Commitment to Public Leisure Service Providers: A Conceptual and Psychometric Analysis

In this investigation, we propos and trialed a scale designed to measure recreationists' commitment to public leisure service providers. We refer toed that the identity of public leisure service providers is embedded in the facilities and settings they manage. Consequently we perceive that it is important to consider recreationists' commitment to public leisure service providers through examining the meanings they associate with the settings and facilities managed by dint of the agency in addition to their trust in the agency's ability to manage these settings in a manner consistent with these meanings. To operationalize this conceptualization, we drew on the place bonding literature to build a measure of agency commitment that consisted of five dimensions; affective attachment, place connection place identity, social bonding, and value congruence Data were gathered from two public leisure service contexts: the Chattahoochee National Forest and Cleveland Metroparks. Our analyses presented strongest support for a correlated factor mould consisting of the five propos dimensions. In addition to offering a valid and reliable measure of public agency commitment, this paper also provides an example of the utility of structural equation modeling for the systematic testing of attitudinal scales.

KEYWORDS: Agency commitment, scale unfolding structural equation modeling, setting attachment.

Introduction

While several authors have discussed the value of committed recreationists for the couple public and commercial service providers (Gahwiler & Havitz, 1998; Iwasaki & Havitz, 1998 2004; Kirn, Scott & Crompton, 1997; KyIe, Graefe, Manning, & Bacon, 2004) consensus upon how best to conceptualize and measure the commitment fabricate remains elusive. For example, Havitz and Dimanche (1997) noted that there has been more [i]or[/i] less disagreement concerning the distinction between leisure involvement and commitment. Researchers who have adapted conceptualizations of commitment from consumer theory have considered commitment in bourns of recreationists' sentiment toward service providers and their service offerings (eg Gahwiler & Havitz, 1998; Iwasaki & Havitz, 2004; Pritchard, Havitz, & Howard, 1999) For these researchers, the relationship between involvement and commitment is reflective of a developmental proces where recreationists' become involved with leisure activities and then evolve distinct service preferences. Consequently, these researchers have indicated that the distinction between involvement and commitment lies in the specificity of the attitude object: involvement is measured at the proceeds level (i.e., activities), whereas commitment is measured at the brand horizontal (i.e., service providers and service offerings). Alternately, other researchers who have drawn from theories surface of landed in sociology have tended to use involvement and commitment interchangeably (Buchanan, 1985; Kirn et al., 1997; Moore & Scott 2003; Scott Baker, & Kirn, 1999) For these researchers, a committed recreationist could be an individual deep involved with a specific activity. While new conceptual and empirical evidence has tendered most support for the former conceptualization (Havitz & Dimanche, 1997; Iwasaki & Havitz, 1998 2004; KyIe, Graefe, Manning, & Bacon, 2003; Park, 1996) we allude to that elements of both approaches have the potential to contribute to our understanding of the commitment fabricate

Another issue confounding our understanding of commitment be of importance tos whether or not the properties underlying commitment are consistent for the one and the other public and commercial contexts. For example, in commercial words immediately preceding [i]or[/i] followings the cultivation of recreationists' commitment to the agency is seen as an important indicator of agency succes as determined by the agency of profit margins. Committed recreationists purchase the service more often and are more inclined to purchase premium cropss (Reichheld & Sasser, 1990). In these connected thought [i]or[/i] thoughtss great importance is placed upon elements related to the immediate transaction connected thought [i]or[/i] thoughts that stress consumer satisfaction, quality, and value. Alternately, Borrie, Christensen, Watson, Miller, and McCollum (2002) recommended that, in the context of public leisure services and public land management, in particular, it is more appropriate for public agencies to focus their efforts upon fostering trust, given their mandate to consider the variety of stakeholders' perspectives and the public aim of the places and resources they manage. Borrie et al. warned against focusing too narrowly upon transactions alone and adopting commercially-derived practices that support these transactions. They indicated that these practices have the potential to lead to the commodification of public profitables and the exclusion of portions within the community. Borrie et al. noted that the shift in focus from transactions to trust is more consistent with fostering the exhibition of long-term relationships with stakeholders.

Thus, to address these issues, we systematically ordealed a scale designed to measure respondents' commitment to public leisure service providers and their yield offerings. In so doing, we build on previous work suggesting that commitment is an attitudinal set up best measured at the brand horizontal In our study contexts-a National Forest and a urban park agency-respondents' attachment to the agency could best be understood in boundarys of the meanings they associated with the settings and facilities managed through the agency along with their trust in the agency's ability to manage these settings in a manner consistent with these meanings. We also systematically proofed the psychometric properties of our propos scale that was adapted from several authors' work that was consistent with our public leisure service words immediately preceding [i]or[/i] following