Understanding the league sport participation experience utilizing the critical incident technique.

Ruihley, Brody J. ; Greenwell, T. Christopher

Understanding the League Sport Participation Experience Utilizing the Critical Incident Technique

In the participant sport industry, a regular patron tends to be the most important customer. Whether the patron is a season ticket holder, a club or league member, or just a continually returning customer, that person is vital as ongoing participation generates much of the revenue for sport clubs, centers, and other membership-based organizations (Iwasaki & Havitz, 2004). With more participation opportunities for sport consumers such as golf, tennis, bowling, fitness centers, climbing facilities, martial arts, baseball/softball, or youth sports, and also the opportunity to choose different service providers within each sport, the need to satisfy and retain participants is critical to an organization.

For example, the majority of participation in a recreational softball league consists of the same participants playing in the respective league year after year. In order to be successful from a business standpoint, the league must adequately satisfy as many players as possible as it is often more profitable and less expensive to retain existing customers than to recruit new customers (Fornell & Wernerfelt, 1987; Reinartz, Thomas, & Kumar, 2005; Zeithaml, 2000). Retention is not automatic, as recreational softball players have choices. A player dissatisfied with the league may choose to switch to another league, such as a YMCA league, parks and recreation league, or church league. Further, softball players dissatisfied with their experience may choose to change recreational activities all together. Satisfied consumers, on the other hand, are likely to be retained (Crawford, Greenwell & Andrew, 2007; Howat & Murray, 2002; Searle, Mactavish, & Brayley, 1993). Therefore, it is vital for sport providers to understand which aspects of the participation experience are most important to sport participants. A better understating of these attributes may add insight into reasons why consumers continue to participate in the sport, switch providers, or discontinue their participation in the sport altogether.

Conceptual Framework

Satisfiers and Dissatisfiers

Satisfied customers are likely to continue consuming the service and are loyal to their service provider (Caruana, 2002; Davidow, 2000; Gustafsson, Johnson, & Roos, 2005; Olsen, 2002). Dissatisfied customers, on the other hand, are likely to either discontinue the activity or switch service providers. In addition, satisfied customers are likely to recommend the service or service provider. This action can influence new customer acquisition (Bansal & Voyer, 2000; Wangenheim & Bayon, 2007). Dissatisfied customers will convey their negative impressions of the service or service provider to potential customers (Anderson, 1998; Naylor, 1999) and possibly create a negative impression of the organization. Therefore, it is important to understand attributes of the service experience that generate strong positive or negative reactions, as those attributes are more likely to influence the overall satisfaction or dissatisfaction of customers (Johnston, 2004).

Similarly, leisure satisfaction, as defined by Beard and Ragheb (1980), is "the positive perceptions or feelings which an individual forms, elicits, or gains as a result of engaging in leisure activities and choices" (p.22). This definition identifies the feelings and perceptions about the engagement in an activity as the main source of satisfaction in leisure services. Leisure satisfaction is important in developing and retaining sport participants as leisure satisfaction has been found to be a factor in continuing participation in leisure activities (Crawford et al., 2007; Howat & Murray, 2002; Searle et al., 1993). These relationships have been validated in several leisure contexts such as parks and recreation (Backman & Veldkamp, 1995), sightseeing attractions (Yu, Chang, & Huang, 2006), physical activity programs (Crawford et al., 2007), sports and leisure centers (Murray & Howat, 2002), tourism (Bigne, Sanchez, & Sanchez, 2001), and festivals (Baker & Crompton, 2000). While much of the literature has focused on the relationships between these constructs, there is still much to be learned about the different attributes of quality that may contribute to leisure satisfaction/dissatisfaction.

Considering focal attributes of (dis)satisfaction may be context specific (Giese & Cote, 2000; Kueh, 2006), the satisfaction process can not be properly understood without identifying which attributes of the service encounter are important to participants. Current conceptualizations of recreational service quality illustrate attributes of the service experience beyond the core service (activity), as participants not only evaluate their experience participating in the sport, but their interactions with others and the physical context of the activity. In recreation and leisure, the delivery of the service may be as important as the core service. Alexandris and Palialia (1999) argue that sport organizations are complex because the products are the facilities and the activities offered. They are, in fact, the means of getting to the real product, since the experience of the participant is the unit of exchange with the customers. Although the product of participation can be spontaneous and unpredictable, emphasis can still be placed on the delivery or presentation prior, during, and after participation. Within the recreation literature, researchers have identified several dimensions of quality such as the core service (Chelladurai & Chang, 2000; Howat, Absher, Crilley, & Milne, 1996), secondary services or amenities (Howat et al., 1996), interactions (Chelladurai & Chang, 2000; Ko & Pastore, 2004; Papadimitriou & Karteroliotis, 2000) and physical environment (Absher, Howat, Crilley, & Milne, 1996; Alexandris, Kouthouris, & Meligdis, 2006; Chelladurai & Chang, 2000; Kim & Kim, 1995; Ko & Pastore, 2004; Osman, Cole, & Vessell, 2006). However, as Ko and Pastore (2004) point out, much of the research has used different conceptualizations of the service encounter encompassing a wide variety of attributes. Therefore, there exists a need to identify a more comprehensive list of attributes that may serve as antecedents in the satisfaction process.

Much of the research assumes dissatisfaction is merely the opposite of satisfaction, which does not address the complexities of the satisfaction process. Specifically, attributes of the service encounter predicting satisfaction may be independent of those predicting dissatisfaction (Cadotte & Turgeon, 1988; Friman & Edvardsson, 2003; Giese & Cote, 2000). Originally suggested by Herzberg, Mausner, and Synderman (1959) and subsequently supported in service quality research (e.g. Maddox, 1981; Swan & Combs, 1976), the two-factor theory posits that attributes causing satisfaction may be different than attributes causing dissatisfaction. Cadotte and Turgeon (1988) extended this theory to propose a four-category taxonomy (satisfiers, dissatisfiers, criticals, neutrals) to account for the idea that the two-factors may not always be mutually exclusive. Satisfiers can cause high levels of satisfaction, but failure in these areas does not necessarily mean customers will be dissatisfied. For example, Greenwell, Lee and Naeger (2007), in a spectator sport setting, found game atmosphere to be a satisfier, but not a dissatisfier. In other words, a good game atmosphere was likely to satisfy customers, but a lack of game atmosphere was not likely to increase dissatisfaction. Dissatisfiers, on the other hand, cause dissatisfaction when present, but may have no effect on satisfaction. For example, Howat and Murray (2002) found in a recreational sport setting, the performance of officials or umpires was a dissatisfier. When officials performed their roles poorly, customers were dissatisfied and complained, but good performances by officials did not necessarily satisfy customers. Criticals are aspects of the service encounter that affect both satisfaction and dissatisfaction. For these aspects, high service performance leads to satisfaction and low service performance leads to dissatisfaction. Neutrals are aspects of the service experience that have little impact on customer satisfaction.

While existing models incorporate dimensions beyond the core service, most were developed to address service quality specific to recreational facilities (e.g., health clubs, recreational centers) or agencies (e.g., parks departments) in which the core element refers to the range of services offered, rather than a specific activity. As such, these models may not identify attributes of the participation experience specific to the activity and distinct from attributes related to the service provider. Given participants have the option to continue participating in the sport, switch providers, or discontinue their participation in the sport altogether, it may be important to understand which attributes may contribute to satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the activity differently than the attributes contributing to satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the service provider.

Critical Incidents Technique (CIT)

The Critical Incidents Technique (CIT) makes use of the customer's words or actions to obtain data and examine a situation, allowing researchers to study phenomena in more depth than typical questionnaire methods (Gremler, 2004). CIT has often been utilized to explore customer perspectives on service quality (Bell, Gilbert, & Lockwood, 1997; Edvardsson, 1988), customer satisfaction (Backhaus & Bauer, 2000; Greenwell, Lee, & Naeger, 2007), service encounters (Bitner, Booms, & Tetreault, 1989; Grove & Fisk, 1997), and service failure (Bejou, Edvardsson, & Rakowski, 1996; Chung & Hoffman, 1998). CIT is often utilized in service research as it allows researchers to understand attributes of the service encounter critical in generating positive or negative consumer perceptions and is more methodologically rigorous than many other qualitative methods (Howat & Murray, 2002; Gremler, 2004).

CIT uses the words, responses, criticisms, stories, or observations of people and analyzes them to find themes and commonality to report. Data, in this approach, can be collected through interviews, observations, stories, and open-ended questions. There are many advantages to this approach. Primarily, CIT is the most appropriate research method for discovering the underlying sources of satisfaction and dissatisfaction in service encounters (Nyquist & Booms, 1987). CIT allows the researcher to get the customer's point of view on incidents within the organization (Greenwell et al., 2007; Edvardsson, 1992). Data collection methods provide another advantage, as participants in CIT studies are not limited in responses by circling a number on a scale or check marking a box. Instead, they are providing anecdotal information, which is useful in reducing some of the problems associated with differences between survey findings and participants' actual perceptions (Ravenscroft & Rogers, 2003).

Complaints and compliments are commonly used to identify critical incidents in service quality research (Friman & Edvardson, 2003; Goetzinger, Park, & Widdows, 2006; Greenwell et al., 2007; Roos, 2002).

Compliments are assumed to represent attributes of the service encounter related to satisfying consumption, while complaints represent attributes of the service encounter related to dissatisfying consumption (Friman & Edvardson, 2003). Compliments and complaints represent extreme attributes of their service encounter (good and bad), and the information provides insight into areas of the activity likely to generate strongly positive or negative reactions which may influence customers' satisfaction or dissatisfaction (Johnston, 2004).

Considering the need to understand what is important to participants, the purpose of the present study is to identify service quality attributes of the sport participation experience that may be most influential to customers' satisfaction and dissatisfaction. Specifically, this study aims to identify and categorize attributes that may favorably (satisfiers) or unfavorably (dissatisfiers) influence participants. Given sport participants not only take part in the activity, but also interact with the service provider, this study examines specific attributes as it relates to being a participant and consumer. This study employs the Critical Incidents Technique (CIT) to identify essential attributes of sport participants' experiences. Complaints and compliments relative to both the activity and the service provider are solicited and analyzed in order to gain a more thorough knowledge of the recreational customer's service experience.

Method

Sample

Data were collected from 396 participants competing in league bowling at one of two bowling centers. The bowling centers combined facilitate 84 lanes (40 and 44) and both are located in the same Southeastern United States city. Both facilities offered identical services as a result of the same management and ownership. League prices, conditions, and internal environment were identical for both facilities. League bowling provides a good setting for the study as it represents an activity dependent on ongoing participation. League bowlers tend to be bowling centers' most important patrons from whom centers derive much of their revenue. Because league bowlers often commit to a season of bowling, the center can depend on revenue each week from lineage, concessions, and alcohol sales from league participants. The league bowler creates a sense of security for management of a bowling center because of the guaranteed revenue for the duration of the league. Further, league bowling participants are likely to experience multiple positive and negative attributes during their tenure with the sport and the sport provider. In this setting, participants do not only take part in the activity, but also interact with the staff, facility, and other participants.

All types of leagues were targeted for this research with the exception of one. Junior leagues, comprised of children under the age of 18, were not invited to participate in this surveyed research. The purpose of casting a wide net was to learn from all types of participation and consumption experiences of all customers. Bowling leagues come in all shapes and sizes. Some are competitive, social, quiet, loud, young, middle-aged, or old. Just as bowling leagues come in all forms, so do the participants of a league. For example, just because someone is in a competitive league does not necessarily mean they are competitive. They may be participating to socialize with a co-worker or friend. On the other side, there may be competitive people in a social league because that was the night available for league participation. Therefore, this research did not wish to classify all participants based on their league reputation.

Instrument

Each participant in the study received a questionnaire consisting of four open-ended questions, adapted from Greenwell et al. (2007) soliciting their opinions regarding the positive and negative attributes of their experiences. Questions were designed to solicit compliments and complaints from the activity's participants. Similar methodologies have been used (e.g., Bugg Holloway & Beatty, 2008; Cadotte & Turgeon, 1988; Feinberg, De Ruyter, Trappey, & Lee, 1995; Friman & Edvardsson, 2003; Greenwell, et al., 2007; Oldenburger, Lehto, Lehto, & Salvendy, 2007) for a variety of reasons. First, participants are more likely to comment on the extreme attributes of their experiences, and those comments, both positive and negative, are most likely to influence satisfaction or dissatisfaction (Johnston, 2004). Secondly, soliciting compliments and complaints from a large number of participants helps quantify which issues may be most relevant to consumers, allowing attributes to be prioritized. Finally, this approach allows researchers to identify and separate attributes of the service encounter most likely to increase customer satisfaction (satisfiers) and attributes most likely to increase customer dissatisfaction (dissatisfiers) (Greenwell et al., 2007).

Rather than asking global questions, questions were designed to separate the activity (league bowling) and the service provider (the bowling center). To solicit compliments and complaints relative to the activity, participants were asked the following two questions: What do you like the best about bowling in this league? What do you like the least about bowling in this league? To solicit compliments and complaints relative to the service provider, they were asked the following two questions: What do you like the most about this bowling center? What do you like least about this bowling center? Questions were open-ended to give the participant the best opportunity to voice their opinion about the bowling league and bowling center. The participants were given adequate amount of space to hand-write their responses on the questionnaire.

Data Collection

Data were collected at each bowling center prior to scheduled league bowling. Most of the leagues were just beginning their second half of the bowling season. The participants were all a part of a league within one of the two sample bowling centers. The researchers selected leagues based on quantity, diversity, and availability of the participants, while taking into account the overlapping leagues (i.e., participants in multiple leagues). A total of 25 leagues were selected for this research. The questionnaire was distributed to participants who were assured of anonymity, asked not to put their name anywhere, advised on the directions, and asked to fill out the survey in the time frame of their league bowling (between two and three hours). The participants were able to complete the questionnaire on their own time (during league) and were able to complete it anywhere in the facility (most completed the questionnaire at their lanes or at the tables behind their lanes). Once the questionnaire was completed, the participant returned the questionnaire to a large envelope near the league lanes. The questionnaires were placed in this envelope to assist in ensuring anonymity. Once the league was complete, the envelope was sealed and returned to the researchers in the following days. Data were collected over the span of one week to account for leagues participating on different days.

Analysis

Content analysis was used to examine participants' responses as it has been found to deliver valid and reliable results in CIT studies (Kassarjian, 1977; Kolbe & Burnett, 1991). Content analysis focuses on "what was said, the properties of the stimuli, rather than what the communicator claims he said or the interpreter perceived to have been said" (Kassarjian, 1977, p. 8). This method examines "the message itself, and not the communicator or the audience" (p. 8). Another definition, appropriate for this analysis, asserts that "content analysis is a phase of information-processing in which the communications content is transformed, through objective and systematic application of categorization rules, into data that can be summarized and compared" (Paisley, 1969, p. 133).

To transform the communicated content (the responses to the open-ended questions) into quantifiable data, researchers identified categories based on a review of the responses to each question. To ensure reliability, researchers also developed a list of categories from recurring themes in the responses and from prior research (e.g., Chelladurai & Chang, 2000; Crawford et al., 2007; Howat et. al., 1996; Ko & Pastore, 2004; Papadimitriou & Karteroliotis, 2000). After identifying categories, a team of three trained raters, acting independently, sorted data into the categories. The research team utilized definition checks to enhance the reliability of the coding process (Gremler, 2004). Where raters disagreed on categories, differences were resolved through discussion with all three raters.

Results

Data were collected from 396 participants. The sample was 52.3% male and 41.3% female bowlers (missing data 6.4%). The largest age group was aged 65 years or more (18.9%) and the lowest percentage age group was aged between 18-24 (6.5%). A majority of the participants were married (63.8%) with 17.3% identifying as single, 10.2% divorced, 5.9% widowed, and 2.8% either described 'other' as their marital status or did not respond. A large majority of the participants identified themselves as Caucasian (85.5%), 7.4% identifying as African-American, 1.5% as Asian, 1.3% as other, and no participant self-identified as Hispanic. The highest percentage group was participants who identified themselves as professionals (24.2%) followed by those who were retired (20.4%).

Overall, respondents provided a total of 1,010 responses over the four open-ended questions. After a review of the responses and a comparison with prior literature, a list of seven distinct categories was identified:

(1) Sport--responses related to participating in the sport.

(2) Policy--responses related to policies, rules, or procedures.

(3) Convenience--responses related to location, time, or date.

(4) Interactions--responses related to interpersonal interactions with management, staff, or other participants.

(5) Physical Facility--responses related to the facility (bowling center) or equipment.

(6) Amenities--responses related to peripheral elements of the core service.

(7) Other

Once assigned to one of the seven main categories, responses were then grouped into common themes. Researchers agreed on over 90 percent of the items, indicating a high level of inter-rater reliability.

The first set of questions dealt with what participants liked most and liked least about bowling in their respective league. Participants provided a total of 310 comments to the question of what they liked most and 183 comments to the question of what they liked least. By far, the most important positive attribute related to participating in league bowling was Interactions (220 comments). The majority of comments within this category concerned Other Participants (143) followed by comments describing general inter-personal interactions (73). When asked what they liked the most about bowling in their league, one participant answered, "The people; I enjoy being around good and decent people." Similarly, another participant responded, "getting together with co-workers and friends you've bowled with over the years." Sport (65) received the second highest number of positive comments. Within this category, the majority of the comments were nearly evenly split between fun (29) and competition (27) with responses like "I like to bowl," "good friendly competition," and "it's fun and competitive." As to what participants liked least, attributes related to Policy (62) and Physical Facility (44) received the most responses. Responses to this question ranged from "no smoking," "Not being able to bring food [into the] center," to "the lanes really need some work; they are sometimes sticky" and "terrible lane maintenance and bad approaches." A summary of the results is presented in Table 1.

The second set of questions dealt with what participants liked most and liked least about bowling at their respective bowling center. Participants provided a total of 274 comments to the question of what they liked most and 243 comments to the question of what they liked least. Similar to the results of the prior set of questions, Interactions (112 comments) received the most comments related to what participants liked most about bowling in their respective center. Comments within this category were somewhat evenly divided among general interactions (38), staff (32), and management (31). Examples of responses to this question include: "Most of your management makes you feel so welcome," "People who work here and owner," "the friendships that I have made," and "employee cooperation." Convenience (96) received the next highest number of comments. Within this category, nearly every positive comment concerned the location of the facility (95).

When participants were asked what they liked least about the bowling center, nearly half of the comments were about issues surrounding the Physical Facility (120 comments). Within this category, the majority of comments concerned the facility's equipment (82). Policy (42) and Amenities (42) categories also received a sizeable number of comments. A summary of the results is presented in Table 2. Responses to this question ranged from "unkempt, sticky lane approaches and flooring poorly waxed," "the cold restrooms in the winter," "breakdowns," "the new rule about no [outside] food; we pay to come and have a good time and sometimes that includes bringing in Wendy's," and "snack bar needs some serious attention."

In regard to the differences between satisfiers and dissatisfiers, categories such as Interactions and Sport generated appreciably more positive responses than negative responses. Categories such as Physical Facility, Policy, and Amenities generated substantially more negative responses than positive responses.

Convenience generated more positive responses related to the service provider and more negative responses related to the league. Spearman's coefficient of rank correlation was used to compare the difference between the rank orders of the frequency of mentions for positive and negative comments. Results (rs = 0.143) suggest the attributes associated with satisfaction are significantly different from those creating dissatisfaction.

When comparing responses related to the activity and service provider, Interactions received the most comments from both areas indicating that social interactions between other participants, management and staff are very important to a participant's satisfaction with his or her respective league and bowling center. Convenience generated more positive comments toward the service provider. Policy generated more negative responses regarding the league and the Physical Facility received more responses related to the bowling center. These results indicate that dissatisfaction may come from different sources when participants evaluate their experiences with the activity and service provider.

Discussion

Compliments and complaints from regular participants and consumers are important to sport managers as a type of insider information. Analysis of this type of information helps develop an awareness of which aspects of the participant's experience can be enhanced to create positive encounters and which aspects may provide barriers to future participation. This study investigates critical attributes of the sport participant's experience related to their participation in an activity and participation with a specific sport provider. Results lend insight into what is important to sport participants and identify factors that may be related to participant loyalty or potential defection.

A number of very different attributes were identified in this study, supporting prior work (e.g., Chelladurai & Chang, 2000; Howat et al., 1996; Ko & Pastore, 2004) suggesting recreational services are multi-dimensional in nature. While a number of comments were related to the sport, even more comments were related to other participants, the facility, and personnel, indicating sport participant satisfaction is a complex evaluation stemming from a variety of factors. The results of this study also suggest that factors such as convenience and policy should be included in comprehensive studies of sport participation.

The vast majority of research in sport management that looked at spectator sport, with the exception of Greenwell et al. (2007), is based on the assumption that dissatisfaction is merely the opposite of satisfaction. However, this study clearly illustrates differences between aspects predicting satisfaction and dissatisfaction. Consistent with prior research (Friman & Edvardsson, 2003; Ravenscroft & Rogers, 2003), positive attributes were often related with interpersonal or social factors, while negative attributes often were related to structural or organizational issues. When asked what they like most about participating in their league, the majority of participants' responses focused on other participants, suggesting interpersonal interactions were vital to participants' positive evaluations of this specific activity. This finding indicates the social nature of league play, being with friends and teammates, and socializing with other members of the league as critical attributes of participation in this type of activity. Attributes related to the sport itself, such as fun and competition, were a distant second, indicating the sport itself was important, but not nearly as important as the social experience. Similarly, comments related to bowling center personnel (staff, management, owners, and other employees) received a sizeable number of positive comments when participants were asked about the bowling center. This finding is interesting due to the fact that when asked what the participants liked about the bowling center, a majority of the responses indicated that the people inside the facility were what they liked most. The importance of social interactions is bolstered by prior findings that social support is related to higher involvement and stronger commitment in recreational activities (Iwasaki & Havitz, 2004).

Negative responses for both the activity and the bowling center tended to focus on structural issues surrounding league or center policies (price, number of teams, smoking policies, and league rules), issues surrounding the facility (equipment, cleanliness), or complaints about amenities (food and drink). These attributes received a substantial number of negative responses but very few positive responses indicating good performance in these areas may not stimulate satisfaction, but poor performance may discourage participants to discontinue participation or choose another service provider. For example, a bowling center with quality, working equipment may not have a strong impact on customers' positive evaluations, as the equipment may merely meet their expectations. Faulty equipment, on the other hand, may generate strong negative feelings among participants, which could spawn dissatisfaction. These findings suggest policy and facility issues may play a large role in re-patronage intentions as negative incidents may have a much greater effect on customers' post hoc evaluations than positive incidents (Giese & Cote, 2000; Petrick, Tonner, & Quinn, 2006).

The aforementioned findings illustrate the complexities of the satisfaction process. Specifically, positive and negative attributes were different, supporting Cadotte and Turgeon's (1988) assertion that some attributes may increase satisfaction when present (satisfiers) but may not have an impact on dissatisfaction. Similarly, some attributes, such as policies and the physical facility, may be related to dissatisfaction if they do not meet participants' needs (dissatisfiers), but may not have an influence on satisfaction. This distinction is important as improvements in each area may have different effects. For example, Pollack (2008) suggests reducing dissatisfiers may increase service quality, but once an acceptable level of quality has been reached, increases in satisfaction may be negligible. On the other hand, increasing satisfiers may require a large investment in quality improvements to make a substantial impact on satisfaction.

Results of this study also extend prior sport management research by illustrating attributes related to the activity (league bowling) were different than those related to the service provider (bowling center). While interactions was an important satisfier for both, convenience was mentioned considerably more often in relationship to the facility. Whether it is a golf course, softball fields, or a tennis club, a convenient location can be an important driver of satisfaction. Similarly, policy was an important dissatisfier for both the activity and the service provider, but the physical facility and amenities received considerably more comments in relationship to the service provider. In this case, poor equipment or unclean facilities could cause participants to look elsewhere to participate in this activity. This is consistent with Lentell's (2000) study of leisure centers, which found respondents rated the importance of physical elements higher than elements related to staffing or secondary services, and problems with the physical elements of the leisure center were cited as causes for dissatisfaction. Together, these findings illustrate that attributes relative to the activity should be assessed differently than attributes related to the service providers. As such, service providers should focus on eliminating negative attributes as negative critical incidents can cause customers to reconsider relationships (van Doorn & Verhoef, 2008).

Practical implications

The results of this study present many practical implications for sport providers and sport marketers. When asked what they like most about participating in their league, the majority of the participants' responses focused on people and interactions. The main themes emerging from participants' responses indicate 1) the social nature of other people involved in the league and 2) other general areas of interaction as critical attributes of participation the respondents take pleasure in. This is one part of the league experience that can be promoted when trying to entice new participants or clients. Some types of sports may carry misconceptions about what is involved to participate or who is actually involved in the leagues. Marketing the social nature of participation may have positive benefits and reverse some of the negative impressions some sports may have. Another part of retention involves prospective participants having apprehension due to being a newcomer and not knowing others, and also could be due to a lack of knowledge of the terminology, equipment, unwritten rules, procedures, and areas of a facility. Whatever the sport activity is, sport managers need to focus the attention of new consumers on interactions during the experience by introducing new members to the group and creating an accepting social environment to ease a newcomer in. Management can also try to clarify the technical, and possibly perplexing, issues that may arise to a new customer or participant.

Another category containing a high amount of responses is associated with the actual sport. In this study, attributes of the sport category were comments focused on fun and competition. In order to retain and obtain league participants, it is important to correctly suggest leagues for participants based on what they want to take from the experience of league play. There are many types of league activities with different rules, competitive focus, gender requirements, and so on. Poorly marketing these choices or misplacing a person in a league may result in a negative, dissatisfying experience, which can create a negative word-of-mouth recommendation, as well as reduce retention rates. For any sport participation activity, correctly advertising and marketing the choices that people have in choosing a league are important. For example, a person may only know slow-pitch softball to be competitive and cutthroat because of a coworker who participates in a competitive league. However, if the person is able to see a marketing campaign emphasizing the choice of league and competition style, they may be more inclined to participate. It is imperative to promote activities with sufficient information about the league, the environment, and the people involved to assist in recruiting and retaining members.

Two major categories arose from the responses identifying negative attributes of league play and the facility offering the service: physical facility and policy. The physical facility category deals with the context of league participation primarily in responses concerned with the equipment and in this case, the lanes, pinsetters, lane conditions, and approaches. These findings indicate an importance on the contextual attributes of league play. Sport managers need to recognize that the consumer does care for the quality and upkeep of the main elements associated with participation. Whether it is nets in a tennis facility or a dartboard in a darts league, the equipment needs to be well maintained to provide the most efficient experience for the consumer. In terms of retaining and obtaining participants, this type of effort will signify to league members an organizational effort to provide a great facility for the consumers to participate in the sport. From season to season, if contextual issues continue to arise and breakdowns occur, then participants may not sense commitment from the organization in efforts to create the best experience for the participant.

The second category with negative responses involves the facility policy of no smoking, and in this particular study, the regulation is not the organization's choice but rather a citywide mandated law the organization must obey to avoid legal trouble and financial penalty. The dissatisfaction of the participants with this law is however, an issue forcing management in all arenas of sport, to cope with legal changes and move forward in a fashion best accommodating the customer. Responding to this kind of issue may force the organization to spend money to possibly build outdoor areas to provide participants a place to smoke and still be a part of the league experience. Marketing comes in to play even with a negative issue like this. Staying with the smoking ban as an example, an organization must now try to market to those that may avoid bowling centers because of the smoke. Marketing the new policy to the nonsmokers stressing the clean atmosphere may bring in participants that are concerned about their own or their family's health. At the same time, if management has provided accommodations for smoking participants, then promoting these accommodations could lead to pleasing both sides of the nicotine divide.

Limitations and Future Research

Using CIT is appropriate for this study due to its ability to identify and quantify major areas of concern for league members by using the words and responses directly from the participant, but it too has its limitations. A major limitation is the inability to follow-up with the participants about any of their responses. While having anonymity is good to receive honest responses to the questions, not being able to ask further questions limits the responses to single sentences and sometimes single words, therefore, severely limiting the research to analyze deeper into the issue. Future research should further analyze some of the main themes to explore the nuances of those aspects of the service experience. This analysis might involve specifically examining how price, smoking policy, structural issues impact overall satisfaction and intentions to return to the activity and the service provider.

A final limitation is league bowlers were used for this study and they may not represent all sport participants. The results of this study may be limited to the bowling industry and further, may be limited to this particular city or organization. Therefore, generalizability is cautioned. Future research should analyze different recreational sports to understand which attributes are most relevant across industries. Further, future research could focus on differences in critical attributes between competitive and non-competitive sport and differences between adult and youth sport.

References

Absher, J. D., Howat, G., Crilley, G., & Milne, I. (1996). Toward customer service: Market segmentation differences for sports and leisure centers. Australian Leisure, 7(1), 25-28.

Alexandris, K., Kouthouris, C., & Meligdis, A. (2006). Increasing customers' loyalty in a skiing resort: The contribution of place attachment and service quality. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 18(5), 414-425.

Alexandris, K., & Palialia, E. (1999). Measuring customer satisfaction in fitness centres in Greece: An exploratory study. Managing Leisure, 4(4), 218-228.

Anderson, E. W. (1998). Customer satisfaction and word-of-mouth. Journal of Service Research, 1(1), 5-17.

Backhaus, K., & Bauer, M. (2000). The impact of critical incidents on customer satisfaction in business-to-business relationships. Journal of Business-To-Business Marketing, 8(1), 25-54.

Backman, S.J., & Veldkamp, C. (1995). Examining the relationship between service quality and user loyalty. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 13(2), 29-41.

Baker, D. A., & Crompton, J. L., (2000). Quality, satisfaction and behavioral intentions. Annals of Tourism Research, 27(3), 785-804.

Bansal, H. S., & Voyer, P. A. (2000). Word-of-mouth processes within a services purchase decision context. Journal of Service Research, 3(2), 166-177.

Beard, J., & Ragheb, M. (1980). Measuring leisure satisfaction. Journal of Leisure Research, 12(1), 20-33.

Bejou, D., Edvardsson, B., & Rakowski, J.P. (1996). A critical incident approach to examining the effects of service failures on guest relationships: The case of Swedish and US airlines. Journal of Travel Research, 35(1), 377-393.

Bell, J., Gilbert, D., & Lockwood, A. (1997). Service quality in food retailing operations: A critical incident analysis. International Review of Retail, Distribution & Consumer Research, 7(4), 405-423.

Bigne, J. E., Sanchez, M. I., & Sanchez, J. (2001). Tourism image, evaluation variables, and after purchase behavior: Inter-relationship. Tourism Management, 22(6), 607-616.

Bitner, M.J., Booms, B.H., & Tetreault, M.S. (1989). Critical incidents in service encounters. In M.J. Bitner & L.A. Crosby (Eds.), Designing a winning service strategy (pp. 98-99). Chicago: American Marketing Association.

Bugg Holloway, B., & Beatty, S. E. (2008). Satisfiers and dissatisfiers in the online environment: A critical incident assessment. Journal of Service Research, 10(4), 347-364.

Cadotte, E. R., & Turgeon, N. (1988). Key factors in guest satisfaction. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 28(4), 45-51.

Caruana, A. (2002). Service loyalty: the effects of service quality and the mediating role customer satisfaction. European Journal of Marketing, 36(7/8), 811-828.

Chelladurai, P., & Chang, K. (2000). Targets and standards of quality in sport services. Sport Management Review, 3(1), 1-22.

Chung, B., & Hoffman, K. D. (1998). Critical incidents: Service failures that matter most. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 39(3), 66-71.

Crawford, S. Z., Greenwell, T. C., & Andrew, D. P. S. (2007). Exploring the relationship between quality in basic instructions programs and repeat participation. The Physical Educator, 64(2), 65-72.

Davidow, M. (2003). Organizational responses to customer complaints: What works and what doesn't. Journal of Service Research, 5(3), 225-250.

Edvardsson, B. (1988). Service quality in consumer relationships: A study of critical incidents in mechanical engineering companies. Service Industries Journal, 8(4), 427-445.

Edvardsson, B. (1992). Service breakdowns: A study of critical incidents in an airline. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 3(4), 17-29.

Feinberg, R. A., Ruyter, K., Trappey, C., & Lee, T. (1995). Consumer defined service quality in international retailing. Total Quality Management, 6(1), 61-67.

Fornell, C., & Wernerfelt, B. (1987). Defensive marketing strategy by customer complaint management: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Marketing Research, 24(4), 337-346.

Friman, M., & Edvardsson, B. (2003). A content analysis of complaints and compliments. Managing Service Quality, 13(1), 20-26.

Giese, J. L., & Cote, A. J. (2000). Defining consumer satisfaction, Academy of Marketing Science Review. Retrieved on November 15, 2010 from http://www.amsreview.org/articles/giese01-2000.pdf.

Goetzinger, L., Park, J. K., & Widdows, R., (2006). E-customers' third party complaining and complimenting behavior. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 17(2), 193-206.

Greenwell, T. C., Lee, J., & Naeger, D. (2007). Using the critical incident technique to understand critical aspects of the minor league spectator's experience. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 16(4), 130-139.

Gremler, D. D. (2004). The critical incident technique in service research. Journal of Service Research, 7(1), 65-89.

Grove, S. J., & Fisk, R. P. (1997). The impact of other customers on service experiences: A critical incident examination of "getting along." Journal of Retailing, 73(1), 63-85.

Gustafsson, A., Johnson, M. D., Roos, I. (2005). The effects of customer satisfaction, relationship commitment dimensions, and triggers on customer retention. Journal of Marketing, 69(4), 210-18.

Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. B. (1959). The motivation to work. New York: Wiley.

Howat, G., Absher, J., Crilley, G., & Milne, I. (1996). Measuring customer service quality in sports and leisure centers. Managing Leisure, 1(2), 7789.

Howat, G., & Murray, D. (2002). The role of critical incidents to complement service quality information for a sports and leisure centre. European Sport Management Quarterly, 2(1), 23-46.

Iwasaki, Y., & Havitz, M. E. (2004). Examining relationships between leisure involvement, psychological commitment and loyalty to a recreation agency. Journal of Leisure Research, 36(1), 45-72.

Johnston, R. (2004). Towards a better understanding of service excellence. Managing Service Quality, 14(2/3), 129-133.

Kassarjian, H. H. (1977). Content analysis in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 4(1), 8-18.

Kim, D., & Kim, S. Y. (1995). QUESC: An instrument for assessing the service quality of sport centers in Korea. Journal of Sport Management, 9(2), 208-220.

Ko, Y. J., & Pastore, D. L. (2004). Current issues and conceptualizations of service quality in the recreation sport industry. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 13(2), 158-166.

Kolbe, R. H., & Burnett, M. S. (1991). Content analysis research: An examination of applications with directives for improving research reliability and objectivity. Journal of Consumer Research, 18(2), 243-250.

Kueh, K. (2006). Service satisfiers and dissatisfiers among Malaysian consumers. Australasian Marketing Journal, 14(1), 77-90.

Lentell, R. (2000). Untangling the tangibles: 'physical evidence' and customer satisfaction in local authority leisure centres. Managing Leisure, 5(1), 1-16.

Maddox, N. R. (1981). Two-factor theory and consumer satisfaction: Replication and extension. Journal of Consumer Research, 8(1), 97-102.

Murray, D., & Howat, G. (2002). The relationships among service quality, value, satisfaction, and future intentions of customers at an Australian sports and leisure center. Sport Management Review, 5(1), 25-43.

Naylor, G. (1999). Why do they whine? An examination into the determinants of negative and positive word-of-mouth. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction & Complaining Behavior, 12, 162-169.

Nyquist, J. D., & Booms, B. H. (1987). Measuring services value from the consumer perspective. In Surprenant, C. (Ed.), Add value to your service (pp. 13-16). Chicago: American Marketing Association.

Oldenburger, K., Lehto, X., Feinberg, R., Lehto, M., & Salvendy, G. (2008). Critical purchasing incidents in e-business. Behaviour & Information Technology, 27(1), 63-77.

Olsen, S. (2002). Comparative evaluation and the relationship between quality, satisfaction, and repurchase loyalty. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 30(3), 240-49.

Osman, R. W., Cole, S. T., & Vessell, C. R. (2006). Examining the role of perceived service quality in predicting user satisfaction and behavioral intentions in a campus recreation setting. Recreational Sports Journal, 30(1), 20-29.

Paisley, W. J. (1969). Studying style as deviation from encoding norms. In G. Gerger et al. (Eds.), The analysis of communications content: Developments in scientific theories and computer techniques (pp. 133-176). New York: Wiley.

Papadimitriou, D. A., & Karteroliotis, K. (2000). The service quality expectations in private sport and fitness centers: A reexamination of the factor structure. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 9(3), 157-164.

Petrick, J. F., Tonner, C., & Quinn, C., (2006). The utilization of critical incident technique to examine cruise passengers' repurchase intentions. Journal of Travel Research, 44(3), 273-280.

Pollack, B. L. (2008). The nature of the service quality and satisfaction relationship: Empirical evidence for the existence of satisfiers and dissatisfiers. Managing Service Quality, 18(6), 537-558.

Ravenscroft, N., & Rogers, G. (2003). A critical incident study of barriers to participation on the Cuckoo trail, East Sussex. Managing Leisure, 8(4), 184-197.

Reinartz, W., Thomas, J. S., & Kumar, V. (2005). Balancing acquisition and retention resources to maximize customer profitability. Journal of Marketing 69(1), 63-79.

Roos, I. (2002). Methods of investigating critical incidents. Journal of Service Research, 4(3), 193-204.

Searle, M. S., Mactavish, J. B., & Brayley, R. E. (1993). Integrating ceasing participation with other aspects of leisure behavior: A replication and extension. Journal of Leisure Research, 25(4), 389-404.

Swan, J. E., & Combs, L. J., (1976). Product performance and consumer satisfaction: A new concept. Journal of Marketing, 40(2), 25-33.

Van Doorn, J., & Verhoef, P. C. (2008). Critical incidents and the impact of satisfaction on customer share. Journal of Marketing, 72(4), 123-142.

Wangenheim, F. V., & Bayon, T. (2007). The chain from customer satisfaction via word-of-mouth referrals to new customer acquisition. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Sciences, 35(2), 233-249.

Yu, Y., Chang, H., & Huang, G. (2006). A study of service quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty in Taiwanese leisure industry. The Journal of the American Academy ofBusiness, 9(1), 126-132.

Zeithami, V. (2000). Service quality, profitability, and the economic worth of customers: What we know and what we need to learn. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(1), 67-85.

Brody J. Ruihley, PhD, is an assistant professor of sport administration at the University of Cincinnati. His research interests lie in the area of sport communication, specifically sport and media, fantasy sport, and public relations in sport. T. Christopher Greenwell, PhD, is an associate professor in the Department of Health and Sport Sciences at the University of Louisville. His research interests include customer service and customer satisfaction.

Table 1.
Critical Aspect Categories and Response Numbers for League
Bowling

Factor                 Like Best        Like Least           Total
                    (310 responses)   (183 responses)   (493 responses)

Interactions          220 (71.0%)       29 (15.8%)        249 (50.5%)
  Staff               143 (46.1%)        17 (5.5%)        160 (32.5%)
  Management          73 (23.5%)         2 (1.1%)         75 (15.2%)
  General
    Interactions       0 (0.0%)          8 (4.4%)          8 (1.6%)
  Other
    Participants       3 (1.0%)          2 (1.1%)          5 (1.0%)
  Ownership            1 (0.3%)          0 (0.0%)          1 (0.2%)
Sport                 65 (21.0%)         11 (6.0%)        76 (15.4%)
  Competition          27 (8.7%)         8 (4.4%)          35 (7.1%)
  Fun                  29 (9.4%)         0 (0.0%)          29 (5.9%)
  Bowling              4 (1.3%)          3 (1.6%)          7 (1.4%)
  Escape               3 (1.0%)          0 (0.0%)          3 (0.6%)
  Performance          2 (0.6%)          0 (0.0%)          2 (0.4%)
Policy                 5 (1.6%)         62 (33.9%)        67 (13.6%)
  Number of Teams      0 (0.0%)         27 (14.8%)         27 (5.5%)
  Price                0 (0.0%)          14 (7.7%)         14 (2.8%)
  League Rules         1 (0.3%)          13 (7.1%)         14 (2.8%)
  Smoking Policy       2 (0.6%)          0 (0.0%)          10 (2.0%)
  League Balance       2 (0.6%)          0 (0.0%)          2 (0.4%)
  Facility Policy      0 (0.0%)          0 (0.0%)          0 (0.0%)
Physical Facility      6 (1.9%)         44 (24.0%)        50 (10.1%)
  Equipment            3 (1.0%)         31 (16.9%)         34 (6.9%)
  Cleanliness          0 (0.0%)          6 (3.3%)          6 (1.2%)
  Atmosphere           3 (1.0%)          0 (0.0%)          3 (0.6%)
  Size and Layout      0 (0.0%)          2 (1.1%)          2 (0.4%)
  Noise Level          0 (0.0%)          2 (1.1%)          2 (0.4%)
  Restrooms            0 (0.0%)          2 (1.1%)          2 (0.4%)
  Temperature          0 (0.0%)          1 (0.5%)          1 (0.2%)
  Lighting             0 (0.0%)          0 (0.0%)          0 (0.0%)
  Safety               0 (0.0%)          0 (0.0%)          0 (0.0%)
Convenience            8 (2.6%)         26 (14.2%)         34 (6.9%)
  Season Length        0 (0.0%)          13 (7.1%)         13 (2.6%)
  Times                3 (1.0%)          5 (2.7%)          8 (1.6%)
  Dates                5 (1.6%)          3 (1.6%)          8 (1.6%)
  Location             0 (0.0%)          5 (2.7%)          5 (1.0%)
Amenities              3 (1.0%)          9 (4.9%)          12 (2.4%)
  Food and Drink       3 (1.0%)          9 (4.9%)          12 (2.4%)
  Pro Shop             0 (0.0%)          0 (0.0%)          0 (0.0%)
Other                  3 (1.0%)          2 (1.1%)          5 (1.0%)

Note: Percentages calculated by column and may not add up to 100%
as a result of a single response containing multiple elements or
themes.

Table 2.
Critical Aspect Categories and Response Numbers for Bowling
Centers

Factor                    Like Best    Like Least       Total
                            (274          (243          (517
                         responses)    responses)    responses)

Interactions             112 (40.9%)   30 (12.3%)    142 (27.5%)
  Staff                  32 (11.7%)     15 (6.2%)     47 (9.1%)
  Management             31 (11.3%)     11 (4.5%)     42 (8.1%)
  General Interactions   38 (13.9%)     2 (0.8%)      40 (7.7%)
  Other Participants      10 (3.6%)     0 (0.0%)      10 (1.9%)
  Ownership               1 (0.4%)      2 (0.8%)      3 (0.6%)
Physical Facility        31 (11.3%)    120 (49.3%)   151 (29.2%)
  Equipment               18 (6.6%)    82 (33.7%)    100 (19.3%)
  Cleanliness             9 (3.3%)      13 (5.3%)     22 (4.3%)
  Restrooms               0 (0.0%)      10 (4.1%)     10 (1.9%)
  Temperature             0 (0.0%)      6 (2.5%)      6 (1.2%)
  Atmosphere              0 (0.0%)      4 (1.6%)      4 (0.8%)
  Noise Level             1 (0.4%)      3 (1.2%)      4 (0.8%)
  Size and Layout         1 (0.4%)      2 (0.8%)      3 (0.6%)
  Lighting                1 (0.4%)      0 (0.0%)      1 (0.2%)
  Safety                  1 (0.4%)      0 (0.0%)      1 (0.2%)
Convenience              96 (35.0%)     5 (2.1%)     101 (19.5%)
  Location               95 (34.7%)     5 (2.1%)     100 (19.3%)
  Times                   1 (0.4%)      0 (0.0%)      1 (0.2%)
  Season Length           0 (0.0%)      0 (0.0%)      0 (0.0%)
  Dates                   0 (0.0%)      0 (0.0%)      0 (0.0%)
Amenities                 10 (3.6%)    42 (17.3%)    52 (10.1%)
  Food and Drink          8 (2.9%)     40 (16.5%)     48 (9.3%)
  Pro Shop                2 (0.7%)      2 (0.8%)      4 (0.8%)
Policy                    6 (2.2%)     42 (17.3%)     48 (9.3%)
  Price                   0 (0.0%)      20 (8.2%)     20 (3.9%)
  Smoking Policy          5 (1.8%)      13 (5.3%)     18 (3.5%)
  Facility Policy         0 (0.0%)      7 (2.9%)      7 (1.4%)
  Number of Teams         0 (0.0%)      1 (0.4%)      1 (0.2%)
  League Rules            1 (0.4%)      0 (0.0%)      1 (0.2%)
  League Balance          0 (0.0%)      1 (0.4%)      1 (0.2%)
Sport                     6 (2.2%)      0 (0.0%)      6 (1.2%)
  Fun                     3 (1.1%)      0 (0.0%)      3 (0.6%)
  Bowling                 2 (0.7%)      0 (0.0%)      2 (0.4%)
  Escape                  1 (0.4%)      0 (0.0%)      1 (0.2%)
  Competition             0 (0.0%)      0 (0.0%)      0 (0.0%)
  Performance             0 (0.0%)      0 (0.0%)      0 (0.0%)
Other                     13 (4.7%)     4 (1.6%)      17 (3.3%)

Note: Percentages calculated by column and may not add up to 100%
as a result of a single response containing multiple elements or
themes.