin that the economic recession influenced the management of. However, Devine and Devine (2012) notice that resource scarcity can also foster innovation and creativity.
2.7 Summary
To conclude the theoretical background of this study, the above presented theory is summarized. Festivals can be seen as a form of tourism, and is recognizable because of the shared characteristics as services. The definition of a festival is “a yearly or at least periodically event, which is characterized
by gathering shows, in which multiple shows are programmed directly after each other and/or at the same time. So, it is a collection of single cultural expressions, which plays in a set geographical area, for a relatively short period of time” (Noordman et al., 2005).
The next topic that was discussed in the theoretical background is innovation in general. The definition of innovation used in this study is “the process of bringing any new, problem solving idea
17
communication or assembling products in teams are also innovations. Innovation is the generation, acceptance and implementation of new ideas, processes, products or services… Acceptance and implementation are central to this definition; it involves the capacity to change and adapt” (Gössling
et al., 2008). Also the different types of innovation introduced by Hjalager (2002) are discussed. Hjalager (2002) identifies four different types of innovation; niche, revolutionary, architectural and regular. These types of innovation are discussed and also some examples for the field of tourism are presented.
Following, the concept of innovation regarding festivals is discussed. Innovation in festivals must be viewed within the network they operate (Larson, 2009). The different actors within the network of festivals are identified by Larson (2009), and are discussed before. The result of identifying the actors that are active in the network of festivals is that Mackelar (2006) comes up with several types of innovations that are relevant for festivals. Mackellar (2006) identifies six types of innovations that festivals implemented; social innovations marketing innovations, service innovations, process innovations, organizational innovations, product innovations.
18
Concept Definition Reference
Festivals ‘A festival is a public, themed celebration with a formal program. It has a core activity and additional activities. The festival has a timescale, in which is accomplishes both the core activity and the additional activities.’
‘A festival is a yearly or at least periodically event, which is characterized by gathering shows, in which multiple shows are programmed directly after each other and/or at the same time. So, it is a collection of single cultural expressions, which plays in a set geographical area, for a relatively short period of time.’ Jaeger & Mykletun (2009) Noordman et al. (2005) Innovation (general)
‘Innovation refers to the process of bringing any new, problem solving idea into use. Ideas for reorganizing, cutting costs, putting in new budgetary systems, improving communication or assembling products in teams are also innovations.
Innovation is the generation, acceptance and implementation of new ideas, processes, products or services… Acceptance and implementation are central to this definition; it involves the capacity to change and adapt.’
Gössling et al. (2008)
Innovation (in festivals)
‘A process in which new and creative ideas are generated in parallel with adaptations to social trends.’
Larson (2009) Process innovation ‘An organizations ability to exploit their resources and
capabilities, and most importantly, the ability to recombine and reconfigure its resources and capabilities to meet the requirement of creative production.’
‘Introduction of new production methods, new management approaches, and new technology that can be used to improve production and management processes.’
Wang & Ahmed (2004) Ahmed (1998) Marketing innovation
‘Creativity in marketing needed by businesses to sustain their position, thus satisfying customer’s need with not only novel products, but also the way in which firms communicate about products in order to inform, educate and excite them.’
Gupta & Malhotra (2013) Social media ‘A group of Internet-based applications that build on the
ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0, and that allow the creation and exchange of User Generated Content.’ Kaplan & Haenlein (2010) Online marketing innovation
‘Change in the way that overall communication to, and with, customers is undertaken, and how relationships between service provider and customer are built and withheld.’
Hjalager (2010) Resource scarcity ‘The absence of particular resources (mostly capital) within an
organization.’
Wicker et al. (2013)
19
3. Conceptual model and hypotheses
In this paper, the relationship between different kinds of innovation and the performance of music festivals in the Netherlands will be tested. As previously discussed, the focus will be on process innovation, marketing innovation and online marketing innovation. Furthermore, the moderating effect of the economic crisis will be tested. The concept of resource scarcity will be used to test this possible moderating effect. The hypotheses that are going to be tested in this study are discussed hereafter.
3.1 Process innovation
As mentioned previously, process innovations refer to “the introduction of new production methods, new management approaches, and new technology that can be used to improve production and management processes” (Ahmed, 1998). The new or improved methods aim to make the processes more efficient, flexible or productive. In other words, process innovations aim to do reduce expenses overall (Goldblatt & Lee, 2012). By lowering the overall expenses, the time and costs of producing the product or service is reduced. Especially in the service industry, process innovations are found to be of great importance (Hipp & Grupp, 2005).
The relationship between process innovation and financial performance is directly observable with the process cost reductions (Davenport, 2013). Also the study of Goldblatt and Lee (2012) find that work to reduce overall expenses is one of the most important practices for management of festivals and events. Therefore, the following hypothesis is developed;
H1a: Process innovation is positively related to the performance of music festivals
On top of the relationship between process innovation and performance, resource scarcity is expected to impact the innovativeness of music festivals (Devine & Devine, 2012). The absence of resources can improve the creativity, because the music festival management has to be creative with the few resources they do have. As a consequence, the following hypothesis is tested;
H1b: The relationship between process innovation and performance is strengthened by resource scarcity
3.2 Marketing innovation
20
communicate about products in order to inform, educate and excite them” (Gupta & Malhotra, 2013). Marketing innovation is tested by using different constructs, such as market orientation, market innovation and marketing innovation (Augusto & Coelho, 2009). Marketing innovation is found to have a direct positive effect on performance (Shergill & Nargundkar, 2005). On top of that, marketing innovation is found to impact the competitive advantage of organizations, which in turn leads to higher performance (Naidoo, 2010).
Also the study of Goldblatt and Lee (2012) confirm the positive relationship between marketing innovation and performance. In their study, Golblatt and Lee (2012) find that increasing the marketing efforts is the most important practice for managers of festivals and events to deal with the scarce resources. Subsequently, the next hypothesis is formed;
H2a: Marketing innovation is positively related to the performance of music festivals
Devine and Devine (2012) discussed the potential impacts the economic crisis can have on festivals. Festivals are likely to suffer from the financial restrictions perceived by customers, organizations and governments (Devine & Devine, 2012). On the other hand, the economic crisis can lead to fewer resources for festivals. These financial restrictions are argued to foster creativity and innovation within festival management. As a consequence, the following hypothesis is tested;
H2b: The relationship between marketing innovation and performance is strengthened by resource scarcity
3.3 Online marketing innovation
One of the most important future practices for managers in the field of festivals and events, is the use of new technologies (Goldblatt and Lee, 2012). With the accelerating rise of new technologies, the online platform has become more interactive (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). This is called Web 2.0, and some examples of Web 2.0 applications are Facebook, YouTube, LinkedIn and Twitter. By using these social platforms, festivals can interact with their visitors extensively. Also, the visitors can interact with each other (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010)
Devine and Devine (2012) confirm this potential of social media, and states that the online platform is changed in such a way that ‘normal’ websites are no longer sufficient. Social media can support the marketing activities of festivals and events (Goldblatt & Lee,2012), and have enormous potential because it can easily reach a lot of customers (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). Therefore, the following hypothesis is developed;
21
As previously discussed, the economic crisis affected the whole world (Devine & Devine, 2012). This resulted in many organizations, customers, governments and also festivals facing revenue problems (Smeral, 2010). The potential of social media is enormous, and one important reason for this enormous potential is the fact that social media can reach a lot of people in a relative easy way (Weber, 2009). Also, the costs of using social media are low (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). The scarce resources, combined with the low costs and the high potential of social media resulted in the following hypothesis;
H3b: The relationship between online marketing innovation and performance is strengthened by resource scarcity
3.4 Conceptual model
In here, an overview of the previously discussed hypotheses is presented. Also, the control variables are introduced. The control variables will be discussed in the following section.
22 4. Methodology
4.1 Research outline
The main point of attention in this study is to test the relationship between innovation and the performance in musical festivals within the Netherlands. The previously described theoretical background is built on academic literature, and based on this theoretical background hypotheses are developed. In order to test the relationship between the different types of innovation and the performance of music festivals in the Netherlands, a quantitative method is used. Quantitative research methods, according to Thomas (2003), allow quantifying the measurements and amounts that are observed. And so, comparisons between and within music festivals in the Netherlands are possible. The aim of this study is to measure the impact of innovation on the performance of music festivals, and therefore the quantitative research method is preferred over the qualitative research method.
In order to collect the appropriate data for this study, online questionnaires were sent out to a significant amount of music festivals within the Netherlands. However, the first step in constructing the online questionnaire was doing pilot studies. By conducting pilot studies, the stories of the festival managers become more meaningful (Thomas, 2003). Based on academic literature and pilot studies, the online questionnaire was developed.
4.2 Data collection
23
provided the mail addresses of the music festival organizers. The music festival organizers were informed with information about the research, and they were reminded with a follow-up mail. At last, the music festival organizers were called when there was no response.
The online questionnaire consists out of several statements, with the 7-point Likert scale as answer possibilities. The 7-point Likert scale is used to give the respondents the opportunity to rate how strongly they agree or disagree with the statement (Zikmund et al., 2012). By doing so, the extent to which music festival organizers innovate become clearer. As previously discussed, the concepts of process innovation, marketing innovation and online marketing innovation are researched because they seem most relevant for music festivals.
4.3 Questionnaire
The development of the online questionnaire is an important part of the research, because it is crucial to ask the right questions by using the right statements. The process that led to the composition of the questionnaire consists out of using previous academic literature and conducting pilot studies. As previously discussed, the pilot studies were held with music festival organizers to shape the questionnaire and get feedback about the questions. The interviews were semi-structured, implying that shaping the questionnaire was the purpose of the interview but the music festival managers were free to tell what was on their mind.
The first construct used in this study is process innovation. The construct of process innovation is based on two studies: the study of Wang and Ahmed (2004) and the study of Ibrahim et al. (2009). Both studies focus on different kinds of innovation, ranging from strategic to behavioural innovation. To study these concepts, both Wang and Ahmed (2004) and Ibrahim et al. (2009) developed a construct to measure process innovation. Wang and Ahmed (2004) made use of statements and the answer possibilities are based on the 7-point Likert scale, with the answers ranging from 1= strongly disagree to 7= strongly agree. Ibrahim et al. (2009) also made use of statements, only they apply the 5-point Likert scale. For the purpose of this study, the construct of Wang and Ahmed (2004) and the related 7-point Likert scale is used.
The second construct used in this study is marketing innovation. The construct of marketing innovation is based on two studies: the study of Augusto and Coelho (2009) and the study of Naidoo (2010). Where the study of Augusto and Coelho (2009) more aim on the customer orientation of organizations, the study of Naidoo (2010) better fits the purpose of this study. In the study of Naidoo (2010), the concept of marketing innovation is tested developing a construct. The items were based on a 9-point Likert scale, with the answers ranging from 1= strongly disagree to 9= strongly agree. This study will use the statements of Naidoo (2010), with the answers ranging from 1= strongly disagree to 7= strongly agree.
24
Likert scale. The statements collect data about the perceived use and the perceived importance of the social media through the eyes of the music festival manager.
4.4 Variables
In this section, the different independent variables that will be tested are presented and also the different items that form the construct are introduced. Furthermore, an overview of all the variables and their related definitions, references and the operationalization are presented in table 6. At first, the different independent variables and the belonging references are displayed in table 2 below.
Process innovation Marketing innovation Online marketing innovation
Ibrahim et al. (2009) Wang & Ahmed (2004) Ahmed (1998)
Davenport (2013) Goldblatt & Lee (2012)
Naidoo (2010)
Augusto & Coelho (2009) Goldblatt & Lee (2012) Devine & Devine (2012)
Kaplan & Haenlein (2010) Goldblatt & Lee (2012) Hjalager (2010)
Table 2. References for the independent variables
4.4.1 Independent variables
The independent variables used in this study can be summarized as types of innovation. Within the concept of innovation, there are many classifications and types, which are discussed previously. In this study, the focus will be on process innovation, marketing innovation and online marketing innovation. Process innovation and marketing innovation have been researched in the past. The constructs that are developed to measure these concepts are based on academic literature and consists out of the following items presented in table 3. Also the way in which the concept of online marketing innovation is measured, is presented in table 3.
Process innovation – Wang & Ahmed (2004)
PI 1: We are constantly improving our business processes
PI 2: Our company changes production methods at a great speed in comparison with our competitors
PI 3: During the past five years, our company has developed many new management approaches PI 4: When we cannot solve a problem using conventional methods, we improvise on new methods
Marketing innovation – Naidoo (2010)
MI 1: Management actively seeks innovative marketing ideas. MI 2: Improvements in product design are readily accepted.
MI 3: Improvements in product promotional activities are readily accepted. MI 4: Improvements in product pricing are readily accepted.
25 Online marketing innovation
OMI 1: Our festival makes a lot of use of social media
OMI 2: Our festival depends heavily on the use of social media
Table 3. Independent variables items
4.4.2 Dependent variable
The performance of the music festivals will be the dependent variable, which is hypothesized to be influenced by the previous mentioned independent variables; namely process innovation, marketing innovation and online marketing innovation. The performance of music festivals is measured in two different ways.
The first way in which the performance of music festivals in this study is measured, is by looking at the number of visitors. As discussed before, music festivals want their festival to be visited by as many people as possible. Not only the ticket sales are greater when there are more visitors, but also the exposure of sponsors and other marketing activities is greater. However, in this study not only the number of visitors is used. This is because some music festivals can lodge a greater amount of visitors compared to other music festivals. Therefore, also the maximum number of visitors is taken into account. So the performance of the music festival is measured as the number of visitors divided by the maximum number of visitors. By looking at the occupancy of the festival, the performance of the music festival is better interpretable. Leenders et al. (2005) used percentage growth of the visitors as indicator of the music festival performance. However, some music festivals have a fixed amount of visitor capacity and so the growth in visitor percentage is not the best measurement. The second measurement for performance used in this study is based on the study of Vázquez et al. (2002). The measurement of the study of Vázquez et al. (2002) is related to this study, because they study non-profit organizations in the service industry. Music festivals in the Netherlands often have a non-profit mission. Vázquez et al. (2002) measure the performance by using a single question, for which a 7-point Likert scale is used. The degree of fulfilment of the organizations can range from 1= scarce fulfilment to 7= high fulfilment. The goals and missions of the different music festivals can differ, and so this question captures all the possible missions.
In this study, the profit is not used as performance metric because non-profit music festivals are also studied in this research. Also, many music festivals within the Netherlands may or will not present their profits. The two different ways to measure the performance of music festivals are presented in table 4.
Performance
1. Performance 1: Number of visitors
Performance 1: Maximum number of visitors
2. Performance 2: To what extent is the mission of the music festival fulfilled?
26 4.4.3 Moderator
The economic crisis lasted from 2007 until 2013 in the Netherlands (OECD, 2013), and this have caused many sponsors to stop sponsoring, and governments to cut grants (Smeral, 2010). During times of financial downturn, festival must find other ways to distinct themselves from other festivals. Innovation is one such way to stand out, and Devine and Devine (2012) argue that in times of economic crisis the creativity and innovation of music festivals is fostered.
In the study of Wicker et al. (2013), the concept of resource scarcity is tested. Resource scarcity in the study of Wicker et al. (2013) refers to resource problems. This is measured by using a single statement. In this study, this statement is used to measure to what extent the music festival experience resource problems. To answer this statement, a 5-point Likert scale is used. The answers ranging from 1= no problem to 5= very big problem. The measurement used in this study is presented in table 5.
Resource scarcity
Item 1: How would you describe the financial situation of your festival?
Table 5. Moderator item
4.4.4 Control variables
In conducting this research, it is important to take into account specific variables that can influence the performance of music festivals. These kinds of variables are referred to as control variables. Based on previous academic literature, the control variables of this study are chosen. Hereafter, the control variables used in this study are discussed.
4.4.4.1 Age
The first control variable of this study is the age of the music festival. Getz(2002) states that many festivals over the years tend to decrease in performance. According to Getz (2002), a plausible explanation for this observation is that the more often a festival is held, the less innovative the festivals are. Moreover, Andersson and Getz (2008) argue that festivals that are relatively young, are often more flexible. Therefore, the young festivals are likely to find new ways to organize their festival more efficient and effective (Andersson & Getz, 2008). This all relates to the concept of inertia, established festivals most often have structures and processes which makes them less adaptive. On the other hand, more established festivals have more experience (Andersson & Getz, 2008). The number of editions is used as a measurement for the age of the music festival.
4.4.4.2 Ticket price
27
Logically, the ticket price is found to have a positive correlation with the budget of the music festival (Leenders et al., 2005). Also, ticket price in the study of Leenders et al. (2005) correlates positive with the line-up of the music festival. So the higher the ticket price, the more budget a music festival has and the better the line-up is. Because the ticket price is found to correlate with the budget and the line-up of music festivals (Leenders et al., 2005), the ticket price is used as a control variable. It also makes sense that the ticket price impacts the performance of festivals. When visitors are willing to pay to visit the music festival it is likely to perform well. The ticket price is questioned as the price of the ticket for one day.
4.4.4.3 Size
The size of the festival refers to several aspects that determine the magnitude of a particular music festival. The size of a festival can influence the innovativeness, bigger festivals have access to more resources and capabilities that can drive innovative behavior (Andersson & Getz, 2008). In order to measure the size of the festival, the budget is used as an indicator of the size of the music festival (Jaeger & Mykletun, 2009). Music festivals that have more resources, can innovate more easily and also market their music festival better. Therefore, the size of the music festival is taken into account by questioning the budget of the music festival.
4.4.4.4 Grants
Devine and Devine (2012) studied the impact of the economic recession on the organization of events. The economic crisis impacted organizations and governments in their sponsoring. Organizations were more hesitant during the economic crisis to sponsor, and governments take a more critical look at their grants. Grants are an important source of income for music festivals (Andersson & Getz, 2008), and because of the economic recession some music festival lost that important source of income (Devine & Devine, 2012). It makes sense that music festivals that receive grants have more income sources compared to music festivals that doesn’t receive grants. On the other hand, music festivals don’t receive grants because they make big profits. Therefore, if the music festival receives grants is questioned.
4.4.4.5 Aim for profit
28
4.4.4.6 Location
Music festivals are experience goods (Jaeger & Mykletun, 2009). Therefore, all kinds of characteristics of the music festival can influence that experience of visitors. According to Leenders et al. (2005), the location of the music festival can be such a characteristic. Aspects such as the accessibility can influence the experience of visitors (Leenders et al., 2005). In their study, Leenders et al. (2005) measure the location of music festivals in two ways; city versus rural and central versus outer Netherlands. In this study, location is measured by dividing the Netherlands in four regions; north, west, east and south. North refers to the provinces Friesland, Groningen and Drenthe, west refers to the provinces Noord-Holland, Zuid-Holland and Utrecht, east refers to Overijssel, Flevoland and Gelderland and the south refers to Limburg, Zeeland and Noord-Brabant.
An overview of all the variables and their belonging definition, operationalization, scale and references are presented in table 6.
Variable Author Definition Operationalization Type Scale Process
innovation
Ibrahim et al. (2009)
‘Introduction of new production methods, new management approaches, and new technology that can be used to improve production and management processes.’ Festivals that introduce and improve new production methods are more innovative. Independent Ordinal Marketing innovation Gupta & Malhotra (2013) ‘Creativity in marketing needed by businesses to sustain their position, thus satisfying customer’s need with not only novel products, but also the way in which firms
communicate about products in order to inform, educate and excite them.’ Festivals that introduce and improve new marketing methods are more innovative. Independent Ordinal Online marketing innovation Hjalager (2010)
‘Change in the way that overall communication to, and with, customers is undertaken, and how relationships between service provider and customer are built and withheld.’
Festivals that make more use and are more dependent on social media are more innovative. Independent Ordinal Resource scarcity Wicker et al. (2013)
‘The absence of particular resources (mostly capital) within an organization.’
Music festivals that face resource scarcity have to be more innovative. Moderator Ordinal Performance 1 - Occupancy Leenders et al. (2005) ‘The performance of festivals is measured by looking at the number of visitors and the maximum number of visitors.’
The rate between the number of visitors and the maximum capacity = Occupancy
29
Performance 2 - Mission
Vázquez et al. (2002)
‘The extent to which the mission of the music festival is perceived to be fulfilled.’
The extent to which music festival managers perceive their mission to be fulfilled = Mission Age Andersson & Getz (2008)
‘Number of times the festival is held.’
Music festivals that are younger tend to be more flexible and innovative than older music
festivals.
Control Nominal
Ticket price Leenders et al. (2005)
‘The price that has to be paid to visit the music festival.’
Music festivals that have higher ticket prices have more income per visitor.
Control Nominal
Size Jaeger & Mykletun (2009)
‘Indicators of size are events’ budget.’
Music festivals that are bigger tend to have access to more resources, allowing them to be more innovative. Control Nominal Grants Andersson & Getz (2008)
‘Number of times the festival is held.’
Music festivals that receive grants are supported by governments and have more income sources.
Control Nominal
Aim for profit Andersson & Getz (2008)
‘Commercially motivated events, which are events constructed so that the organizers can make a profit.’
Music festivals that are commercial tend to be more innovative. Control Nominal Location Leenders et al. (2005)
‘Location of the music festival is measured by the region in which the music festival is held.’
Music festivals that are more accessible are likely to be experienced as better by the visitors.
Control Nominal
30 4.5 Data analysis
The data is collected by using the previously mentioned Qualtrics. The data from Qualtrics can be downloaded and used in the statistical program IBM SPSS Statistics 20 (SPSS 20). Within SPSS 20, several analyses can be made. The first step after the data is opened in SPSS 20, is to correct the data so that the statistical program can run the analyses in the correct way. After the data is corrected and the missing values are assigned, the basic analyses such as descriptives, frequencies and the correlations can be executed.
Hereafter, the factor analysis is used to test if the items that form the different constructs belong to the same construct. The principal component analysis is used to do the factor analysis, specified Oblimin with Kaiser Normalization. Several items needed to be deleted (MI4, MI5 and PI4). The KMO and Bartlett’s Test indicates whether the factor analysis is justified. The result (KMO= .685, sig.= .000) indicate that the factor analysis is justified.
The following step concerns the reliability of the before found constructs. The reliability analysis with the Cronbach’s Alpha is consulted to test if the constructs that are the result of the factor analysis are reliable. The Cronbach’s Alpha has to be above .70 in order to be reliable. The three different constructs that are found in the factor analysis show a Cronbach’s Alpha above .70. The regression analysis will be executed without the previously mentioned items MI4, MI5 and PI4. In table 7, the results of both the factor analysis and the reliability analysis are presented.
Items Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3
PI1 PI2 PI3 .960 .768 .632 MI1 MI2 MI3 .893 .839 .680 OMI1 OMI2 .974 .798
Name of factor Process innovation Marketing innovation Online marketing
innovation Percentage of variance explained 40,06 11,93 20.88 Reliability (Cronbach’s Alpha) .744 .752 .741
Table 7. Factor analysis Principal component analysis using Oblimin with Kaiser Normalization
4.6 Sample selection
31
Also, some music festivals were not able to provide correct information about the ticket price, the number of visitors, or the maximum number of visitors. The most important characteristics of the music festivals with their belonging frequency, range and mean are presented in table 8.
Item Frequency Range Mean SD
Music festivals 138 - - - Editions 138 1 – 150 12,91 15,68 Ticket price 136 € 0 - € 53 € 12,58 13,66 Employees 138 0 – 25 6,30 5,15 Budget 123 € 750 – € 1.500.000 € 133.217,48 €244.786,07 Visitors 130 100 – 200.000 8.635,05 25.131,55 Table 8. Descriptives
Within the sample of 138 music festivals that filled in the online questionnaire, there are several characteristics that are interesting to discuss and present. Next to the above mentioned figures, there are certain questions in the online questionnaire related to the characteristics of the music festivals. Interesting to see is that 77,5 % of the music festivals in the sample size stated that the music festival has the business form of a foundation. The second most reported business form is the private company, representing 9,4 % of the sample size.
Another interesting characteristic of the music festivals is the location where the music festival takes place. The districts in which the music festivals are held can be North, East, West and South. As can be seen in figure 4, the music festivals in this study are mostly held in the Southern region. The least music festivals take place in the Northern region.
Figure 4. Location
32
grants. The music festivals are asked if they receive grants or not. The figure show that almost the half of the music festivals reported that they received grants (52,9 %). Logically, the other half of the music festivals does not receive grants (47,1 %). Figure 5 show the distribution of the grants and aim for profit of the music festivals used in this study.
Figure 5. Grants and aim for profit
4.7 Quality criteria
Within this study, there are three quality criteria used to ensure that the results of this study are valuable. The three quality criteria are; controllability, reliability and validity. According to Van Aken et al. (2012), the first requirement is controllability. Controllability is a precursor for the other two quality criteria. Controllability refers to making clear how the study is executed (Van Aken et al., 2012). The purpose of controllability is that other researchers can replicate the study, and come to the same results. The steps that are taken in this study are discussed extensively, allowing other researchers to execute the study in the same way.
The second quality criteria Van Aken et al. (2012) discuss is reliability. Reliability in the field of research refers to whether the results are independent of circumstances and characteristics, and because of that can be used in other studies (Van Aken et al., 2012). Reliability is based on several potential biases, namely researcher, instrument, respondents and situation biases(Van Aken et al., 2012). So, when the results are independent of the researcher, the instruments, the respondents and the situation, the research is reliable.
The last quality criterion that is identified by Van Aken et al. (2012) is validity. Validity, according to Van Aken et al. (2012), refers to the justification of the research. In other words, validity has to do with the results and the way in which these results are generated. The reasoning of the study must show that the study results are plausible.
