Sport Sciences: One-year Master’s Thesis
15 Credits, Second CycleUsability of sport arenas
A multiple case study of Olympia
and Helsingborg Arena
Güncel Ömer
Master (One Year/ 60 ECTS) of Science in Sport Sciences
Seminar opposition: 26 August 2019
Examiner: Johan Norberg Supervisor: Joakim Åkesson Department of Sport
Science, Faculty of Education and Society
2
Table of contents
Acknowledgments 5
Abstract 6
Introduction 7
Research aim and questions 9
Previous Research 10
Arena development 10
Arena location 11
Usability of arenas 12
Summary of Previous Research 13
Theoretical framework 14
Utilization 14
Localization & planning 15
Effectivity and productivity 15
Stakeholders 16 Methodology 19 Research design 19 Empirical data 21 Semi-structured interviews 21 Secondary data 22 Data collection 23 Interviews 23 Documents 24
Summary of data collection 25
Data analysis 25
Methodological discussion 27
Critical discussion of sources 27
Validity & Reliability 28
Ethical considerations 29
Results and Analysis 33
Usage of the arenas 33
Sport related usability of Olympia 33
Non-sport related usability of Olympia 34
Analysis of the usability of Olympia 35
Sport related usability of Helsingborg Arena 36
Non-sport related usability of Helsingborg Arena 38
Analysis of the usability of Helsingborg Arena 40
Localization of the arenas 41
Analysis of localization 43
Values for the stakeholders 44
3
HISO 46
HASAB 46
FC Helsingborg 47
Analysis of values for stakeholders 47
Conclusions and discussion 49
Discussion 49
Usability of Helsingborg Arena 49
Usability of Olympia 50
Localization 51
Categorized Stakeholders values 52
Conclusions 54
Implications and suggestions for further research 56
References 57
Appendices Fel! Bokmärket är inte definierat.
Interview guidelines 62
5
Acknowledgments
I want to thank my supervisor Joakim Åkesson for his advice and guidance throughout this course. Thank you Anders, Charlie, Fredrik and Julius for taking your time and participating in this study. I wish you all the very best in your careers.
6
Abstract
The aim of this thesis is to analyze the usability phenomena of sport arenas and what values it brings to different stakeholders. The thesis is a multiple case study of Olympia and
Helsingborg Arena in Helsingborg city. Both arenas are built and owned by the municipality and are used for sports and entertainment purposes of various themes. The main stakeholders that have been part of the thesis are the Helsingborg municipality administration of School and Leisure administration (responsible of green surfaces at the arenas), HASAB (a
municipally owned corporation that manages Helsingborg Arena), HISO (organization of local sport clubs in Helsingborg) and FC Helsingborg (an elite floorball club playing and training at Helsingborg Arena). For this study, a stakeholder model has been applied together with theoretical concepts of utilization, localization and efficiency & productivity to create a theoretical framework. This case study is a qualitative study with semi-structured interviews with key informants. Moreover, secondary data in reports and on websites connected to the different stakeholders have been analyzed and presented. Representatives have been interviewed from each organization and stakeholder in order to understand their view and perspective on usability with regard to Helsingborg Arena and Olympia. The results of this study presents an understanding that modern and new arenas create opportunities for more clubs to use advanced and better equipped venues for their activities and offers usability for other purposes than just sport-related activities. However, the results in this study shows us also that building new, modern sport arenas does not necessarily result in satisfactory usability for all actors. According to the results, the local clubs and schools tend to look for other sport venues due to the fact that they have to reschedule and change the venue for their activities when larger events occupy the arena. This leads to lower attractiveness for some stakeholders, which affects the usability of the arena. However, arenas of a high level increase attractiveness for producers and organizations to use the arenas for their products and
competitions. Localization plays a decisive role for the accessibility of the sport arenas and creates a large sports oasis in the central of Helsingborg offering more than five sport halls at the same area.
7
Introduction
In the last decades, there has been a boom in building and reconstruction of sports arenas, especially football arenas (Svensk elitfotboll, 2015). Building and reconstruction of arenas requires large investments and there are usually many stakeholders involved in the procedure, such as municipalities financed by the public by tax money (Coates & Humphfreys, 2003), but also sports organizations and private companies. Arenas are an interest for global companies and part of the globalization. English football arenas now have the name of Gulf-based corporate sponsors including the the Etihad Stadium of Manchester City and Emirates stadium of Arsenal, both sponsored by airlines beckoning European travelers to UAE as a tourist destination (Houlihan & Malcolm, 2015). Different types of stakeholders can have different visions and aims with regard to arena-projects and the usage of arenas. In
Scandinavia, there is a high degree of state involvement concerning in the field of sport this is manifested by extensive government support to voluntary organizations in form of subsidies and publicly financed sport arenas and facilities (Bergsgrad & Norberg, 2010).
When building new arenas, it is important to discuss the usage of the arena and and how society, the city and the sports community will benefit from it. Even though the building of the arenas may cause an economic deficit, the arenas can create values to the city and its citizens that make the investments worthwhile in the long run.
There are many opportunities that arise with building an arena in a city. Often the arena can be an attraction for visitors and become a landmark and part of an identity for the city (Andersson, 2011). It can increase the amounts of events in the city (Greenwell, Danzey- Bussell & Shonk, 2020) and offer multiple indoor & outdoor sport halls for many different stakeholders such as sport clubs, schools and other sport related organizations.
Modern sports arenas help to increase sports tourism globally which has become a
phenomenon in itself (Greenwell, Danzey-Bussell & Shonk, 2020). Sport arenas and facilities are developed because they are competing for events with many other organizations and arenas (Greenwell, Danzey-Bussell & Shonk, 2020). At the same time, there are many providers such as municipal sport arena and facility providers, professional sport teams that would not see themselves as part of the sport tourism sector nor the tourism industry
(Houlihan & Malcolm, 2015). These modern arenas can also be used for non-sport related events such as musical events and can thus reach out to other audiences as well which can be
8
seen as an income generator by the arena owners. It can also provide services to the local sport clubs that are not profit generators for the owners of the arenas.
The construction of arenas requires strategies and plans for how the arenas shall be used once it is completed and what else can it be used for except sport events? Constructions of arenas for major sport events, i.eg. World Cup in football, costs billions of dollars (Coates &
Humphreys, 2003;Alm, Tofft-Jorgensen, Brandt & Bang, 2012). When the event is over and the arena will not host any major events, large concerns arises due to the utilization of the arenas are not high enough and the expenses causes economic problems for arena owners (Alm, Tofft-Jorgensen, Brandt & Bang, 2012).
This study will challenge the ideas of usability of sport arenas by creating an understanding of how different stakeholders, such as municipalities and owners of an arena and sport clubs and organizations that are using and the arenas, reflects regarding usability and what values they see when operating an arena. To understand the phenomenon of usability, it is important to analyze the participants (stakeholders) perspectives of usability and values of arenas. This study will also explore what opportunities and problems can be created with new and modern arenas and furthermore, provide ideas of what different stakeholders think of when making a decision to construct an arena, with regard to other stakeholders’ visions on values and usability of arenas.
9
Research aim and questions
The aim of this study is to analyze, discuss and problematize the usability and localization of sport arenas and the values arenas provide for different stakeholders. The study is a multiple case study with focus on two big arenas in the city of Helsingborg – Olympia and
Helsingborg Arena.
The study consists of three main research questions: Research Question #1: What are are the arenas used for?
This question relates to the understanding of in what ways the arenas are used and operated. Research Questions #2: How does the stakeholders reflect regarding the localization of the arenas?
The aspect of the question is how the planning and localization of an arena affects the functionality of arenas.
Research Questions #3: What values do the arenas bring to different stakeholders? This question relates to different values to different stakeholders with regard to what their aims and plans are with investing in the construction of an arena. It also relates to how
effective and productive the arenas are by how they are operated and used by the stakeholders. The reason for choosing to study these two arenas in Helsingborg is because they are the two largest arenas in the city and both are relatively new. Helsingborg Arena was finished in late 2012 and Olympia underwent a complete reconstruction between 2014-2017. While
Helsingborg Arena is an indoor arena, Olympia is an outdoor arena with green surface. There are plenty of green surfaces and sport arenas in Helsingborg but not on the same level as Olympia and Helsingborg Arena. Moreover, the two arenas are located at the same area and neighborhood in Helsingborg and are only separated by Idrottens Hus (another sport arena with three halls + bowling surface). This makes the two sport arenas very unique as there are very few, if any, places in Sweden that have so many sport stadiums at the same place. The two arenas, together with Idrottens Hus, make a total of five sport halls at the same area. The construction of the indoor arena, Helsingborg Arena, has provided even more opportunities to the municipality of Helsingborg and its inhabitants and visitors. Furthermore, stakeholders of certain categories are of interest for this study with regard to how they reflect regarding usability of arenas.
10
Previous Research
Previous research will be presented about the central themes of arena developments, arena location and arena usability. Research shows there has been demands and directives introduced and fulfilled from the Danish Football Union (Alm & Storm, 2018) regarding arenas in Denmark. Swedish research is also presented in this chapter. Other themes that are presented are about what impact the localization has on planning and building a sport arena and what usability opportunities can be created with the arenas. To find and identify relevant previous research, I have searched for studies and literature with focus on arena and
utilization of arenas through sports management matters. Furthermore, this has helped me to find research regarding non sport related activities at arenas.
Arena development
Research in Denmark shows that sport arenas and mainly football arenas in Denmark have required to hold a certain level of standards and capacity from the football federation (Alm & Storm, 2018).
The research showed that the Danish Football Federation shows had put specific demands on the sport arenas and it was understood that some of the arenas needed to be upgraded and the municipalities were then forced to help with the investments coming directly from tax paying people. There were different opinions from the municipalities and the football clubs on these demands by the Danish Football Federation according to Alm and Storm (2018). The Danish and Swedish sport culture has its similarities in financing an arena but also the size and capacities of the sport arenas.
Public sector support and constitutes the largest and most external source of income for the major part of organized sports in Scandinavia (Bergsgrad & Norberg, 2010). In Sweden, the municipalities own around one half of the sports arenas and facilities and are the dominating actor when it comes to building and operating big and expensive arenas (Bergsgrad &
Norberg, 2010). The financial support from municipality accounts to around 55% of the total public support to sports and when comparing to Denmark and Norway, the financing of sport arenas and various sport facilities have been by tax funding in Sweden while the other two countries have been funded by government revenues from the gambling market (Bergsgrad & Norberg, 2010). According to Bergsgrad & Norberg, the municipalities stand for the largest share by far with an estimated 490 million euro annually, in which 360 million euro is
11
constituting capital costs for sports arenas & facilities and 130 million euro comprising activity and leader funding.
Public support to the sports movement has been based on a clear division of responsibility whereby the government has provided funding to the national confederations, while the municipalities have had the main responsibility for local sports life (Bergsgrad & Norberg, 2010). Furthermore, the government support has primarily taken various forms of subsidies to the voluntary organizations, whereas sports arenas & facilities have been mainly regarded as municipal concerns.
Arena location
Alm and Storm (2016) have also made a study regarding the usage of sport arenas after a major sport event which showed some significant results. The authors discussed that cities should be analyzed before building a mega arena in a city that does not have the same attraction and need for a new arena after the sport event has passed (Alm et al. 2016). These studies on sport arenas focus on their utilization and as well as the different stakeholders’ view of working with arenas. It shows us different interests and needs of an arena
construction and demands of sport organizations and how it affects the society and furthermore, that building a new stadium is not always a guarantee for success. This is interesting for the aim and purpose of this study. This puts focus on the localization and the planning of a sport venue to make it as efficient as possible.
According to Karin Book (2005), marketing the area and neighborhood of where the arenas are localized has increased in popularity to be studied by researchers. Furthermore, Karin Book talks about the connection between constructing a sport arena or multi-arenas and the activities that local people are exercising. Another issue that is brought up in the article is optimal localization of sports arenas and their accessibility for both physical and social matters. The fact that the arenas have a very different function and location (in both the outer areas and the inner city) opens up for an interesting cultural geographical analysis of how the surrounding spatial structure and the business composition affect the new arenas and
therefore, Karin Book urges that dialogues between representatives of the sports movement and community and urban planners are important.
Striving to be competitive, the cities build large, high, spectacular arenas to attract big events and to arrange international events such as the Olympic Games due to it is a way to put the
12
city on the map according to Book & Eskilsson (2001). John Bale (1993) discusses the development towards ever-larger arenas where sports and other pleasures and experiences are combined. Bale believes that one can even see some arenas as an example of a new type of theme parks, in.eg. a Disneyland for sports. In his book Sport Geography, John Bale (2005) discusses that the central place theory in the traditional geography theory could very well be used as a normative model for the location of sports arenas and facilities.
Usability of arenas
The latest years’ developments of sport arenas are seen as income generators for investors according to the journalists Andrew Cave and Alex Miller (2016) at The Telegraph. The journalists’ states similar findings and arguments as Alm et al. (2016) about countries building new arenas for mega event such as the EURO 2016 in football in France where a total of 1,6 billion € was invested in renovation of arenas. Other countries such as England where teams increase their capacity by reconstruction or new construction of arenas, has been about investments return rather than pure capacity increasing. An example that is given by Cave and Miller (2016) is the The Staples Center in Los Angeles with only 19 067 seats capacity which is a quarter of Old Trafford (homegrown for Manchester United), and a third of Emirates Stadium (home ground for Arsenal FC). When comparing the annual revenue of Staples Center and Old Trafford, the revenues was a total of 345 million dollars for Staples Center while Manchester United had match day takings of 132 million dollars. Old Trafford is home-ground only for Manchester United while Staples Center is homegrown for Los
Angeles Lakers, Los Angeles Clippers and Los Angeles Sparks in basketball and Los Angeles Kings in ice hockey and this ensures 140 match days a year with play-offs and major concerts excluded. Professor Chris Brady at University of Salford (2016) has analyzed stadiums and stated that the future of stadiums must be linked to their ability to generate maximum revenue for the investment needed to either build or upgrade the stadiums. According to Brady, the arenas need to be used more than twice a week and more than just the sport of the hosting organization. In addition, building vertically arenas with car parks and shopping malls in the actual arena or connected to the arena can provide huge commercial opportunities according to Chris Brady.
Turner and Rosentraub’s (2002) study about tourism, sports and the centrality of cities issues the case of decentralized municipalities in various states in America in an attempt to revive their city image with tourism and sports involvement. In the 1990s, the sport became a
13
development category to spur the local economy and public strategies surfaced to embrace the new opportunity for downtowns in various cities, in.eg. as Atlanta in America, with new sport arenas and attraction for mega events, in e.g. the Olympic Games and for sport teams to use the facilities (Turner & Rosentraub, 2002). At the same time, there were other cities that did not have the same effect, in e.g. Gateway Center at Cleveland. However, many cities were convinced of the idea and still pursued their projects with the investing on sport facilities.
Summary of Previous Research
The previous researches presented in this chapter has focused on the utilization of mega arenas post sport tournaments, investments opportunities, development of sport arenas in Scandinavia and how localization has as an impact on the arenas.
This study will focus specifically on two arenas of how usable they are, their localization and what values they bring to the stakeholders regarding usability of new arenas. This study will problematize the usability and the values highlighted by the different stakeholders and analyze the utilization of sport arenas. This particular study focuses on two arenas in Sweden that are relevantly new and located at the same spot in the city. While Helsingborg Arena is an indoor arena, Olympia is an arena based on green surface. This study has it context applied to Swedish arena usability and what value it brings to different stakeholders.
14
Theoretical framework
For this study I have constructed a theoretical framework with a combination of concepts and analytical model. The main concept is utilization which is explained further in this chapter. The analytical model of stakeholders is also important since the study will focus on analyzing stakeholders’ perspectives. The concepts of effectivity and productivity as well as localization and planning has also been implemented to this theoretical framework.
Utilization
There can be various definitions of utilization and the Cambridge Dictionary (2019) describes utilization as the act of using something in an effective way. This presented definition suits this study because it is connected to the aim of how usable the arenas can be. In this study the utilization-concept will focus on the functionality and what the arenas are used for.
The concept utilization will be used to give a theoretical perspective for the research study to understand how usable the arenas are and what they bring to society. A post event-utilization theory presented by Jens Alm & et. al. (2014) have three main factors when looking into the utilization and two of them are directly connected to the core activity:
1. What is the attendance at sporting events? 2. Are there concerts and festivals on the arenas?
3. Are there any possibilities for the arena to become iconic together with other facilities, upholding or improving the popularity of the city among tourists?
Alm. et. al. (2014) says that the post-event utilization of sport arenas is a matter of efficiency and that sport arenas that are seldom used or has many empty seats when hosting an event are examples of excess supply.
The chosen and described utilization concept was applied on arenas that were built and used for a mega-sport events such as the World Cup in football and how the utilization became after the event. Sweden has not had a mega event in the last decades but the study and the utilization theory is relevant for the research study to see how usable the arenas are and what they bring to the societies. A utilization-perspective can help to achieve the initiative goals of where to use the arenas and for what purpose. Furthermore, it can help us understand to which
15
stakeholders it is most appealing for. This helps us also to understand if an arena is efficient and productive in regard to how the arenas are used.
Localization & planning
“Where can the arena be most efficient and productive?” is a question that should be asked when planning an arena that can provide services to different “stakeholders”.
Karin Book (2005) presents three different perspectives for sports in cultural geographic studies in Svensk idrottsforskning NR 3-2005 and lifts up the localization of arenas as an important part for arena construction. The first perspective Karin Book discusses is based on the individual level and aims at evaluating the location and significance of the arenas financed (in this case financed by the Handshake, which have been created and planned in Malmö). The second perspective is specifically analyzing the location of arenas. This reads: Analyzing how smaller sports arenas and facilities for sports can be planned into the existing urban environment in order to best create good accessibility and synergies with other businesses in the immediate area. The third perspective is when knowledge has been created about the conditions for localization of smaller sports arenas (nearby sports facilities), it may be
interesting to think about the priorities and balances between different facilities that the cities must do. According to Karin Book, this perspective can be based on the following question: How a city can strike a good balance between investing in large, image-creating, spectacular arenas and small local sport facilities?
The presented concepts and models in this chapter can help to understand the concepts of which values are important for the different stakeholders when it comes to usability of arena. In order to understand the ideal utilization from their perspective it is important to know how the stakeholders reflect upon being effective and productive with arenas. Localization
highlights the advantages and disadvantages uplifted by the stakeholders in relation to usability and their values.
Effectivity and productivity
Effectivity and productivity are two concepts that are connected to each other. Effectivity is about doing the right things and productivity is about doing things the right way (Drucker, 1975). Effectivity focuses on the relation between the organization and the environment. For example: if an organization satisfies customer needs, then it means that the organization is
16
effective (Forslund, 2013). However, if it costs too much for the organizations to do it, then it is not done the right way and this means that the organizations are not productive enough (Forslund, 2013). According to Forslund, productivity is determined on how much can be created (output) and is resulted from the available resources (inputs). In connection with usability of an arena, effectivity and productivity becomes important concepts in order for the stakeholder that is owning the arena to do the right thing (being efficient) while using the arena and when selling a product to other stakeholders (can be a sports club, association holding an event and citizens of Helsingborg). In order to attract and have as many
stakeholders as possible at their arena and increase the usability, it is important to do the work in the right way (productive). Usability can be everything from sport clubs, associations and companies that are using the arena and are satisfied with the outcome and it can also refer to customers such as citizens buying tickets and going to the arenas to attend the events. By holding events and customers who buys tickets to attend the event can be an indication confirming the efficiency and productivity with utilization of the arena.
Productivity and effectivity of an arena built and owned by a municipality needs to see more values than cost efficiency due to municipality can not only aim to make a profit, but to make it valuable for the citizens and the society. It is important to see the difference between effectivity and productivity. Increased productivity is about producing more out of the available resources and this can be done by smarter and faster production while increased effectivity can be about developing a new product which is better suited to the demands and needs of the customers and the various stakeholders’ (cf. Forslund, 2013). Effectivity and productivity can be affected by the localization. By having a sport arena at a specific location can increase and decrease the effectivity & productivity of usability of the arena and this is why these concepts are included in the theoretical framework.
Stakeholders
In 1997, Mitchell, Agle and Wood came up with a normative stakeholder theory which gives answers to why a board of an organization shall take specific groups into account as
stakeholders for the organization. The stakeholders model of Mitchell, Agle and Wood (1997) aims to identify the stakeholders that are surrounding an organization and according to the authors’ model, there are three head categories to take place in.
17
Three attributes are decisive for the placement of stakeholders in the different categories. The attributes are:
1. Power, defined through the connection and relation between two parts whereas part A can make part B to do something that they would not have done in the first place. 2. Legitimacy, Mitchell, Agle and Wood describes the notion legitimacy as socially
accepted, expected structures or behaviors that are often coupled implicitly with the power of when people attempt to evaluate the nature of relationships in society. It is similar to power as a variable rather than a steady state – a dynamic attribute of the stakeholder-manager relationship.
3. Urgency, is applied to catch the dynamics in an interaction between stakeholders and boards in an organization. It is to the degree to which stakeholder claims call for immediate attention according to Mitchell, Agle & Wood, whom also suggest urgency helps the model to move from static to dynamic and believes that urgency with
synonyms such as “compelling”, “driving” and” imperative” exists only when two conditions are met: when the relationship or claim is of a time-sensitive nature and when the relationship or claim is important or critical to the stakeholder.
In regard to these attributes, Mitchell, Agle and Wood (1997) divides the stakeholders to the following three categories: latent, expectant & strongly expectant, with seven subcategories: Dormant stakeholders (Latent), a relevant attribute of a dormant stakeholder is power and they possess power to impose their will on a firm by not having a legitimate relationship or urgent claim and therefore, their power remains unused. They have little or no interaction with the firm. Example of a dormant stakeholder is someone with power and a group or a person who can spend a lot of money.
Discretionary stakeholders (Latent), possess the attribute of legitimacy but does not have any power to influence the firm and no urgent claims. They are a particularly interesting group for scholars of corporate social responsibility and performance. The key point
regarding this stakeholder is absent power and urgent claims. There is absolutely no pressure on managers to engage in an active relationship with such a stakeholder. It can be an ideal association using an arena for social responsibility matter.
Demanding stakeholder (Latent), is where the sole relevant attribute of the stakeholder-manager relationship is urgency. The stakeholder is described as “demanding”.The attribute of concern does not make this kind of stakeholder sufficiently qualified to have a more
18
prominent role. An example is demonstrators protesting a specific company regarding their businesses which can be irritating for the company but the concerns of the demonstrators remains unconcerned.
Dominant stakeholder (Expectant), possesses both power and legitimacy and have a secure place within the organization and has the power to influence. Through the attributes they posses, the dominant stakeholder forms a dominant alliance in the enterprise. In fact,
dominant stakeholders are those stakeholders that so many scholars are trying to establish as the only stakeholders of the firm. Example can be a group within the company with directors, creditors and representative of owners discussing the visions for the company.
Dependent stakeholders (Expectant), lacks power but have urgent legitimate claims as “dependent” due to these stakeholders depend upon others such as the firm’s manager for the power that is necessary to carry out their will. Example is an organization that is in need of something to be able to do their business but does not have the power to fulfill their wishes and needs permission from an organization higher above in the hierarchy.
Dangerous stakeholders (Expectant), characterizes urgency and power. The stakeholder lacks legitimacy according to Mitchell, Agle & Wood (1997) and will become coercive and even violent which leads to making the stakeholder ‘dangerous’ for the own firm and can harm their own interests by putting their firm into danger under hard times and circumstances. Example is a group aiming to create sabotage when the situation is already affected negatively and put the interests of the organization in danger.
Definitive stakeholders (strongly expectant), possesses both power & legitimacy and
therefore becomes instantly a member of firm’s dominant coalition (alliance). When this kind of stakeholders’ claim is urgent, the managers have clear and immediate mandate to deal with and prioritize the stakeholders’ claims.
Any expectant stakeholder can become a definitive stakeholder by acquiring the missing attribute according to Mitchell, Agle & Wood (1997). An example is a board of an
association or a club which is formed after having a vote to create a board of selected people with mandate to act and work for the interests of the organization.
These different categories will be applied to the different stakeholders that are presented in this case study whereas some of them are dominant stakeholders with power and legitimacy.
19
Methodology
Research design
This study has a case study research design. The case is exploratory in nature and the motivation to choose this type of research design was to be able to explore how different stakeholders identifies the arenas, their usefulness and what values they provide. By applying case study research design I have, furthermore, studied specific events, activities, settings and phenomena, for the purpose of investigating the usability of a sport arena (cf. Andrew,
Pedersen, McEvoy, 2011).
Robert Stake (1995) notes that case study investigations are about the complexity of the case and its special character. Bryman (2016) marks the most common use of the term ‘case’ and associates the case study with a location, such as a community or organization. Case studies entail the detailed and intensive analysis of a case and in this study I am analyzing two sport arenas in Helsingborg (cf. Bryman, 2016). This study furthermore analyzes the different stakeholder perspectives on usability of sport arenas and what values are important for them. By analyzing this, we will be able to understand the mindset of different stakeholders in relation to sport arenas and why specific values are important to them.
The case study research has allowed me to analyze the phenomena of usability by studying two different arenas and important stakeholders, which has enabled me to also identify relationships between stakeholders (Ghauri & Gronhaug, 2005). Case studies give few or no opportunities to generalize results, but George & Bennet (2005) state that through case studies, based on the idea of detailed examination of specific phenomena, comes an
opportunity to develop or test historical explanations that can be generalized for other events. Exponents prefer qualitative methods for the case study design such as participants'
observations and unstructured interviews, as these methods are particularly useful for generating an intensive and detailed examination of a case (Bryman, 2016). My case study has also been a qualitative case study which has focused on conducting interviews and document analysis and thus, I have applied mixed methods and variety of collecting data in order to understand the usability phenomena and what values it brings to different
20
Flyvbjerg (2003) argues that the advantage of large sample methods is the breadth while they have problems with it depth. For case studies, the situation is the opposite (Flyvbjerg, 2003). By narrowing down the study to specific arenas, it makes the study more brief and focused as opposed to if all arenas in Sweden had been included (Bryman, 2016). Furthermore, it has helped me to narrow down the questions asked in interviews and focus on the specific values that an arena can bring to a city.
I have chosen to apply a qualitative method in order to provide a deeper understanding of the phenomena usability of arenas, what different stakeholders value and their reflections
regarding usability. Interviews have been a suitable data collection technique and by
conducting interviews, I have been able to ask the participants what usability means to them, their reflections on usability and values and what is being done and why at specific
organizations regarding the arenas. A disadvantage of interviews can be if the conversation focuses too much on questions that are not relevant for the case study. (Ahrne & Svensson, 2011). To minimize this problem, I have tried to control the interviews to the research questions and the research topic whenever I felt that the conversation started to focus on subjects not relevant for this study.
The advantage of the case study is that it gives a close look at real life situations and directly tests the opinions of the phenomena that is being studied (Flyvbjerg, 2003). This research has focused on the significance responses that the respondents has given to the questions I have asked them and therefore, the qualitative method is more applicable for me while doing my research due to my aim is to understand what values are the most important for the different stakeholders. Focus has therefore been on the various values that are lifted up by the
stakeholder and their reflections regarding usability of arenas.
My role as an author of this study has not been affected by my employment at the Culture Administration office at Helsingborg municipality at the time of the study. The CEO of HASAB (Helsingborg Arena & Scen AB), also the head of culture at Helsingborg
municipality, is not a participant of this study but has helped me get in touch with another key person at HASAB. Furthermore, this study does not challenge or ask any controversial
questions to the participants in order to fulfil the study aim. Neither is the study in the nature of problematic issues such as to take contact with a manager or colleagues but instead quite the opposite, it has been helpful to get in touch with a key person at HASAB who has able to participate for this study.
21
Empirical data
The study focuses on Helsingborg Arena and Olympia, which are a stone's throw away from each other in the Olympia area of Helsingborg and are the two biggest arenas in Helsingborg. Through the approach applied for gathering and processing the empirical data as set out below, this study will contribute to the understanding and problematizing of the usability of arenas and what values it gives to different stakeholders.
Semi-structured interviews
Semi-structured personal interviews have been conducted for this study with the following participants from chosen stakeholders:
Name of participant Title Organization (stakeholder) Category stakeholder Charlie Fält Head of production Helsingborg Arena
och Scen AB (HASAB)
Definitive
Anders Hammarlund Head of green surfaces
Helsingborg Sport and Leisure department.
Definitive
Julius Bergkvist Operations manager Sports confederation of Helsingborg (HISO)
Dependent
Fredrik Azelius Club director & board member
FC Helsingborg & HISO
Dominant
The length of the interviews has varied. While the interview with HASAB and Helsingborg municipality lasted over an hour each, the personal interview with HISO lasted approximately thirty minutes. However, in the latter case, Fredrik Azelius who is a board member of HISO and club director of FC Helsingborg, participated in writing by email.
For this study, I have chosen to conduct interviews with individuals that have a key role in their respective organizations, with the aim of gathering primary data from individuals directly involved with the management of arenas. Therefore, two of the stakeholders chosen for the study are HASAB a company owned by the municipality (Helsingborgs stad) that manages Helsingborg Arena, and the municipality of Helsingborg Stad itself, owner of
22
Olympia and many other sport facilities in Helsingborg. The participant and representative from HASAB has been Charlie Fält, the production manager of the company. From
Helsingborg municipality I have interviewed Anders Hammarlund, who is the head of green lanes and sports center at the School and Leisure administration at Helsingborg municipality, which is the administration managing Olympia. By having direct contact with these persons, I was able to ask questions regarding the usability of arenas directly to individuals that are head of their respective organizations or who work with the management of the arenas.
For the purpose of including the perspective of a sports team in this study, I have also interviewed FC Helsingborg (floor ball) which plays its home games and has trainings at the Helsingborg Arena. The participant from this club has been Fredik Azelius, club and sport director of FC Helsingborg. The participation of FC Helsingborg has enriched this study with a sports team’s reflections on usability and values of sport stadiums. Fredrik Azelius is also a board member of HISO (Helsingborgsidrottens Samorganisation) and has given his individual perspective on the issues of the study, from the perspective of HISO as well. This has resulted in two participations from HISO as Julius Bergkvist, head of operations at HISO has also participated on the study through personal interview.
HISO is an organization working and operating as the voice of the local sport teams in Helsingborg and have they have been interviewed to give the perception of the Helsingborg sport clubs regarding usability and values of arenas.
Secondary data
Secondary data in the form of reports and official websites of the participating organizations and stakeholders have been collected. Reports from the website of Swedish Football
Association has also been collected since Olympia is dominated by football activities. In addition to this, I have reviewed relevant news articles from Helsingborgs Dagblad and national newspapers in order to provide more background information and and analyze the perception of how the arenas are portrayed in the media and if there have any specific issues that can be connected to the usability and values of arenas. To gather more information on the development of arenas and sport facilities across the world, I have also reviewed international newspapers on the internet, academic journals and reports available on Google Scholar. The database of Malmö University has also been useful for finding information, secondary data and relevant literature for my study. I have studied the websites of all my stakeholders to find more information about them. Helsingborg Arenas’ official website lists the events that are
23
scheduled at the arena and other activities offered aside from events. This enables me to study what kind of events and activities that dominate the arena and what more can be offered in the facilities.
The information available to the public about Helsingborg Arena and Olympia is on a general basis, but through my interviews combined with the documents and the information I have found online and in news reports, I have been able to gather more data to answer my research questions.
Data collection
The data collection methods used for this thesis are interviews and document analysis.
Interviews
The interviews have had a semi-structured form. I have used semi-structured interviewing in order to keep more of an open mind about the contours of what needs to be known, so that the concepts and theories can emerge out of the data (cf. Bryman 2016). Doing semi-structured interviews has given me a chance to ask the participants about these specific relationships and connections among them. Semi-structured interviews have followed an interview guideline with the questions formed and decided beforehand. However, the participants have been able to answer openly and have different replies to the questions (cf. Bryman, 2016).
All of the interviews have been conducted through personal meetings, except for one interview that was conducted in writing (through email) by request from the participant. Conducting interviews online or through email enables the participant to reflect and read the question multiple times before replying, which may improve the quality of the response (cf. Bryman, 2016). Furthermore, offering to conduct doing interview online via email increases the chances of targets accepting to participate, and it is also more likely that they accept to participate if a request is sent to them prior to the actual questions (Bryman (2016). This was the case with the participation of FC Helsingborg. On the other hand, there is a risk of
misinterpretation when conducting interviews by email, i.e. that the participant misinterprets a question and gives another answer to the question than what the author had intended.
Furthermore, the need for follow-up questions by email may prolong the process, in comparison to if the interview had been conducted through a personal meeting
24
Online interviews can loose momentum and interest for the respondent (cf. Bryman (2016). It requires greater commitment and motivation for completing an interview online and in regard to this the replies are often more detailed and considered than doing face-to-face interviews which has been the case with the online interview with FC Helsingborg club director Fredrik Azelius (cf. Curasi, 2001). The collected data through email and online became significantly shorter than personal interviews due to the fact that there was no discussion between me and the participant (cf. Bryman, 2016). With regard to personal interviews, the given responses by the participants does not necessarily mean that it is a repetition of presented data, but rather an opportunity for the participant to further elaborate on the answers and allowing me to ask supplementary questions (cf. Silverman, 2010).
There is a risk of close-lined connection between the participating stakeholders in this study due to their relation of work, which can affect their replies. When conducting my personal interviews for the study I have tried to be as transparent as possible. My aim with the collected data has been to present the highest possible quality of data and for this purpose, I have tried to present the case for the participants in the best possible way in order for the participants to understand the aim of this study. This approach has made the collected data more relevant and reliable.
Key persons at clubs and companies can have a tight schedule and, therefore, not be able to participate in the study. There was another participant from HASAB whom I first contacted, that declined to do an interview but instead referred to an another key person in the
organization who could participate. This was unfortunately not the case with Helsingborgs IF.
Documents
Secondary data has also been important for my study. As a researcher, my aim is to gather information from as many relevant documents as possible involving sport arenas and the perspective of stakeholders (cf. Hancock, Dawson R, 2017). When reviewing the documents, the researcher needs to ask the following questions:
1. Who is the source of the information? 2. What part of it is needed?
3. Where can it be found? 4. When was it prepared? 5. How will it be collected?
25
Media reports can also be rewarding for the collection of data, but it has been taken into consideration what kind of article it is and who the media reporter is (i.e. who the publisher is). It can be a biased publisher or a publisher that is very critical towards a specific issue such as the usability of arenas or the costs of the arenas. For this study, the primary documents that have been analyzed are news reports from the media but also reports from the Swedish
Football Association and websites of the various stakeholders that are participating in this study. To gather information, I have thoroughly reviewed the websites to gather as much information as possible regarding the arenas. The collected data has thereafter been divided into different categories for structural purposes. I have then selected what is most relevant to my research questions.
Summary of data collection
I have gathered information on the different stakeholders’ reflections on arena usability and what values are important for them. This has been put in contrast with the concepts mentioned in the theoretical framework. I have interviewed the participating stakeholders in order to receive the most accurate and relevant data for this study research. Personal interviews have enabled me to ask questions on how and why things are done in a specific way and to
understand the mindset of the specific stakeholder I have also studied secondary data to both compliment and compare with my own results.
Data analysis
The collection of qualitative data results in a large volume of information (Bryman, 2016). I have been inspired by content analysis & narrative analysis methods for analyzing my collected data.
Content analysis method has inspired me when analyzing documented information and context. This method has been appropriate for my research since it has enabled me to understand the content of what I am reading and who is stating it, i.e. what has been said on the websites of the stakeholders and in reports regarding the arenas (cf. Silverman, 2010). This method has also helped me to understand how a stakeholder can interact with an arena and other stakeholders and what they discuss and problematize regarding usability of sport arenas. The method is a very transparent method (Bryman, 2016) and has helped me analyze the collected data and divide it into categories for Olympia and Helsingborg Arena of
26
usability, localization and values for the different stakeholders. I have also been able to detect potential similarities and differences in the answers provided by the different stakeholders and this has been identified as a finding for the research. Different stakeholders tend to have different perspectives and views on issues which has been taken into considerations while analyzing the collected data to answer the aim and research questions of this study. The important task has been to determine ‘what’ has been said and not ‘how’ it has been said (cf. Bryman, 2016).
Narrative analysis focuses on using the stories and experiences shared by the participants to answer my questions (Bryman 2016). This has inspired me to analyze what my participants have told me when reflecting over the usability of arenas and what values it gives them as stakeholders and what they think regarding the localization of the arenas.
The data analysis for this study has required a significant amount of time since I have chosen to conduct personal interviews, which quite often tend to result in answers that are not connected to the aim or questions of the study (cf. Silverman, 2010). The interviews have been recorded and transcripted since I have required more time to analyze the answers and focus on the actual details of the collected data and furthermore categorize the accurate and relevant data for this study (cf. Bryman, 2016). While analyzing the data, it is important to understand that the collected answers are not necessarily the correct answer or the only possible answer to my questions. There often is more than one answer to a question, depending on who is replying and their individual perspective.
A guideline suggested by Hancock, Dawson R (2017) is constant focus on the research questions being investigated. While conducting case studies, a researcher can feel overwhelmed by the large amount of information normally obtained from interviews, observations and documents. An example of this is multiple pages of transcribed interview data and several documents of articles and reports. Hancock, Dawson R advices a way to control the resulting sense of being overwhelmed by constantly reminding oneself of the fundamental research questions being explored in the study.
27
Methodological discussion
Critical discussion of sources
As a researcher I need to bear in mind several important questions when using documents as a source of information; 1) what kind of sources is analyzed? 2) what types of answers will be available? and
3) how will information be selected from all that is available (cf. Hancock, Dawson R, 2017). Olympia football stadium has only one team using the arena; Helsingborgs Idrottsförening, also known as HIF. I have tried multiple ways of getting in touch with HIF, for example through phone calls and email to the chairman of the club as well as the club director of Helsingborgs IF. Furthermore, I also tried to contact the club’s office on the telephone
number and email address available on their official website. My attempts to establish contact with the club were unsuccessful. Thus, I have not been able to present a perspective from the only sport club who frequently uses Olympia arena today and this makes the case study limited with regard to usability of Olympia.
For this study, I had planned at least five interviews with Helsingborgs IF(HIF) included on the list as a stakeholder but ultimately conducted only four interviews due to I did not receive any reply from HIF. It does not necessarily have to be a flaw that a study has fewer interviews than planned (cf. Gratton and Jones (2010). Instead, this has given me as an author the
opportunity to prepare and conduct the planned interviews in a better way as well as provide better opportunities for a thorough analysis (cf. Gratton and Jones, 2010).
Participants have been recommended by their respective organizations or administrations to participate in this study, which means that they are relied upon to provide me with the best answers. A contact person at the contact center for Helsingborg Municipality referred me to Anders Hammarlund at the School & Leisure-department. For HISO, I was forwarded to them by the Helsingborg-office of Regional Sport Federation of Skåne. In the case of HASAB, I was forwarded to the head of production by the CEO who could not find the time to
participate for my study. In the case of FC Helsingborg, I made direct contact with the club director myself.
28
Validity & Reliability
The transparency of a study has an impact on the reliability which is why I have aimed to clearly discuss and present my choices of methods and thoughts regarding my process of collecting data and how I have analyzed it (cf. Ahrne & Svensson, 2011). I have aimed to have a clear and brief presentation of my study in order for the study to be critically reviewed and discussed by the readers (cf. Ahrne & Svensson, 2011).
The challenge for me has been to convince my readers that I have accurately reflected what has been said and placed into the proper content within the study and therefore I have aimed to interview people that are directly involved in operating the arenas and have a good insight of the arenas, together with secondary data in form of websites linked to the stakeholders and reports regarding usability of sport arenas. For a qualitative study research as this study, me as an author of this study had to consider whether the data was validated by that the data
adequately represent what I saw or heard during the collection process (cf. Andrew, Pedersen, McEvoy, 2011). Interviews that I have recorded have therefore been important to be of good sound quality so that I always could repeat and hear them more than once to understand what the participant actually said if I’m not certain of the detail. This made the transcript correctly so could later read the transcripts instead of listening to the recordings.
Gratton and Jones (2010) write about the process of validating data and define it as
triangulation. In Gratton and Jones’ (2010) view, triangulation refers to the use of multiple means of data collection to explore a single phenomenon, which has been the case with this study. Miles & Huberman (2004) extend triangulation thinking by conceiving of triangulation in several ways and these ways are by data source (can include a person), by method (can include an interview or observation), by researcher, by theory and by data type (qualitative or quantitative). For my qualitative study, I have applied more than one form of method, except for my main collection of data which has been through interviews. I have also conducted document analysis of previous studies, reports from sport organizations and newspapers that has been published regarding sport arenas. By applying a combination of methods, such as case studies and interviews for the purpose of this study, methodological triangulation is possible and it helps to balance out any potential weaknesses in each data collection method. (Gray, 2014).
Credibility of a case study design is gained from reliability which involves whether similar results and conclusions would be found if another sport management student or if a person
29
with higher degree would have conducted the study (Andrew, Pedersen, McEvoy, 2011). In order to increase the reliability of this study, I have attempted to accurately account
everything in approach to the study design, and furthermore, to be as much as possible transparent with the procedures of doing this study. I have also mentioned my own
background in regard to this study. Having knowledge of previous work at Olympia and my current work at the Culture administration of Helsingborg has given me an insight of how the arenas are used and what is popular at the arenas. This does not affect the validity and
reliability of the study since the important thing has always been to work with the
transparency and to distance myself in relation to my position to get an objective perspective. I have been documenting (thoroughly operationalizing), using specific procedures such as using a study protocol and as for this multiple case study I have categorized the data from the research questions (cf. Andrew, Pedersen, McEvoy, 2011).
Ethical considerations
The UNESCO principles and ethical guideline have been applied for this study. The principals urge the research to be conducted in a way that the integrity of the research is maintained and negative after-effects which might diminish potential for future research should be avoided. Furthermore, the seventh principle of the ethical guideline code says that the research should be carried out in full compliance and awareness of laws, standards, local customs and regulations. For this research I have followed the GDPR-law since I have collected personal data and this data has been handled with integrity and full responsibility and confidentiality. The personal data has not been presented or shared with anyone not concerned with the study. The collected data has been used for the purpose of this study only. All participants have been fully informed about the aim of this study and how their
participation would help this study and on what principles I was doing my study. To make the participants more comfortable before the interviews, I also stated and presented who the different stakeholders would be part of the study. This was done to assure the participants so that they were fully confident when they participated and so that they knew what they were being part of when participating in this study.
Furthermore, the participants have been informed that they are free to decide whether they want to participate in the study and to cancel the participation whenever they want.
30
It was always my responsibility to minimize this by presenting a well interview-guideline for all the participating stakeholders in good time before the interviews were held
The participants are working with issues related to sport arena usability on a daily basis and within their profession. Therefore, it lies within the framework of their profession to answer questions regarding issues and arenas of the city, especially Olympia and Helsingborg Arena which are owned and managed by the municipality and municipality owned companies. The participants can answer in a way that the other participants of this study might not agree with their view, however, this is not something that would be a danger or concern for the
participants. All stakeholders with different perspectives and views needs to be respected. The participants are persons that have a certain key role for the various stakeholders and who hold similar positions with similar responsibilities. They have, in one way or another, a connection to each other due to the fact that they operate and have sections which connect with each other regarding the sport arenas in Helsingborg.
By informing the participants of which type of organizations I was aiming to interview, participants could have decline an interview because they wouldn’t feel 100% comfortable being interviewed because they don’t wish to create any tensions towards other stakeholders. All planned stakeholders except HIF responded to the requests. I am lifting this up because some of the stakeholder has a connection because of their operations. HASAB is a state owned company and HISO are driven and funded by the government and has a connection to Helsingborgs municipality as well. HISO is representing the local clubs and their voice in this matter and is speaking from their point of view. This can put a pressure on the participant and make them uncomfortable with some questions if they start to feel that they are unsure and might not want to take the risk of giving the wrong answers because it can harm local clubs or affect the collaboration with other stakeholders, i.e. the municipality or HASAB. This is one important reason why the participants were given the chance to look over the transcripts of their interviews. They participants been able to change the wording of their answers in order to not be too verbally critical towards any other stakeholder. This is something that I have been careful with in order to not make the participants feel misinterpreted in their answers and that they accidentally said something that could damage the reputation of other participants. Ethical principles that I have not been able to control was if any of the participants was offending or giving a statement or answers that was targeted towards a specific person when replying my questions.
31
My responsibility as author of this study has been to affect the answers as little as possible. Throughout my interviews, there was no occasions of any replies that were negative towards specific persons or other individuals.
However, if there would have been a case of this issue, I would have notice the remarks that may have a negative impact on other people and private individuals and then it would not have been published in the study.
Guideline 13 in the UNESCO highlights the importance of the participants to be protected against any and all potentially harmful effects and that they should be informed of potential consequences of their participation and this is connected to guideline 11 which urges that I as the author of the study should obtain a freely given informed consent from all human subjects. For this study, every participant that has been interviewed from an organization (stakeholder) have been sent an informed consent from Malmö University which they have either agreed on or signed personally.
Participants have been informed that the study will be uploaded at Malmö University Electronic Publishing (MUEP) and the research itself will be reported with objectivity and integrity which is another ethical guideline code of UNESCO (number 16). I would only use suitable and relevant collected data for the research aim and exclude any potential data that could harm or insult a participant or specific stakeholder.
The study is compliant with the guidelines of Malmö University and the GDPR since I have been collecting personal data by doing interviews for this research. General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) ensures the protection of collected data and privacy for individuals in the EU (European Union) and EEA (European Economic Area) (European Commission, retrieved 2019). All personal data collected in EU must be obliged by this law (European Commission, 2019). I have also used a consent form for the participants to sign in order for me to use their given information for a certain period of time. If the participants would have withdrawn their consent at any time before the certain time, I would have not used and presented the collected data from these participants in this study.
Furthermore, GDPR underlines that all interviews and observation tied to a specific person, such as an interview or a recorded audio file of interview with a person, is categorized as personal data which means that the gathered data shall be confidential. Since I am a student of the Malmö University which is a Swedish university and Sweden is a member of EU and therefore, the study is obliged to apply with the GDPR in every process.
32
The study focuses on the participants in their profession (the participants that are representing an organization) and not as private individuals.
As an international master student of Malmö University, I am aware of the ethical principals which the university has to adhere toThis is something I have presented to the participants t0 give the study more authenticity. As an author of this study I need to collect and go through all of my collected data from an analyzing critical perspective to be able to fulfil the study aim.
33
Results and Analysis
The results in this study consists of interviews and secondary data consisting of publications, reports and websites linked to stakeholders. Analyzing content is presented with my
interpretations of the results in each subheadings that are presented in this chapter.
Usage of the arenas
Sport related usability of Olympia
The current and only team using the stadium of Olympia is Helsingborgs Idrottsförening (HIF) a well-known football club in Sweden based on their performances and their history of success. The team normally plays 15 of their home-games at Olympia stadium and has done so the last two years. According to HOUGS (head of unit for green surfaces) at Helsingborgs municipality, Anders Hammarlund (2019), no other football team or sports team is at the moment using Olympia and the Swedish U21 National football team is excluded from this calculation. As a precondition for using Olympia as home ground, HIF is paying rent to Helsingborgs municipality (Hammarlund, 2019). HIF is renting the south and west stand of the arena only and on match days they have access to all four stands of Olympia.
Olympia is one of the oldest football arenas in Sweden and was built in 1898 (HIF.se, 2019). On the website of Helsingborgs IF it states that Olympia had cycling and athletics
competitions together with football (2019). It was not until 1915 when the cycle paths were replaced with athletics tracks and in 1985, the arena was reconstructed to become a “pure” football arena and classified as the finest football arena in Sweden according to the website of Helsingborg IF (2019). This shows that Olympia has been applicable to multiple sports in the past. The arena has hosted major tournaments such as the World Cup for women in 1995 (HIF.se, 2019).
There are specific requirements for playing in the highest division of the Swedish football system and for the second league including sport arenas and sport venues such as security levels, safety levels and numbered seats with for the visitors according to the regulations of Swedish FA (2019). The turf must also be in line to fulfill demands of international football organizations such as UEFA and FIFA (Swedish Football Associaion, 2019) and Olympia is fulfilling these demands.
34
If other football teams in Helsingborg municipality would start climbing up the to the first and second division, the teams would be able to play at Olympia and would most definitely do so, according to Hammarlund (2019) since there is no other sport arena in the city except
Olympia stadium that fulfills the requirements for the highest divisions. The Olympia stadium is capable of having more than one team using the arena for their home games and this is something that Helsingborg municipality would happily welcome (Hammarlund, 2019). This has happened before. In 2014, when Ängelholms FF was playing in the second division of Sweden, Superettan, the team used Olympia as home arena (Expressen, 2013). This was due to the fact that no other stadium in the area fulfilled SVFF requirements for Superettan division (HD.se 2013). Previously, the team was allowed to play at their own ground after receiving exemption from the Swedish Football Association. In 2014, the club started their season at Olympia but afterwards applied for license to play at their own turf due to
economical problems (Helsingborgs Dagblad, 2014). Clubs can apply for license and needs to fulfil and assure demands in regard to the regulations of Swedish FA (2019).
Furthermore, the Olympia stadium has been used as final stadium for all youth categories for both boys and girls whom has been playing Eskilscupen (Second largest football tournament in Scandinavia for youth teams after Gothia Cup) to give the youth teams and the people visiting the city extra value of the tournament by playing at the Olympia Stadium
(Hammarlund, 2019). The grass on Olympia's football pitch is natural grass and has been praised by various football players and profiles and according to Hammarlund (2019), there are few football pitches in Sweden that can compete with Olympia's lawn. Historically, Olympia has also hosted athletics and cycling competitions and training activities between 1898 and until 1973 (HIF.se, 2019). The shape of the arena is nowhere near of how it looked when it once was built and the only common thing from when it was opened and today is the fact that the arena is located at the exact same place (HIF.se, 2019).
Non-sport related usability of Olympia
Hammarlund (2019) tells that the rebuilding Olympia was done with the ambition to make the arena optimal for music-concerts as well. Except football, there should now be concerts given at Olympia but since the reconstruction has been completed, there has been none concerts given at Olympia (Hammarlund, 2019). There is a reason for this according to Hammarlund (2019) and it is due to the capacity of the stadium, 15 300 at national football games & 25 000 capacity for a concert (Helsingborg.se, 2019), has either been ‘too high’ for the concerts that
