Usability of Sport Arenas a Multiple Case Study of Olympia and Helsingborg Arena Güncel Ömer

Department of Sport

Science, Faculty of Education and Society

Sport Sciences: One-year Master’s Thesis 15 Credits, Second Cycle

Usability of sport arenas A multiple case study of Olympia and Helsingborg Arena Güncel Ömer

Master (One Year/ 60 ECTS) of Science in Examiner: Johan Norberg Sport Sciences Seminar opposition: 26 August 2019 Supervisor: Joakim Åkesson

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 Helsingborg Municipality 44

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 Consent form 66

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.

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.

Keywords: usability, sport arenas, stakeholders, activity, accessibility, priority

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

7 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.

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.

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

10 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

11 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

12 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.

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

14 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

15 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.

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

17 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.

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 stakeholders (cf. Ahrne & Svensson, 2011).

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.

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 Title Organization Category participant (stakeholder) stakeholder

Charlie Fält Head of production Helsingborg Arena Definitive och Scen AB (HASAB)

Anders Hammarlund Head of green Helsingborg Sport Definitive surfaces and Leisure department.

Julius Bergkvist Operations manager Sports confederation Dependent of Helsingborg (HISO)

Fredrik Azelius Club director & FC Helsingborg & Dominant board member HISO

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

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

22 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

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?

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

25 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.

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.

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

28 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

34 has been held in Helsingborg or the capacity has been ‘too low’ for the larger events which makes the producers seek towards bigger cities. In the presentation of Olympia at Helsingborg municipality website, the municipality indicates that the stadium is suitable for concerts (Helsingborg.se, retrieved 2019). Instead, concerts are held at Helsingborg Arena and the city already has a concert hall and a theatre saloon together with Sofiero which also hosts concerts, mostly at summer times (Helsingborg.se, retrieved: 2019).

Hammarlund (2019) points out that non-sport related users of the sport arena has been the police of Helsingborg municipality using the arena for various training exercises and furthermore, there have been organizations using the arena for restaurant courses and training that is no longer active due to costs and applicability.

At Olympia, there is an active restaurant that is operating on weekdays and weekends when HIF is playing games and the club has a store at the arena as well (HIF.se, 2019).

Analysis of the usability of Olympia

The stadium offers in particularly only football and is the only stadium in the city fulfilling the demands for the Swedish Premier division and Second division (Allsvenskan & Superettan) and this makes the arena unique in that matter (Hammarlund, 2019; Swedish FA, 2019). If more teams would qualify to the two highest divisions, then they would be forced to play at Olympia since no other arena (or green surface) in the city is approved for the two highest leagues. However, an arena can not host to many teams either and therefore investing in another arena and facility in the city would have been more optional since Olympia already fulfills the demands of the Swedish FA for elite football. Hammarlund (2019) points out many advantages and praises the arena in football matters which are legitimate but the arena has failed to reach some of their aims since the rebuild of the arena. Olympia is an arena that was rebuilt to be able to host musical concerts as well but has until this day failed to do so which indicates that the arena is not preferred for music concerts.

The non-sport related usability of Olympia is almost close to none. This makes the usage of Olympia limited. According to Hammarlund (2019) there has been usage of the arena for the police to have practice and exercises for their trainings but they are not a constant user of the arena and the courses in restaurant education is no longer active which can be an indicator that Olympia is not optimal for those kind of activities either.

One can wonder why there are not more teams using Olympia for their football games since there are more football teams than HIF, but the reason is rental costs which something clubs needs to pay to the Municipality who owns the arena according to Hammarlund. The situation of Ängelholms FF in 2014 underlines this. The team sent in a request of license that was approved by the Swedish FA for them to return to their own ground in Ängelholm instead of playing at Olympia which had increased their costs and affected their vulnerable economy even further. Clubs that are not at an elite level would not be bothered by not using the arena since it would cost them too much – however, as a municipality, prioritizing an upgrade on other green surfaces around in the city would have been a smarter idea for the other sport teams that uses green surfaces for their games and trainings and in the future, if needed, upgrade the arena to elite requirements of the Swedish FA. Even HIF is not using the whole arena when not playing games at the arena.

FC Helsingborg, HISO and HASAB has no direct connection and usage of Olympia. FC Helsingborg is not using the arena since it is not optimal for floor ball and HISO has no business with Olympia football stadium due to none of the other local sport clubs except the senior team of Helsingborg If are the users of Olympia arena and HASAB has no activities or events at Olympia.

Sport related usability of Helsingborg Arena

Helsingborg Arena (Hbgarena.se, 2019) is described as a place for ‘magical experiences’ at their website. It is an indoor arena where two major teams use the arena as their home ground (Azelius, 2019; Fält 2019). These teams are FC Helsingborg (floor ball) and OV Helsingborg (handball). Both of the teams plays in the highest division in their respective sport.

Moreover, there are also school classes across all Helsingborg that uses Helsingborgs Arena for their PE-classes (Hammarlund, 2019). The arena consists of three halls: A-hallen, B- hallen and C-hallen and is optimal and constructed to be used for events and fairs. Larger areas and conference rooms exists and and are used frequently (Fält, 2019; Hbgarena.se 2019).

When planning the construction of the Arena, the idea was to use 60% of the arena for sport activities and 40% for events and fairs according to Hammarlund (2019), however, it has become the opposite and has affected schools around in Helsingborg negatively when it

36 comes to having PE-classes (Hammarlund, 2019). According to Hammarlund (2019), school classes has instead turned their interest away from the Arena due to loss of PE-classes.

Prioritizing events and fairs can be positive on the short run but events and fairs does not last forever and is not guaranteed that they will return. On the other hand, the schools of Helsingborg are there forever and they have many classes in different ages that needs to have PE-classes and will constantly use and come to the Helsingborg Arena. The usage of the arena increases with more schools and PE-classes.

By letting the schools go away to use other sport arenas and facilities, Helsingborg Arena decreases in value for the schools and local sport clubs. This is something that affects the efficiency and productivity of the arena as well due to it will not have as much users when schools are leaving for other sport halls.

HISO (Bergkvist, 2019) believes that Helsingborg Arena could have been used more effectively if all the halls would have been used. According to HISO (Bergkvist, 2019), the A- hall (the main and largest sport hall) is not often used for sport trainings due to preparation for events and the events collide with trainings of the local sport clubs. HISO (Bergkvist, 2019) highlights a problem with this and it is the fact that it leads to cancellations of trainings. There occurs a risk with having trainings and sport activities for teams at Helsingborg Arena and the risk is possible cancellations due to events and other programs. This creates a problem of hall shortage in the city and many of the teams and clubs are located very centrally in Helsingborg and want to use sport facilities because of its location.

HISO has a dialogue with the affected clubs regarding the sport halls of Helsingborg Arena. The problem that occurs for them lays fore and foremost in the cancellations that occurs as there are events scheduled at the arena (Azelius, 2019). It requires extra work for the sport clubs due to they need to redistribute the time and do reschedules for their own teams according to HISO. The organization believe that the Arena could be used more for sports activities. In the best of worlds, there is much more room for sports in both Helsingborg Arena and at Olympia (Azelius, 2019).

FC Helsingborg uses the arena for trainings for their senior and youth teams. The men’s team play the majority of their games at the A-hall (the main hall), the youth teams and the women’s team play the majority of their games at the B-hall and C-hall (Azelius, 2019).

The training activity is free of charge for the sport club, however the men’s and women’s team pays to rent the A-hall for their games (Azelius, 2019).

Statistics presented by Charlie Fält (2019) from HASAB shows that the majority of the time there has been sport in the last five years:

2014, 59% occupancy, of which 73% sports

2015, 67% occupancy, of which 75% sports

2016, 68% occupancy, of which 67% sports

2017, 72% occupancy, of which 61% sports

2018, 68% occupancy, of which 67% sports

The arena has hosted large international sport event such as U19 World Cup in floor ball for men, European championship in handball for women has also been held at the arena and this indicates there is a high quality and satisfaction from the federation to put larger tournaments at the arena and the arena is also scheduled for World Cup in heavy lifting as upcoming international sport event. Fält (2019) says the aim of the Helsingborg Arena is in large scale to have sports and is the core subject at the Arena with OV and FC Helsingborg having their games and trainings at the sport halls at Helsingborg Arena and also many of the youth teams uses the arena and while the youth teams activity hours are paid through taxing systems in accordance with the guidelines of Helsingborg Municipality, the elite teams of OV and FC Helsingborg pays rent to Arena for their usage and the teams have only access to what they agree to use and rent at their events and this is what adjust the rent costs for the teams (Fält, 2019).

Non-sport related usability of Helsingborg Arena

An overview of the event-schedule for Helsingborg Arena shows that the arena is scheduled for both international and European championships in sports, Swedish championship in sports, one art and antique fair, three musical concerts for this year (Helsingborg Arena 2019). Previously for this year, there has been two sports event and championships, two fairs and seven entertainment events (Helsingborg Arena, 2019).

Charlie Fält (2019) indicates that HASAB has a very busy schedule with a lots of events taking place at the arena and when the summer comes along they tend to change the focus from sport to other subjects such as antic fairs which is very popular and comes back year after year to the arena. Moreover, there has been Sports Marketing educations at vocational education-level (not active today) and at the moment there are work educating companies

38 having their offices and business running at the arena (Fält, 2019). This implements shows that the arena is functioned to offer more than just events and sport activities and is also attractive for other businesses and industries rather than just sport and entertainment.

Moreover, there are schools at elementary and high school level that is having their PE- classes at Helsingborg Arena (Hammarlund, 2019).

The arena provides four different conference rooms for their stakeholders and customers with some included with lounges for special entertainment and sport events. These facilities can host up to 660 guests in total according to Helsingborg Arenas own numbers (Helsingborg Arena, 2019).

The arena hosts a restaurant with a capacity for 150 guests (Hbgarena.se, 2019) and provides services every weekday and on events. The restaurant is run by a private owned company. In regard to the events that the arena is hosting, this provides opportunities for the restaurants to make more profit and to operate even more at the arena with more people visiting the arena for different events. With different operations in the house, Fält (2019) highlights the opportunities of works being created at the arena and the chance to have internships and to work with events and sports but also with various arena-questions and issues.

The arena has a café as well at the main floor whereas they also sell tickets to different cultural and entertainments venues in Helsingborg and also to the largest ticket distributor in Sweden, Ticketmaster (Hbgaarena.se, 2019). The café works as an info-point as well and provides information about Helsingborg Arena and the city of Helsingborg. The Arena can therefore be seen as an information hub of the city as well and with marketing of events on other places in Helsingborg and what is up-to-date and trending in the city.

As it can be seen on the schedule of events at the arena, there are both national and international events and large events which attracts people from not only Helsingborg but also people from other cities and regions around Sweden. Therefore, the information hub can be very productive and useful for the arena offered to the guests and visitors. Fält (2019) mentions their respect for local sport clubs and schools PE-classes and marks it as an important stakeholder for the company and Helsingborg Arena. The costs for local sport clubs and school activities are regulated by tax-system (Fält, 2019). Furthermore, HASAB wishes to be able to offer experiences of all kind with Helsingborg Arena. The events mainly involve sports and this was the idea from the beginning when Helsingborg Arena was built. However,

Helsingborg Arena provides more concerts for the city with the arena available all around the year according to Fält (2019).

Analysis of the usability of Helsingborg Arena

From these findings we can tell that there is different types of events and activities present at the arena. While HISO is concerned for the local grassroots sport clubs and Helsingborg Municipality are concerned for the schools, HASAB’s priority is profitable events. From the perspective of HASAB, they would not be able to finance and run the arena and by this it would be hard to offer training hours for local sport clubs and schools.

From the narrative of HISO, the usability is not optimal. The usability is not satisfactory for HISO and Helsingborg Municipality when it comes to local sport clubs and schools. This creates and issue for them when the clubs and schools suffer from cancelled training hours at Helsingborg Arena and this leads to clubs and schools preferring other arenas and sport halls.

HASAB focuses on providing something for everyone and this includes the local clubs, the schools but also the inhabitants and visitors of the city in order to provide them various events. Statistics provided by HASAB shows that the majority of events and occupancy has been sports in response to that sport is not priority at the arena. The statistics shows that the occupancy has been increasing but the sport occupancy has decreased below 70% even though the majority of the occupancy is sport. However, the concerns from HISO and the municipality is yet again present since they feel that the schools and local teams shall be able to use the arena as much as possible in order to have their trainings at the same place in order to get a consistency for their activities rather than being relocated to other places or have no training hour at all.

In the case of FC Helsingborg, the elite team pays rent for using the arena at match events but the youth teams of the club are paid by taxing system. However, they have also been affected by reschedules even though they are an important stakeholder for the arena since the first team plays their games at the arena and can be seen as income generator for HASAB.

Helsingborg Arenas usability is very high since there are conferences mixed with sport and non-sport related events at the arena constantly and furthermore other businesses are active at the arena such as restaurants are operating and previously there have been education programs provided in Sports Marketing at post-high school. From this point of view, the stakeholder of HASAB is satisfied with the usability of the arena.

Localization of the arenas

Helsingborg Arena & Olympia are very centrally localized in Helsingborg and easy to access by collective traffic and also by biking or walking. On the website of Helsingborg Municipality (Helsingborg.se, 2019), the municipality recommends the visitors to leave their cars at home and instead they recommend to either walk, arrive by bicycle or by public transport when going to events or football games.

At the same time, Helsingborg Municipality (Helsingborg.se, 2019) states that there are approximately 1600 parking spots nearby both arenas and points out on a map where the parking spots are located and where bus stops are located as well as the closest roads leading to the arenas.

Both of the arenas are placed at Olympia-district of Helsingborgs municipality. It is less than 100 meters between Helsingborg Arena and Olympia football stadium, they are separated only by Idrottens Hus, an arena venue built in 1957 and was the centrum for sport events until the Helsingborg Arena was built (Helsingborg.se, 2019).

Due to the large football stadium Olympia and after the construction of Helsingborg Arena, the Olympia district of Helsingborg has become well known and interconnected with sports activities and events. Olympia football stadium has been placed at the same spot for over 100 years and has many large green surfaces for football fields but also for sports on ice and a racket hall for sports such as tennis and Badminton in the area and thanks to these facilities it marks as the home to many sport clubs and has a lot of participants for sport exercises (Helsingborg.se, 2019). Moreover, it has renewably built a sports park between the Arena and Olympia football stadium and less then 300 meters there is the famous Fredriksdals museum and garden.

The Olympia area is an area with a lot of residence’s and accommodations. Close by lies three high schools, one named after the area – Olympiaskolan. The area of where the arena and football stadium is located is only three minutes of car travel away from Helsingborg central station and nine minutes away with collective traffic. The arenas are 18 minutes away by walk from the central station and therefore, makes the location very central. Cities develop a lot through the years and the location might not be the most suitable place today in regard to that is is a very popular residence area and very close to the central part of Helsingborg city.

As the area grows with more accommodations surrounding the Olympia stadium and Helsingborg Arena, it might not be the most optimal spot today.

Hammarlund (2019) confirms information about the ideas and discussion regarding the placement of new Olympia was also considered to be moved out to Filborna area, closer to the highways and a bit far away from the central part of Helsingborg city. The idea was to have better accessibility to the stadium. Other issues have been that Filborna contains less buildings and residences. According to Hammarlund (2019), security and safety reasons have been an issue in the eyes of the municipality and the people living close to the football ground on match days for Helsingborgs IF. This would occur also if there would be a match-event at Olympia at the same time when there is an another event held at the Arena at the same time which brings many people to the same place. With a lot of residences and buildings for accommodation, this leaves a narrow room for parking lots at the area of where the sport arenas are located. In matter of fact, there has been built a new parking spot outside the east stand of Olympia and there is an existing minor parking area between Olympia and Helsingborg Arena. Another parking place exists 300 meters away from the arena and one that is used for Fredriksdal museum and garden. No larger parking garage or areas exists for the visitors.

HISO points out same similarities as Helsingborgs Municipality: traffic concerns. According to HISO, it gets ‘chaotic’ if there are more than one event at the same time at the Olympia area since there are a total of four sport arenas together with Idrottens Hus and the ice-hall which is just behind Helsingborg Arena (Bergkvist, 2019).

Azelius (2019) believes that both Olympia and Helsingborg Arena are built from a geographical perspective in order to have both arenas close to each other and centrally located. Both arenas are centrally located and together with other sport fields and arenas such as the Idrottens Hus, the area is forming a ‘fine sports cluster’ according to Azelius. It is easy to walk and to cycle to matches and trainings but the biggest problem lies in the parking facilities, where they would have been able to improve the area according to Azelius (2019) who is HISO-board member and club director of FC Helsingborg.

Fält (2019) highlights the Helsingborg Arena as a unique addition to the location of having five indoor sport halls when calculating both Helsingborg Arena and Idrottens Hus and the area was given a complete new kindergarten as well which is located between Idrottens Hus and Helsingborg Arena. According to Fält (2019), there is no other place in Sweden except Halmstad whom can match the same quantity of sport halls at one place. Fält (2019) also

42 points out the political decision that was made to have the arena centrally placed in Helsingborg. Furthermore, Fält is very satisfied with the location of the arena and feels it is placed at the right side being very close to the city and for people who is visiting Helsingborg for concerts and sport events. Fält (2019) is aware of parking issues is not the most satisfying, however, he indicates it is seldom a simple task when it comes to larger sport areas.

Analysis of localization

One identification is that all stakeholders are aware of the parking issues at the area where Helsingborg Arena and Olympia is located. Not everyone can arrive by collective traffic and by bus lines and especially if they live outside the city center and this problem is also notified per the website of Helsingborg Municipality.

Helsingborg Municipality focuses on multiple issues and and except the parking issue they also highlight possible security and safety concerns when it comes to larger events at both arenas by the narrative of Hammarlund (2019). It is important to keep in mind that both Olympia and Helsingborg Arena hosts larger events and have many visitors. Olympia has Helsingborgs IF playing their home games at the arena for at least 14 games a season/year while Helsingborg Arena hosts multiple events throughout the year. This can require big operations with security organizations such as the police and stewards in order to guarantee the security for the visitors. By having a lot of events at the same spot creates an ‘busy’ area for various activities and events.

Although, there are issues, the stakeholders point out positive aspects as well with the location, especially by having two major arenas at the same places adds a value to the specific location of Helsingborg as the sports center of the city. This can be connected to the research of Andersson (2011) stating that stadiums can be a symbol for cities and in his research, Olympia is one of the arena examples as a symbol for the city of Helsingborg.

Fält (2019) points out that with Helsingborg Arena, Olympia and Idrottens Hus placed at the same place is unique for Helsingborg and for Sweden by having at least five larger sport halls + the Olympia football arena at the same location with the possible extension of Halmstad having the same situation. This is something that adds up to the value of the area as an ‘event & sport dominant area’. From these results of localization, we can understand that having multiple arenas at the same spot helps to boost a sports and an arena image of the specific location and the city itself. Olympia area was already a dominated sports area with multiple

43 green surfaces for sports and the sport halls at Idrottens Hus. By building Helsingborg Arena and upgrading Olympia, the sport and arena image of Olympia district has boosted even more.

By living or staying close to Olympia or central Helsingborg, there are easy and good opportunities to get to the arena area with bicycle and public transport as an alternative to car travel, something that Fält and Azelius discusses in this study. This is necessary due to many visitors can be here solely for the sake of events and stay in hotels in central Helsingborg.

On the other hand, for it to be easily accessible to everyone, it needs to be able to offer enough parking spaces and close to major roads such as motorways since everyone does not have the opportunity to cycle or get to the arena area by public transport. Fält (2019) mentions that this is rarely an easy task in arena context. This is a truth in itself, but it is also understandable that there were discussions in the municipality that Hammarlund (2019) points out about building a new football arena closer to the Filborna area. The purpose of that idea was precisely to be able to simplify the accessibility to get to Olympia arena and at the same time, have close connections to major freeways and a bit outside the central city but still offer cycle routes and public transport up to the area according to Hammarlund (2019). This shows an indication that Helsingborg Municipality was aware of the problems that could arise with the location, limitations and challenges that would arise with keeping the arena in the same place.

Values for the stakeholders

In this part I focus on what are the most prioritized values among the different stakeholders’ narratives: Helsingborg Municipality, HISO, HASAB and the Floorball club Helsingborg (FCH) who plays their home games and have their trainings at Helsingborg Arena.

Helsingborg Municipality

The prioritized value for Helsingborg Municipality with arena usability is occupancy rate and to be able to fulfil the wishes from the different sport clubs in the city according to Hammarlund (2019). The wishes from the sport club towards the municipality is for them to be able to accomplish and run their organization and their sport activities. This puts a demand of available sport halls and sport fields for the teams to have their activities, but also to use the services that they can take advantage of while being at Olympia or Helsingborg Arena. With occupancy rate Hammarlund (2019) is referring to be able to have as much activity as

44 possible on a surface, in other words, use the arenas and the surfaces as much as possible. The municipality is working actively with environmental goals but also for the sport clubs to be able to start their sport trainings as early as possible of the year and to end their season as late as possible on the green surfaces given as an example.

In the case of Olympia sport arena specifically, a value has been the request of the Swedish National U-21 football team to have Olympia as their home ground. This is a football value of Helsingborg municipality that the arena is capable of having international games at the arena. Another value has been when the city has hosted the SM-week whereas Olympia had been used for rugby-games and was very much appreciated by the teams and players to play at an arena as Olympia according to Hammarlund (2019) whom also states that these kind of events and minor tournaments gives more value for both the tournaments but indeed Olympia as well.

The values that can be seen from Helsingborg Municipality perspective is to use and give different events more value by offering them to use Olympia in their tournaments. Since Olympia is built to have mainly football games with natural grass, it is more optional for sports on green surfaces and therefore, can exclude some sports but include sports like rugby. Also, since the city of Helsingborg has a sport club as Helsingborgs IF, a football team playing on elite level and in the highest football league, the Swedish Football Association puts demand and a level of standards to be met for playing on the highest level and this puts pressure on Helsingborg municipality to build and have an arena that is fulfilling the demands of the Swedish Football Association. This opens up to have other stakeholders interested and the municipality has achieved this by having attracted the U21 national team of Sweden to play home-games at the stadium.

Olympia is complemented by many other green surfaces and football fields and as well as racket halls which are together all named as Olympiafältet. There are several clubs and teams using the green surfaces at this spot instead of being inside at Olympia football stadium. As Hammarlund (2019) mentioned, it is a matter of cost as well for any surfaces and Olympia the football stadium stands out higher and more expensive to use which makes it not worth to use for non-elite clubs or clubs with a minor budget.

HISO

The most important value for HISO is the sport usability and productivity of sport (Bergkvist, 2019). HISO want to see an increase of usability for sport matters at Helsingborg Arena and especially for the Helsingborg sport clubs according to Bergkvist (2019).

HISO demands to see as much as possible of the sport productivity at Helsingborg Arena where a lot of associations and sport clubs have their activities. The organization itself works to promote the sport and to exist as a link for sport clubs to have a communication with regarding usage of sport arenas and venues in the city of Helsingborg (Bergkvist, 2019). HISO is an organization that cares and prioritize the sport clubs interest and have to work after their values similar to Helsingborg municipality. For HISO, the fore and foremost objectivity is that arenas shall be built for the sports sake. In the eyes of HISO, a sport hall shall for the most time be filled by youths that aims to conduct sport activities (Azelius, 2019). There is a wish from HISO to use the sport halls for more sport activities than they are used today according to Fredrik Azelius (2019) and this is because HISO is determined to improve the sport in the area. HISO are also aware and understands the needs of having arrangement of various events to be able to finance the arena of Helsingborg. Bergkvist (2019) says HISO are not aware of how long the expected timeline is for the preparation and installation for upcoming events and the procedure after events are finished and thereafter ready for sport activities again.

HASAB

HASAB values the experiences offered to the citizens of Helsingborg and for the sport in Helsingborg according to Fält (2019). HASAB aims to deliver something special for the city and for the citizens to find something that addresses themselves. The arena can create so many objects and evolve so many people at the same time according to Fält (2019) and admits it is necessary for every city to have an arena offering experiences and excitements for the citizens.

When building this arena, the idea was to create new opportunities and to develop the pride of Idrottens Hus regarding sport activities (Fält, 2019). The most important opportunity according to Fält (2019) becomes the greater range of offers for the society and the citizens. More sport halls are offered for sport clubs and more training hours that are demanded from the clubs and organization such as HISO.

With an arena such as Helsingborg Arena, the concerts and events has increased in Helsingborg according to Fält (2019) and this can be seen as a more value for the city of Helsingborg and for the citizens and visitors outside the city and furthermore, the Arena creates opportunities such as working places for people on hour-basis in their first service- works, both in sport-events and non-sport events as an example.

FC Helsingborg

The most important value for FC Helsingborg is the availability of the arena. The club plays their home games and have their trainings at the Helsingborg Arena. To some extent this works for the club but they also state they need to re-schedule too many trainings and matches in other sport halls at the arena in order for the club’s activities to work. For FC Helsingborg it is hard to estimate the value of but at present time (calculated on three halls) about 50% of their "value" of the arena is fulfilled according to their club director Fredrik Azelius (2019).

Analysis of values for stakeholders

Hammarlund (2019) mentions multiple values that are important for Helsingborg Municipality and the most important ones are occupancy rate and availability of halls for the the schools and local teams in the city. Hammarlund (2019) says the municipality wants to see the occupancy rate as high as possible with the surfaces that are available to be used as much as possible throughout the year and this can be linked to what Bergkvist (2019) says about the usability values for HISO. The main concern of HISO is cancelled training hours for the local sport clubs at Helsingborg Arena and the organization has a definitive aim of having as much as possible of sport activity at Helsingborg Arena and in Helsingborg city in general.

HISO focuses on to improve the sport in the city and has a wish that the teams shall not have cancelled training hours and not be sacrificed for events at Helsingborg Arena. HISO is however not a definitive stakeholder which makes it hard for them to affect and change the ‘problem’ they identify with Helsingborg Arena.

Hammarlund (2019) mentions the Under 21 Swedish national team in football who uses Olympia as their home ground. This is a confirmation for the Municipality that Olympia stadium is one of the best football stadiums in the country and is preferred by the Football Association. This is a value which that can be interpret as ‘prestige’ and ‘status’ for the city hosting the games of Under 21 Swedish National team in football at Olympia.

Due to the concerns of being not able to offer much activity for school, local sport clubs but also non sports activities, the municipality would need to reconsider what they can do to get more users of the arena. An example given by Hammarlund is the police enforcement in the municipality that has used Olympia for training exercises but also courses in restaurant- business that were held once at Olympia (which is no longer active) which is a value of occupancy rate and availability. However, this is not the case when thinking of other sport clubs except HIF who uses it every season. This can be an indication at the same time that Olympia is not optimal for usage to non-sport related activities and organizations. One reason can be the rental costs of Olympia and this is one reason why HIF is the only football team to use the arena today according and meanwhile they do not rent the whole arena either, except on match days according to Hammarlund (2019). Hammarlund himself mentions that he would have suggested other ideas when building Olympia, giving examples of building the walls in the arena differently which could make it make it more optimal for other usage as well.

Azelius (2019) mentioned availability as the most important value for their organization. While it works essentially for the club, they are forced to reschedule their games and trainings to other sports halls in the Helsingborg Arena which affects their organization and various teams. This indicates that they have a common issue just as HISO and School Leisure Department of Helsingborg Municipality has stated in their interviews.

Fält (2019) is clear in his interview that they need to prioritize subjects and projects that gains them profit. This makes it possible for them to run Helsingborg Arena and at the same time offer sport halls for local sport teams and schools in the city. Fält highlights in the interview that HASAB aims to offer experiences by having all kind of events and by this attracts everyone in Helsingborg and tries to have as much as sport as possible at the arena. Looking at the numbers presented by Fält & HASAB (2019) for Helsingborg Arena 2014-2018, the arena has had an increase occupancy rate and the majority has been sport activities. In the last two years the occupancy has still been sport activities but has decreased in total occupancy below 70%. Another value that is identified by Fälts (2019) responses are that Helsingborg Arena opens way to creates new jobs for people starting up their job career to work with events and service-related jobs by having events and operations at the arena.

Conclusions and discussion

In this chapter the presented results are discussed and problematized following with conclusions and implications and suggestions on further research.

Discussion

Usability of Helsingborg Arena

Building new modern large arenas does not necessarily mean more usability for all stakeholders. Although more opportunities are provided, it does not guarantee satisfactory results with the utilization for everyone. A new modern arena is qualified for larger events and concerts and by this, it is attracting larger sport activities and events. This can also force rescheduling or cancellation of local sport clubs sport clubs training hours or PE-classes of local schools. To such a degree, the arena looses attractiveness in the eyes of local sport clubs according to HISO (2019) and it looses attractiveness of schools according to Hammarlund (2019) since the schools are looking for other arenas and surfaces for their PE-classes. Local sport clubs would prefer other places since they can not lose their training hours. While the schools and local sport clubs might not bring profit for the arena owners as various events of concerts, fairs and major conferences and sport events does, they certainly use the arena more often since they are located in the city and use the sport halls at Helsingborg Arena every week.

If local sport clubs would be rescheduled and have cancelled activities too often they would and has according to the telling’s of Hammarlund at Helsingborg municipality (2019), turned their attention away from the arena and start looking for new sport halls. All the usage at Helsingborg Arena by schools and local sport clubs are tax regulated with lists conducted by the municipality, however, to be able to have continuous and balanced times for usage of the arenas – it is harmful with rescheduling and cancellations since this will decrease and counteract the purpose of the arena to offer sport halls to sport activities in the city and have a majority of sport hours at the arena.

From another point of view, it is understandable for the arena owners, HASAB, aims to offer various events at Helsingborg Arena (Fält 2019). HASAB as a definitive stakeholder, aims to provide something for every citizen which has different interests that they wish to experience

49 and watch at the arena – everything from sports, concerts and fairs. Being a municipality owned company, HASAB needs to make a profit in order to run their business and it is therefore, very common to prioritize profit-awarding objects rather than non profit-awarding.

Larger and modern arenas bring higher operational costs which is a reasonable factor for pushing the owners towards profit-events. While entertainment and various major sport events can be held once a while it does not guarantee that they will return every year. Meanwhile, the schools and local sport clubs have the intention to use the sport arenas continuously for their activities. The Helsingborg Arena has proven to be able to offer facilities for sports related- education opportunities and even more non sport affiliated activities such as conferences to be held at the arena. Private companies have their offices and facilities for job-educations and moreover, there is a restaurant which provides opportunities to host and have events of highest quality for the customers and guests.

Usability of Olympia

The usability of Olympia is limited when comparing it to Helsingborg Arena. Due to the size of Olympia football stadium, it is not prioritized for concerts and since completing the reconstruction there has been none concerts held at Olympia (Hammarlund, 2019). It is fair to say it was a miss calculation from the governing body of the municipality when rebuilding the arena and with the outcome in hand, the reconstruction could have been done differently and more optimal for other activities and values. Olympia is still an arena of highest quality and standard in football matters in Sweden and qualified for the highest level of football in Swedish and European football. Thus, the arena was qualified for this before the reconstruction and was optimal to switch their north and south stand from standing plan to seating plans when HIF were playing in European tournaments.

Having only one football team playing at Olympia regularly for a half year and a national team playing a couple of times a year, the stadium could have been built in an another way in order to attract more customers and organizations such as offering a public gym, office hotels for companies as examples to receive and offer more for the investment made on the stadium. This would have resulted in more customers and people visiting and using Olympia which would increase the usability. Olympia is productive when it comes to football, however, it is not effective since there is not so much activity happening except football and HIF and therefore, it can be interpreted as interest to individuals who is interested of football activities

50 and of HIF. Other sports played on green surfaces on high level should consider using a top qualified green surface as well.

Localization

The localization of the two arenas creates a sports dominant area in the city. Other then the two sport arenas, the area have dozens of green surfaces, ice halls, multiple sport surfaces and Idrottens Hus whom includes multiple sport halls (Helsingborg.se; Hammarlund, 2019; Fält, 2019; Bergkvist, 2019). Idrottens Hus is where the administration for school and leisure- department of Helsingborg municipality and HISO have their offices among other sport federations and organizations and offers multiple indoor sport halls. This area creates a symbol for the city and the neighborhood “Olympia” as a dominant sport-area and becomes an attraction for sport enthusiasts. All these mentioned areas are financed by the municipality while municipality owned company HASAB, is the owner of Helsingborg Arena.

Due to the centrally located positions of Olympia and Helsingborg Arena, it is easy to arrive to the arenas with collective traffic from all central parts of Helsingborg. Since it is a neighborhoods area there are not so much space left for parking spots. Furthermore, the houses and apartments close by leads to smaller roads and increases risks for traffic concerns for people living close-by to the arenas, especially at event days. Having one event at Helsingborg Arena and one football game played at Olympia can create major concerns of not just traffic issues, but security issues since it creates large groups of people at the same area.

By having both arenas centrally located and not very close to any major roads or highways, the accessibility is affected for people living outside central parts of Helsingborg who wants to go to the arena leading to amid transportation concerns. It is therefore not a surprise that there were discussions of building Helsingborg Arena and a complete new football arena close to highways in order to have a better accessibility and more transportation options.

Building larger arenas outside the central parts of the city does can offer better conditions when working with security issues and easier transportation for visitors, i.e. building more parking spots and have more collective traffic lines going to the area. At the same time, this is a matter of costs as well for the involved stakeholders who constructs and plans arena projects.

Categorized Stakeholders values

From the approached theory framework for stakeholders, two particular stakeholders are identified as “definitive” stakeholders: HASAB and Helsingborg Municipality. HASAB is controlling and running the Helsingborg Arena and Helsingborg Municipality is controlling and running the Olympia football stadium. HASAB has total control of the priorities at the arena regarding the usability and has the power to put their interests first over other stakeholders. HASAB aims to offer as much as possible of activities and events to the society itself and citizens & visitors of Helsingborg and in return, it generates revenues for HASAB. In this matter, The School and Leisure-administration (Helsingborg Municipality) has no direct power to change the decisions and operation of Helsingborg Arena. Floor bandy team FC Helsingborg is a dominant power. They have power and legitimate attribute since they are one of two elite clubs using the Helsingborg Arena as their training ground and home ground for matches – making them to a team using Helsingborg Arena constantly for their activities. Since they are the only team in the city on elite level in their sport branch (the other elite- team, OV Helsingborg, plays handball), HASAB and FC Helsingborg needs to have good relationship due to the elite-teams of FC Helsingborg (and OV Helsingborg) is an income and revenue generator for HASAB. FC Helsingborg is paying rent for their usage of the arena and rental of equipment and areas such as cafés, lobbies and commentary-bases to name a few examples when they play games at the arena. By having both teams at the arena, it is providing elite sport events and the supporters of the clubs comes to the arena to watch the games. A modern and large arena as Helsingborg Arena requires a lot of personnel at events and this creates job opportunities for the society which are positive values for the society and the city of Helsingborg.

Helsingborg municipality is a definitive stakeholder when it comes to Olympia, however there are no other users than Helsingborgs IF which makes HIF an important stakeholder for the municipality. The football club is the only sport club to use Olympia while other football teams and sport teams competing on larger green surfaces uses other sport grounds suited for their size and their activities. HIF has been and still is is, a dominant stakeholder. Helsingborg Municipality on the other hand has the power to decide who shall be playing at the stadium and can therefore force HIF to share the arena with other elite teams in the future if necessary (which it would be today due to Olympia is the only football arena qualified for elite football in Helsingborg).

HISO has a responsibility towards all sport clubs in Helsingborg by representing their interests and acts as a representative between Helsingborg Municipality and the sport clubs & young citizens of Helsingborg. However, they do not have a dominant role but rather dependent stakeholder’s role since they depend upon others such as Helsingborg Municipality and Helsingborg Arena for power and be able to carry out their aims of helping sport clubs with their activities. Local sport clubs and schools shall be seen as demanding stakeholders and consumers since they are there to use the arena for their activities making them to an important stakeholder as well but in reality they do not have any power to affect the utilization priorities at Helsingborg Arena is a value that is important.

When comparing to the utilization described by Jens et. Al. (2014), the utilization of Helsingborg Arena has a variety of events with sport as majority events and this welcomes sport-interested people but also non sport-interested people since the Helsingborg Arena offers concerts and fair events as well. Moreover, it is suitable for sport tournaments, local sport clubs and schools to have PE-classes but not perfectly and satisfactory since they are forced to reschedule or cancel their activities. Olympia is attractive and appealing to individuals who are interested of football and most significantly supporters of Helsingborgs IF since they are the only team using the arena at the moment. Olympia was built in 1898 and was a multi-arena with cycling and athletics competitions but since 1985 it becomes a ‘pure’ football arena. When being renovated in the 1980’s it was classified as the ‘finest football arena’ in Sweden and being placed at the same location for over 100 years makes it “iconic” as one of the criteria’s reads for the utilization-concept presented in the theoretical framework and as “symbol” for Helsingborg city as referred to Andersson (2011) in the previous research chapter. A value for the city with Olympia arena has been national football being played at Olympia since the Under 21-national team has used the arena for their home games continuously and this is an indication of satisfaction from the Swedish Football Association returning to Olympia. This increases the value and the image of Olympia and Helsingborg in sport a particularly football context as referred to Karin Books (2005) research regarding localization and importance of arenas.

Effectivity and productivity depends on from who’s perspective we are looking at utilization. HASAB has their perspective and business to take care of when looking into productivity and aims to balance their productivity between making a profit and at the same time to have Helsingborg Arena as much as possible available for local clubs, elite clubs and schools for their activities and trainings. HISO, FC Helsingborg and the School and Leisure-department

53 from Helsingborg Municipality can from their perspective sense that it is not satisfactory effective since their trainings and activities can be cancelled or rescheduled which affects their businesses. This creates a dilemma for the involved stakeholders.

Conclusions

A new modern arena gives more opportunities of offering events and concerts all time of the year since it is an indoor arena and it becomes an alternative for producers to come to the city and hold events. With a new modern arena that is well ensured with facilities and equipment of highest quality helps to create a better event. This can increase the attraction for producers and make them come back in the future to hold their event at the Helsingborg Arena again.

Having a new modern arena available increases, the usage of an arena but not for every stakeholder and interests. Although no specific school has been interviewed or been chosen as a specific stakeholder in this study, The School and Leisure-department from Helsingborg Municipality has been part of the study as a stakeholder and has mentioned the schools of Helsingborg municipality as an effected part when it comes to usage of Helsingborg Arena. Cancellations and rescheduling of PE-classes and training activities in the sport halls at Helsingborg Arena leads to decrease of utilization among schools and local sport clubs and makes the arena less attractive for the stakeholders who works with schools and local sport clubs.

Olympia is capable of having events and music concerts as well, however, it is not suited for the events that are attracted by the producers when coming to Helsingborg due to the capacity of the arena. There are other facilities that are more suitable arenas and venues in Helsingborg. This leaves it only suitable and attractive to football teams. Olympia is used by Helsingborgs IF and Swedish Under 21 national team and this makes Olympia as an arena very restricted and mostly attractive to football enthusiastic people. The Helsingborg Arena on the other hand, can attract all kind of people who shares different interests and wishes to experience various content.

Value of attractiveness for events in Helsingborg City increases with a well equipped arena and both Helsingborg Arena and Olympia stadium are qualified and equipped for big events and Olympia is qualified for the highest standard of football in Sweden and Europe.

Constructing an arena should be considered by what the arena will mainly be used and prioritized for. Building smaller sport halls and excluding larger seating stands, technology

54 equipment of highest class would be more effective and productive for local sport clubs and school classes since they would be more customized for their activities and operations and it would offer a value of a very good satisfaction of usability of sport halls in the city. This does not mean that larger arenas as Helsingborg Arena shall not be built or reconstructions of arenas such as Olympia.

Having two mega arenas placed at the same location creates a sports cluster and boosts the image of the specific area as a sport area. However, it creates other concerns such as security and traffic issues at larger events for the neighborhood area. Placing the arenas in the outskirts or closer to main highway roads where there does not exists similar size of neighborhood areas, makes it easier to access the arenas. Furthermore, there is less risks of security- concerns if it would have been in the outskirts of the city since it will not fill an area which is already crowded and populated.

The participating stakeholders and foremost the organizations such as HISO, Sport and Leisure department of Helsingborg Municipality, HASAB and FC Helsingborg are well aware of each others responsibilities and concerns. While HASAB has respect for schools and local teams being upset by reschedules and cancellations, HISO are aware of HASAB business to make a profit. The objective of HISO is to have sport activities and events as much as possible of at the arenas and according to the statistics of HASAB there is a majority of sport content and sport activities at Helsingborg Arena. It is not just concerning sport activities of schools and local clubs, but overall sport activities of national and international events as well. FC Helsingborg is not satisfied 100% of their situation of usability likewise as HISO and The School and Leisure-department. This indicates that it leaves concerns over usability of a modern arena combining both profitable-events and sport activities for the local teams, both elite- and non elite-teams.

A modern new arena increases the brand of a city with the opportunities to offer experiences and events for the citizens and visitors of the city. An indoor arena provides an increase of events (both sports- and non-sports events) and activities for the whole year and a sport stadium as Olympia attracts football of national level and puts them in a pole position to host larger competitions in the future.

Implications and suggestions for further research

This study has focused on usability of Olympia & Helsingborg Arena and what values it brings to different stakeholders in Helsingborg. There is opportunities to follow up this study with further research due to arenas can increase and decrease in usability. In the coming years there can be more than one football team using Olympia and non-sport related organizations have used Helsingborg Arena and Olympia before. Suggestions for further research are how PE-classes in schools are affected in the long term by inconsistency of arena usage by the cause of cancellations and rescheduling and focusing on the school as the main stakeholder. By having all the major arenas gathered at one place can create a mega arena center but it challenges and creates concerns to the phenomenon of security which can evolve to a study regarding arena security. Furthermore, this study can be used as a guideline for more efficiency in process for planning an arena in regard to what the arena actually will be used for and what values the involved stakeholders would aim to bring to the city. Further research can also be implemented on which stakeholders actually benefits the most of a new constructed arena.

References

Literature:

Ahrne, G., & Svensson, P. (2011). Handbok i kvalitativa metoder. Liber.

Alm, J., Tofft-Jørgensen, L., Brandt, H., & Bang, S. (2012). World Stadium Index: stadiums built for major events: bright future or future burden?. Play the Game/Danish Institute for Sports Studies.

Alm J. & Rasmus K. Storm (2018). Isomorphic Forces and Professional Soccer Standardizations: Instruments of Governance for Municipal Investments? International Journal of Public Administration, 42:3, 185-194, DOI: 10.1080/01900692.2017.1422746. Link: https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2017.1422746

Andersson, T. ”Spela fotboll bondjävlar!": en studie av svensk klubbkultur och lokal identitet från 1950 till 2000-talets början. D. 1, Helsingborg, Landskrona, Malmö, Listerlandet, Växjö och Göteborg, Brutus Östlings bokförlag Symposion, Eslöv, 2011

Andrew, D. P., & Pedersen, P. M. (2011). Research methods and design in sport management. Human Kinetics.

Bale, J. (1993) Sport, space and the city. London: Routledge;

Bale, J. (1994) Landscapes of modern sport. Leicester: Leicester University Press; Bale, J.

Bale, J. (2003) Sports Geography. London: Routledge;

Bergsgard, N. A., & Norberg, J. R. (2010). Sports policy and politics–the Scandinavian way. Sport in society, 13(4), 567-582.

Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods. Oxford university press.

Book, K. (2005). Arenors lokalisering, betydelse och användning: förslag på kulturgeografiska perspektiv. Svensk Idrottsforskning Nr 3. 75-79

Book, K., & Eskilsson, L. (2001). The City of Tormorrow–Balancing Sustainability and Global Competitiveness. In XIIth Metrex meeting. October 2001 Copenhagen. http://www2.gwu.edu/~iits/104/unit07/sports_tourism_and_centrality_in_cities.pdf

Coates, D., & Humphreys, B. R. (2003). Professional sports facilities, franchises and urban economic development. Public Finance and Management, 3(3), 335-357.

Curasi, C. F. (2001). A Critical Exploration of Face-to Face Interviewing vs. Computer- Mediated Interviewing. International Journal of Market Research, 43(4), 1-13.

Drucker, P.F. (1975). Organisation, ledning, ansvar: Handboken för beslutsfattare. Stockholm: Liber/Beckman.

Flyvbjerg, B. (2003). Fem missförstånd om fallstudieforskning (Five Misunderstandings about Case-Study Research). Statsvetenskaplig tidskrift, 106(3), 185-206.

Forslund, M. (2013). Organisering och ledning. LundaText AB.

Gratton, C & Jones, I. (2010). Research methods for sports studies. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.

Gray, E. D. (2014). Doing Research in the real world (3rd edition). London: SAGE

Ghauri, P. N., & Grønhaug, K. (2005). Research methods in business studies: A practical guide. Pearson Education.

George, A. L., Bennett, A., Lynn-Jones, S. M., & Miller, S. E. (2005). Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. mit Press.

Greenwell, T. C., Danzey-Bussell, L. A., & Shonk, D. J. (2019). Managing sport events. Human Kinetics.

Houlihan, B., & Malcolm, D. (Eds.). (2015). Sport and society: a student introduction. Sage.

Hancock, D. R., & Algozzine, B. (2017). Doing case study research: A practical guide for beginning researchers. Teachers College Press.

Jens Alm, Harry Arne Solberg, Rasmus K. Storm & Tor Georg Jakobsen (2016). Hosting major sports events: the challenge of taming white elephants, Leisure Studies, 35:5, 564-582, DOI: 10.1080/02614367.2014.994550. link article: https://doi.org/10.1080/02614367.2014.994550

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., Huberman, M. A., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. sage.

Mitchell R., Agle, B., och Wood, D. (1997). Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts. Academy of Management Review.

Silverman, D. (2010). Doing qualitative research: A practical handbook. SAGE Publications Limited.

Stake, R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Internet:

European Commission, Data protection in the EU, retrieved: 2019-04-05: https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-topic/data-protection/data-protection-eu_en

Datainspektionen, The GDPR fundamental principles, retrieved: 2019-04-05: https://www.datainspektionen.se/other-lang/in-english/the-general-data-protection-regulation- gdpr/the-gdpr-fundamental-principles/

Helsingborg Arena, hbgarena.se, retrieved 2019-05-02: https://hbgarena.se/om- helsingborgarena/, https://hbgarena.se/konferens/, https://hbgarena.se/evenemang/ & https://hbgarena.se/faq/

Expressen. Klart: Ängelholm ska spela på Olympia. Published: 2013-10-23 Retrieved: 2019- 05-01: https://www.expressen.se/kvallsposten/sport/klart-angelholm-ska-spela-pa-olympia/

Helsingborgs Dagblad.Klart: ÄFF till Olympia. Published: 2013-10-22. Retrieved: 2019-05- 01: https://www.hd.se/2013-10-22/klart-aff-till-olympia

Helsingborgs stad. Olympia, Published: 2017-03-07, Retrieved: 2019-05-01: https://helsingborg.se/uppleva-och-gora/anlaggningar-och-sporthallar/olympia/

Helsingborgs stad. Trafik och stadsbestämmelser. Published: 2014-01-22, retrivied: 2019-10- 09 from: https://helsingborg.se/trafik-och-stadsplanering/parkering/parkeringsplatser- allmanna/parkering-arenaomradet/?highlight=parkeringar+p%C3%A5+omr%C3%A5det

Helsingborgs IF. OLYMPIA. Retrieved: 2019-10-11 from http://www.hif.se/om-hif/olympia/

Svensk elitfotboll. (2015). Byggboom i elitfotbollen. Retrieved: 2019-04-10 from https://www.svenskelitfotboll.se/byggboom-i-elitfotbollen/

Svenska fotbollsförbundet. Arenaregler. Published: - retrieved:2019-05-01: https://fogis.se/anlaggningarenor/anlaggningar/arenaregler/

Svenska fotbollsförbundet. Specifikation av anläggningskrav för arenor. Retrieved: 2019-05- 01 from: https://www2.svenskfotboll.se/ImageVault/Images/id_42849/ImageVaultHandler.aspx

Svenska fotbollsförbundet.

Föreskrifter om arenakrav för svensk elitfotboll, herrar och damer, fr o m 2014. Retrieved: 2019-05-01 from: https://www2.svenskfotboll.se/ImageVault/Images/id_8733/ImageVaultHandler.aspx

HISO. Om oss. Published: - Retrieved: 2019-05-01: http://hiso.se/om-oss/

UNESCO. Code of conduct social science research. Published: -. Retrieved: 2019-04-10. Available at:http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/SHS/pdf/Soc_Sci_Code.pdf

Online interviews:

Azlius, Fredrik. FC Helsingborg. 2019-05-27.

Personal Interviews:

Hammarlund, Anders. Helsingborg Skol- och fritidsförvaltning. 2019-04-26.

Bergkvist, Julius. Helsingborgsidrottens Samorganisation (HISO). 2019-05-17.

Fält, Charlie. Helsingborg Arena och Scen AB. 2019-05-21.

Appendices

Interview guidelines

INTERVJUGUIDE, ANDERS HAMMARLUND, ENHETSCHEF GRÖNYTOR I HELSINGBORGS STAD

VÄRDE 1. VILKA VÄRDEN ÄR VIKTIGA FÖR HELSINGBORGS STAD MED DESS ARENOR OCH I SYNNERHET OLYMPIA?

2. HUR REFLEKTERAR HELSINGBORGS STAD KRING BEGREPPET VÄRDEN? D.V.S. VAD ÄR AV VÄRDE FÖR HELSINGBORGS STAD?

3. VILKA MÖJLIGHETER UPPSTÅR OCH SKAPAS ENLIGT HELSINGBORGS STAD MED IDROTTSARENOR? SPECIFIKT: OLYMPIA & HELSINGBORGS ARENA

4. VILKA INTRESSENTER ÄR VIKTIGAST FÖR HELSINGBORGS STAD NÄR DET GÄLLER ARENOR OCH SPECIFIKT OLYMPIA?

OLYMPIA: 1. FÖRUTOM FOTBOLLEN, FÖR VAD MER ÄR FOTBOLLSARENAN OLYMPIA OPTIMALT ATT ANVÄNDA FÖR?

2. PÅ VILKET SÄTT GYNNAR FOTBOLLSARENAN OLYMPIA HELSINGBORG OCH DESS INVÅNARE?

3. OLYMPIAS OMBYGGNAD BLEV KLAR 2017, VARFÖR KRÄVDES DET EN OMBYGGNAD? VAD KAN NYA OLYMPIA ERBJUDA BESÖKARE OCH INTRESSENTER?

4. VAD ÄR OLYMPIAS KÄRNA ENLIGT HELSINGBORGS STAD?

5. HADE HELSINGBORGS STAD KUNNAT TÄNKA SIG ATT SÄLJA OLYMPIA TILL EN TREDJE PART? EXEMPELVIS ETT FÖRETAG ELLER EN FOTBOLLSKLUBB? VARFÖR/VARFÖR INTE?

INTERVJUGUIDE CHARLIE FÄLT, PRODUKTION CHEF FÖR HELSINGBORGS ARENA OCH SCEN AB.

VÄRDE 1. HUR REFLEKTERAR DU (SOM REPRESENTANT OCH PRODUKTIONSCHEF FÖR HASAB) KRING BEGREPPET VÄRDEN?

2. VILKA VÄRDEN ÄR VIKTIGA ANSER DU MED EN ARENA?

3. VILKA MÖJLIGHETER UPPSTÅR OCH SKAPAS MED ARENOR SÅ SOM HELSINGBORGS ARENA?

HELSINGBORGS ARENA: 4. VAD ÄR HELSINGBORGS ARENA MEST OPTIMAL FÖR? PÅ VILKET SÄTT BLIR HELSINGBORG ARENA MEST EFFEKTIV FÖR ANVÄNDNING?

5. ANVÄNDS HELSINGBORG ARENA FÖR NÅGONTING MER ÄN IDROTT, UNDERHÅLLNINGSEVENEMANG OCH MÄSSOR?

6. VAD FÖR BEHOV OCH ANLEDNINGAR FANNS DET ATT BYGGA HELSINGBORGS ARENA? VAD SPELAR LOKALISERING OCH PLACERING AV ARENA FÖR ROLL?

Intervjufrågor till Fredrik Azelius styrelsemedlem i HISO (Helsingborgsidrottens Samorganisation) och klubbchef & sportchef för FC Helsingborg

VÄRDE: Värden av arenor för HISO: 1. Vilka värden är viktiga anser HISO när det gäller arenor? Varför?

2. Vilka grundvärden tycker ni saknas (ifall ni tycker att det saknas) på Helsingborg Arena och Olympia som ska gynna idrottsföreningar i Helsingborg? Eventuellt, vad kan förbättras?

Värden av arenor för FC Helsingborg: 3. Vilka värden är viktiga anser FC Helsingborg när det gäller arenor? Varför? 4. Till vilken grad uppfyller Helsingborg Arena FC Helsingborgs värden för arenor?

HELSINGBORGS ARENA OCH OLYMPIA: HISO: 1. Hur har dialogen varit med Helsingborgs idrottsföreningar för HISO gällande användande av Helsingborg Arena? T.ex: Är föreningarna nöjda med Helsingborg Arena och vad är de i sådana fall nöjda med? Har föreningarna visat något missnöje gällande användandet av Helsingborg Arena?

2. Vad tycker HISO kring användbarheten av Helsingborgs Arena & Olympia? Är arenorna effektiva och produktiva för Helsingborgs idrottsföreningar enligt HISO?

3. Är arenorna geografiskt sätt placerad på rätt plats eller hade HISO hellre velat se Helsingborg Arena och Olympia på andra placeringar i Helsingborg?

FC Helsingborg: 1. Hur fungerar FC Helsingborg användande av Helsingborg Arena? T.ex: Klubben hyr enbart en hall, använder arenan enbart på matchdagar etc.

Intervjufrågor till Julius Bergkvist, verksamhetschef, HISO (Helsingborgsidrottens Samorganisation) för fältstudie: Helsingborgs arenor.

VÄRDE: Värden av arenor för HISO: 1. Vilka värden är viktiga anser HISO när det gäller arenor? Varför?

2. Vilka av dessa värden väger tyngst för HISO?

3. Vilka grundvärden tycker ni saknas (ifall ni tycker att det saknas) på Helsingborg Arena och Olympia som ska gynna idrottsföreningar i Helsingborg? Eventuellt, vad kan förbättras?

HELSINGBORGS ARENA OCH OLYMPIA: 4. Har ni någon överblick över hur många av föreningarna i Helsingborg har tillgång och använder antingen Helsingborgs Arena och Olympia?

5. Hur ofta har dessa föreningar tillgång till arenorna och är föreningar nöjda (överlag) med utbudet och tillfällen som erbjuds?

6. Vad tycker HISO kring användbarheten av Helsingborgs Arena & Olympia? Är arenorna effektiva och produktiva för Helsingborgs idrottsföreningar enligt HISO?

7. Vad för relation har HISO till andra intressenter som HASAB samt Helsingborgs stad gällande användandet av Helsingborgs Arena samt Olympia?

Consent form

Samtyckesblankett / Consent form Vår behandling av dina personuppgifter bygger på att dina personuppgifter behandlas med ditt samtycke. Du kan när som helst ta tillbaka samtycket och uppgifterna får då inte bevaras eller behandlas vidare utan annan laglig grund.

Genom insamling av uppgifter om [namn, e-post och övriga kontaktuppgifter som framkommer i intervju] kommer Malmö universitet att använda i arbetet med examensarbetet. Uppgifterna kommer att behandlas under [tiden som masterstudien bearbetas] varefter de [arkiveras och sedan raderas när uppsatsen blivit godkänd]. Du kan ta del av det som registrerats om dig eller ha synpunkter på behandlingen eller de uppgifter som samlats in genom att kontakta författaren till studien eller lärosätets dataskyddsombud på [email protected]. Klagomål som inte kan lösas med Malmö universitet kan lämnas till berörd tillsynsmyndighet.

Processing of personal data This processing of your personal data is based on your consent. You may withdraw the consent at any time, and the data may not be retained or processed without any other legal grounds.

By collecting data on [2. categories of personal data], Malmö University will [4. brief description of the purpose]. The data will be processed during [5. period of time] after which the information will be [6. deleted / archived], [3. information about possible third party]. You can find out what has been registered about you or have feedback on the processing or information collected by contacting [7. contact person for the treatment] or the university's Data Protection Officer at [email protected]. Complaints that can not be resolved with Malmö University may be submitted to the responsible regulatory authority.

……………………………………………………………… Underskrift / Signature