Sport MarHeting Quarterly, 2005,14,125-131, © 2005 West Virginia University
to a particular problem (Gay & Essinger, 2000).
Circumstantial Factors
and Institutions'
Outsourcing Decisions
on Marketing
Operations
Willie J. Burden, Ming Li
Abstract
During the past decade, the outsourcing of market-
ing operations has become a common practice in
American college athletics. While the reasons that an
intercollegiate athletics program might choose to out-
source its marketing operations are numerous, the
decision to do so really depends on various circum-
stances. This study was designed to reveal both the
advantages and disadvantages of outsourcing and the
circumstantial factors affecting athletic administrators'
outsourcing decisions. Also, three real cases were pre-
sented and examined to substantiate motives as well as
the importance of reviewing circumstantial factors
before an outsourcing decision is made.
Circumstantial Factors and Institutions'
Outsourcing Decisions on Marketing
Operations
Introduction
Historically, outsourcing was a strategic initiative
used by the general business community as a solution
Willie J. Burden, EdD, is an associate professor in sport the bills are often forced into painful downsizing of
management in the Department of Hospitality, Tourism,
and Family and Consumer Science at Georgia Southern
University. His research interests include outsourcing of
sport marketing operations, student-athlete welfare, and
facility and event management.
Ming Li, EdD, is a professor in sports administration
and director of the School of Recreation and Sport Sciences munity is more abundant. With such characteristics as
at Ohio University. His research interests include outsourc- advantages and disadvantages, business strategies, busi-
ing of sport marketing operations, international sport
management, and financial and economic issues of sport
Volume 14 • Number 2 • 2005 • Sport MarHetlng Quarterly 125
However, during the past decade, the outsourcing of
marketing operations has become a common practice
in American college athletics. According to Li and
Burden (2002), more than one half of all NCAA
Division I-A athletic programs have outsourced some
or all of their marketing operations and rights to a
growing number of nationally prominent outsourcing
agencies. Among the operations commonly outsourced
are the production of radio game broadcasts, produc-
tion of radio call-in shows, coaches' television shows,
sales of media and venue advertising, sales of "official
sponsorship" rights to corporations, and production
and management of Internet websites, etc. (Li &
Burden, 2002).
Outsourcing simply means acquiring services from
an external organization instead of using internal
resources (Butler, 2000). By using outsourced
resources, organizations can gain a competitive advan-
tage by using contingent staff to accomplish strategic
goals without incurring the fixed overhead. By focusing
on the leading edge and highly specialized skill sets,
outsourcing providers can often offer services better, or
at a lower price than the client organization. Typical
reasons for outsourcing go beyond simple contingent
staffing. Outsourcing providers are able to maintain
economies of scale with regard to specialization
(Butler, 2000).
The outsourcing movement has been energized by
the increasing commercialization of intercollegiate ath-
letics, largely a result of the enormous competition
among the largest programs in the NCAA and their
mandate to be successful, self-supporting, and eco-
nomically profitable. Intercollegiate athletics has grown
into a $3 billion-a-year annual industry (Padilla &
Baumer, 1994; Sneath, Hoch, Kennett, & Erdmann,
2000) with more and more money being spent for new
stadiums, celebrity coaches, and better training facili-
ties, etc. Some schools have independent athletic
departments that support themselves, but the majority
is funded by the university. Approximately 100 athletic
departments in Division I are "sucking money from the
schools" (Rozin & Zegel, 2003). Those that cannot pay
their sports programs (Rozin & Zegel, 2003).
Since outsourcing in intercollegiate athletics is fairly
new, the amount of information available regarding
the advantages that athletic programs gain from out-
sourcing is limited. However, the information available
concerning outsourcing and the broader business com-
ness goals, quantity and types of functions outsourced,
the availability of experienced service providers, and
even the proportion of companies that have out-
sourced, outsourcing has affected intercollegiate athlet-
ics in similar as well as dissimilar ways as the general
business community.
Many of the reasons that an intercollegiate athletics
program might choose to outsource are the same as the
general business community. In addition to the advan-
tages previously stated, by outsourcing, organizations
can alleviate time pressure, draw from a varied base of
professional expertise including technology expertise,
gain additional resources, remove internal political bar-
riers, maintain cost effectiveness, and increase staff
without all of the associated costs (Elmuti, &
Kathawala, 1998; Williams, 1998). Specifically, by out-
sourcing, an organization can free up valuable
resources for other uses and can redirect its people and
other resources to its core business activities that better
serve the organization's mission, purposes, and goals.
By outsourcing, the organization can reduce operating
costs through the elimination of the need for it to try
to do everything itself, which often incurs high
research, development, marketing, and deployment
expenses (Davy, 1998).
The advantages in outsourcing can be operational,
strategic, or both. Operational advantages usually pro-
vide for short-term trouble avoidance, while strategic
advantages offer long-term contributions in maximiz-
ing opportunities. Outsourcing can cost more than
doing something in-house, but offer benefits that justi-
fy it, like saving money or saving time (Chin, 2003).
On the other hand, colleges and universities, when
managed traditionally, are usually much more con-
strained. Because businesses are motivated to build
their enterprises, they can be extremely creative. Unlike
campus service departments, they are not allocated a
budget or fund and asked to administer it. They work
all the time for the market they serve in order to pro-
vide more and enhanced products and services that
may earn them more money. That's a very different
kind of thinking than is typical of colleges and univer-
sities (Bartem & Manning, 2001).
The general business community has found it benefi-
cial to outsource an ever-widening number of func-
tions, including business processes, human resources
services, personnel benefits, administrative services,
and business services (Rombel, 2002). Historically, the
focus of intercollegiate athletics programs has been on
some aspect of marketing operations and rights that
has included printed media, production of radio game
broadcasts and call-in shows, coaches' TV shows,
licensing, and sale of media advertising. Also, the sport
organization can utilize outside experts to handle diffi-
cult-to-manage functions. Most importantly, by out-
sourcing, the sport organization is able to access
126 Volume 14 • Number 2 • 2005 • Sport MarHeting Quarterly
resources that are not available to it otherwise. This is
vital considering today's highly competitive athletic cli-
mate where many institutions, already understaffed, are
experiencing hiring freezes or reduction in work force
combined with the pressure to generate additional rev-
enues to support expanding sports programs (e.g.,
NCAA Division I qualifications, gender equity require-
ments, and facility enhancements, etc.). The University
of Virginia, for example, was able to take advantage of
increased professional staffmg while getting its needs
met in the areas of corporate sponsorships, sales of
radio and television rights, advertising sales such as
signage and roadway billboards, and more promotions
for Olympic sports. Additionally, by using an outsourc-
ing agency, they were able to avoid the State of
Virginia's tough procurement regulations. Via addi-
tional business contacts, outsourcing has enabled the
university to generate significantly more revenue than
it would have on its own.
The general business community can select from
numerous well-established service providers within
each particular industry. However, since outsourcing is
still relatively new in intercollegiate athletics, there are
only a handful of reputable, major companies to select
from, such as Collegiate Licensing Company (CLC),
Viacom, Nelligan Sports, Host Communication,
International Sports Properties (ISP), and Learfield
Communications. ISP, in business since 1994, counts
15 NCAA Division I programs as its clients, which
makes it the largest single college media rights holder
in the country ("ISP Sports", 2002). Both CLC and
Viacom are among the companies that service the
University of Virginia.
There is a downside to outsourcing. One major
international study concerning the biggest outsourcing
deals of the 1990s concluded that more that 35 percent
of the deals failed. The causes for the failures included
degradation of services, biased business dealings in
favor of the vendor, lack of input from management,
loss of control, and problems related to selecting the
right service provider to meet the organizations' needs
(Gay & Essinger, 2000). Therefore, outsourcing might
not be the right option for everyone. In addition, out-
sourcing does not always bring the anticipated benefits,
and in some instances can be a risky proposition
(Chin, 2003). V^illcocks and Lacity (1998) stated that
among its disadvantages are the potential loss of con-
trol over critical functions such as timeliness and quali-
ty of service, difficulty in monitoring vendor
performance, difficulty in explaining the business
needs to vendors, the potential for loss of company
secrets as well as intellectual property, and the high
cost of outsourcing contracts. Schools also risk devel-
oping a dependency on outside agencies, lowering
employee morale, loss of development skills for
employees, and having to face the prospect of manag-
ing relationships that go wrong (Kakabadse &
Kakabadse, 2000; Hayes, 2001). By outsourcing, not
only do schools lose some of the personal touch in
servicing their employees but their clients as well
(Rombel, 2002).
With respect to colleges, while outsourcing has
become one of the measures taken by colleges to sup-
port their need to gain a competitive advantage, it has
not always been the most ideal alternative for attaining
marketing goals. The Air Force Academy is a good
illustration of what could go wrong if a college makes a
poor decision about outsourcing. By outsourcing. The
Air Force Academy lost control over their radio net-
work and team travel package, and from a competitive
standpoint was disadvantaged by their partnership
with the service provider. Their relationship with the
business community soured and the outsourcing
agency contracted sponsors that were a poor match for
the Academy. Because the service provider benefited
more from the arrangement than the athletic depart-
ment it became necessary to dissolve their contract.
As mentioned previously, among the largest NCAA
Division I programs, some schools have chosen the
outsourcing option while others have not; outsourcing
has advantaged some schools and not others; and,
some schools have been successful while keeping every-
thing in house and managing the job themselves.
Under what circumstances should a school choose one
option over the other? Burden and Li (2002) stated
that circumstantial factors play a significant role in dif-
ferentiating those athletics programs that have out-
sourced their marketing operations from those that
have chosen to keep their operations in house.
Other circumstantial factors affecting out-
sourcing decisions
In addition to the perceived advantages outsourcing
could bring to the institution, other situational issues
play a significant role in the decision-making process.
For example, the athletics director at Georgia Tech
might outsource; however, if that same person subse-
quently takes the job at Washington, a school in a very
different environment, he or she might easily decide
against it. When the athletic administrators at a partic-
ular institution are contemplating whether or not they
should outsource their marketing operations, they
need to examine their institution's mission, assess the
attractiveness of their athletic product, establish who
controls the property rights, determine the nature and
status of the relationship it has with its local business
community, and determine whether or not in-house
resources are sufficient to get the job done.
Volume 14 • Number 2 • 2005 • Sport MarHeting Quarterly 127
First, the institution's mission, philosophy, and goals,
etc., should be consistent with an outsourcing strategy.
Further, the mission defines the purpose and goals of
the organization, what its products, services, markets,
and customers will be. It describes what core compe-
tencies will be necessary to achieve the goals, how the
organization will distribute the products and services,
and how it will interact with customers (Greaver,
1999). A couple of questions administrators need to
consider are "what is the organization in business to
do?" and "what resources does the organization need in
order to do what it is in business to do?" (Gay &
Essinger, 2000, p. 30). If outsourcing plays a critical
role in the organization's overall strategy or service
offerings, then outsourcing makes good sense for the
organization and administrators can more effectively
align its outsourcing objectives with the organization's
overall strategies (Issacs, 1999). Otherwise, in-house
operations would be more appropriate.
Next, if the institution is to derive some benefits
from outsourcing, it must be positioned to do so.
Butler (2000) maintains that the decision to outsource
or not, really depends on various circumstances. In
arriving at the correct solution, sport organizations
contemplating the outsourcing option should examine
their unique characteristics. For example, their athletic
product needs to be attractive enough to attract a top-
notch service provider as well as the interests of poten-
tial, new corporate partners. Outsourcing agencies are
less likely to pursue a relationship with those programs
that have few followers, are not widely recognized or
do not command the interests of advertisers. To deter-
mine the attractiveness of their product, they need to
evaluate such information as (1) the level of national
or regional recognition and exposure of their athletic
programs (e.g., number of games or events that have
been televised by the national and regional media), (2)
the level of success of all of their athletic programs, (3)
the degree of alumni and fan support or following, (4)
membership in one of the NCAA elite conferences, (5)
national ranking of football and men's basketball pro-
grams, (6) availability and/or use of state of the art
facilities, and (7) accessibility of high profile coaches
and blue chip athletes, etc. One rule of thumb in deter-
mining the attractiveness of an institution's athletic
program is to see whether or not the responses from
outsourcing agencies to the institution's request for
proposal (RFP) for outsourcing collaboration are
favorable. If the athletic administrators do believe their
product is attractive enough, they should move on to
the next step. Otherwise, they should not go for the
outsourcing option (Li & Burden, 2004).
Who controls the property rights? This is a funda-
mental question that needs to be answered after the
attractiveness of the product has been determined. In
most cases, the athletic department has complete con-
trol over the rights of their athletic properties (e.g.,
sales of media advertising and venue signage, coaches'
TV shows, TV and radio game broadcasts, licensing
and merchandising, "official" sponsorships and venue
naming rights, luxury seating, and production and
management of Internet web sites, etc.). Nevertheless,
there are some colleges and universities whose admin-
istrations want to exercise close control over all proper-
ty rights, including those in athletics. As such, the
athletic department cannot make any unilateral deci-
sions in terms of outsourcing. If the athletic depart-
ment has the ultimate authority to determine the use
of athletic properties then it can certainly exercise its
right to do so. In this scenario, the relationship
between the athletic department and the business com-
munity is the next issue that needs to be examined.
The depth of an institution's relationship with the
business community is another importance considera-
tion (Li & Burden, 2004). If it were strong, the coUabo-
Flgure I
Flowchart of Declslon-MaHIng Process for Outsourcing
ration with an outsourcing agency will not diminish
the relationship but increase leverage and synergy. If
the relationship is weak, the institution risks losing
support from local businesses by introducing an unfa-
miliar intermediary.
If the athletic administrator is still uncertain, then he
or she should determine whether or not in-house
resources are sufficient to get the job done. Finally, if it
is determined that in-house resources are not suffi-
cient, and, after all of the issues have been thoroughly
reviewed, then outsourcing logically becomes a viable
alternative for achieving the organization's goals.
Figure 1 is a flowchart illustrating the decision-making
process for outsourcing recommended for intercolle-
giate athletic administrators in NCAA Division I insti-
tutions.
Case Studies
In the following sections, three cases involving
NCAA Division I institutions are discussed. These
cases illustrate some of the advantages as well as the

Intention to Outsource

No Examination of Institutional Yes

Mission

r r

No
Dperations Attractiveness of Products

i Yes
No
Control of Property Rights

Yes
No Relationship with Business
Community

Yes
No Availability of In-house
Resources
Yes

Outsourcing

128 Volume 14 • Number 2 • 2005 • Sport MarHetlng Quarterly

disadvantages of outsourcing in the context of each
institution's unique circumstances affecting the athlet-
ics administrator's decision regarding outsourcing
some or all of their marketing operations. One institu-
tion has chosen the outsourcing option; another has
decided to keep its marketing operations in-house,
while the third initially outsourced its marketing oper-
ations, and then moved everything in-house and later
on decided to outsource part of their operations. The
three institutions presented are the University of
Virginia, Stanford University, and The Air Force
Academy.
University of Virginia - Making the Case for
Outsourcing
The first case involves the University of Virginia
(UVa). UVa is an NCAA Division I-A institution that
has fully embraced the outsourcing option. Currently,
it works with three outsourcing agencies. Collegiate
Licensing Company (licensing). College Sports Online
(website), and Cavalier Sports Marketing (Viacom,
multi-media). "The outsourcing agencies meet our
needs in terms of staffing, budget, expertise, and red
tape (the state of Virginia's cumbersome procurement
regulations). It also frees up our marketing staff to
concentrate on other important activities that we are
responsible for," said Andrew Rader, UVa's director of
marketing. Clearly, this arrangement provides advan-
tages for the athletics program.
For the past eight years, the university has worked
most closely with a company called Viacom (otherwise
known as Cavalier Sports Marketing). When consider-
ing the outsourcing option, the university acted upon
several factors related to its particular position. First, it
is a major university competing in one of the big-time
athletic conferences—the Atlantic Coast Conference
(ACC). Most, if not all, of the schools in the conference
outsource their major marketing operations to promi-
nent national outsourcing agencies like Viacom.
Second, the principal advantage that Viacom brings
to the table is their manpower, expertise, and experi-
ence in selling, something that the university lacks
internally according to Mr. Rader (2002). Viacom sells
radio and television rights, corporate sponsorships and
signage, etc. Additionally, "Viacom has a broader base
of resources and contacts than we do," said Rader. "For
instance, we got a deal with Nickelodeon and nine free
roadway billboards from Viacom that we would not
have received otherwise."
When the partnerships were initiated the institution
had concerns about their relationship with the business
community as well as the issue of whether or not the
different staffs could effectively co-exist. However, no
major problems have been evident (Rader, 2002; Terri
Volume 14 • Number 2 • 2005 • Sport MarHetlng Quarterly 129
Mattie, telephone conversation on May 26, 2004).
Assistant director of marketing, Katie McFadden (tele-
phone conversation on July 2, 2002) stated "the staff at
the university works closely with the Viacom staff, even
sharing the same office area, and is involved in the
marketing and promotions process." Involving a third
party in marketing operations has been a good busi-
ness decision for the University of Virginia.
Conducting Business In-house Is the Right Choice at
Stanford
Stanford University is an NCAA Division I-A mem-
ber that competes in the prestigious Pacific 10
Conference. From a competitive standpoint, the insti-
tution has done extraordinarily well, perennially finish-
ing among the top 10 schools for the Sears Director's
Cup, emblematic of overall program excellence.
However, in order to maintain its competitive edge, it
is important that Stanford continues to generate the
needed revenues to support its more than 30 intercol-
legiate men and women's sports programs. The athletic
department's marketing operations are a large and vital
part of the revenue generating effort.
Director of marketing Bob Carruesco (telephone
conversation on July 15, 2002 & May 26, 2004) stated
"Stanford's marketing operations are conducted 100%
in-house; however, we are contemplating the outsourc-
ing of corporate sponsorship sales beginning summer,
2004." Even though Mr. Carruesco admits there are
some distinct advantages to outsourcing, when schools
contract out services and/or give away marketing
rights, they are disadvantaging their program in
numerous ways. In Carruesco's view,
"If Stanford were to contract out its major mar-
keting operations, first, we would not be getting
the attention or value that our university deserves,
and second we would lose that personal contact
with the business community. It is important that
we maintain the ability to generate entertainment
and client satisfaction. Our philosophy is 'nobody
can sell our product better than we can!'"
This attitude stems from the high value that the
institution places on its product. They have recruited
and trained quality people to market and sell their
product in-house and provided them with the tools
necessary to do the job. The evidence has been refiect-
ed in their financial success. "We would not have had
such phenomenal success if someone else were selling
our product," said Carruesco.
Stanford's success has been predicated on other core
values as well. First, retaining their property rights has
allowed the athletic department to maintain total con-
trol of its product. Second, it requires that the staff stay
involved in everything that is going on. This has signif-
icant implications related to maintaining close contact
with friends in the business community and ensuring
that contractual obligations and promises are fulfilled.
Carruesco explained "the business community likes to
feel that they are doing business with the athletics
department instead of someone else. Something is lost
when they are working with an outsourcing agency."
Therefore, vigilant management and control is a fun-
damental part of Stanford's marketing philosophy.
When Stanford does bring in an outside agency in
summer 2004, these core beliefs will serve as the foun-
dation for structuring the relationship with the service
provider.
Air Force Academy Makes an Adjustment to Create a
Better Fit for Its Marketing Operations
The Air Force Academy is a unique member of the
NCAA Division I-A, Mountain West Conference. It has
an enrollment of just 4,000, all cadets, and competes
against institutions like Brigham Young University, the
University of Wyoming, and the University of Nevada,
Las Vegas.
In the Air Force Academy's case, outsourcing did not
bring the anticipated benefits. According to Steve
Becvar, former associate athletic director (telephone
conversation, January 11, 2002), "like many other insti-
tutions, we outsourced our major marketing opera-
tions until approximately seven years ago. Then the
decision was made to bring everything back in-house."
"Subsequently, we decided to outsource the stadium
Scoreboard advertising to Viacom," stated marketing
director Clayton Zenner (telephone conversation. May
26, 2004). Via the 27 intercollegiate sports (men and
women) the Academy sponsors, the quality facilities on
base and competitiveness within the league, the
Academy feels that their product is highly attractive.
Also, the department of athletics has control over its
property rights.
The Air Force Academy made the decision to bring
everything back in-house because "it better fit our mis-
sion as well as our emphasis on developing relation-
ships with the business community, generating more
support and interest in the program, and having the
ability to host many national and regional events," said
Mr. Becvar. Their goals included maximizing athletic
revenues, regaining control of their property rights,
and enhancing the image of their program.
Outsourcing simply was not providing the Academy
with the competitive advantage it needed to accom-
plish these goals. Unreasonable financial demands,
issues related to contractual arrangements, and con-
fiicting goals with the service provider were some of
the concerns that caused the Academy to rethink its
marketing strategy.
130 Volume 14 • Number 2 • 2005 • Sport MarHeting Quarterly
Although they had to add the staffing and the skills
necessary to get the job done, they are now able to
maximize returns. "We purchased a new Scoreboard for
the stadium and sold the sponsorships ourselves. The
board was paid off in five years and now everything we
make is revenue," proclaimed Becvar. By contrast, the
outsourcing agency wanted a 10-15 year deal to sell the
board and share in the revenues, which would have
been too costly a venture for the Academy (The recent
arrangement with Viacom is much more advanta-
geous). Additionally, intercollegiate athletics regained
control over their radio network and team travel pack-
age because they felt that the outsourcing agency was
benefiting more from these arrangements than the ath-
letic department. Mr. Becvar added "the outsourcing
agency contracted sponsors that otherwise would not
have been approved by the Academy." Now, the
Academy is back in control and that has translated into
additional revenues for the department.
In short. The Air Force Academy lost trust in its con-
tracted property rights holder. Bringing everything
back in-house gave the Academy the competitive
advantage it needed. From a financial standpoint
Becvar proudly stated "revenues from radio rights have
increased from just under $48,000 to $150,000; sales of
game programs went from $1,500 per game to a net of
$25,000 and ad sales are now $150,000. The Falcon
Stadium Scoreboard that originally cost $225,000 now
nets $275,000 per year." Now they feel that they are in a
position where the arrangement with Viacom can take
them to the next level in advertising sales. Services to
clients have been substantially enhanced, which leads
to quality programming and hospitality for contribu-
tors, sold-out stadium skyboxes, more attractive and
satisfactory packages for corporate partners, and
enhanced fanfest experiences (inflatable, pony rides,
bands, etc.) at games for patrons. Evidently, the move
in-house was the right choice for the Air Force.
Summary
The fiercely competitive nature of intercollegiate ath-
letics, escalating cost of doing business, and mandate
that campus athletics programs be self sufficient has
made outsourcing marketing functions fashionable in
recent years. Outsourcing has been described as an
important tool for attaining and maintaining a com-
petitive edge in intercollegiate marketing programs.
Additionally, outsourcing is growing in appeal to indi-
vidual institutions because of a variety of reasons
important to them. The advantages in outsourcing can
be operational, strategic, or both, ranging from allevi-
ating time pressure on understaffed departments to
generating large sums of revenues that were not avail-
able to the institution before. The disadvantages
include the potential loss of control over critical func-
tions such as timeliness and quality of services to man-
aging dysfunctional partnerships.
This study discussed the process of making outsourc-
ing decisions in intercollegiate athletics and proposes
that the decision to outsource is circumstantial. Cases
involving three NCAA Division I-A institutions were
reviewed and used to support the central theme.
Essentially, athletics administrators must complete a
strategic analysis of their business environments to
determine if outsourcing is a good fit for their institu-
tions. However, according to Butler (2000) it must be
emphasized that an organization's philosophy, goals,
and strategic directions strongly influence the decision
whether to outsource and what work to contract out.
outsourcing decisions. International Journal of Sport Management, 5(4),
1-11.
Padilla, A., & Baumer, D. (1994). Big-time college sports: Management and
economic issues. Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 18(2), 123.
Rader A. (2002, June). Working with an outside agency. Paper presented at
the 11^" Annual Conference of the National Association of Collegiate
Marketing Administrators, Dallas, Texas.
Rombel, A. (2002). Handing it over. Global Finance, 16(6), 42.
Rozin, S., & Zegel S. (2003, October 20). A whole new ball game? The push
to reform and scale back collegiate athletics is gaining yardage. Business
Week, 3854, 100.
Sneath, J. Z., Hoch, R.M., Kennett, P.A., & Erdmann, J.W. (2000). College
athletics and corporate sponsorship: The role of intermediaries in suc-
cessful fundraising efforts. The Cyberjournal of Sport Marketing, 4(3), 42.
Willcocks, L., & Lacity, M. (1998). Strategic sourcing of information sys-
tems: Perspectives and practices. New York: Wiley & Sons.
Williams, O. (1998). Outsourcing: A CIO's perspective. Boca Raton, LA: St.
Lucie Press.

Consideration of these factors helps the institution

determines whether it is advantageous to outsource or
keep everything in-house.
Additionally, it is evident that outsourcing in inter-
collegiate athletics is an evolving process. Some schools
are positioned to gain a competitive advantage by out-
sourcing. Others have the necessary resources in-house
to get the job done. However, some schools still need to
better position themselves if they are to gain benefits
from outsourcing. Also, what about those schools that
do not have a top 10 athletics program, how do they
retain their competitiveness? In order to address these
issues future study is needed.

References
Bartem, R., & Manning, S. (2001). Outsourcing in Higher Education.
Change, 33(1), p 42.
Butler, J. (2000). Winning the outsourcing game. Boca Raton, FL: Auerbach.
Chin, T. (2003). The doctor is outsourcing. American Medical News 46(30),
17.
Davy, J. (1998). Outsourcing human resources headaches. Managing Office
Technology, 43(7), 6.
Elmuti, D., & Kathawala, Y. (1998). Outsourcing to gain a competitive
advantage. Industrial Management,40{3), 20-25.
Gay, C , & Essinger, J. (2000). Inside outsourcing. Naperville, IL: Nicholas
Brealey.
Greaver, M. (1999). Strategic outsourcing. Nevjf York: American Management
Association.
Hayes, F. (2001 j . A light on ASPs computer world, 35(34), 62.
ISP Website. ISP sports celebrates 10th birthday (n.d.). Retrieved May 25,
2004, from http://vnvw.ispsports.com/news.cfm?id=8
Issacs, N. (1999). Two companies, two outsourcing decisions. InfoWorld,
2/(24), 82.
Johnson, G. (2001, March 8). Big West wants a big league share of sports
marketing pie; sponsorship: The little known conference hires two big
names in the business to get the ball rolling. Los Angeles Times, p. CI.
Kakabadse, N., & Kakabadse, A. (2000). Critical review - Outsourcing: A
paradigm shift. Journal of Management Development, 19 (8), 670-728.
Li, M., & Burden, W. (2002). Outsourcing sport marketing operations by
NCAA Division I athletic programs: An exploratory study. Sport
Marketing Quarterly, ll{i), 226-232.
Li, M., & Burden, W. (2004). Institutional control, perceived product attrac-
tiveness, and other related variables in affecting athletic administrators'

Volume 14 • Number 2 • 2005 • Sport MarHetlng Quarterly 131