Is Overall Tourist Satisfaction Broader Than The Cumulative Sum?

1+1=3 Is overall satisfaction broader than the cumulative sum of individual experiences? Georgia Zouni , Markos Tsogas, Athanassios Kouremenos University of Piraeus 01 Piraeus, Greece

Research Objective To investigate the contribution of customer satisfaction from each tourism service (encounter) on cumulative* and overall satisfaction from destination experience 02 (*) Cumulative satisfaction refers to the summation of satisfaction with all transactions (Iaccobucci, Ostrom, Grayson 1995)

Tourism destination experience assessment can follow: Literature Review (1) process-type approaches, dealing with the cognitive antecedents and consequences of service quality and satisfaction, (2) outcome-type approaches, based on a static framework. In tourism and hospitality it seems that a process-based approach may be most appropriate for addressing extended service experiences in destinations. 03

Methodologically, when measuring overall Literature Review satisfaction with a particular destination most researchers simply add satisfaction from all destination individual attributes or services (Chon & Olson 1991, Huang & Sarigollu,2008) The ultimate assessment of a destination overall satisfaction is represented as a “cumulative sum of individual experiences” (Danaher & Mattsson, 1994) 04

Research Variables 05 Representation Overall Satisfaction

Research Question But since overall satisfaction is a broader concept (Fornell, 1992) should destination research distinguishes between overall and cumulative satisfaction? 06

• Primary data was obtained from tourists in Olympia, one of the most famous and visited destinations in Greece. The Study • The study presents results of a much bigger survey and research project. 07

• SQ multi-item measurement scales – Destination attributes (accessibility, accommodation, attractions, and ancillary services-trade) Measurement & – Service quality dimensions (i.e., tangibility, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, access). – 5-point Likert scale ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree” Measures • CS single-item measurement scales – Destination attributes (accessibility, accommodation, attractions, and ancillary services-trade) – Overall Satisfaction from destination experience – An asymmetrical 4-scale Likert (Crompton, MacKay, & Fesenmaier, 1991) Based on guidelines provided by Rossiter (2002), 08 SQ & CS are treated as formative latent variables (FLVs).

• Partial Least Squares (PLS) • Following recommendations by Diamantopoulos & Winklhofer (2001) and Measurement Mathieson et al. (2001) collinearity analysis revealed no problems. • Measures of convergent validity (i.e, AVE; Model Fornell & Larcker, 1981) or discriminant validity are only relevant for RLVs. 09

Table 1: Regression Coefficients of HypothesisedPathways andGoodness of Fit Indices Structural Pathways Standardisedpathcoefficients (t-values) Attractions Quality →Attractions Satisfaction .797(8.57***) Attractions Satisfaction →Overall Satisfaction -.091(1.56) A m ccom odation Quality→A dditive Satisfaction .109(0.76) Trade Q uality →AdditiveSatisfaction .236(1.65*) Catering Quality →A dditive Satisfaction .371(1.96*) Additive Satisfaction →Overall Satisfaction .451(2.17*) Goodness of Fit R2 Model Attractions Satisfaction .635 Additive Satisfaction .328 Overall Satisfaction .203 10

Representation of 11 Functional Relationships

Discussion • The overall satisfaction from a destination experience could NOT be represented as a “cumulative sum of individual experiences”. • Overall satisfaction is a much broader concept: social- psychological state of tourist (e.g., mood, disposition, and needs), 12 • extraneous events (e.g., climate, social group interactions). Visitors might not break their complex experiences down in terms of different services.

Discussion • Three out of four destination services have a significant impact on the overall satisfaction of tourists • Some of them (Satisfaction from Food services & Tourism trade) were more important factors that influence overall satisfaction. 13 • This finding can be useful to the planners and marketers of the destination in formulating strategies to maintain or enhance their competitiveness.

Discussion • In an established heritage destination Satisfaction from Attractions seem not to influence overall satisfaction from the destination. • This finding might be explained by Social Constructivism theory of knowledge (Fairclough, 1992), and the specific historical and 14 • cultural context of the destination. Typical heritage tourist is a “mindful visitor” (Moscardo, 1996) and seeks more in the type of experience expected (Apostolakis, 2003).

• Tourism experience is not something that could be “stage-managed” by the service provider (Morgan 2007) • Service providers should not sell a pre- Conclusion ochestrated experience to the customers. Set the stage for tourists to create their own experiences 16

The whole is more than the sum of its parts (Aristotle 350BC). Last slide 17

Is Overall Tourist Satisfaction Broader Than The Cumulative Sum?

by Georgia Zouni on Nov 09, 2009

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

2 Embeds 45

Statistics

Is Overall Tourist Satisfaction Broader Than The Cumulative Sum? — Presentation Transcript

http://marketingeorgia.blogspot.com	35
http://www.slideshare.net	10