Business and the Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth GamesExpectations, outcomes and the future
June 2019
Joan Carlini and Andrew O’Neil
The size of the event does not matter. What matters most is the integrity of the outcome.[1]
Image by stephenk1977, available at flic.kr/p/J2ZJ7N, licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/
FOREWORDOur aim as ‘Friends of Griffith Business School’ is to increase the collaboration between the School and the business community to help build a sustainable, diverse and prosperous Gold Coast.
We seek to combine the School’s strengths in cutting edge, rigorous, and independent research, with the passion and ‘can do’ attitude of our local entrepreneurs to drive better outcomes for business on the Gold Coast. With a particular focus on private enterprises, our vision is to provide research that will be a vital resource for Gold Coast businesses in driving improvement and sustainability in a manner that is practical, and easy to understand, implement and access.
In our collaboration, we once again focused on the Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games (GC2018) and now look back after the event to consider the impact, legacy and opportunity Gold Coast businesses experienced.
This report, which draws on the views of Gold Coast private enterprises and businesses, is our way of understanding what really happened and use these findings to assist Gold Coast businesses when dealing with other large ‘all of city’ events. It is our way of continuing our journey of collaboration between Griffith Business School and the business community to drive long term success for our Gold Coast.
Janelle Manders Chair, Friends of Griffith Business School
SNAPSHOTDuring GC2018 business faced many challenges, including having reliable and accurate information on which to base their preparations. Disrupted market forces and increased costs contributed to a negative business impact.
Businesses agree that GC2018 has contributed to developing the Gold Coast as an appealing world-class city with capacity to attract future sporting events.
BusinessC
ity
Did the information you have regarding GC2018 meet your business needs?
The cost of business planning for GC2018 was a lot.
If the Gold Coast hosted a similar event to GC2018 in the future, I would prepare my business in the same way.
I understood how I could leverage opportunities from GC2018 to benefit my business.
Holding GC2018 during the Easter trading period was a good choice.
Financially, GC2018 provided our business with a boost.
Overall, the return on investment from GC2018 on our business was good.
Which best describes how your business was impacted by GC2018?
GC2018 has contributed to the Gold Coast growing into a world-class city with distinct strengths.
GC2018 will aid in attracting more sporting events to the Gold Coast.
Overall, GC2018 has contributed to urban infrastructure that will build the city’s image.
GC2018 enhanced the ability of the Gold Coast to offer attractive cultural, artistic and recreational resources.
e.g. events, arts and culture, sporting facilities, open space
GC2018 increased awareness of the Gold Coast city internationally.
How would you rate your overall experience of attending GC2018 event/s?
58%DISAGREE
42%AGREE
20%DISAGREE
62%AGREE
64%DISAGREE
23%AGREE
44%DISAGREE
57%AGREE
69%DISAGREE
61%AGREE
72%DISAGREE
65%GOOD TO
EXCELLENT
77%DISAGREE
74%NEGATIVE
CONTENTSOverview 1
GC2018—Amplifying expectations 2
Why host a Commonwealth Games? 2
GC2018—The view from business 3
Business impacts 3
Customer numbers, behaviour and sales volume 4
Vehicle and pedestrian access 6
Personal wellbeing and work hours 6
Work atmosphere and staffing 7
Supply chain interruption 7
Reputation 8
GC2018 media, information and inflated estimates? 9
Information accuracy and predictions 10
Business planning 11
How did businesses plan for GC2018? 11
Efficacy of planning 12
Cost of planning 13
Event timing 13
Commonwealth Games event planners 14
Feedback 15
Centralisation and authority 15
City-level impacts 16
Gold Coast city image 16
Business operating environment 17
Government and leadership during GC2018 18
Recommendations 19
Conclusion 21
References 21
Appendices 22
Australia’s Commonwealth Games history
GC2018 in numbers
Our research
Majority survey respondents
1938Sydney
6,600athletes
and officials
$200,000+ annual turnover
1962Perth
71countries
represented
1982Brisbane
11days of sport
39face-to-face interviews
business owners
2006Melbourne
1.2mtickets to
sport events
150survey responses hard copy and online
1–19 employees
2018Gold Coast
1.5bglobal
audience
GOLD COASTBrisbane
Townsville
Cairns
GC2018 event locations
Image by Jan Clewett, available at flic.kr/p/24PidDJ
Q U E E N S L A N D
1
The highly anticipated Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games (GC2018) was held from 4 to 15 April 2018. This was the fifth time Australia had hosted a Commonwealth Games and more than 6,600 athletes, including 300 para-athletes, from 71 Commonwealth countries took part. Sporting and related events occurred at venues on the Gold Coast, Brisbane, Cairns and Townsville [2]. GC2018 was the Gold Coast’s first experience hosting a mega-sporting event, and the Games provided key insights into the costs and benefits associated with doing so.
In this report we focus on the impact of GC2018 on the Gold Coast business community and the broader regional business environment. There is no doubt that the Games raised the Gold Coast’s profile nationally and internationally, while public benefits flowing from major infrastructure initiatives—most notably the light rail—were significant. Furthermore, net economic gains were noteworthy.
In the year prior to the Games, the State government published several reports underscoring the once-in-a-generation economic opportunities that would flow from GC2018. This included analyses contained in the ‘Economic Impacts of the Gold Coast Commonwealth Games’, which forecast a $2 billion boost to Queensland’s Gross State Product, including a $1.7 billion injection for the Gold Coast. In the wake of the Games, the Deputy Mayor of the Gold Coast announced that the event had delivered $2 billion to the local economy alone[3].
Yet one of the enduring puzzles of GC2018 is the disconnect between the overall success of the Games in attracting revenue to the Gold Coast and a persistent sentiment on the part of Gold Coast business operators that they received little, if any, direct benefit from GC2018. Indeed, during the Games, reports emerged that a number of Gold Coast businesses had incurred significant loss of revenue due to the disruption caused by the event and also because event organisers had miscalculated planning estimates which businesses had used to guide their activities during the period of the Games.
The research contained in this report seeks to understand the impact of GC2018 from the perspective of Gold Coast business. It is not the report’s objective to evaluate the overall success and legacy-impact of the Games. We do not aim to verify or ‘fact check’ government claims regarding economic benefits, but instead to report how businesses perceived the impact of the Games. Our objective is to provide insights into the key challenges confronting small and medium enterprises with a view to promoting better future outcomes for Gold Coast businesses. The report makes a number of constructive recommendations for the planning, implementation and evaluation of future mega-events, which should mitigate risks and failure for the Gold Coast and future host cities.
Against this background, the research underpinning this report was framed around two stages, the first consisting of 39 face-to-face interviews with businesses, academic experts and industry associations. This stage explored the impact of GC2018 on business and the general operating environment on the Gold Coast, which subsequently informed the development of the stage two survey. Stage two comprised a detailed survey targeted at business owners and managers with questions concerning business impacts, GC2018 information sources, business planning, event planning, and more general city impacts.
Invitations to participate in the online survey were disseminated through email dispersal via chambers of commerce, industry associations, and promotion via social media and traditional media channels. In addition, 550 hard copy surveys were distributed across the Gold Coast (from Mount Tamborine to Coolangatta). This yielded 98 online and 52 hard copy surveys (150 in total). The majority of survey respondents were business owners, had operated their business for more than ten years, had between 1–19 employees, had an annual turnover greater than $200,000, were located on the central Gold Coast, and were in the retail and accommodation and hospitality sectors (see Appendix A).
OVERVIEW
2
GC2018—AMPLIFYING EXPECTATIONS
Unlike other events held on the Gold Coast, GC2018 was a one-off event that involved unprecedented investment in the region’s infrastructure and enormous planning, coordination, and execution specifications. The Queensland State government spent $1.5 billion on the event, which was nearly double the amount that was spent on the 2014 Commonwealth Games in Scotland[4].
The project was overseen by the Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games Corporation (GOLDOC), a not-for-profit organisation, which partnered with the Australian Government Major Sporting events Committee, the State Government Office of Commonwealth Games (OCG), Queensland Police Services (QPS), Queensland Fire and Emergency Services (QFES), the Department of Transport and Main Roads (DTMR), and the City of Gold Coast (CoGC)[5].
With event tourism increasingly competitive globally, there is an obvious need to examine not just the planning, coordination, and execution of events but also the impact of these events on stakeholder communities. Interestingly, the impact of mega-sporting events on businesses local to where they are held is often overlooked, which is paradoxical given that a key justification for holding these events is the benefits they yield for business—from small and medium enterprises to the top end of town. Lessons for jurisdictions hosting future mega-events are often lost in the afterglow when the event concludes. In our 2017 study, we found that the various impacts of mega-sporting events on business are seriously under-analysed, and that rarely, if at all, are the lessons transferred to future host cities[6]. For stakeholder communities in Birmingham, learning the lessons of GC2018 will be important in their preparation for the 2022 Commonwealth Games.
Why host a Commonwealth Games?The cost of hosting a large-scale sporting event is significant. This is typically justified by reference to the anticipated economic outcomes and associated benefits for local communities, especially local business. However, in sections of the academic literature, concern has emerged over the exaggerated foreshadowed benefits to private enterprise and the disparity between promised and actual outcomes. Some analysis has juxtaposed what they identify as the limited benefits for local communities with prioritising interests of non-local stakeholders such as corporate sponsors[7].
In the lead-up to GC2018, messaging from the State government underscored the expected economic benefits for the region. The report, ‘Ahead of the Games’, focused on the positive estimated outcomes that would lead to businesses converting this into profit:
‘Overall, GC2018 will help to deliver billions of dollars worth of positive economic impact for Queensland and support more than 30,000 full-time, part-time and temporary jobs. Tourism will be taken to a new level with an estimated 1.1 million visitors predicted in the lead-up to, during and after the Games—spending more than $870 million in Queensland.’ [8]
Media messages used prior to GC2018 amplified the expectation that businesses would see a strong influx of tourists, both overseas and interstate, which would lead inevitably to enhanced bottom lines and an unprecedented ‘win’ for business [9,10].
3
GC2018—THE VIEW FROM BUSINESS
Business impactsThe central aim of the research underpinning our analysis was to understand how Gold Coast businesses were impacted by GC2018. In our survey therefore we asked a variety of specific questions in relation to the effect of GC2018 on demand, supply, and business activity more generally. At the broadest level, half of respondents (51%) reported that their business was impacted very negatively; 23% somewhat negatively; 16% felt no impact; and 9% of respondents were somewhat positive with only 1% very positive.
Which best describes how your business was impacted by GC2018?
Which best describes how your business was impacted by GC2018?
If you noticed a decrease in the local population, how did it impact on your
business?
Did the information you have regarding the GC2018 meet your business needs?
Based on what actually happened to your business during the GC2018, how
e�ective was your planning?
The cost of business planning for the GC2018 was a lot?
When asked about the impact of the GC2018 on business - change in Customer numbers (57%), sales volume (52%), and customer behaviour
(40%) were rated as having a very negative impact.
Holding the GC2018 during the Easter trading period was a good choice.
Have you provided feedback about the GC2018 impact on your business?
Most business were not impacted by supply chain interruptions (35%). However, examples in
real estate and the building industry showed unanticipated in�uences
Businesses reported that their reputation was not impacted (56%) by the GC2018
For what purpose did you use the information in your business planning?
Restricted vehicle (42%) and pedestrian access (41%) very negatively impacted business.
Personal wellbeing (40%) and my working hours (37%) were very negatively impacted by the GC2018.
Most business were not impacted by work atmosphere (40%) or sta�ng (39%)
Very negative
Somewhat negative
No impact
Somewhat positive
Very positive
51%
23%
16%
9%1%
Description of business impactThe preeminent factor identified for the negative impact on businesses was a change in customer numbers (57%), with reduced sales volume coming a close second (52%). Other significant factors that negatively affected business were vehicle (42%) and pedestrian (41%) access, and changes to customer behaviour (40%). Two out of five (40%) reported their personal wellbeing had been very negatively affected.
Business impacts we asked about:
Customer numbers
Vehicle access
Supply chain interruption
Customer behaviour
Opening hours
Discretionary spending
Sales volume
Staffing
Working hours
Personal wellbeing
Pedestrian access
Resource expenses
Work atmosphere
Business reputation
Business considers customer numbers, sales volume, access and customer behaviour as the most significant negative impacts of GC2018.
Businesses agreed that the GC2018 worked on multiple factors to improve the attractiveness of the Gold Coast city image nationally and internationally.
The information sources most used by businesses were “Get Set for the Games”, mainstream media and social media. However, “Get Set for the Games” was
reported as not accurate by 41% of business
Business consider customer numbers, sales volume, access and customer behaviour as the most signi�cant negative impacts of the GC2018
Businesses did not agree that the GC2018 had a positive e�ect on the City’s business environment
When planning the GC2018, the organisers - considered the needs of business; listened to local experts.
There was transparency in the planning of the GC2018.
The state/federal government assisted businesses during the GC2018.The local council assisted businesses during the GC2018.
‘Informal leadership’ (e.g. community groups, industry associations) assisted businesses during the GC2018.
WO
RK
ATM
OSP
HER
E
RES
OU
RCE
EX
PEN
SES
OP
ENIN
G H
OU
RS
STA
FFIN
G
DIS
CRET
ION
ARY
SP
END
ING
SUP
PLY
CH
AIN
IN
TER
RU
PTI
ON
BU
SIN
ESS
REP
UTA
TIO
N
CUST
OM
ER N
UM
BER
S
SALE
S V
OLU
ME
VEH
ICLE
ACC
ESS
PED
ESTR
IAN
ACC
ESS
CUST
OM
ER B
EHAV
IOU
R
PER
SON
AL
WEL
LBEI
NG
WO
RK
ING
HO
UR
S
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
100%
50%
0%
4
Customer numbers, behaviour and sales volume
Most businesses reported that the change in customer numbers provided the most significant negative impact, which explains the reduced sales volume. Business were expecting an increase in customer numbers with a flow-on effect to sales. However, several factors contributed to the reduced customer numbers. Firstly, the Gold Coast’s leisure tourist was displaced by a budget conscious and sports focused tourist who generally did not frequent retail or food service outlets (outside of sporting venues). This study’s sample included retail trade (38%) and accommodation and food services (24%) industries which may explain the importance of customer numbers as an impact.
‘I think there was an expectation that we would see a strong influx of tourists, both overseas and interstate and that didn’t eventuate.’ Food service
‘…those people [GC2018 visitors] aren’t on holidays, and so they then don’t go down into the precinct and buy an ice-cream, do some retail shopping.’ Accommodation and food service
Three out of five (58%) businesses reported that there was a severe decrease in the number of local residents on the Gold Coast in the lead-up to and during GC2018. An accommodation and food service operator stated, ‘Local customers left the city afraid of the high volume of tourism affecting all areas of the city (traffic, shopping, hospitals, etc).’ A respondent from the first stage of the research explained to us that she had stocked up on groceries for her family prior to the Games to avoid the inconvenience of congestion and disruption, but as a result resisted going out for the Games period.
‘I’m not dealing with that. I’m not going into Woolworths to buy milk and dealing with 10,000 tourists. So, I went in and spent $200 the day before the Games.’ Arts and culture
Which best describes how your business was impacted by GC2018?
If you noticed a decrease in the local population, how did it impact on your
business?
Did the information you have regarding the GC2018 meet your business needs?
Based on what actually happened to your business during the GC2018, how
e�ective was your planning?
The cost of business planning for the GC2018 was a lot?
When asked about the impact of the GC2018 on business - change in Customer numbers (57%), sales volume (52%), and customer behaviour
(40%) were rated as having a very negative impact.
Holding the GC2018 during the Easter trading period was a good choice.
Have you provided feedback about the GC2018 impact on your business?
Most business were not impacted by supply chain interruptions (35%). However, examples in
real estate and the building industry showed unanticipated in�uences
Businesses reported that their reputation was not impacted (56%) by the GC2018
For what purpose did you use the information in your business planning?
Restricted vehicle (42%) and pedestrian access (41%) very negatively impacted business.
Personal wellbeing (40%) and my working hours (37%) were very negatively impacted by the GC2018.
Most business were not impacted by work atmosphere (40%) or sta�ng (39%)
Very negative Relatively negative No impact Relatively positive Very positive
Customer numbers
Sales volume
Customer behaviour
Rate the impact of GC2018 on your business
When asked about the impact of GC2018 on business, change in customer numbers (57%), sales volume (52%), and customer behaviour (40%) were rated as having a very negative impact.
5
Almost half of businesses (46%) commented that residents leaving the Gold Coast affected them very negatively. Noting reports that many locals holidayed away from the Gold Coast resulting in a reduction of local patronage, a food service operator commented, ‘We lost all our regulars for two to three weeks and gained no extra revenue.’ One survey respondent observed:
‘I operate car parks on the Gold Coast and the visitor numbers were down 90%, I didn’t expect many visitors to drive, but I didn’t expect all Gold Coast residents to leave town for two weeks.’ Transport, postal and warehousing
The GC2018 disruption has had what might best be termed a hangover effect for many businesses in the region and it is taking the city a long time to get back to normal trading levels. Within the survey, businesses have stated that they are experiencing an extensive recovery time, longer than they anticipated. In the survey, some businesses commented that the patronage has not returned to pre-Games volume with consumers going elsewhere.
‘Because our business relies a lot on annual return visits we are now feeling the impact again with low numbers as clients that we normally see at this time of year, [because last year they have] chosen to go elsewhere and have not returned this year.’ Retail
If you noticed a decrease in the local population, how did it impact on your business?
Which best describes how your business was impacted by GC2018?
If you noticed a decrease in the local population, how did it impact on your
business?
Did the information you have regarding the GC2018 meet your business needs?
Based on what actually happened to your business during the GC2018, how
e�ective was your planning?
The cost of business planning for the GC2018 was a lot?
When asked about the impact of the GC2018 on business - change in Customer numbers (57%), sales volume (52%), and customer behaviour
(40%) were rated as having a very negative impact.
Holding the GC2018 during the Easter trading period was a good choice.
Have you provided feedback about the GC2018 impact on your business?
Most business were not impacted by supply chain interruptions (35%). However, examples in
real estate and the building industry showed unanticipated in�uences
Businesses reported that their reputation was not impacted (56%) by the GC2018
For what purpose did you use the information in your business planning?
Restricted vehicle (42%) and pedestrian access (41%) very negatively impacted business.
Personal wellbeing (40%) and my working hours (37%) were very negatively impacted by the GC2018.
Most business were not impacted by work atmosphere (40%) or sta�ng (39%)
46%
18%
33%
2%3%
Very negative
Relatively negative
No impact
Relatively positive
Very positive
6
Vehicle and pedestrian access
Restricted vehicle access was a major impediment to business. Affected firms made arrangements to have deliveries during the night, which also carried the added burden of increased costs as expressed by a survey respondent:
‘All deliveries were at night between 1 and 6 am because of road closures. We had to stay at our shop all night to receive goods to enable us to trade. Tourists did not visit so we had very few customers for weeks before the Games started. We lost over $80,000 through lack of trade.’ Accommodation and food service
Personal wellbeing and work hours
The negative effect on personal wellbeing and work hours featured in the list of impacts. Two out of five (40%) respondents stated that their personal wellbeing had suffered. A combination of negative business impacts and long work hours (e.g. due to overnight deliveries) has most likely resulted in this adverse effect.
Restricted road access and alternate routes made it difficult for customers to visit businesses; as a consequence, patronage by locals and tourists was down, as reflected by this survey respondent:
‘The road was cordoned off and all public sent via an alternate route by signage. Not even our regular clients came they all went overseas.’ Retail
Similarly, increased security and closures of normal routes forced foot traffic away. Restricted parking times at park and ride stations meant that spectators returning to their vehicles did not stay in the area, instead returning to their accommodation.
‘We were expecting so much traffic and even foot traffic and people and stuff, and that never came to fruition.’ Retail
Rate the impact of GC2018 on your business
Which best describes how your business was impacted by GC2018?
If you noticed a decrease in the local population, how did it impact on your
business?
Did the information you have regarding the GC2018 meet your business needs?
Based on what actually happened to your business during the GC2018, how
e�ective was your planning?
The cost of business planning for the GC2018 was a lot?
When asked about the impact of the GC2018 on business - change in Customer numbers (57%), sales volume (52%), and customer behaviour
(40%) were rated as having a very negative impact.
Holding the GC2018 during the Easter trading period was a good choice.
Have you provided feedback about the GC2018 impact on your business?
Most business were not impacted by supply chain interruptions (35%). However, examples in
real estate and the building industry showed unanticipated in�uences
Businesses reported that their reputation was not impacted (56%) by the GC2018
For what purpose did you use the information in your business planning?
Restricted vehicle (42%) and pedestrian access (41%) very negatively impacted business.
Personal wellbeing (40%) and my working hours (37%) were very negatively impacted by the GC2018.
Most business were not impacted by work atmosphere (40%) or sta�ng (39%)
Very negative Relatively negative No impact Relatively positive Very positive
My personal wellbeing
My working hours
In short, we went from over 200 customers a week to ZERO for the duration of the Games.Accommodation and food service
A very negative impact and our worst trading period in the 9 years we have been in business. Accommodation and food service
Rate the impact of GC2018 on your business
Which best describes how your business was impacted by GC2018?
If you noticed a decrease in the local population, how did it impact on your
business?
Did the information you have regarding the GC2018 meet your business needs?
Based on what actually happened to your business during the GC2018, how
e�ective was your planning?
The cost of business planning for the GC2018 was a lot?
When asked about the impact of the GC2018 on business - change in Customer numbers (57%), sales volume (52%), and customer behaviour
(40%) were rated as having a very negative impact.
Holding the GC2018 during the Easter trading period was a good choice.
Have you provided feedback about the GC2018 impact on your business?
Most business were not impacted by supply chain interruptions (35%). However, examples in
real estate and the building industry showed unanticipated in�uences
Businesses reported that their reputation was not impacted (56%) by the GC2018
For what purpose did you use the information in your business planning?
Restricted vehicle (42%) and pedestrian access (41%) very negatively impacted business.
Personal wellbeing (40%) and my working hours (37%) were very negatively impacted by the GC2018.
Most business were not impacted by work atmosphere (40%) or sta�ng (39%)
Pedestrian access
Vehicle access
Very negative Relatively negative No impact Relatively positive Very positive
Restricted vehicle (42%) and pedestrian access (41%) very negatively impacted business.
Personal wellbeing (40%) and my working hours (37%) were very negatively impacted by GC2018.
7
Work atmosphere and staffing
Most businesses reported that GC2018 had no impact on the work atmosphere (40%). During an interview, one retail business commented on an improved work environment due to athletes using the facilities and associating with normal customers. Interestingly, most survey comments on this impact discussed it negatively, using examples of ‘imposing leave on staff, mandating staff work from home, and making them work extra shifts, with the disruption to normal work schedule negatively impacted staff morale’.
‘Customer numbers and staff access impacted numbers of staff rostered on, but all staff are permanent so had to provide alternative hours for them and some forced annual leave which impacted staff morale.’ Retail
Rate the impact of GC2018 on your business
Which best describes how your business was impacted by GC2018?
If you noticed a decrease in the local population, how did it impact on your
business?
Did the information you have regarding the GC2018 meet your business needs?
Based on what actually happened to your business during the GC2018, how
e�ective was your planning?
The cost of business planning for the GC2018 was a lot?
When asked about the impact of the GC2018 on business - change in Customer numbers (57%), sales volume (52%), and customer behaviour
(40%) were rated as having a very negative impact.
Holding the GC2018 during the Easter trading period was a good choice.
Have you provided feedback about the GC2018 impact on your business?
Most business were not impacted by supply chain interruptions (35%). However, examples in
real estate and the building industry showed unanticipated in�uences
Businesses reported that their reputation was not impacted (56%) by the GC2018
For what purpose did you use the information in your business planning?
Restricted vehicle (42%) and pedestrian access (41%) very negatively impacted business.
Personal wellbeing (40%) and my working hours (37%) were very negatively impacted by the GC2018.
Most business were not impacted by work atmosphere (40%) or sta�ng (39%)
Work atmosphere
Staffing
Very negative Relatively negative No impact Relatively positive Very positive
Supply chain interruption
The real estate and property market were affected by inflated expectations of sellers, with owners holding off listing property prior to GC2018. This shortfall resulted in a peak prior to the Games from lack of stock. A real estate proprietor commented that ‘People who were trying to get a higher price thought they’d do it after the Games. Then the market hasn’t come off after the Games, because there wasn’t the exposure. I guess it was bit of a dampener, a lot of negative press over the Games.’
‘In the building industry, most infrastructure development work was completed prior to the Games. As a result of this accelerated work program, a survey respondent suggested that no new contracts were tendered for many months, thus creating a boom in the market leading to difficulty to find suitable subcontractors.’
‘...in the building industry, we were busy until the end of March…, everyone went away. The State Government spent all their money on the Games… New projects did not start to [be] sent out to price until November 2018. There is so much [work] to price now, that we will have trouble getting subcontractors to do the work, if everything starts around the same time.’ Construction
Which best describes how your business was impacted by GC2018?
If you noticed a decrease in the local population, how did it impact on your
business?
Did the information you have regarding the GC2018 meet your business needs?
Based on what actually happened to your business during the GC2018, how
e�ective was your planning?
The cost of business planning for the GC2018 was a lot?
When asked about the impact of the GC2018 on business - change in Customer numbers (57%), sales volume (52%), and customer behaviour
(40%) were rated as having a very negative impact.
Holding the GC2018 during the Easter trading period was a good choice.
Have you provided feedback about the GC2018 impact on your business?
Most business were not impacted by supply chain interruptions (35%). However, examples in
real estate and the building industry showed unanticipated in�uences
Businesses reported that their reputation was not impacted (56%) by the GC2018
For what purpose did you use the information in your business planning?
Restricted vehicle (42%) and pedestrian access (41%) very negatively impacted business.
Personal wellbeing (40%) and my working hours (37%) were very negatively impacted by the GC2018.
Most business were not impacted by work atmosphere (40%) or sta�ng (39%)
Very negative
Relatively negative
No impact
Relatively positive
Very positive
31%
1.4%0.7%
32%
35%
Rate the impact of GC2018 on your business
Most business were not impacted by supply chain interruptions (35%). However, examples in real estate and the building industry showed unanticipated influences.
Most business were not impacted by work atmosphere (40%) or staffing (39%).
8
ReputationThe reputational effect of GC2018 was varied. Some businesses experienced major reputational benefits in their association with the Games. In particular, some businesses felt an enhanced status associated with servicing the Games. For others it provided a lift to their business reputation and image.
‘Servicing the Games, there was a certain ‘prestige’ being a locally based business.’ Construction
Major structural improvements for businesses that ‘doubled’ as venues also helped to improve the business’s international reputation. For example, the film industry’s Village Roadshow’s Oxenford studios scored a partly Government funded super stage to host some of the competition events. Soundstage 9 has already had films such as Marvel’s Thor, and Warner Brothers Aquaman. For another business, their venue hosted a sporting event which provided a great opportunity to distinguish them from their competitors internationally.
‘It stood us out from the rest of other [sporting venues like ours] worldwide.’ Sport
That said, the benefits were not uniformly experienced. In terms of reputation and financial impact, one arts and culture business stated that the disruption to their business and lack of customers caused damage. Looking to save loyal customers, the business gave vouchers to disgruntled clients.
‘Our core customer base did not attend our premises during the Games. Our venue was forced to cut hours due to lack of numbers, which caused reputation damage and additional cost as we gave out vouchers to people who tried to attend but could not.’ Arts and culture
Which best describes how your business was impacted by GC2018?
If you noticed a decrease in the local population, how did it impact on your
business?
Did the information you have regarding the GC2018 meet your business needs?
Based on what actually happened to your business during the GC2018, how
e�ective was your planning?
The cost of business planning for the GC2018 was a lot?
When asked about the impact of the GC2018 on business - change in Customer numbers (57%), sales volume (52%), and customer behaviour
(40%) were rated as having a very negative impact.
Holding the GC2018 during the Easter trading period was a good choice.
Have you provided feedback about the GC2018 impact on your business?
Most business were not impacted by supply chain interruptions (35%). However, examples in
real estate and the building industry showed unanticipated in�uences
Businesses reported that their reputation was not impacted (56%) by the GC2018
For what purpose did you use the information in your business planning?
Restricted vehicle (42%) and pedestrian access (41%) very negatively impacted business.
Personal wellbeing (40%) and my working hours (37%) were very negatively impacted by the GC2018.
Most business were not impacted by work atmosphere (40%) or sta�ng (39%)
Very negative
Relatively negative
No impact
Relatively positive
Very positive
56%
13%
19%8%4%
Rate the impact of GC2018 on your business
Businesses reported that their reputation was not impacted (56%) by GC2018.
9
GC2018 INFORMATION, MEDIA AND INFLATED ESTIMATES?
The most frequent information sources used were: the State government’s ‘Get Set for the Games’ documentation (12%), traditional media (7%) and social media (9%).
The choice of information used, in hindsight was problematic, as businesses reported that the most inaccurate information sources were ‘Get Set for the Games’, government agencies, mainstream media and industry associations. While the most accurate were their professional and personal contacts, and social media.
How often did you use these information sources? How accurate would you say the information was?
Not accurate
Very accurate
Used most
Businesses agreed that the GC2018 worked on multiple factors to improve the attractiveness of the Gold Coast city image nationally and internationally.
The information sources most used by businesses were “Get Set for the Games”, mainstream media and social media. However, “Get Set for the Games” was
reported as not accurate by 41% of business
Business consider customer numbers, sales volume, access and customer behaviour as the most signi�cant negative impacts of the GC2018
Businesses did not agree that the GC2018 had a positive e�ect on the City’s business environment
When planning the GC2018, the organisers - considered the needs of business; listened to local experts.
There was transparency in the planning of the GC2018.
The state/federal government assisted businesses during the GC2018.The local council assisted businesses during the GC2018.
‘Informal leadership’ (e.g. community groups, industry associations) assisted businesses during the GC2018.
WO
RK
ATM
OSP
HER
E
RES
OU
RCE
EX
PEN
SES
OP
ENIN
G H
OU
RS
STA
FFIN
G
DIS
CRET
ION
ARY
SP
END
ING
SUP
PLY
CH
AIN
IN
TER
RU
PTI
ON
BU
SIN
ESS
REP
UTA
TIO
N
CUST
OM
ER N
UM
BER
S
SALE
S V
OLU
ME
VEH
ICLE
ACC
ESS
PED
ESTR
IAN
ACC
ESS
CUST
OM
ER B
EHAV
IOU
R
PER
SON
AL
WEL
LBEI
NG
WO
RK
ING
HO
UR
S
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
100%
50%
0%
Social media
Websites
Subscription news
Government
Community hearsay
Media mainstream
Industry associations
Professional contacts
Personal contacts
‘Get Set for the Games’
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
Most used information
12%‘Get Set for the Games’
9%Social media
7%Traditional
media
The information sources most used by businesses were ‘Get Set for the Games’, mainstream media and social media. However, ‘Get Set for the Games’ was reported as not accurate by 41% of business.
10
Information accuracy and predictionsIn the survey, many respondents commented that the information they received from the ‘Get Set for the Games’ documentation was inaccurate, with businesses told they could anticipate high volumes of foot traffic and mass arrival of tourists. But instead, businesses experienced the opposite.
‘We were led to believe business would be strong, many people would attend [the Games]. Change operations to suit traffic conditions, etc. There were few travellers, roads were deserted, and no-one was spending money.’Accommodation and food service
The notable gap between predictions and actual outcome has caused discontent within the local business community. In trying to understand the significant miscalculation of numbers, an art and culture interviewee stated: ‘Someone is responsible for getting the numbers so wrong. And is it an administrative error? Did someone accidentally put another zero on the end? That happens.’
The optimistic estimates provided to business, coupled with the publicised disruption and media campaign aimed at local residents, meant that most business considered the information supplied as inaccurate and unhelpful in planning for GC2018.
‘What should have been a wonderful opportunity for Gold coast business was ruined by negativity and misinformation.’ Retail and manufacturing
The Government’s information aimed at locals to reduce traffic and congestion was blamed for reduced customer volume and for locals departing the Gold Coast. In the campaign, businesses were urged to have their employees work from home or take leave. Similarly, residents were instructed to stock up on groceries to avoid unnecessary car trips. With this in mind, many locals departed the Gold Coast, as suggested by this survey respondent:
‘It was a very strong campaign to convince the locals to stay home (or to close the business) and others to avoid Gold Coast during the Commonwealth Games. My observation [is that] this caused a large Gold Coast population [to] travel interstate or overseas. We experienced the worst Easter holiday period ever in our last 25 years of trade.’ Tourism
Did the information you have regarding GC2018 meet your business needs?
Which best describes how your business was impacted by GC2018?
If you noticed a decrease in the local population, how did it impact on your
business?
Did the information you have regarding the GC2018 meet your business needs?
Based on what actually happened to your business during the GC2018, how
e�ective was your planning?
The cost of business planning for the GC2018 was a lot?
When asked about the impact of the GC2018 on business - change in Customer numbers (57%), sales volume (52%), and customer behaviour
(40%) were rated as having a very negative impact.
Holding the GC2018 during the Easter trading period was a good choice.
Have you provided feedback about the GC2018 impact on your business?
Most business were not impacted by supply chain interruptions (35%). However, examples in
real estate and the building industry showed unanticipated in�uences
Businesses reported that their reputation was not impacted (56%) by the GC2018
For what purpose did you use the information in your business planning?
Restricted vehicle (42%) and pedestrian access (41%) very negatively impacted business.
Personal wellbeing (40%) and my working hours (37%) were very negatively impacted by the GC2018.
Most business were not impacted by work atmosphere (40%) or sta�ng (39%)
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Agree
Strongly agree
38%
20%
24%
14%
4%
11
BUSINESS PLANNING
How did businesses plan for GC2018?The Gold Coast has never hosted an event at the size and scale of GC2018. Many businesses took on board the possibility that their firm could face challenges that would require altering normal activities. Most managers realised that such a large-scale event could have unforeseen results and took the planning seriously as noted during an interview:
‘Businesses had it [their Games strategy] 85% planned, they took it very seriously. They were expecting big crowds, they were expecting significant outcomes…’ Hospitality
‘We used documentation on traffic flow, public transport flow, advice from Comm Games organisers and Festival 2018 organisers, all ‘Get Set for the Games’ advice on Games preparation including meetings which all advised to purchase a lot of stock in advance and make delivery and transport plans that were more expensive to the business than usual processes. Our trading hours were determined directly in response to advice from organisers in upper management positions in the Comm Games organising committee.’ Arts and culture
For what purpose did you use the information in your business planning?
Which best describes how your business was impacted by GC2018?
If you noticed a decrease in the local population, how did it impact on your
business?
Did the information you have regarding the GC2018 meet your business needs?
Based on what actually happened to your business during the GC2018, how
e�ective was your planning?
The cost of business planning for the GC2018 was a lot?
When asked about the impact of the GC2018 on business - change in Customer numbers (57%), sales volume (52%), and customer behaviour
(40%) were rated as having a very negative impact.
Holding the GC2018 during the Easter trading period was a good choice.
Have you provided feedback about the GC2018 impact on your business?
Most business were not impacted by supply chain interruptions (35%). However, examples in
real estate and the building industry showed unanticipated in�uences
Businesses reported that their reputation was not impacted (56%) by the GC2018
For what purpose did you use the information in your business planning?
Restricted vehicle (42%) and pedestrian access (41%) very negatively impacted business.
Personal wellbeing (40%) and my working hours (37%) were very negatively impacted by the GC2018.
Most business were not impacted by work atmosphere (40%) or sta�ng (39%)
Did not use Used a bit Used moderately Used often Always used
Finance
Investment
Marketing
Risk assessment
Operational
In planning for GC2018, most businesses used information for operational decision-making (27%) (e.g. change operating hours, predicting customer demand), and risk assessment (25%) (e.g. whether changes such as road closures would affect business). To a lesser extent, businesses referred to information for finance (16%), marketing 16%), and least of all, investment decisions 11%).
12
Efficacy of planningIn determining successful future business strategy, accurate information is indispensable. When reflecting on their GC2018 strategic planning, most businesses (36%) said that their business planning was not at all effective. In contrast, 12% reported that their business planning was very effective. One retail business remarked on mismanagement in planning resulting in an immense economic cost associated for their five retail stores:
‘GC2018 was a huge disappointment and cost our business enormously, we would have been better off to close our 5 retail stores for the entire GC2018. The tourists didn’t spend any money except for accommodation and GC2018 events. Locals were so scared they deserted the whole city or stayed at home.’ Retail
‘We were only affected two days so to be totally honest we could’ve just run business as per usual but because it was so hammered into us, it would be so busy on the roads and all that stuff, we ended up cutting back our business hours.’ Tourism
Based on what actually happened to your business during GC2018, how effective was your planning?
Which best describes how your business was impacted by GC2018?
If you noticed a decrease in the local population, how did it impact on your
business?
Did the information you have regarding the GC2018 meet your business needs?
Based on what actually happened to your business during the GC2018, how
e�ective was your planning?
The cost of business planning for the GC2018 was a lot?
When asked about the impact of the GC2018 on business - change in Customer numbers (57%), sales volume (52%), and customer behaviour
(40%) were rated as having a very negative impact.
Holding the GC2018 during the Easter trading period was a good choice.
Have you provided feedback about the GC2018 impact on your business?
Most business were not impacted by supply chain interruptions (35%). However, examples in
real estate and the building industry showed unanticipated in�uences
Businesses reported that their reputation was not impacted (56%) by the GC2018
For what purpose did you use the information in your business planning?
Restricted vehicle (42%) and pedestrian access (41%) very negatively impacted business.
Personal wellbeing (40%) and my working hours (37%) were very negatively impacted by the GC2018.
Most business were not impacted by work atmosphere (40%) or sta�ng (39%)
Not at all effective
Somewhat ineffective
Neutral
Somewhat effective
Very effective
36%
18% 18%
17%
12%
Three in five business (64%) disagreed with the statement: ‘If the Gold Coast held a similar event in the future that they would prepare their business in the same way’. Numerous businesses criticised GC2018 information inaccuracy that led them to implement changes that were inappropriate and adversely affected firm performance.
13
Cost of planningThe sum total of 49% (agree and strongly agree) of businesses agreed that planning for GC2018 ‘cost a lot’. Business mentioned that they undertook detailed scenario plans to get ready for the Games.
The cost of business planning for GC2018 was a lot?
Which best describes how your business was impacted by GC2018?
If you noticed a decrease in the local population, how did it impact on your
business?
Did the information you have regarding the GC2018 meet your business needs?
Based on what actually happened to your business during the GC2018, how
e�ective was your planning?
The cost of business planning for the GC2018 was a lot?
When asked about the impact of the GC2018 on business - change in Customer numbers (57%), sales volume (52%), and customer behaviour
(40%) were rated as having a very negative impact.
Holding the GC2018 during the Easter trading period was a good choice.
Have you provided feedback about the GC2018 impact on your business?
Most business were not impacted by supply chain interruptions (35%). However, examples in
real estate and the building industry showed unanticipated in�uences
Businesses reported that their reputation was not impacted (56%) by the GC2018
For what purpose did you use the information in your business planning?
Restricted vehicle (42%) and pedestrian access (41%) very negatively impacted business.
Personal wellbeing (40%) and my working hours (37%) were very negatively impacted by the GC2018.
Most business were not impacted by work atmosphere (40%) or sta�ng (39%)
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Agree
Strongly agree
9%
11%
32% 23%
25%
‘We spent a lot of time creating logistics around how staff are going to get here, then working from home and costs. Then there was no traffic on the roads, so it all went out the window. Day one we went with our plan, and then we didn’t need it from day two onwards.’ Real estate
Many businesses also attributed their failed planning attempts and increased costs to incorrect information received from Government agencies. For example, a hospitality business said that they ‘were told 6,000 people in the queue at any one time’. With this in mind, the business extended operating hours and increased staff, but the expected customer demand did not materialise.
For another business, the expected disruption (such as road closures) led them to shut down for the two weeks. When in reality, the professional service provider discovered that their planning was based on incorrect information and pronounced, ‘We closed the business as we were told we would be unable to access. This was entirely incorrect.’
Event timingIn the survey, many businesses strongly urged against holding GC2018 during the Easter break. Easter is normally a very busy time when school is on holidays and tourist and locals alike take full opportunity of the Gold Coast amenities. Holding the event during the holidays resulted in the displacement of local, domestic, and international leisure visitors.
When asked what time of the year would be best for holding a major sporting event in the future, comments included ‘non-peak periods for tourism (i.e. not during the school holidays, such as February, September or October)’. Another popular option was the ‘December Christmas holidays when business is generally quiet’.
Many respondents preferred that that the Gold Coast not host a mega-event in the future, stating that the ‘cost to business, and the disruption made it untenable’.
‘Preferable not to happen [ future mega-events on the Gold Coast]. If really need to, May after the Labour Day could be a better option as we will not losing too much of the business as this is normally a quiet month.’ Tourism
Holding GC2018 during the Easter trading period was a good choice.
Which best describes how your business was impacted by GC2018?
If you noticed a decrease in the local population, how did it impact on your
business?
Did the information you have regarding the GC2018 meet your business needs?
Based on what actually happened to your business during the GC2018, how
e�ective was your planning?
The cost of business planning for the GC2018 was a lot?
When asked about the impact of the GC2018 on business - change in Customer numbers (57%), sales volume (52%), and customer behaviour
(40%) were rated as having a very negative impact.
Holding the GC2018 during the Easter trading period was a good choice.
Have you provided feedback about the GC2018 impact on your business?
Most business were not impacted by supply chain interruptions (35%). However, examples in
real estate and the building industry showed unanticipated in�uences
Businesses reported that their reputation was not impacted (56%) by the GC2018
For what purpose did you use the information in your business planning?
Restricted vehicle (42%) and pedestrian access (41%) very negatively impacted business.
Personal wellbeing (40%) and my working hours (37%) were very negatively impacted by the GC2018.
Most business were not impacted by work atmosphere (40%) or sta�ng (39%)
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Agree
Strongly agree
58%
13%
20%
7%2%
14
COMMONWEALTH GAMES EVENT PLANNERS
Planning a Commonwealth Games is an enormous task with detailed coordination and execution required for a multitude of activities. When asked about the consideration of local business by GC2018 event planners, most businesses did not sense that local experts were listened to seriously or well represented during the planning process.
For example, when asked if those who planned GC2018 helped to stimulate flow-on benefits for your business (e.g. increased customer demand, increased exposure to new markets), three out of five (57%) strongly disagreed, one in five (20%) somewhat disagreed, 15% remained neutral and 8% agreed.
Event planners were deemed responsible for a number of miscalculations that included inaccurate traffic information —‘The traffic ‘management’ was rubbish’ (accommodation and food service)—inaccurate forecasting of visitor numbers—‘Better forecasting of number of visitors’ (accommodation and food service)—and using ‘scare tactics frightened people away’ (Professional services).
When planning GC2018, did the organisers consider the needs of business; listened to local experts.There was transparency in the planning of GC2018.
Businesses agreed that the GC2018 worked on multiple factors to improve the attractiveness of the Gold Coast city image nationally and internationally.
The information sources most used by businesses were “Get Set for the Games”, mainstream media and social media. However, “Get Set for the Games” was
reported as not accurate by 41% of business
Business consider customer numbers, sales volume, access and customer behaviour as the most signi�cant negative impacts of the GC2018
Businesses did not agree that the GC2018 had a positive e�ect on the City’s business environment
When planning the GC2018, the organisers - considered the needs of business; listened to local experts.
There was transparency in the planning of the GC2018.
The state/federal government assisted businesses during the GC2018.The local council assisted businesses during the GC2018.
‘Informal leadership’ (e.g. community groups, industry associations) assisted businesses during the GC2018.
WO
RK
ATM
OSP
HER
E
RES
OU
RCE
EX
PEN
SES
OP
ENIN
G H
OU
RS
STA
FFIN
G
DIS
CRET
ION
ARY
SP
END
ING
SUP
PLY
CH
AIN
IN
TER
RU
PTI
ON
BU
SIN
ESS
REP
UTA
TIO
N
CUST
OM
ER N
UM
BER
S
SALE
S V
OLU
ME
VEH
ICLE
ACC
ESS
PED
ESTR
IAN
ACC
ESS
CUST
OM
ER B
EHAV
IOU
R
PER
SON
AL
WEL
LBEI
NG
WO
RK
ING
HO
UR
S
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
100%
50%
0%
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Agree
Strongly agree
Considered needs of business
Listened to local experts
Transparency in planning
Specators gather along the GC2018 Marathon course in Burleigh
15
FeedbackReceiving and acting upon feedback is pivotal for improvement in any organisation. In realising the Commonwealth Games’ potential for future host city businesses, including Birmingham 2022, we asked if businesses provided feedback about their experience. Of the 37% businesses that provided feedback on how their business was affected, venues used to provide feedback include: GC2018 team, local council, State government, industry associations, various surveys, media and shopping centre management.
For those who did not provide feedback, we asked why not. Their responses varied:
‘No avenue/opportunity to provide feedback, event organisers and government don’t care, it won’t make any difference, they weren’t affected, and, they did not want to waste any more time.’
One business suggested a formalised feedback loop:
‘I would have thought the [organisers] would have held debriefing sessions, but those groups dissolved.’’ Retail
Have you provided feedback about GC2018 impact on your business?
Which best describes how your business was impacted by GC2018?
If you noticed a decrease in the local population, how did it impact on your
business?
Did the information you have regarding the GC2018 meet your business needs?
Based on what actually happened to your business during the GC2018, how
e�ective was your planning?
The cost of business planning for the GC2018 was a lot?
When asked about the impact of the GC2018 on business - change in Customer numbers (57%), sales volume (52%), and customer behaviour
(40%) were rated as having a very negative impact.
Holding the GC2018 during the Easter trading period was a good choice.
Have you provided feedback about the GC2018 impact on your business?
Most business were not impacted by supply chain interruptions (35%). However, examples in
real estate and the building industry showed unanticipated in�uences
Businesses reported that their reputation was not impacted (56%) by the GC2018
For what purpose did you use the information in your business planning?
Restricted vehicle (42%) and pedestrian access (41%) very negatively impacted business.
Personal wellbeing (40%) and my working hours (37%) were very negatively impacted by the GC2018.
Most business were not impacted by work atmosphere (40%) or sta�ng (39%)
37%
YesNo
63%
Centralisation and authorityA common theme from the survey comments concerned the centralisation of power in, and authority exercised by, the event organisers and government. This approach triggered frustration among Gold Coast business, evident in one respondent’s observation:
‘It could have delivered better outcomes if organisers had been less involved in trying to control visitors to the area and just focused on the job of organising events. The strategic planning and impacts on hospitality venues was myopic. Event organisers were more concerned with the execution of the Games with insufficient consideration of local residents and businesses who suffered loss and damage as a result of the Games. The traffic ‘management’ was rubbish. Com Games attract nationally and all the negative publicity about traffic just stopped people from coming to the GC.’ Retail
Businesses reflected concern regarding the accuracy of information and the way in which it was promulgated by government and organisers. Many businesses frequently scrutinised the limited and linear process of information dissemination and what some regarded as the somewhat high-handed nature of issuing advice:
‘…they should of been up front with all of the planning. We were told we would be real busy; this was not the case. They shouldn’t have exaggerated the benefits.’ Retail
16
CITY-LEVEL IMPACTS
Gold Coast City imageWith destination image playing a major role in the competitiveness for travel destinations such as the Gold Coast, businesses agreed that GC2018 did improve the city’s appeal. Results show that the influence of GC2018 contributed to the Gold Coast’s city image in the following ways:
� GC2018 increased awareness of the Gold Coast nationally (63%*)
� GC2018 will aid in attracting more sporting events to the Gold Coast (62%*)
� GC2018 increased awareness of the city internationally (61%*)
� GC2018 enhanced the ability of the Gold Coast to offer attractive cultural, artistic and recreational resources (57%*)
� GC2018 contributed to urban infrastructure that will build city image (53%*)
� GC2018 has contributed to the Gold Coast growing into aworld-class city with distinct strengths (43%*)
� GC2018 improved Gold Coast’s ability to meet the needs for public services (42%*)
(*sum —agree and strongly agree)
One of the key features of GC2018 was the opportunity it provided to strengthen and further showcase the Gold Coast’s image by promoting it nationally and internationally as an attractive and livable city with the capacity to host mega-sporting events.
‘[GC2018] portrayed the Gold Coast as a safe, enthusiastic wonderful city to be in.’ Retail
‘With better planning and less scare mongering from the media, I believe the GC is the perfect place to hold future similar events and I think this could be very beneficial to the Coast.’ Retail
Businesses agreed that the GC2018 worked on multiple factors to improve the attractiveness of the Gold Coast city image nationally and internationally.
The information sources most used by businesses were “Get Set for the Games”, mainstream media and social media. However, “Get Set for the Games” was
reported as not accurate by 41% of business
Business consider customer numbers, sales volume, access and customer behaviour as the most signi�cant negative impacts of the GC2018
Businesses did not agree that the GC2018 had a positive e�ect on the City’s business environment
When planning the GC2018, the organisers - considered the needs of business; listened to local experts.
There was transparency in the planning of the GC2018.
The state/federal government assisted businesses during the GC2018.The local council assisted businesses during the GC2018.
‘Informal leadership’ (e.g. community groups, industry associations) assisted businesses during the GC2018.
WO
RK
ATM
OSP
HER
E
RES
OU
RCE
EX
PEN
SES
OP
ENIN
G H
OU
RS
STA
FFIN
G
DIS
CRET
ION
ARY
SP
END
ING
SUP
PLY
CH
AIN
IN
TER
RU
PTI
ON
BU
SIN
ESS
REP
UTA
TIO
N
CUST
OM
ER N
UM
BER
S
SALE
S V
OLU
ME
VEH
ICLE
ACC
ESS
PED
ESTR
IAN
ACC
ESS
CUST
OM
ER B
EHAV
IOU
R
PER
SON
AL
WEL
LBEI
NG
WO
RK
ING
HO
UR
S
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
100%
50%
0%
Increased awareness—city nationally
Aid in attracting more sporting events
Increased awareness—city internationally
Enhanced cultural, artistic and recreational
Contributed to urban infrastructure to build city image
Contributed to world-class city with distinct strengths
Improved ability to meet public service needs
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Businesses agreed that GC2018 worked on multiple factors to improve the attractiveness of the Gold Coast city image nationally and internationally.
17
Business operating environmentIn terms of the impact that GC2018 had on the Gold Coast city business environment, the results show that many businesses saw no benefit in the factors and forces that allow a business to build and maintain a successful operation. Survey results show that business did not agree that GC2018 had a positive impact on the following:
� GC2018 positively impacted the Gold Coast from an economic perspective (55%*)
� GC2018 improved the chances of businesses to seek funding, finance and investment (50%*)
� GC2018 has enhanced job prospects for workers on Gold Coast (48%*)
� GC2018 has contributed to Gold Coast image as a good place to do business (44%*)
� GC2018 has improved the city’s ability to attract workers from outside the Gold Coast (36%*)
� GC2018 has assisted the Gold Coast in becoming more attractive to international trade and investment (33%*)
(*sum—disagree and strongly disagree)
The impacts discussed earlier in Section 3 illustrate that businesses were generally hit hard by GC2018. With this in mind, business did not agree that GC2018 had a positive impact on the City’s business environment with commentary in the survey including:
‘What a huge expense that costs local jobs and business thousands of dollars in lost trade and workers losing lost hours!’ Retail
‘The GC2018 was for the greater good of all. We LOVED the Games. Sadly business was turned on its head.’ Accommodation and food service
‘A lot of the locals went overseas which took money out of our economy. The cost of funding the Games was horrendous.’ Professional services
Businesses agreed that the GC2018 worked on multiple factors to improve the attractiveness of the Gold Coast city image nationally and internationally.
The information sources most used by businesses were “Get Set for the Games”, mainstream media and social media. However, “Get Set for the Games” was
reported as not accurate by 41% of business
Business consider customer numbers, sales volume, access and customer behaviour as the most signi�cant negative impacts of the GC2018
Businesses did not agree that the GC2018 had a positive e�ect on the City’s business environment
When planning the GC2018, the organisers - considered the needs of business; listened to local experts.
There was transparency in the planning of the GC2018.
The state/federal government assisted businesses during the GC2018.The local council assisted businesses during the GC2018.
‘Informal leadership’ (e.g. community groups, industry associations) assisted businesses during the GC2018.
WO
RK
ATM
OSP
HER
E
RES
OU
RCE
EX
PEN
SES
OP
ENIN
G H
OU
RS
STA
FFIN
G
DIS
CRET
ION
ARY
SP
END
ING
SUP
PLY
CH
AIN
IN
TER
RU
PTI
ON
BU
SIN
ESS
REP
UTA
TIO
N
CUST
OM
ER N
UM
BER
S
SALE
S V
OLU
ME
VEH
ICLE
ACC
ESS
PED
ESTR
IAN
ACC
ESS
CUST
OM
ER B
EHAV
IOU
R
PER
SON
AL
WEL
LBEI
NG
WO
RK
ING
HO
UR
S
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
100%
50%
0%
Positively impacted Gold Coast—economic
Improved the chances of businesses to seek funding, finance and investment
Enhanced job prospects for workers on Gold Coast
Contributed to Gold Coast image as a good place to do business
Improved the city’s ability to attract workers from outside the Gold Coast
Assisted Gold Coast to become more attractive to international trade and investment
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Businesses did not agree that GC2018 had a positive effect on the City’s business environment.
18
Government and leadership during GC2018The government takes many roles during the bidding, planning and execution of a sporting mega-event. Considerable negotiation is required between levels as well as with the hosting communities. The results reveal that business did not feel supported by government or informal leadership networks in civil society.
� The state/federal government assisted businesses during GC2018 (66%*)
� Local council assisted businesses during GC2018 (62%*)
� ‘Informal leadership’ (e.g. community groups, industry associations) assisted businesses during GC2018 (40%*)
(*sum—disagree and strongly disagree)
Incorrect and inaccurate information combined accompanied by a perceived high-handed and distant approach gave rise to a sense of ‘us versus them’ among some respondents. This left a negative impression as to the genuineness of the consultation process:
‘From what seemed like a great opportunity it turned into an awful nightmare, made worse by the lack of support, lies and insults made by our [local government] and [the organising committee]. The Gold Coast is still suffering economically as a consequence thereof.’ Accommodation and food service
Did the state/federal government; local council; and ‘informal leadership’ (e.g. community groups, industry associations) assist businesses during GC2018?
Businesses agreed that the GC2018 worked on multiple factors to improve the attractiveness of the Gold Coast city image nationally and internationally.
The information sources most used by businesses were “Get Set for the Games”, mainstream media and social media. However, “Get Set for the Games” was
reported as not accurate by 41% of business
Business consider customer numbers, sales volume, access and customer behaviour as the most signi�cant negative impacts of the GC2018
Businesses did not agree that the GC2018 had a positive e�ect on the City’s business environment
When planning the GC2018, the organisers - considered the needs of business; listened to local experts.
There was transparency in the planning of the GC2018.
The state/federal government assisted businesses during the GC2018.The local council assisted businesses during the GC2018.
‘Informal leadership’ (e.g. community groups, industry associations) assisted businesses during the GC2018.
WO
RK
ATM
OSP
HER
E
RES
OU
RCE
EX
PEN
SES
OP
ENIN
G H
OU
RS
STA
FFIN
G
DIS
CRET
ION
ARY
SP
END
ING
SUP
PLY
CH
AIN
IN
TER
RU
PTI
ON
BU
SIN
ESS
REP
UTA
TIO
N
CUST
OM
ER N
UM
BER
S
SALE
S V
OLU
ME
VEH
ICLE
ACC
ESS
PED
ESTR
IAN
ACC
ESS
CUST
OM
ER B
EHAV
IOU
R
PER
SON
AL
WEL
LBEI
NG
WO
RK
ING
HO
UR
S
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
100%
50%
0%
State/federal government assisted businesses
Local council assisted businesses
Informal leadership assisted businesses
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
19
1 2
RECOMMENDATIONS
The key takeout from this report is that the overwhelming number of survey respondents and interviewees felt that GC2018 delivered little in the way of tangible business benefits. Indeed, a major theme was that the Games was actually counterproductive in advancing the interests of Gold Coast businesses. This is starkly at odds with the broader narrative from government and event organisers that GC2018 provided a significant boost to the Gold Coast economy.
In large part, the negative themes underlying respondent feedback appear to stem from a perception that business was provided with information from government and GC2018 organisers that was inaccurate. A closely related theme is that outcomes during GC2018 did not align with anticipated outcomes envisioned by organisers and government agencies. Put bluntly, a significant proportion of businesses participating in the survey believe the Games over-promised and under-delivered.
Looking ahead to future events on the Gold Coast and how business can benefit, at least three issues need to be addressed. Future research recommendations are discussed.
Authentic engagement with business is requiredThe sense that business was spoken at, rather than consulted with, in the planning phase surfaced in the survey and interviews as a recurring theme. For the majority of respondents, government engagement was too little in the lead-up to the Games. And many felt that GC2018 organisers, particularly GOLDOC, were unwilling to hear about business concerns, high-handed in their approach, and disconnected from the day-to-day impact of the Games on business operations.
In future planning, event organisers and government need to be much more attuned to the micro-level concerns of business in the run up to their being held. This requires working meaningfully with small and medium enterprises—as well as the top end of town—at a grass roots level to identify threats and opportunities arising from events and ensuring that businesses feel they are part of the planning cycle.
Put another way, event organisers and government should focus their efforts on collaborating with businesses as strategic partners. This must not be faux collaboration that merely aims to ‘tick a box’ for the multitude of stakeholders involved, but rather a process that incorporates a well-defined feedback loop whereby businesses can play a direct role in event planning, not just a service provision role for delivering the event. State government and local council must provide the partnership frameworks that ‘democratise’ opportunities for small and medium enterprises to not only have their say but also to influence key decisions in the planning phase.
Businesses themselves need to be criticalThere is a sense that business respondents tended to be passive recipients rather than critical consumers of information from GC2018 organisers and government. Exhibiting scepticism towards authority is a long-standing trait of Australian democracy, so it is somewhat surprising that respondents seem to accept uncritically most (if not all) of the pre-event advice with little hard-edged analysis. There is no doubt that small and medium enterprises are seriously strapped for time, but it is important they actively source information and data that is independent from governments and even peak industry bodies including chambers of commerce. Relying on information from providers whose interests do not necessarily align with those of individual businesses is risky. The impacts of GC2018 were not uniform in terms of traffic flows, loss of customer flow, and supply chain disruption. This was foreseen prior to the Games[6], and individual businesses could certainly have been more curious in exploring alternative information sources to those provided by government and event organisers, which in turn were often filtered through mainstream and social media.
At the end of the day, accessing rigorous and independent research—including from universities and independent think tanks—is crucial for businesses to enable strategic planning ahead of major events, and businesses themselves must be proactive.
20
43Businesses need to be active in distributing informationComparing and exchanging notes with like-minded businesses can help to circumvent information bottlenecks. Yet, competition among businesses in the same sector is often relentless and the notion of collaborating with rivals is not instinctive. Small and medium enterprises are frequently too busy focusing on detailed operational challenges to think about how they might play a role in information exchange. But if these same businesses are to capitalise on opportunities arising from major events and avoid inevitable costs, comparing notes with peer competitors is a must. This, combined with accessing a wide variety of reliable information channels, has the potential to yield valuable intelligence that can then be integrated into firm strategic and operational planning. After the experience of GC2018, there must be questions about whether the various formalised Gold Coast business networks have the capacity to act as effective clearing houses for information and intelligence exchange. At the very least, small and medium enterprises should not rely on industry associations and chambers to do their work for them. There is certainly scope for deeper information distribution and additional forums for business to facilitate this exchange; universities with a presence on the Gold Coast can play a more active thought leadership role in assisting business in this area.
Future researchLearning the key lessons of GC2018 for business is crucial, but this goes beyond the impact of the Commonwealth Games per se. Inevitably, there will be future mega-events on the Gold Coast and business must prepare for these at a firm level but also in collaboration with major stakeholders. Research will be crucial in preparing business for this, and further analysis of the impact of GC2018 that goes beyond the scope of this report is necessary. In particular, the following areas merit closer research scrutiny:
� The context in which businesses did prosper during GC2018. What were the conditions? And can these be replicated in future across different sectors?
� The impact of government investment. This was particularly apparent in the arts, culture and sport; what have been the payoffs for Gold Coast businesses?
� Ways in which the Gold Coast business environment has benefited from public sector investment associated with GC2018. Can this be further leveraged to benefit others?
� Quantifying the impact on the Gold Coast flowing from GC2018, such as destination image, tourism, and trade and investment.
21
REFERENCES1. Getz, D. and S. Page, Event studies: Theory, research and
policy for planned events. 2016: Routledge.
2. Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games Corporation, Annual Report 2017 - 2018. 2018.
3. ABC Gold Coast. Commonwealth Games: Looking back at Gold Coast 2018 as organising committee calls it a day. 2018 [cited May 2019]; Available from: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-29/gold-coast-2018-hailed-one-of-best-as-organisers-call-it-a-day/10179072.
4. Miller, A. The organisers of the 2018 Commonwealth Games on Australia’s Gold Coast are making the sums add up for this month’s festival of elite athletics. 2018 [cited May 2019]; Available from: https://www.accaglobal.com/hk/en/member/member/accounting-business/2018/04/insights/commonwealth-games.html.
5. Mosadeghi, R., D. Barr, and R. Moller, The Use of GIS in Major Sport Events Management; the Host City’s Lessons Learned from Gold Coast 2018, Commonwealth Games. Applied Spatial Analysis and Policy, 2019: p. 1-17.
CONCLUSIONFour months after GC2018 concluded, the Queensland government formally ruled out using the $35 million surplus generated by the Games to compensate Gold Coast traders who had lost income as a result of GC2018[3}. This was not unexpected—the State government argued that it had already invested significant amounts in Games infrastructure—but coming at the same time as event organisers were hailing the event overall as an unqualified success, the ‘optics’ of this decision were not positive.
Planning and executing mega-sporting events is highly demanding. It is difficult enough ensuring that sporting and related events go according to plan. But it is even harder for organisers to balance competing agendas among multiple stakeholders across government and industry. In the case of GC2018, while the organisers can be commended for executing a well-planned event, our research shows that the impact of GC2018 on Gold Coast business was far more mixed. In particular, inaccurate information from government and organisers regarding disruption as well as inflated forecasts around customer numbers and benefits exercised many respondents and interviewees.
There is also a sense in which small and medium enterprises feel they were not taken seriously in the preparation phase and that their concerns were downplayed or dismissed by government and organisers.
Our report recommendations underscore the need for a more proactive endeavour on the part of future event organisers and government to engage business across the board in the planning stages; this includes an integrated post-event assessment process. Genuine strategic collaboration between businesses, organisers, and government is not only preferable for future event planning on the Gold Coast, it is crucial.
But businesses too need to be more proactive in seeking out reliable sources of information to underpin their operational planning. Avoiding a situation where they are merely passive recipients of information from government and corporate entities is a critical first step. As this report has shown, the impact on business arising from major events endures after the caravan moves on.
6. Carlini, J. and A. O’Neil, Gold Coast business and the Commonwealth Games: Impact, legacy and opportunity. 2017, Griffith University.
7. Kirby, S., M. Duignan, and D. McGillivray, Mega-Sport Events, Micro and Small Business Leveraging: Introducing the. Event Management, 2018. 22(6): p. 917-931.
8. State of Queensland, Ahead of the Games: Evaluation report for the Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games legacy program. 2017.
9. Emery, L. Gold Coast will become Australia’s next hub for major international events following the Commonwealth Games. 2017 [cited May 2019]; Available from: https://www.goldcoastbulletin.com.au/news/gold-coast/tourism-counting-on-a-major-events-boom-following-the-commonwealth-games/news-story/c5efc0790c941f5202e06cf6244e2d2a.
10. Pierce, J. Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games leads to $17 billion investment boom. 2017 [cited May 2019]; Available from: https://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/gold-coast-2018-commonwealth-games-leads-to-17-billion-investment-boom/news-story/905b6ab25847e48bad711c7897b4c1c1.
22
APPENDICES
A—About the sample
Survey responses
Online 98
Hard copy 52
Total 150
Indigenous business
Yes 2%
No 98%
Respondent position
Owner 59.3%
CEO 6%
Manager 28%
Other 6.7%
Age (years) Avg 48
Min age – Max age 19–79
Gender
Male 47.3%
Female 50.7%
Prefer not to say 2%
Years operating
< 2 years 6.1%
2 to < 5 years 19.6%
5 to < 10 years 17.6%
10 years + 56.8%
FTE employees
1–19 83.2%
20–149 13.4%
150–200 1.3%
>200 2%
Industry Sector
Profit 95.3%
NFP 3.4%
Public and Gov. 1.3%
Annual turnover
< $50 000 6.3%
$50 000–$200 000 20.1%
$200 000–$2 M 47.9%
> $2 M 25.7%
Main type of customer
Business to business 12.7%
Consumers 87.3%
Primary business location by region
North Gold Coast 16%
Central Gold Coast 54%
Southern Gold Coast 14%
Hinterland 2%
Other (multiple locations) 14%
Industry classification
Accommodation and food services 24.3%
Administration and support services 2.7%
Arts and recreation services 3.4%
Construction 1.4%
Education and training 0.7%
Finance and insurance services 0.7%
Health care and social assistance 8.1%
Information, media and telecommunications 2.0%
Manufacturing 1.4%
Professional, scientific and technical services 6.1%
Sport 2.0%
Rental, hiring and real estate services 3.4%
Retail trade 37.8%
Tourism 3.4%
Transport, postal and warehousing 1.4%
Wholesale trade 1.4%
23
APPENDICES
B—Survey
Page 1 of 19
You are invited to participate in a research project being conducted by the Griffith Business School.
Why is the research being conducted? In April 2018, the Gold Coast hosted the XXI Commonwealth Games (GC2018). Questions remain about the impact of this mega-event on the city’s business community. The aim of this project is to learn more about how GC2018 impacted local businesses, and the city. We are seeking owners, operators, and/or managers of Gold Coast businesses to complete the survey. A better understanding of key issues facing private enterprise can assist with designing future strategies and agendas aimed at supporting businesses in the city. What you will be asked to do: You will spend about 20 minutes answering survey questions about; 1) The business, 2) Business impacts resulting from the GC2018, and 3) Impacts on the Gold Coast City.
Your participation is voluntary, by completing the survey you consent to participate in this research. Your responses are confidential, and you will not be identified. This project has ethics approval from Griffith University #2018/791
For further information please contact.
Prof Andrew O’Neil Phone: (07) 5552 8472, Email: [email protected] Dr Joan Carlini Phone: (07) 5552 9094, Email: [email protected]
24
Page
2 o
f 19
FIR
MO
GR
APH
IC
How
man
y ye
ars
has
this
bus
ines
s be
en o
pera
ting?
Und
er 2
yea
rs
2
to u
nder
5 y
ears
5 to
und
er 1
0 ye
ars
1
0 ye
ars
and
over
Wha
t is
the
num
ber o
f FTE
em
ploy
ees
this
bus
ines
s em
ploy
s?
1
– 1
9
20
– 14
9
150
– 2
00
ove
r 200
Ove
r the
pas
t yea
r, th
e nu
mbe
r of e
mpl
oyee
s in
the
busi
ness
has
:
Sign
ifica
ntly
dec
reas
ed
Slig
htly
dec
reas
ed
R
emai
ned
the
sam
e
Slig
htly
incr
ease
d
Sig
nific
antly
incr
ease
d
Wha
t ind
ustr
y se
ctor
doe
s yo
ur b
usin
ess
oper
ate
in?
P
rofit
Sol
e tra
der
P
artn
ersh
ip
C
ompa
ny
O
ther
, ple
ase
spec
ify _
____
____
____
____
___
N
ot-fo
r-pro
fit
C
harit
y
Clu
b
Ass
ocia
tion
O
ther
, ple
ase
spec
ify _
____
____
____
____
___
P
ublic
and
Gov
ernm
ent
Whi
ch re
gion
of t
he G
old
Coa
st is
the
prim
ary
loca
tion
of y
our b
usin
ess?
N
orth
Gol
d C
oast
Cen
tral G
old
Coa
st
Sou
th G
old
Coa
st
Hin
terla
nd
O
ther
, ple
ase
spec
ify _
____
____
____
____
____
____
_
Wha
t is
the
post
code
of t
he p
rimar
y lo
catio
n of
the
busi
ness
? __
____
____
____
____
____
____
Pl
ease
tell
us a
bit
abou
t the
bus
ines
s th
at y
ou o
wn/
man
age/
ope
rate
.
Page
3 o
f 19
Wha
t ind
ustr
y cl
assi
ficat
ion
best
des
crib
es th
e bu
sine
ss?
(Sel
ect o
ne)
A
ccom
mod
atio
n an
d fo
od s
ervi
ces
Man
ufac
turin
g
Adm
inis
tratio
n an
d su
ppor
t ser
vice
M
arin
e
Agr
icul
ture
Min
ing
A
rts a
nd re
crea
tion
serv
ices
Pro
fess
iona
l, sc
ient
ific
and
tech
nica
l ser
vice
s
Con
stru
ctio
n
Spo
rt
Edu
catio
n an
d tra
inin
g
Ren
tal,
hirin
g an
d re
al e
stat
e se
rvic
es
E
lect
ricity
, gas
, wat
er a
nd w
aste
ser
vice
s
Ret
ail t
rade
Fin
ance
and
insu
ranc
e se
rvic
es
Tou
rism
Hea
lth c
are
and
soci
al a
ssis
tanc
e
T
rans
port,
pos
tal a
nd w
areh
ousi
ng
In
form
atio
n, m
edia
and
tele
com
mun
icat
ions
Who
lesa
le tr
ade
O
ther
, ple
ase
spec
ify _
____
____
____
____
__
Who
is th
e m
ain
user
of y
our p
rodu
cts
or s
ervi
ces?
O
ther
bus
ines
ses
Con
sum
ers
Gov
ernm
ent
Oth
er, p
leas
e sp
ecify
____
____
___
Is th
is a
n in
dige
nous
bus
ines
s?
Y
es
No
To w
hat e
xten
t do
you
agre
e th
at th
is b
usin
ess
has
expe
rienc
ed g
row
th o
ver t
he p
ast y
ear?
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
Whi
ch fi
gure
bes
t rep
rese
nts
this
bus
ines
s’ a
nnua
l tur
nove
r in
the
last
fina
ncia
l yea
r:
L
ess
than
$50
000
Bet
wee
n $5
0 00
0 an
d $2
00 0
00
B
etw
een
$200
000
and
$2
milli
on
O
ver $
2 m
illion
M
y po
sitio
n in
this
bus
ines
s is
:
Ow
ner
C
EO
M
anag
er
O
ther
, ple
ase
spec
ify _
____
____
____
____
____
___
Whi
ch G
C20
18 v
enue
is c
lose
st to
this
bus
ines
s’ p
rimar
y lo
catio
n? (S
elec
t onl
y on
e)
B
road
beac
h Bo
wls
Clu
b
G
old
Coa
st H
ocke
y C
entre
Car
rara
Sta
dium
Met
ricon
Sta
dium
Com
mon
wea
lth G
ames
Villa
ge
N
eran
g N
atio
nal P
ark
(mou
ntai
n bi
king
)
Coo
mer
a Sp
ort a
nd L
eisu
re C
entre
Oxe
nfor
d St
udio
s
Ela
nora
/Cur
rum
bin
Valle
y (ro
ad c
yclin
g)
Par
k an
d rid
e st
atio
n
Gol
d C
oast
Aqu
atic
Cen
tre
Que
en E
lizab
eth
Park
(bea
ch v
olle
ybal
l)
Gol
d C
oast
Con
vent
ion
and
Exhi
bitio
n C
entre
The
prox
imity
of t
his
busi
ness
to th
e cl
oses
t GC
2018
ven
ue is
:
Les
s th
an 1
km
Bet
wee
n 2
– 5
km
Bet
wee
n th
an 6
– 2
0 km
Mor
e th
an 2
0 km
Wha
t is
your
birt
h ye
ar?
____
____
_
Wha
t is
your
gen
der?
M
ale
Fem
ale
P
refe
r not
to s
ay
25
Page
4 o
f 19
How
ofte
n di
d yo
u us
e th
ese
info
rmat
ion
sour
ces?
1. G
et S
et fo
r the
Gam
es
Did
not
use
at a
ll
Use
d a
bit
U
sed
mod
erat
ely
Use
d of
ten
Alw
ays
used
2. P
erso
nal c
onta
cts
(e.g
. frie
nds)
D
id n
ot u
se a
t all
U
sed
a bi
t
Use
d m
oder
atel
y
U
sed
ofte
n
A
lway
s us
ed
3.
Pro
fess
iona
l con
tact
s (e
.g. b
usin
ess
netw
ork)
D
id n
ot u
se a
t all
U
sed
a bi
t
Use
d m
oder
atel
y
U
sed
ofte
n
A
lway
s us
ed
4.
For
mal
indu
stry
/bus
ines
s as
soci
atio
ns (e
.g. C
ham
bers
of C
omm
erce
)
D
id n
ot u
se a
t all
U
sed
a bi
t
Use
d m
oder
atel
y
U
sed
ofte
n
A
lway
s us
ed
5.
Mai
nstr
eam
med
ia (e
.g. o
nlin
e an
d pa
per n
ewsp
aper
s, te
levi
sion
new
s)
Did
not
use
at a
ll
Use
d a
bit
U
sed
mod
erat
ely
Use
d of
ten
Alw
ays
used
6. G
ener
al ‘h
ears
ay’ w
ithin
the
com
mun
ity
Did
not
use
at a
ll
Use
d a
bit
U
sed
mod
erat
ely
Use
d of
ten
Alw
ays
used
7. G
over
nmen
t age
ncie
s an
d as
soci
ated
pub
licat
ions
D
id n
ot u
se a
t all
U
sed
a bi
t
Use
d m
oder
atel
y
U
sed
ofte
n
A
lway
s us
ed
8.
Sub
scrip
tion
new
s se
rvic
es a
nd o
pt-in
em
ail n
ewsl
ette
rs
Did
not
use
at a
ll
Use
d a
bit
U
sed
mod
erat
ely
Use
d of
ten
Alw
ays
used
9. V
ario
us w
ebsi
tes
Did
not
use
at a
ll
Use
d a
bit
U
sed
mod
erat
ely
Use
d of
ten
Alw
ays
used
10. T
he 2
017
Grif
fith
Bus
ines
s Sc
hool
, Gol
d C
oast
Bus
ines
s an
d th
e C
omm
onw
ealth
Gam
es:
Impa
ct, L
egac
y an
d O
ppor
tuni
ty s
tudy
D
id n
ot u
se a
t all
U
sed
a bi
t
Use
d m
oder
atel
y
U
sed
ofte
n
A
lway
s us
ed
11
. My
own
obse
rvat
ions
D
id n
ot u
se a
t all
U
sed
a bi
t
Use
d m
oder
atel
y
U
sed
ofte
n
A
lway
s us
ed
12
. Soc
ial m
edia
D
id n
ot u
se a
t all
U
sed
a bi
t
Use
d m
oder
atel
y
U
sed
ofte
n
A
lway
s us
ed
13
. Oth
er, p
leas
e sp
ecify
___
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
D
id n
ot u
se a
t all
U
sed
a bi
t
Use
d m
oder
atel
y
U
sed
ofte
n
A
lway
s us
ed
Th
inki
ng a
bout
the
busi
ness
that
you
ow
n/m
anag
e/op
erat
e, p
leas
e an
swer
the
follo
win
g qu
estio
ns
abou
t the
info
rmat
ion
you
used
for t
he G
C20
18.
Page
5 o
f 19
How
val
uabl
e di
d yo
u fin
d th
ese
info
rmat
ion
sour
ces
to b
ase
your
bus
ines
s de
cisi
ons
for t
he
GC
2018
?
1. G
et S
et fo
r the
Gam
es
N
ot v
alua
ble
at a
ll
Som
ewha
t val
uabl
e M
oder
atel
y va
luab
le
Abo
ve a
vera
ge v
alue
V
ery
valu
able
NA
(did
not
use
) 2.
Per
sona
l con
tact
s (e
.g. f
riend
s)
N
ot v
alua
ble
at a
ll
Som
ewha
t val
uabl
e M
oder
atel
y va
luab
le
Abo
ve a
vera
ge v
alue
V
ery
valu
able
NA
(did
not
use
) 3.
Pro
fess
iona
l con
tact
s (e
.g. b
usin
ess
netw
ork)
N
ot v
alua
ble
at a
ll
Som
ewha
t val
uabl
e M
oder
atel
y va
luab
le
Abo
ve a
vera
ge v
alue
V
ery
valu
able
NA
(did
not
use
) 4.
For
mal
indu
stry
/bus
ines
s as
soci
atio
ns (e
.g. C
ham
bers
of C
omm
erce
)
N
ot v
alua
ble
at a
ll
Som
ewha
t val
uabl
e M
oder
atel
y va
luab
le
Abo
ve a
vera
ge v
alue
V
ery
valu
able
NA
(did
not
use
) 5.
Mai
nstr
eam
med
ia (e
.g. o
nlin
e an
d pa
per n
ewsp
aper
s, te
levi
sion
new
s)
N
ot v
alua
ble
at a
ll
Som
ewha
t val
uabl
e M
oder
atel
y va
luab
le
Abo
ve a
vera
ge v
alue
V
ery
valu
able
NA
(did
not
use
)
6.
Gen
eral
‘hea
rsay
’ with
in th
e co
mm
unity
N
ot v
alua
ble
at a
ll
Som
ewha
t val
uabl
e M
oder
atel
y va
luab
le
Abo
ve a
vera
ge v
alue
V
ery
valu
able
NA
(did
not
use
) 7.
Gov
ernm
ent a
genc
ies
and
asso
ciat
ed p
ublic
atio
ns
N
ot v
alua
ble
at a
ll
Som
ewha
t val
uabl
e M
oder
atel
y va
luab
le
Abo
ve a
vera
ge v
alue
V
ery
valu
able
NA
(did
not
use
) 8.
Sub
scrip
tion
new
s se
rvic
es a
nd o
pt-in
em
ail n
ewsl
ette
rs
N
ot v
alua
ble
at a
ll
Som
ewha
t val
uabl
e M
oder
atel
y va
luab
le
Abo
ve a
vera
ge v
alue
V
ery
valu
able
NA
(did
not
use
)
9. V
ario
us w
ebsi
tes
N
ot v
alua
ble
at a
ll
Som
ewha
t val
uabl
e M
oder
atel
y va
luab
le
Abo
ve a
vera
ge v
alue
V
ery
valu
able
NA
(did
not
use
) 10
. The
201
7 G
riffit
h B
usin
ess
Scho
ol, G
old
Coa
st B
usin
ess
and
the
Com
mon
wea
lth G
ames
: Im
pact
, Leg
acy
and
Opp
ortu
nity
stu
dy
N
ot v
alua
ble
at a
ll
Som
ewha
t val
uabl
e M
oder
atel
y va
luab
le
Abo
ve a
vera
ge v
alue
V
ery
valu
able
NA
(did
not
use
) 11
. My
own
obse
rvat
ions
N
ot v
alua
ble
at a
ll
Som
ewha
t val
uabl
e M
oder
atel
y va
luab
le
Abo
ve a
vera
ge v
alue
V
ery
valu
able
NA
(did
not
use
) 12
. Soc
ial m
edia
N
ot v
alua
ble
at a
ll
Som
ewha
t val
uabl
e M
oder
atel
y va
luab
le
Abo
ve a
vera
ge v
alue
V
ery
valu
able
NA
(did
not
use
) 13
. Oth
er, p
leas
e sp
ecify
___
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
N
ot v
alua
ble
at a
ll
Som
ewha
t val
uabl
e M
oder
atel
y va
luab
le
Abo
ve a
vera
ge v
alue
V
ery
valu
able
NA
(did
not
use
) Th
inki
ng a
bout
the
busi
ness
that
you
ow
n/m
anag
e/op
erat
e, p
leas
e an
swer
the
follo
win
g qu
estio
ns
abou
t the
info
rmat
ion
you
used
for t
he G
C20
18.
26
Page
6 o
f 19
How
eas
y w
as it
to g
et in
form
atio
n to
mak
e bu
sine
ss d
ecis
ions
for t
he G
C20
18?
1. G
et S
et fo
r the
Gam
es
Very
diff
icul
t
Som
ewha
t diff
icul
t
N
eutra
l
R
elat
ivel
y ea
sy
V
ery
easy
2. P
erso
nal c
onta
cts
(e.g
. frie
nds)
Ve
ry d
iffic
ult
So
mew
hat d
iffic
ult
Neu
tral
Rel
ativ
ely
easy
Ver
y ea
sy
3.
Pro
fess
iona
l con
tact
s (e
.g. b
usin
ess
netw
ork)
Ve
ry d
iffic
ult
So
mew
hat d
iffic
ult
Neu
tral
Rel
ativ
ely
easy
Ver
y ea
sy
4.
For
mal
indu
stry
/bus
ines
s as
soci
atio
ns (e
.g. C
ham
bers
of C
omm
erce
)
Ve
ry d
iffic
ult
So
mew
hat d
iffic
ult
Neu
tral
Rel
ativ
ely
easy
Ver
y ea
sy
5.
Mai
nstr
eam
med
ia (e
.g. o
nlin
e an
d pa
per n
ewsp
aper
s, te
levi
sion
new
s)
Very
diff
icul
t
Som
ewha
t diff
icul
t
N
eutra
l
R
elat
ivel
y ea
sy
V
ery
easy
6. G
ener
al ‘h
ears
ay’ w
ithin
the
com
mun
ity
Very
diff
icul
t
Som
ewha
t diff
icul
t
N
eutra
l
R
elat
ivel
y ea
sy
V
ery
easy
7. G
over
nmen
t age
ncie
s an
d as
soci
ated
pub
licat
ions
Ve
ry d
iffic
ult
So
mew
hat d
iffic
ult
Neu
tral
Rel
ativ
ely
easy
Ver
y ea
sy
8.
Sub
scrip
tion
new
s se
rvic
es a
nd o
pt-in
em
ail n
ewsl
ette
rs
Very
diff
icul
t
Som
ewha
t diff
icul
t
N
eutra
l
R
elat
ivel
y ea
sy
V
ery
easy
9. V
ario
us w
ebsi
tes
Very
diff
icul
t
Som
ewha
t diff
icul
t
N
eutra
l
R
elat
ivel
y ea
sy
V
ery
easy
10. T
he 2
017
Grif
fith
Bus
ines
s Sc
hool
, Gol
d C
oast
Bus
ines
s an
d th
e C
omm
onw
ealth
Gam
es:
Impa
ct, L
egac
y an
d O
ppor
tuni
ty s
tudy
Ve
ry d
iffic
ult
So
mew
hat d
iffic
ult
Neu
tral
Rel
ativ
ely
easy
Ver
y ea
sy
11
. My
own
obse
rvat
ions
Ve
ry d
iffic
ult
So
mew
hat d
iffic
ult
Neu
tral
Rel
ativ
ely
easy
Ver
y ea
sy
12
. Soc
ial m
edia
Ve
ry d
iffic
ult
So
mew
hat d
iffic
ult
Neu
tral
Rel
ativ
ely
easy
Ver
y ea
sy
13
. Oth
er, p
leas
e sp
ecify
___
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
Ve
ry d
iffic
ult
So
mew
hat d
iffic
ult
Neu
tral
Rel
ativ
ely
easy
Ver
y ea
sy
Th
inki
ng a
bout
the
busi
ness
that
you
ow
n/m
anag
e/op
erat
e, p
leas
e an
swer
the
follo
win
g qu
estio
ns
abou
t the
info
rmat
ion
you
used
for t
he G
C20
18.
Page
7 o
f 19
How
acc
urat
e w
ould
you
say
the
info
rmat
ion
was
?
1. G
et S
et fo
r the
Gam
es
N
ot a
t all
accu
rate
S
omew
hat a
ccur
ate
Neu
tral
Rel
ativ
ely
accu
rate
V
ery
accu
rate
NA
(did
not
use
) 2.
Per
sona
l con
tact
s (e
.g. f
riend
s)
N
ot a
t all
accu
rate
S
omew
hat a
ccur
ate
Neu
tral
Rel
ativ
ely
accu
rate
V
ery
accu
rate
NA
(did
not
use
) 3.
Pro
fess
iona
l con
tact
s (e
.g. b
usin
ess
netw
ork)
N
ot a
t all
accu
rate
S
omew
hat a
ccur
ate
Neu
tral
Rel
ativ
ely
accu
rate
V
ery
accu
rate
NA
(did
not
use
) 4.
For
mal
indu
stry
/bus
ines
s as
soci
atio
ns (e
.g. C
ham
bers
of C
omm
erce
)
N
ot a
t all
accu
rate
S
omew
hat a
ccur
ate
Neu
tral
Rel
ativ
ely
accu
rate
V
ery
accu
rate
NA
(did
not
use
) 5.
Mai
nstr
eam
med
ia (e
.g. o
nlin
e an
d pa
per n
ewsp
aper
s, te
levi
sion
new
s)
N
ot a
t all
accu
rate
S
omew
hat a
ccur
ate
Neu
tral
Rel
ativ
ely
accu
rate
V
ery
accu
rate
NA
(did
not
use
)
6.
Gen
eral
‘hea
rsay
’ with
in th
e co
mm
unity
N
ot a
t all
accu
rate
S
omew
hat a
ccur
ate
Neu
tral
Rel
ativ
ely
accu
rate
V
ery
accu
rate
NA
(did
not
use
) 7.
Gov
ernm
ent a
genc
ies
and
asso
ciat
ed p
ublic
atio
ns
N
ot a
t all
accu
rate
S
omew
hat a
ccur
ate
Neu
tral
Rel
ativ
ely
accu
rate
V
ery
accu
rate
NA
(did
not
use
) 8.
Sub
scrip
tion
new
s se
rvic
es a
nd o
pt-in
em
ail n
ewsl
ette
rs
N
ot a
t all
accu
rate
S
omew
hat a
ccur
ate
Neu
tral
Rel
ativ
ely
accu
rate
V
ery
accu
rate
NA
(did
not
use
)
9.
Var
ious
web
site
s
N
ot a
t all
accu
rate
S
omew
hat a
ccur
ate
Neu
tral
Rel
ativ
ely
accu
rate
V
ery
accu
rate
NA
(did
not
use
) 10
. The
201
7 G
riffit
h B
usin
ess
Scho
ol, G
old
Coa
st B
usin
ess
and
the
Com
mon
wea
lth G
ames
: Im
pact
, Leg
acy
and
Opp
ortu
nity
stu
dy
N
ot a
t all
accu
rate
S
omew
hat a
ccur
ate
Neu
tral
Rel
ativ
ely
accu
rate
V
ery
accu
rate
NA
(did
not
use
) 11
. My
own
obse
rvat
ions
N
ot a
t all
accu
rate
S
omew
hat a
ccur
ate
Neu
tral
Rel
ativ
ely
accu
rate
V
ery
accu
rate
NA
(did
not
use
) 12
. Soc
ial m
edia
N
ot a
t all
accu
rate
S
omew
hat a
ccur
ate
Neu
tral
Rel
ativ
ely
accu
rate
V
ery
accu
rate
NA
(did
not
use
) 13
. Oth
er, p
leas
e sp
ecify
___
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
N
ot a
t all
accu
rate
S
omew
hat a
ccur
ate
Neu
tral
Rel
ativ
ely
accu
rate
V
ery
accu
rate
NA
(did
not
use
) Th
inki
ng a
bout
the
busi
ness
that
you
ow
n/m
anag
e/op
erat
e, p
leas
e an
swer
the
follo
win
g qu
estio
ns
abou
t the
info
rmat
ion
you
used
for t
he G
C20
18.
27
Page
8 o
f 19
How
wou
ld y
ou ra
te th
e cr
edib
ility
of t
he fo
llow
ing
info
rmat
ion
sour
ces?
1. G
et S
et fo
r the
Gam
es
Not
at a
ll cr
edib
le
Som
ewha
t cre
dibl
e
N
eutra
l
Rel
ativ
ely
cred
ible
Ver
y cr
edib
le
2.
Per
sona
l con
tact
s (e
.g. f
riend
s)
Not
at a
ll cr
edib
le
Som
ewha
t cre
dibl
e
N
eutra
l
Rel
ativ
ely
cred
ible
Ver
y cr
edib
le
3.
Pro
fess
iona
l con
tact
s (e
.g. b
usin
ess
netw
ork)
N
ot a
t all
cred
ible
S
omew
hat c
redi
ble
Neu
tral
R
elat
ivel
y cr
edib
le
V
ery
cred
ible
4. F
orm
al in
dust
ry/b
usin
ess
asso
ciat
ions
(e.g
. Cha
mbe
rs o
f Com
mer
ce)
Not
at a
ll cr
edib
le
Som
ewha
t cre
dibl
e
N
eutra
l
Rel
ativ
ely
cred
ible
Ver
y cr
edib
le
5.
Mai
nstr
eam
med
ia (e
.g. o
nlin
e an
d pa
per n
ewsp
aper
s, te
levi
sion
new
s)
Not
at a
ll cr
edib
le
Som
ewha
t cre
dibl
e
N
eutra
l
Rel
ativ
ely
cred
ible
Ver
y cr
edib
le
6.
Gen
eral
‘hea
rsay
’ with
in th
e co
mm
unity
N
ot a
t all
cred
ible
S
omew
hat c
redi
ble
Neu
tral
R
elat
ivel
y cr
edib
le
V
ery
cred
ible
7. G
over
nmen
t age
ncie
s an
d as
soci
ated
pub
licat
ions
N
ot a
t all
cred
ible
S
omew
hat c
redi
ble
Neu
tral
R
elat
ivel
y cr
edib
le
V
ery
cred
ible
8. S
ubsc
riptio
n ne
ws
serv
ices
and
opt
-in e
mai
l new
slet
ters
N
ot a
t all
cred
ible
S
omew
hat c
redi
ble
Neu
tral
R
elat
ivel
y cr
edib
le
V
ery
cred
ible
9. V
ario
us w
ebsi
tes
Not
at a
ll cr
edib
le
Som
ewha
t cre
dibl
e
N
eutra
l
Rel
ativ
ely
cred
ible
Ver
y cr
edib
le
10
. The
201
7 G
riffit
h B
usin
ess
Scho
ol, G
old
Coa
st B
usin
ess
and
the
Com
mon
wea
lth G
ames
: Im
pact
, Leg
acy
and
Opp
ortu
nity
stu
dy
Not
at a
ll cr
edib
le
Som
ewha
t cre
dibl
e
N
eutra
l
Rel
ativ
ely
cred
ible
Ver
y cr
edib
le
11
. My
own
obse
rvat
ions
N
ot a
t all
cred
ible
S
omew
hat c
redi
ble
Neu
tral
R
elat
ivel
y cr
edib
le
V
ery
cred
ible
12. S
ocia
l med
ia
Not
at a
ll cr
edib
le
Som
ewha
t cre
dibl
e
N
eutra
l
Rel
ativ
ely
cred
ible
Ver
y cr
edib
le
13
. Oth
er, p
leas
e sp
ecify
___
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
N
ot a
t all
cred
ible
S
omew
hat c
redi
ble
Neu
tral
R
elat
ivel
y cr
edib
le
V
ery
cred
ible
Thin
king
abo
ut th
e bu
sine
ss th
at y
ou o
wn/
man
age/
oper
ate,
ple
ase
answ
er th
e fo
llow
ing
ques
tions
ab
out t
he in
form
atio
n yo
u us
ed fo
r the
GC
2018
.
Page
9 o
f 19
Did
the
info
rmat
ion
you
have
rega
rdin
g th
e G
C20
18 m
eet y
our b
usin
ess
need
s?
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
Wha
t oth
er in
form
atio
n w
ould
hav
e as
sist
ed y
our b
usin
ess
for t
he G
C20
18?
Do
you
have
any
gen
eral
com
men
ts a
bout
GC
2018
and
info
rmat
ion?
F
or w
hat p
urpo
se d
id y
ou u
se th
e in
form
atio
n in
you
r bus
ines
s pl
anni
ng?
1. O
pera
tiona
l dec
isio
n-m
akin
g (e
.g. c
hang
e op
erat
ing
hour
s, p
redi
ctin
g cl
ient
dem
and,
ro
ster
ing
and
staf
fing,
etc
.)
Did
not
use
at a
ll
Use
d a
bit
U
sed
mod
erat
ely
Use
d of
ten
Alw
ays
used
2.
Ris
k as
sess
men
t (w
heth
er c
hang
es fr
om th
e G
C20
18, s
uch
as ro
ad c
losu
res,
wou
ld a
ffect
yo
ur b
usin
ess)
Did
not
use
at a
ll
Use
d a
bit
U
sed
mod
erat
ely
Use
d of
ten
Alw
ays
used
3.
Mar
ketin
g (p
rom
otin
g yo
ur b
usin
ess,
act
iviti
es, e
tc.)
D
id n
ot u
se a
t all
U
sed
a bi
t
Use
d m
oder
atel
y
U
sed
ofte
n
A
lway
s us
ed
4. I
nves
tmen
t dec
isio
ns (e
.g. c
apita
l exp
endi
ture
to p
rodu
ce m
ore)
Did
not
use
at a
ll
Use
d a
bit
U
sed
mod
erat
ely
Use
d of
ten
Alw
ays
used
5.
Fin
ance
and
bud
getin
g (s
uch
as c
ater
ing
for c
hang
es in
dem
and
prod
uced
by
the
GC
2018
)
Did
not
use
at a
ll
Use
d a
bit
U
sed
mod
erat
ely
Use
d of
ten
Alw
ays
used
6. O
ther
, ple
ase
spec
ify _
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
__
D
id n
ot u
se a
t all
U
sed
a bi
t
Use
d m
oder
atel
y
U
sed
ofte
n
A
lway
s us
ed
Now
, we
wou
ld li
ke to
kno
w a
bout
how
the
info
rmat
ion
influ
ence
d yo
ur b
usin
ess
deci
sion
s.
28
Page
10
of 1
9 Ba
sed
on w
hat a
ctua
lly h
appe
ned
to y
our b
usin
ess
durin
g th
e G
C20
18, h
ow e
ffect
ive
was
you
r pl
anni
ng?
N
ot a
t all
effe
ctiv
e
Som
ewha
t ine
ffect
ive
Neu
tral
S
omew
hat e
ffect
ive
Very
effe
ctiv
e
The
cost
of b
usin
ess
plan
ning
for t
he G
C20
18 w
as a
lot.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
If th
e G
old
Coa
st h
oste
d a
sim
ilar
even
t to
the
GC
2018
in
the
futu
re,
I w
ould
pre
pare
my
busi
ness
in th
e sa
me
way
.
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
Dis
agre
e
N
eutra
l
A
gree
S
trong
ly a
gree
I u
nder
stoo
d ho
w I
coul
d le
vera
ge o
ppor
tuni
ties
from
the
GC
2018
to b
enef
it m
y bu
sine
ss.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
My
busi
ness
was
abl
e to
ada
pt q
uick
ly to
the
unex
pect
ed c
hang
e in
incr
ease
d or
dec
reas
ed
dem
and
durin
g th
e G
C20
18 p
erio
d.
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
Dis
agre
e
N
eutra
l
A
gree
S
trong
ly a
gree
NA
The
GC
2018
con
trib
uted
to v
alue
cre
atio
n in
this
bus
ines
s (e
.g. n
ew p
roce
sses
, tec
hnol
ogy,
co
nsum
ers,
pre
mis
es, k
now
ledg
e).
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
The
GC
2018
con
trib
uted
to th
is b
usin
ess
bein
g di
stin
ct in
the
mar
ket c
ompa
red
to it
s co
mpe
titor
s.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
Fina
ncia
lly, t
he G
C20
18 p
rovi
ded
our b
usin
ess
with
a b
oost
.
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
Dis
agre
e
N
eutra
l
A
gree
S
trong
ly a
gree
H
oldi
ng th
e G
C20
18 d
urin
g th
e Ea
ster
trad
ing
perio
d w
as a
goo
d ch
oice
.
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
Dis
agre
e
N
eutra
l
A
gree
S
trong
ly a
gree
In
this
sec
tion,
we
wan
t to
know
abo
ut h
ow th
is b
usin
ess
has
been
impa
cted
by
the
2018
Gol
d C
oast
Com
mon
wea
lth G
ames
(GC
2018
).
Page
11
of 1
9 If
the
Gol
d C
oast
wer
e to
hol
d an
othe
r lar
ge e
vent
like
the
GC
2018
, wha
t tim
e of
the
year
wou
ld
best
sui
t you
r bus
ines
s (e
.g. m
onth
, hol
iday
per
iod,
etc
.)
Ove
rall,
the
retu
rn o
n in
vest
men
t fro
m th
e G
C20
18 o
n ou
r bus
ines
s w
as g
ood.
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
Whi
ch b
est d
escr
ibes
how
you
r bus
ines
s w
as im
pact
ed b
y G
C20
18?
Ver
y ne
gativ
e
Som
ewha
t neg
ativ
e
N
o im
pact
S
omew
hat p
ositi
ve
V
ery
posi
tive
Th
inki
ng a
bout
the
impa
ct o
f the
GC
2018
on
your
bus
ines
s, p
leas
e ra
te th
e fo
llow
ing:
1.
Cha
nge
in c
usto
mer
num
bers
Ve
ry n
egat
ive
impa
ct
Rel
ativ
ely
nega
tive
impa
ct
No
impa
ct
R
elat
ivel
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
Ver
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
N
A 2.
C
hang
e in
cus
tom
er b
ehav
iour
(e.g
. cha
nge
in le
ngth
/tim
e of
vis
it)
Ve
ry n
egat
ive
impa
ct
Rel
ativ
ely
nega
tive
impa
ct
No
impa
ct
R
elat
ivel
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
Ver
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
N
A 3.
C
hang
e in
sal
es v
olum
e
Ve
ry n
egat
ive
impa
ct
Rel
ativ
ely
nega
tive
impa
ct
No
impa
ct
R
elat
ivel
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
Ver
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
N
A 4.
C
hang
e in
ped
estr
ian
acce
ss to
bus
ines
s
Ve
ry n
egat
ive
impa
ct
Rel
ativ
ely
nega
tive
impa
ct
No
impa
ct
R
elat
ivel
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
Ver
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
N
A 5.
C
hang
e in
veh
icle
acc
ess
to b
usin
ess
Ve
ry n
egat
ive
impa
ct
Rel
ativ
ely
nega
tive
impa
ct
No
impa
ct
R
elat
ivel
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
Ver
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
N
A 6.
C
hang
e to
bus
ines
s op
enin
g ho
urs
Ve
ry n
egat
ive
impa
ct
Rel
ativ
ely
nega
tive
impa
ct
No
impa
ct
R
elat
ivel
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
Ver
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
N
A 7.
St
affin
g (a
vaila
bilit
y/ro
ster
ing)
Ve
ry n
egat
ive
impa
ct
Rel
ativ
ely
nega
tive
impa
ct
No
impa
ct
R
elat
ivel
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
Ver
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
N
A 8.
C
hang
e in
reso
urce
exp
ense
s (e
.g. h
iring
equ
ipm
ent,
etc.
)
Ve
ry n
egat
ive
impa
ct
Rel
ativ
ely
nega
tive
impa
ct
No
impa
ct
R
elat
ivel
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
Ver
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
N
A 9.
Su
pply
cha
in in
terr
uptio
n (e
.g. d
iffic
ulty
rece
ivin
g st
ock,
pro
duct
s, o
r ser
vice
s)
Ve
ry n
egat
ive
impa
ct
Rel
ativ
ely
nega
tive
impa
ct
No
impa
ct
R
elat
ivel
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
Ver
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
N
A 10
. C
hang
e to
bus
ines
s op
enin
g ho
urs
Ve
ry n
egat
ive
impa
ct
Rel
ativ
ely
nega
tive
impa
ct
No
impa
ct
R
elat
ivel
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
Ver
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
N
A
29
Page
12
of 1
9 Th
inki
ng a
bout
the
impa
ct o
f the
GC
2018
on
your
bus
ines
s, p
leas
e ra
te th
e fo
llow
ing:
11
. C
hang
e in
dis
cret
iona
ry s
pend
ing
Ve
ry n
egat
ive
impa
ct
Rel
ativ
ely
nega
tive
impa
ct
No
impa
ct
R
elat
ivel
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
Ver
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
N
A 12
. C
hang
e in
my
wor
king
hou
rs
Ve
ry n
egat
ive
impa
ct
Rel
ativ
ely
nega
tive
impa
ct
No
impa
ct
R
elat
ivel
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
Ver
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
N
A 13
. C
hang
e in
wor
k at
mos
pher
e
Ve
ry n
egat
ive
impa
ct
Rel
ativ
ely
nega
tive
impa
ct
No
impa
ct
R
elat
ivel
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
Ver
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
N
A 14
. M
y pe
rson
al w
ellb
eing
Ve
ry n
egat
ive
impa
ct
Rel
ativ
ely
nega
tive
impa
ct
No
impa
ct
R
elat
ivel
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
Ver
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
N
A
15.
Bus
ines
s re
puta
tion
Ve
ry n
egat
ive
impa
ct
Rel
ativ
ely
nega
tive
impa
ct
No
impa
ct
R
elat
ivel
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
Ver
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
N
A 16
. O
ther
, ple
ase
spec
ify _
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
_
Ve
ry n
egat
ive
impa
ct
Rel
ativ
ely
nega
tive
impa
ct
No
impa
ct
R
elat
ivel
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
Ver
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
N
A In
you
r op
inio
n, w
hy w
as t
his
busi
ness
im
pact
ed i
n th
e w
ays
that
wer
e se
lect
ed i
n th
e pr
evio
us q
uest
ion?
How
wel
l did
you
cop
e w
ith w
ork
pres
sure
s du
ring
the
GC
2018
?
Not
at a
ll
Did
not
cop
e w
ell
No
impa
ct
Rel
ativ
ely
cope
d C
oped
ver
y w
ell
In th
e le
ad u
p, d
id y
ou n
otic
e a
decr
ease
in th
e lo
cal p
opul
atio
n (re
side
nts
leav
ing)
?
N
one
Very
mild
M
ild
M
oder
ate
Seve
re
If yo
u di
d no
t sel
ect ‘
none
’ in
the
abov
e qu
estio
n:
Did
the
decr
ease
in re
side
nts
impa
ct o
n yo
ur b
usin
ess?
Ve
ry n
egat
ive
impa
ct
Rel
ativ
ely
nega
tive
impa
ct
No
impa
ct
R
elat
ivel
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
Ver
y po
sitiv
e im
pact
Com
pare
d to
typi
cal E
aste
r tra
ding
, the
GC
2018
trad
ing
perio
d w
as g
ood.
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
Dis
agre
e
N
eutra
l
A
gree
S
trong
ly a
gree
Page
13
of 1
9 W
ould
you
like
to m
ake
any
othe
r com
men
ts a
bout
how
the
GC
2018
affe
cted
this
bus
ines
s?
The
bene
fits
to th
is b
usin
ess
from
the
GC
2018
met
my
expe
ctat
ions
.
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
Ove
rall,
the
GC
2018
ben
efits
to th
is b
usin
ess
wer
e w
orse
than
exp
ecte
d.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
Dis
agre
e
N
eutra
l
A
gree
S
trong
ly a
gree
Th
e G
C20
18 b
enef
its to
this
bus
ines
s w
ere
bette
r tha
n ex
pect
ed.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
Dis
agre
e
N
eutra
l
A
gree
S
trong
ly a
gree
O
vera
ll, I
was
sat
isfie
d w
ith h
ow th
e G
C20
18 im
pact
ed th
is b
usin
ess.
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
Ove
rall,
I a
m h
appy
with
the
bus
ines
s de
cisi
ons
mad
e in
res
pons
e to
the
GC
2018
for
thi
s bu
sine
ss.
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
The
bene
fits
of th
e G
C20
18 o
utw
eigh
the
cons
eque
nces
for t
his
busi
ness
.
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
Now
, we
wan
t to
know
abo
ut y
our b
usin
ess
expe
ctat
ions
of t
he G
old
Coa
st C
omm
onw
ealth
G
ames
(GC
2018
).
Now
, we
are
aski
ng a
bout
you
r bus
ines
s sa
tisfa
ctio
n of
the
Gol
d C
oast
Com
mon
wea
lth G
ames
(G
C20
18).
30
Page
14
of 1
9 Th
ose
who
pla
nned
the
GC
2018
hel
ped
to s
timul
ate
flow
-on
bene
fits
for
my
busi
ness
(e.
g.
incr
ease
d cu
stom
er d
eman
d, in
crea
sed
expo
sure
to n
ew m
arke
ts).
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
Dis
agre
e
N
eutra
l
A
gree
S
trong
ly a
gree
Th
ere
was
tran
spar
ency
in th
e pl
anni
ng o
f the
GC
2018
.
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
Whe
n pl
anni
ng th
e G
C20
18, t
he o
rgan
iser
s lis
tene
d to
loca
l exp
erts
.
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
Whe
n pl
anni
ng th
e G
C20
18, t
he o
rgan
iser
s co
nsid
ered
the
need
s of
bus
ines
s.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
Dis
agre
e
N
eutra
l
A
gree
S
trong
ly a
gree
G
old
Coa
st b
usin
esse
s w
ere
wel
l rep
rese
nted
dur
ing
the
GC
2018
pla
nnin
g pr
oces
s.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
Dis
agre
e
N
eutra
l
A
gree
S
trong
ly a
gree
H
ave
you
prov
ided
feed
back
abo
ut th
e G
C20
18 im
pact
on
your
bus
ines
s?
Y
es, w
ho d
id y
ou p
rovi
de fe
edba
ck to
?
N
o, w
hy d
idn’
t you
pro
vide
feed
back
?
Do
you
have
any
com
men
ts o
n ho
w th
e G
C20
18 p
lann
ing
coul
d be
hav
e be
en im
prov
ed to
hel
p bu
sine
ss o
utco
mes
?
Did
you
atte
nd a
ny G
C20
18 s
ports
or t
rade
eve
nts?
Y
es, h
ow w
ould
you
rate
you
r ove
rall
expe
rienc
e of
atte
ndin
g th
e G
C20
18 e
vent
/s?
Ver
y po
or
P
oor
A
vera
ge
Goo
d
Exc
elle
nt
Now
, we
wan
t to
know
wha
t you
thin
k ab
out t
he p
lann
ing
for t
he G
old
Coa
st C
omm
onw
ealth
G
ames
(GC
2018
).
Page
15
of 1
9
No,
why
did
you
not
atte
nd a
ny o
f the
GC
2018
eve
nts?
Th
e G
C20
18 in
crea
sed
awar
enes
s of
the
Gol
d C
oast
city
inte
rnat
iona
lly.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
The
GC
2018
impr
oved
the
repu
tatio
n of
the
Gol
d C
oast
for a
ttrac
ting
new
bus
ines
ses.
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
Dis
agre
e
N
eutra
l
A
gree
S
trong
ly a
gree
The
GC
2018
incr
ease
d aw
aren
ess
of th
e G
old
Coa
st c
ity n
atio
nally
.
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
Dis
agre
e
N
eutra
l
A
gree
S
trong
ly a
gree
The
GC
2018
impr
oved
the
Gol
d C
oast
’s a
bilit
y to
mee
t the
nee
ds fo
r pub
lic s
ervi
ces
(e.g
. he
alth
, em
erge
ncy
serv
ices
and
edu
catio
n).
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
The
GC
2018
enh
ance
d th
e ab
ility
of t
he G
old
Coa
st to
offe
r attr
activ
e cu
ltura
l, ar
tistic
and
re
crea
tiona
l res
ourc
es (e
.g. e
vent
s, a
rts
and
cultu
re, s
port
ing
faci
litie
s, o
pen
spac
e).
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
The
GC
2018
impr
oved
the
wel
l-bei
ng o
f the
Gol
d C
oast
com
mun
ity.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
The
stat
e/fe
dera
l gov
ernm
ent a
ssis
ted
busi
ness
es d
urin
g th
e G
C20
18.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
The
loca
l cou
ncil
assi
sted
bus
ines
ses
durin
g th
e G
C20
18.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
‘Info
rmal
lead
ersh
ip’ (
e.g.
com
mun
ity g
roup
s, in
dust
ry a
ssoc
iatio
ns) a
ssis
ted
busi
ness
es
durin
g th
e G
C20
18.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
The
GC
2018
impr
oved
my
busi
ness
’s a
cces
s to
infr
astr
uctu
re (e
.g. t
echn
olog
y,
com
mun
icat
ions
, tra
nspo
rt).
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
The
GC
2018
impr
oved
my
busi
ness
’s a
cces
s to
sui
tabl
e an
d af
ford
able
com
mer
cial
pro
pert
y/
real
est
ate
(e.g
. war
ehou
se, o
ffice
bui
ldin
gs, s
tudi
o sp
ace)
.
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
Dis
agre
e
N
eutra
l
A
gree
S
trong
ly a
gree
Th
e G
C20
18 im
prov
ed th
e G
old
Coa
st’s
spa
tial l
ayou
t (e.
g. c
lust
ers,
hub
s, p
reci
ncts
, zon
es o
f ac
tivity
) for
bus
ines
ses.
This
sec
tion
is a
bout
the
GC
2018
impa
ct o
n th
e G
old
Coa
st C
ity.
31
Page
16
of 1
9
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
The
GC
2018
impr
oved
the
city
’s a
bilit
y to
attr
act w
orke
rs fr
om o
utsi
de th
e G
old
Coa
st.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
The
educ
atio
n an
d tr
aini
ng a
ssoc
iate
d w
ith th
e G
C20
18 h
as im
prov
ed th
e sk
ill o
f Gol
d C
oast
w
orke
rs.
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
Dis
agre
e
N
eutra
l
A
gree
S
trong
ly a
gree
The
GC
2018
has
enh
ance
d jo
b pr
ospe
cts
for w
orke
rs o
n th
e G
old
Coa
st.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
The
GC
2018
impr
oved
the
chan
ces
of b
usin
esse
s to
see
k fu
ndin
g, fi
nanc
e an
d in
vest
men
t.
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
Dis
agre
e
N
eutra
l
A
gree
S
trong
ly a
gree
Ove
rall,
the
GC
2018
pos
itive
ly im
pact
ed th
e G
old
Coa
st fr
om a
n ec
onom
ic p
ersp
ectiv
e.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
The
GC
2018
has
ass
iste
d th
e G
old
Coa
st in
bec
omin
g m
ore
attr
activ
e to
inte
rnat
iona
l tra
de
and
inve
stm
ent.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
The
GC
2018
impr
oved
resi
dent
s’ s
uppo
rt o
f loc
al b
usin
ess.
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
Dis
agre
e
N
eutra
l
A
gree
S
trong
ly a
gree
Th
e w
ays
in w
hich
loca
ls c
hang
ed th
eir b
ehav
iour
dur
ing
the
GC
2018
has
bec
ome
embe
dded
(e
.g. u
se o
f pub
lic/tr
ansp
ort,
shop
ping
, ent
erta
inm
ent).
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
Dis
agre
e
N
eutra
l
A
gree
S
trong
ly a
gree
The
GC
2018
has
impr
oved
rela
tions
hips
bet
wee
n di
ffere
nt s
ecto
rs (e
.g. b
usin
esse
s,
inst
itutio
ns, g
over
nmen
ts).
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
The
GC
2018
impr
oved
rela
tions
hips
bet
wee
n bu
sine
sses
on
the
Gol
d C
oast
(e.g
. sha
ring
of
reso
urce
s su
ch a
s kn
owle
dge,
sup
plie
s an
d te
chno
logy
).
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
Dis
agre
e
N
eutra
l
A
gree
S
trong
ly a
gree
Th
e G
C20
18 h
as im
prov
ed th
e su
pply
of r
elev
ant a
nd re
liabl
e bu
sine
ss in
form
atio
n.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
You
are
alm
ost a
t the
end
!
This
fina
l sec
tion
is a
bout
the
GC
2018
impa
ct o
n th
e G
old
Coa
st C
ity.
Page
17
of 1
9 O
vera
ll, th
e G
C20
18 h
as c
ontr
ibut
ed to
the
Gol
d C
oast
’s im
age
as a
goo
d pl
ace
to d
o bu
sine
ss.
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
Dis
agre
e
N
eutra
l
A
gree
S
trong
ly a
gree
O
vera
ll, th
e G
C20
18 h
as c
ontr
ibut
ed to
urb
an in
fras
truc
ture
that
will
bui
ld th
e ci
ty’s
imag
e.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
The
GC
2018
will
aid
in a
ttrac
ting
mor
e sp
ortin
g ev
ents
to th
e G
old
Coa
st.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
The
GC
2018
has
con
trib
uted
to th
e G
old
Coa
st g
row
ing
into
a w
orld
-cla
ss c
ity w
ith d
istin
ct
stre
ngth
s.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
In y
our o
pini
on, w
hich
bes
t des
crib
es h
ow th
e G
old
Coa
st c
ity w
as im
pact
ed b
y th
e G
C20
18?
V
ery
nega
tive
S
omew
hat n
egat
ive
N
o im
pact
S
omew
hat p
ositi
ve
V
ery
posi
tive
The
bene
fits
to th
e G
old
Coa
st C
ity fr
om th
e G
C20
18 m
et m
y ex
pect
atio
ns.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
Ove
rall,
the
GC
2018
ben
efits
to th
e G
old
Coa
st w
ere
wor
se th
an e
xpec
ted.
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
Dis
agre
e
N
eutra
l
A
gree
S
trong
ly a
gree
The
GC
2018
ben
efits
to th
e G
old
Coa
st w
ere
bette
r thi
s ex
pect
ed.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
Ove
rall,
I w
as s
atis
fied
with
how
the
GC
2018
impa
cted
the
Gol
d C
oast
.
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
Dis
agre
e
N
eutra
l
A
gree
S
trong
ly a
gree
Ove
rall,
I am
hap
py w
ith th
e G
old
Coa
st h
ostin
g th
e G
C20
18.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
The
bene
fits
to th
e G
old
Coa
st fr
om th
e G
C20
18 o
utw
eigh
ed th
e co
nseq
uenc
es.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
The
Gol
d C
oast
sho
uld
hold
sim
ilar e
vent
s to
the
GC
2018
in th
e fu
ture
.
S
trong
ly d
isag
ree
Dis
agre
e
N
eutra
l
A
gree
S
trong
ly a
gree
The
GC
2018
pro
vide
d on
goin
g be
nefit
s fo
r bus
ines
ses
on th
e G
old
Coa
st.
Stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
D
isag
ree
Neu
tral
Agr
ee
Stro
ngly
agr
ee
Wou
ld y
ou li
ke to
mak
e an
y ot
her c
omm
ents
abo
ut h
ow th
e G
C20
18 a
ffect
ed th
e G
old
Coa
st C
ity?
Whe
n an
swer
ng th
e fo
llow
ing
ques
tions
abo
ut th
e 20
18 C
omm
onw
ealth
Gam
es, p
leas
e th
ink
abou
t yo
ur a
nsw
ers
in re
latio
n to
the
Gol
d C
oast
Com
mon
wea
lth G
ames
and
Gol
d C
oast
City
.
32
Page
18
of 1
9
Page
19
of 1
9 I w
ould
like
to b
e up
date
d w
ith a
sum
mar
y of
the
rese
arch
at t
he c
ompl
etio
n of
the
proj
ect.
Y
es, p
leas
e pr
ovid
e yo
ur e
-mai
l bel
ow:
No
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
__
I wou
ld li
ke to
par
ticip
ate
in fu
ture
Gol
d C
oast
City
rese
arch
act
iviti
es th
at m
ay p
rovi
de u
sefu
l in
form
atio
n to
the
Gol
d C
oast
bus
ines
s co
mm
unity
.
Y
es, p
leas
e pr
ovid
e yo
ur e
-mai
l bel
ow:
No
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
__
I wou
ld li
ke to
go
into
the
draw
to w
in 1
of t
wo
$500
Col
es M
yer v
ouch
ers
Y
es, p
leas
e pr
ovid
e yo
ur c
onta
ct b
elow
:
N
o N
ame:
___
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
___
Phon
e nu
mbe
r: __
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
_ Po
stal
add
ress
: ___
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
Than
k yo
u ve
ry m
uch
for
fin
ishi
ng th
is s
urve
y!
Your
ans
wer
s w
ill he
lp in
form
bus
ines
ses
and
plan
ners
for f
utur
e ev
ents
in th
e ci
ty.
You
have
mad
e it
to th
e en
d!
Joan CarliniJoan Carlini is a lecturer in the Department of Marketing at Griffith Business School. Her scholarly work specialises in the intersection of business, government and society. She chairs the Gold Coast Health Consumer Advisory Group, whose members actively work with Gold Coast Hospital to provide a consumer voice in the design, delivery, and planning of health services. Joan has significant industry experience having worked extensively in marketing and hospitality.
Andrew O’NeilAndrew O’Neil is Professor of Political Science and Dean (Research) at Griffith Business School. He is the author of a range of scholarly publications and a regular contributor to international and national media outlets. Andrew is the recipient of a number of grants, including from the Australian Research Council, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and the Japan Foundation. Prior to entering academia in 2000, he was a Commonwealth Public Servant.
Griffith Business SchoolGriffith Business School is committed to high-quality business and public sector education and research, with a special focus on sustainable business development and responsible leadership. Griffith Business School is an accredited member of AACSB International—The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business. It is also an active partner in the Globally Responsible Leadership Initiative, a signatory to the UN Principles for Responsible Management Education and the UN Global Compact. This engagement demonstrates the School’s strong commitment to sustainable enterprise development and corporate responsibility.
AcknowledgementsThe authors would like thank the study participants, and acknowledge the research assistance of Amelia Green during the first phase of the project, as well as the assistance and advice of Helen Perkins with the survey development and analysis. The authors are also grateful to Laura Phoenix at Griffith Business School for production copy of the final report. Finally, the authors thanks Janelle Manders and David Grant for their ongoing support for the project. Any errors or oversights in the report are the authors’ alone.
griffith.edu.au/gbs
CRI
COS
No.
00
23
3E