Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Tech N Tourism 1960 2010


Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Tech N Tourism 1960 2010

  1. 1. Tourism & Technology An Introduction by Tony Jolley
  2. 2. Aim <ul><li>To consider together the past, present and future relationship between Tourism and Technology </li></ul>
  3. 3. Tourism Preconditions
  4. 4. Technology and its Influence <ul><li>Anything that affects availability and choice of how much time and money we have directly and indirectly affects tourism. </li></ul><ul><li>Anything that affects transport systems directly and indirectly affects tourism. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>New means of transport. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>pricing … eg air transport </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>public / private provision etc.…eg rail de-privatisation </li></ul></ul>
  5. 5. Transport Technology <ul><li>Ship Empire mass troop and civil service movements & exposure to travel: The Grand Tour </li></ul><ul><li>Railway introduction development of new infrastructure and possibilities railway hotels … Brighton and other Resorts accessible for day trips and w/e breaks for the working population </li></ul>
  6. 6. Technology Take Up 1 <ul><li>Process of Diffusion: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>of the idea of the utilisation of technology </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>by suppliers / producers </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>by consumers </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Process of Adoption </li></ul><ul><ul><li>of the means (hardware) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>of the ends (willingness to use for a purpose) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Subject to ‘influence’ of </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>competitor pressure / business environment stimuli </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>government ‘sticks’ (legislation / regulation) and carrots (subsidies / exhortation ) </li></ul></ul></ul>
  7. 7. Technology Take up 2 Classical innovation adoption profile
  8. 8. Technology Take Up 3 <ul><li>Innovators </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Actively seek or generate new ideas Go it alone revolutionaries. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Opinion leaders </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Not usually popular or respected </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>healthy disregard for risk </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>prepared to pay the price </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Early Adopters </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Respected and capable of promoting the diffusion process </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Sought out for their advice </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Open to manageable risk. Solo but follow innovator footsteps. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Early Majority </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Socially interactive group </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Seek interpersonal advice before adoption. Play it safe. Passive. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Provide interconnections in the diffusion process </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Late Majority </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Sceptics due to financial circumstances and disinterest. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Require the weight of a systems norms to be in place before they adopt. Passive resistance. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Adopt out of economic necessity or peer pressure once they are comfortable with the risks involved </li></ul></ul>
  9. 9. Technology Take Up 4 <ul><li>Laggards </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Suspicious traditionalists </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Isolated in the social system </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Seek incontrovertible evidence before making the decision to adopt </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Lacking any conviction - don’t respond to pressure </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Often have restricted finances </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Luddites </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Active resistance to change </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>the ultimate reactionaries </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>infectious (sometimes charismatic) refuse-niks </li></ul></ul>
  10. 10. Technology Take Up 5 <ul><li>Innovator - I don’t see , but I believe. </li></ul><ul><li>Early Adopter - I’d like to believe and from the little I can see, I’ll take a step out in faith </li></ul><ul><li>Early Majority - I believe because I have seen </li></ul><ul><li>Late Majority - I believe because they believe they have seen and they seem OK </li></ul><ul><li>Laggard - I didn’t want to believe but you just can’t avoid it now can you - it’s all over the place? </li></ul><ul><li>Luddite - I see it and I don’t believe it .. And I don’t believe anyone else should either. </li></ul>
  11. 11. Technology Take Up 5 <ul><li>So which are you? </li></ul><ul><li>Innovator </li></ul><ul><li>Early Adopter </li></ul><ul><li>Early Majority </li></ul><ul><li>Late Majority </li></ul><ul><li>Laggard </li></ul><ul><li>Luddite </li></ul>
  12. 12. Diffusion & Adoption Process <ul><li>Awareness </li></ul><ul><li>Understanding </li></ul><ul><li>Liking </li></ul><ul><li>Preference </li></ul><ul><li>Decision </li></ul><ul><li>Implementation </li></ul><ul><li>Evaluation </li></ul><ul><li>Confirmation </li></ul><ul><li>Commitment </li></ul><ul><li>Cascade </li></ul><ul><li>Perceived Attributes </li></ul><ul><li>C omparative Advantage </li></ul><ul><ul><li>e fficency </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>e conomy </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>e ffectiveness </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>e quity </li></ul></ul><ul><li>C omplexity </li></ul><ul><li>C ompatibility </li></ul><ul><li>C ommunicability </li></ul>Awareness Interest Decision Action Reflection Embedding
  13. 13. Why New Technology 1? <ul><li>Enabling:- innovation - new products / services / systems </li></ul><ul><li>Economy:- may get the job done at lower total cost </li></ul><ul><li>Efficiency:- may get the job done more easily / quickly / at lower average unit cost </li></ul><ul><li>Effectiveness:- may enable more complete achievement of A&O / deliver greater value. </li></ul><ul><li>Equity and Ethics:- may make possible a fairer distribution of product and service benefits meeting moral and social A&O. </li></ul><ul><li>IT MUST BE PERCEIVED AS ADDING VALUE GREATER THAN ITS COST </li></ul>
  14. 14. Why New Technology 2? <ul><li>It can overcome the constraints and inversely proportional relationship between ‘Richness’ and ‘Reach’ which have always bedevilled the marketeer….the ‘holy grail’ of RELATIONSHIP can be realised on a one to one basis: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>“ We are moving from one mass market to mass markets of one” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Anna Pollock (1999) ENTER Conference Edinburgh. </li></ul></ul>
  15. 15. ICT Impacts: Disintermediation Provider Buyer Tour Operator Travel Agent TO or TA Provider Direct Provider Buyer Buyer Fully Disintermediated Partially Disintermediated Traditional Intermediated
  16. 16. 1960 2010 <ul><li>No email </li></ul><ul><li>No internet </li></ul><ul><li>Expensive international com </li></ul><ul><li>Little mass mkt travel exp. </li></ul><ul><li>Little language capability </li></ul><ul><li>No direct booking </li></ul><ul><li>Ticketing by specialists </li></ul><ul><li>‘ No’ High Street distribution </li></ul><ul><li>No Direct Sell </li></ul><ul><li>email </li></ul><ul><li>Internet search </li></ul><ul><li>Virtually free comms </li></ul><ul><li>Experienced mass market </li></ul><ul><li>Language training </li></ul><ul><li>Direct booking </li></ul><ul><li>DIY ticketing </li></ul><ul><li>Direct sell by suppliers </li></ul><ul><li>Dynamic packaging </li></ul><ul><li>Intelligent software </li></ul><ul><li>Online agents </li></ul><ul><li>Case for: </li></ul><ul><li>Tour operators </li></ul><ul><li>Travel agents </li></ul><ul><li>The Inclusive Tour </li></ul>Any case remaining ???? Would we ‘invent’ these now if they didn’t already exist????
  17. 17. ICT & Tourism 2 <ul><li>Think about these Qs for a minute or two & discuss with your friends adjacent... </li></ul><ul><li>Q1. What can a traditional travel agent or tour operator do presently that ICT can’t - and how crucial are such things to buyers? </li></ul><ul><li>Q2. In the next 5-10 years as software and internet based applications become even more intelligent and customisable to individual needs and wants - will there still be things that only a traditional agent/operator can do, or that he/she can still do much better (economically, effectively, efficiently…) than the technological alternative? </li></ul><ul><li>Q3. What sorts of agents and operators are most at risk? </li></ul><ul><li>Q4. What survival strategies might you advocate to those at risk? </li></ul>
  18. 18. ICT & Tourism <ul><li>Disintermediation. (goodbye Mr T/A or Mr T/O?) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Tour Operator </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>cost saving (commission), </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>direct relationship acquisition (via screen) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Customer </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>loses intermediary benefits not provided by ICT </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>loses (in one sense) choice of booking options </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>possible savings (if passed on by Tour Op / direct provider) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Travel Agent </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>add value to customer and tour operator =/> commission </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>large ops --> multi-channel. Small --> niche. Medium??? </li></ul></ul></ul>
  19. 19. ICT Successes - Why? <ul><li>Ryanair </li></ul><ul><li>Expedia </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>Amazon </li></ul><ul><li>Why do some operators find ICT ‘easy’ to adopt and others not? </li></ul><ul><li>Is there anything about Tourism that makes it difficult to apply ICT successfully? </li></ul>