ENTER 2015 Research Track Slide Number 1

Travellers' intended future trip arrangement strategies for things to

do during a trip: Implications for travel distribution

Niklas Eriksson

Arcada University of Applied Sciences, Finlandniklas.eriksson@arcada.fi

http://www.arcada.fi

ENTER 2015 Research Track Slide Number 2

Introduction• Travel distribution is in constant change and has emerged into a

complex structure (Kracht & Wang, 2010; Rensmann & Klein, 2011). • The emergence of a hybrid era of three screens – computer, tablet

and smartphone – is further driving the change. (Thakran & Verma, 2013)

• Many travellers are nowadays connected to the Internet in all stages of the traveller life cycle (e.g. Hjalager & Jensen, 2012).

• The activity and attraction sector of the travel and tourism market sets a high focus on at destination distribution (Schott, 2007).

• Intelligent and context-aware mobile services aimed at the traveler on the go may change the distribution of attraction and activity services.

– Very little seems to be written about how the distribution may change

ENTER 2015 Research Track Slide Number 3

Objective

• The aim of this study is to investigate travelers’ intended future trip arrangement strategies for things to do during a trip

• To discuss the implication this may have for travel distribution– The focus is on the mobile ICT channel

ENTER 2015 Research Track Slide Number 4

The mobile ICT channel• Increase in mobile use

– In the third quarter of 2013 the number of mobile subscriptions increased to 6,6 billion globally and the number is expected to grow to 9,3 billion by 2019 (Ericsson, 2013).

– In Finland the use of smart phones doubled between 2010 and 2011 and in 2013 61% of the population (16 – 89 years) had a smart phone (Statistics Finland, 2014).

• Increase in mobile use in travel and tourism– Both travellers and travel managers expect mobile bookings to

reach 25 percent of online transactions by 2017. (CWT Travel Management Institute, 2014)

– The smart phone is influencing peoples’ everyday life and the travel experience (Wang et al., 2014).

– Traveler use of mobile devices should not be overestimated for travel related activities such as bookings (Douglas & Lubbe, 2014)

ENTER 2015 Research Track Slide Number 5

• In distribution of attractions a priority is often placed on at destination distribution (Schott, 2007).

• For example direct sales on location, including walk-ins and calls, and in-direct through local tourist offices and travel agencies (Fodness & Murrey, 1999).

• Pre-trip distribution is conducted through direct web-sales and, depending on the target groups, different types of distribution channel mixes are executed e.g. through a wide range of middlemen (Pearce & Tan, 2006).

Distribution of activities and attractions

ENTER 2015 Research Track Slide Number 6

Distribution of activities and attractions

• Online middlemen that focus heavily on a mobile strategy or even mobile only strategies– For example GetYourGuide and Viator are aggregating

tours and activities online.– Different online travel agencies (OTAs) have also been fast

to move into three screen solutions– Groupon is heavily relying on the mobile channel to provide

the best local deals for e.g. different types of travel services Drive cybermediation

• The attraction and activity sector in travel and tourism is less connected to global distribution systems (GDSs), e.g. Amadeus, than the hotel and airline industry

ENTER 2015 Research Track Slide Number 7

Travelers’ trip arrangement strategies

Strategies Look strategy Book strategy

Pre-trip - I try to do these types of information searches before the trip

- I try to do these types of bookings before the trip

During a trip Off-line

- I visit the hotel reception or local tourist offices - I use paper brochures

- I call or visit local travel suppliers’ sales office - I visit a local travel agent

During a trip service provider device

- I use Internet services with a device provided by the hotel, Internet café etc.

- I use Internet services with a device provided by the hotel, Internet café etc.

During a trip personal laptop or tablet device

- I use Internet services / mobile services with my personal laptop or tablet device

- I use Internet services / mobile services with my personal laptop or tablet device

During a trip personal smartphone

- I use Internet services / mobile services with my personal mobile phone / smartphone

- I use Internet services / mobile services with my personal mobile phone / smartphone

*I believe that I in the future primarily look for information regarding things to do during a trip e.g. attractions and activities….** I believe that I in the future primarily book things to do during a trip (e.g. attractions and activities)….

* **

ENTER 2015 Research Track Slide Number 8

Research Questions

• RQ1: What are the respondents’ intended future look and book strategies for things to do during a trip?

• RQ2: Are the respondents’ intended future look and book strategies similar in character

• RQ3: Is there a difference in the respondents’ intended future look and book strategies between frequent travellers and non-frequent travellers?

• RQ4: Is there a difference in the respondents’ intended look and book strategies between low- and high-skilled users of the Internet?

In answering the four research questions -> gain some answers to implications for future travel distribution of things to do during a trip.

ENTER 2015 Research Track Slide Number 9

Data collection • A large scale quantitative online survey in

Finland was conducted in order to answer the RQ:s.

Variables Sample N = 893

Variables Sample N = 893

Gender Male Female

24,1% 75,9%

Internet proficiency High skilled user of the Internet Low skilled user of the Internet

75,7% 24,3%

Age 18 – 35 36 – 50 51 – 60 > 60

40,9% 41,4% 13,6% 4,1%

Travel frequency (business and/or leisure) Frequent traveller Non-frequent traveller

26,1% 73,9%

ENTER 2015 Research Track Slide Number 10

The intended future look and book strategies (RQ1)

The proportions (N = 893)

ENTER 2015 Research Track Slide Number 11

The similarities between the intended look and book strategies (RQ2)

Book strategy

Look strategy Pre-trip

During trip

offline

During trip service

provider device

During trip personal laptop/ tablet

During trip personal

smartphone Total

Pre-trip 340 75,7%

80 55,5%

23 28,0%

23 16,0%

7 9,5%

473 53,0%

During trip offline 43 9,6%

35 24,3%

10 12,2%

7 4,9%

0 0,0%

95 10,6%

During trip service provider device

21 4,7%

16 11,1%

39 47,6%

8 5,6%

6 8,1%

90 10,1%

During trip personal laptop/tablet

34 7,6%

12 8,3%

8 9,8%

95 66,0%

5 6,8%

154 17,2%

During trip personal smartphone

11 2,4%

1 0,7%

2 2,4%

11 7,6%

56 75,7%

81 9,1%

Total 449 100,0%

144 100,0%

82 100,0%

144 100,0%

74 100,0%

893 100,0%

Symmetric Measures: Cramer's V value 0,457, approx. sig. 0,000 Contingency Coefficient value 0,715, approx. sig. 0,000

ENTER 2015 Research Track Slide Number 12

Travel Frequency (RQ3)

FT: N = 217non-FT: N = 676.

ENTER 2015 Research Track Slide Number 13

Internet proficiency (RQ4)

High-skilled: N=660Low-skilled: N=233

ENTER 2015 Research Track Slide Number 14

Implications• Especially many frequent travellers and/or skilled

users of the Internet intend to rely on their personal mobile devices in during trip settings in the future for both look and book strategies.

• Indicate that attraction and activity suppliers are increasingly moved in the direction of online distribution at destination.

• Note: the pre-trip look and book strategy was preferred by a majority of the respondents. Also ‘during trip offline’ scored high proportions– Traveler use of mobile devices should not be overestimated

ENTER 2015 Research Track Slide Number 15

Implications• Opportunity for actors that focus on context aware and

smart mobile booking solutions for the attraction and activity sector – SMTEs have limited resources to invest in technology (Schegg

et al., 2013) – Schegg et al. (2014), who looked particularly at hotel

distribution, the growth of the direct online distribution in the future is scant as OTAs have the resources to apply new technology and the market position to drive cybermediation.

– Ease, simplicity and reputation are key factors for visitors to use intermediate channels in travel distribution (Pearce & Schott, 2005).

ENTER 2015 Research Track Slide Number 16

Limitations• Sample• Speculative in nature as it may be hard for travellers to

predict their future intentions to make trip arrangements– Especially when it comes to the mobile channel which has evolved

rapidly during recent years– Longitudinal studies based on actual trip arrangements may

provide a better base for predicting future market structures• Future studies could include information and booking

sources in order to capture differences between direct and indirect mobile bookings

• The travel market is highly complex in nature and the impact of ICT on the market structure is hard to estimate (Rensmann & Klein, 2011).

ENTER 2015 Research Track Slide Number 17

Thank you!

ENTER 2015 Research Track Slide Number 18

References

CWT Travel Management Institute (2014). Tap into mobile: managed travel in the digital economy. Retrieved October 20, 2014, from http://www.cwtinsights.com/CWT-tap-into-mobile-service.pdf

Douglas, A. & Lubbe, B. (2014). Mobile Devices as a Tourism Distribution Channel. In I. Tussyadiah and Xiang, Z. (Eds.), Proceedings of Information and communication technologies in tourism 2014, Dublin, Irland, pp. 855-867.

Ericsson (2013). Telebriefing: Ericsson Mobility Report - On the pulse of the networked society, November 11, 2013. Retrieved October 20, 2014, from http://www.ericsson.com/res/investors/docs/2013/131111-ericsson-mobility-report-telebriefing.pdf.

Fodness, D. & Murray, B. (1999). A model of tourist information search behaviour. Journal of Travel Research 37(3): 220-230.

Hjalager, A-M. & Jensen, J.M. (2012). A typology of travellers based on their propensity to go online before, during and after the trip. In: Fuchs, M., Ricci, F. & Cantoni, L. (Eds.), Proceedings of Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2012, Helsingborg, Sweden, pp. 96-107.

Pearce, D.G. & Schott, C. (2005). Tourism Distribution Channels: The Visitors' Perspective. Journal of Travel Research 44(1): 50-63.

Pearce, D. G. & Raewyn, T. (2006). The Distribution Mix For Tourism Attractions in Rotorua, New Zealand. Journal of Travel Research 44(3): 250-258.

ENTER 2015 Research Track Slide Number 19

References

Rensmann, B. & Klein, S. (2011). Sarkar, Butler & Steinfield (1995) “Intermediaries and Cybermediaries” Revisited: A Review and Identification of Future Research Directions for Intermediaries in Electronic Markets. In: Proceedings of 24th Bled eConference, Bled, Slovenia.

Schegg, R., Stangl, B., Fux, M. & Inversini, A. (2013). Distribution channels and management in the Swiss Hotel sector. In: L. Cantoni & Z. Xiang (Eds.), Proceedings of Information and communication technologies in tourism 2013, Innsbruck, Austria pp. 554-565.

Schegg, R. & Scaglione, M. (2014). Substitution Effects Across Hotel Distribution Channels. In I. Tussyadiah and Xiang, Z. (Eds.), Proceedings of Information and communication technologies in tourism 2014, Dublin, Irland, pp. 801-812.

Schott, C. (2007). Selling adventure tourism: a distribution channels perspective. International Journal of Tourism Research 9(4): 257–274.

Statistics Finland (2013). Over one-quarter of persons aged 75 to 89 use the Internet. Retrieved January 15, 2014, from http://www.stat.fi/til/sutivi/2013/sutivi_2013_2013-11-07_tie_001_en.html

Thakran, K. & Verma, R. (2013). The Emergence of Hybrid Online Distribution Channels in Travel, Tourism and Hospitality. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly 54(3): 240-247.

Werthner, H. & Klein, S. (1999). Information Technology and tourism: A challenging relationship. Wien – New York: Springer-Verlag.

Wang, D., Xiang, Z. & Fesenmaier, D.R. (2014). Smartphone Use in Everyday Life and Travel, Journal of Travel Research published online 19 May 2014.