still working away at this SP FP thing
i have 2000 words - just wanna sort out the rest 1500? by friday
still some cospetic changes to make to some of what has been done
plus more on what has been happening of late. since 1990 ish
more on stakeholder theory and simple rationale behind it.
more on where I want to go with this - need to make the jump to where I want to be.
going throught the rest of the articles, picking out what is relevant.
defo finished by friday...
Tuesday 4 November 2008
Saturday 1 November 2008
saturday 1st nov
been working my way through writing the first part of the it review.
part 1 - CFP - FP link and how it is flawed - rationale for looking at specific industry and in a new way.
have about half done. Want to have 3500 words done by friday. 7th. and then onto model and experience.
need to work through sunday to get done.
part 1 - CFP - FP link and how it is flawed - rationale for looking at specific industry and in a new way.
have about half done. Want to have 3500 words done by friday. 7th. and then onto model and experience.
need to work through sunday to get done.
Tuesday 28 October 2008
McWilliams 1999
Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance: Correlation or Misspecification?
Thinks that R&D has been overlooked by researchers looking at these CSP FP relationships.
Again, misses the point a little.
My point is that the whoel thing needs to be reassessed. The whole outlook, approach.
Thinks that R&D has been overlooked by researchers looking at these CSP FP relationships.
Again, misses the point a little.
My point is that the whoel thing needs to be reassessed. The whole outlook, approach.
Roberts 2002
Corporate reputation and sustained superior financial performance
Average article - thinks that reputation has been overlooked in some CSP FP models
not worth looking at.
Average article - thinks that reputation has been overlooked in some CSP FP models
not worth looking at.
Monday 27 October 2008
oosterhout 2006
Much Ado About Nothing: A Conceptual Critique of CSR
Odd piece, but might be quite useful - looks at the rational behind ditching CSR altogether.
Same kind of arguments as other authors - general lack of theoretical background - or at least a real mishmash of different concepts - slates the whole CFP CSP thing - waste of time.
A lot of references to data chasing theory - loads of stats, but what do they mean?
good quote on pg 15
it should be acknowledged that there is no uncontestable way of measuring such a complex construct...
Odd piece, but might be quite useful - looks at the rational behind ditching CSR altogether.
Same kind of arguments as other authors - general lack of theoretical background - or at least a real mishmash of different concepts - slates the whole CFP CSP thing - waste of time.
A lot of references to data chasing theory - loads of stats, but what do they mean?
good quote on pg 15
it should be acknowledged that there is no uncontestable way of measuring such a complex construct...
Lankoski 2007
Corporate responsibility activities and economic performance: a theory of why and how they are connected
One of what i imagine to be a raft of new articles trying to sort out this mess. Not entirely sure what this article is trying to say. The author tries to separte the outcomes form the activities and tries to resurrect the idea of the inverted U -curve. The idea that initial gains can be made but will suffer form diminishing marginal returns. Lots of hocus-pocus about where the curve is and how it can move.
The article has an odd env feel to it, and leaves a lot to be explained. Interesting to see if a little more will come out of articles like this. I think there is a need to untangle this web, but I'm not sure this article is quite the way forward.
Mentions some articles - Orlitszky 2003 - not sure i still have this - meta analysis.
One of what i imagine to be a raft of new articles trying to sort out this mess. Not entirely sure what this article is trying to say. The author tries to separte the outcomes form the activities and tries to resurrect the idea of the inverted U -curve. The idea that initial gains can be made but will suffer form diminishing marginal returns. Lots of hocus-pocus about where the curve is and how it can move.
The article has an odd env feel to it, and leaves a lot to be explained. Interesting to see if a little more will come out of articles like this. I think there is a need to untangle this web, but I'm not sure this article is quite the way forward.
Mentions some articles - Orlitszky 2003 - not sure i still have this - meta analysis.
Griffin Mahon 1997
The Corporate Social Performance and Corporate Financial Performance Debate: Twenty-Five Years of Incomparable Research
as the title suggests
pg 10 big critique of all these silly studies, despite clear remarks not to go down that road.
pg 11 starts to veer towards what i ma talking about - "the focus on a single industry may allow for the development and recognition of specific patterns of social performance that may be specific to a single industry and its stakeholder patterns of action and involvement, and it also allowas for a clearer recognition of different social performance by individual companies within the industry."
Big critique of FP measures pg 11 - over 70% of financial performance measures were used only once.!!!!!
Outline the Fortune survey pg 14
And then KLD (at bottom) pg 14
And TRI - toxic release inventory pg 15
And corporate philanthrophy pg 16
one industry (chemicals)
5 FP measures - return on equity, return on assets, total assets, asset age, 5-year return on sales.
Not huge findings - points to "CSP and FP relationships in specific industry contexts and offer more relevant insights to practitioners. In addition, we believe that such a research focus will yield rich insights into specific corporate social performance activities by individual firms.
pg 25
Need to refie complex relationships by looking in depth at one industry.
as the title suggests
pg 10 big critique of all these silly studies, despite clear remarks not to go down that road.
pg 11 starts to veer towards what i ma talking about - "the focus on a single industry may allow for the development and recognition of specific patterns of social performance that may be specific to a single industry and its stakeholder patterns of action and involvement, and it also allowas for a clearer recognition of different social performance by individual companies within the industry."
Big critique of FP measures pg 11 - over 70% of financial performance measures were used only once.!!!!!
Outline the Fortune survey pg 14
And then KLD (at bottom) pg 14
And TRI - toxic release inventory pg 15
And corporate philanthrophy pg 16
one industry (chemicals)
5 FP measures - return on equity, return on assets, total assets, asset age, 5-year return on sales.
Not huge findings - points to "CSP and FP relationships in specific industry contexts and offer more relevant insights to practitioners. In addition, we believe that such a research focus will yield rich insights into specific corporate social performance activities by individual firms.
pg 25
Need to refie complex relationships by looking in depth at one industry.
De Bakker 2005
A Bibliometric Analysis of 30 Years of Research and Theory on Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Social Performance
A long kindof content analysis of CSR / CSP up until now. Quite dense, but looks at the evoltion of the concept in good detail and identifies 3 main ways to approach the history: progressive, variegation, and normative. The distinctions are not overly clear.
Pg 308 the authors point to the CSP-FP literature and put it in the descriptive category, becasue they do not offer any theoretical contribution. "These papers appear to be stuck in repetitive mode as they do not so much build on each others work but mainly repeat or critique it without providing underlying causal relationships. They go back to the reasons Rowley and Berman gave for the approach - justify the studies themselves, add to moral arguements as to why firmsshould attend to their social responsibilities.
not sure ho wmuch this adds, other than backing up Rowley and Berman on CSP FP
A long kindof content analysis of CSR / CSP up until now. Quite dense, but looks at the evoltion of the concept in good detail and identifies 3 main ways to approach the history: progressive, variegation, and normative. The distinctions are not overly clear.
Pg 308 the authors point to the CSP-FP literature and put it in the descriptive category, becasue they do not offer any theoretical contribution. "These papers appear to be stuck in repetitive mode as they do not so much build on each others work but mainly repeat or critique it without providing underlying causal relationships. They go back to the reasons Rowley and Berman gave for the approach - justify the studies themselves, add to moral arguements as to why firmsshould attend to their social responsibilities.
not sure ho wmuch this adds, other than backing up Rowley and Berman on CSP FP
Friday 24 October 2008
Rowley and Berman 2000
Great article to get into this braod critique of CSP FP.
really gets at the core of it by asking why researchers are looking at this question anyway - what will it add even if something is found? really just to justify the existance of researchers.
P401 very strong.
single dimensions as proxies
research looking at things csp in 14 different ways. No reason to believe there will be any consistancy. - comparing air pollution with illegal activity?
pg 402
Multiple dimensions
pg 403 goes though a number of different issues relating to why this is also flawed. very strong language at the bottom of 404.
pg 406 Proposes looking at more industry specific stuff. Hooray!
social performance must be defined according to social context p407
excellent article - all the right things - points to moving away from CSP -FP and is very straight about it.
really gets at the core of it by asking why researchers are looking at this question anyway - what will it add even if something is found? really just to justify the existance of researchers.
P401 very strong.
single dimensions as proxies
research looking at things csp in 14 different ways. No reason to believe there will be any consistancy. - comparing air pollution with illegal activity?
pg 402
Multiple dimensions
pg 403 goes though a number of different issues relating to why this is also flawed. very strong language at the bottom of 404.
pg 406 Proposes looking at more industry specific stuff. Hooray!
social performance must be defined according to social context p407
excellent article - all the right things - points to moving away from CSP -FP and is very straight about it.
Friday 24th
bit of a waste yesterday - this Rebecca Hawkins - got to try to bin this whole thing.
No pointi ngoing there. Way out of my ballpark.
Lets get back to basics. Start with the lit review part 2, and start drilling into make these paragraphs bigger.
Experience - scales
Loyalty - wom, etc.
RT - what have we got?
need to have something for XF monday
No pointi ngoing there. Way out of my ballpark.
Lets get back to basics. Start with the lit review part 2, and start drilling into make these paragraphs bigger.
Experience - scales
Loyalty - wom, etc.
RT - what have we got?
need to have something for XF monday
Thursday 23 October 2008
Latest thursday 23rd
Getting abit all over the place. XF asked me to look at this rt critique for some project or other by end nov. I don't really like the idea of it, but some dosh has been mentioned. I really don't want to get side-tracked. but it is relevant and might actually open the door to some articles/ feedback I might not otherwise have received.
This week I still want to develop the plan for the lit review. I have something vaguely intelligible for the first bit, but need to develop the second. I see no reason why i can't have this done by w/e.
This week I still want to develop the plan for the lit review. I have something vaguely intelligible for the first bit, but need to develop the second. I see no reason why i can't have this done by w/e.
Tuesday 21 October 2008
Section one Lit review
The first section is really setting the scene within CSR.
Why?
We need to show what has been done in the past and how others have looked at the issue.
Ultimately we need to see some link between CSR as a whole and making money.
I want to show why this is not the best way to go about it.
The macro approach is flawed. (5000)
End of week realistic?
Why?
We need to show what has been done in the past and how others have looked at the issue.
Ultimately we need to see some link between CSR as a whole and making money.
I want to show why this is not the best way to go about it.
The macro approach is flawed. (5000)
End of week realistic?
Lit review
Started to look at very general stuff about 'alternative' tourism and leading into sustainable and responsible etc.
But called XF and we came up with a more interesting plan.
Idea is to have 2 sections to the lit review.
First part is to place the work within CSR (5000 words)
- looking at approaches to the business case for CSR
- why has there been so much work on this?
- what kind of rhetoric is used?
- in simple terms, why is it looked at in the way that it is? What are the consequnces of looking at it in this way? Very much a macro view as opposed to micro. What is gained by this method, what is lost?
- Will the Holy Grail ever be found?
Next part is to look at what I am proposing... (15000 words)
- really just looking at the angle I am going to look at
- why include what I am going to include?
Experience Economy (4000 words)
Responsible tourism (4000 words)
Loyalty (4000 words)
Introducing the model and why it offers strengths that other models do not.
Detailed critique of what is out there in terms of what has been done before.
Need to break down further to decide exactly what I want to say with each subsection.
But called XF and we came up with a more interesting plan.
Idea is to have 2 sections to the lit review.
First part is to place the work within CSR (5000 words)
- looking at approaches to the business case for CSR
- why has there been so much work on this?
- what kind of rhetoric is used?
- in simple terms, why is it looked at in the way that it is? What are the consequnces of looking at it in this way? Very much a macro view as opposed to micro. What is gained by this method, what is lost?
- Will the Holy Grail ever be found?
Next part is to look at what I am proposing... (15000 words)
- really just looking at the angle I am going to look at
- why include what I am going to include?
Experience Economy (4000 words)
Responsible tourism (4000 words)
Loyalty (4000 words)
Introducing the model and why it offers strengths that other models do not.
Detailed critique of what is out there in terms of what has been done before.
Need to break down further to decide exactly what I want to say with each subsection.
Monday 20 October 2008
Lit review
Think i need to get my head around exactly what a lit review is.
Look for a bit of info about what exactly it is, and then look for an angle.
I guess peopl have been looking for this angle for some time, but all the approaches are flawed. that is what i ultimately want to show.
CSR macro is flawed - what has been done by harold etc is flawed, what has been done by scalers and satisfaction is flawed (too mass), and so has the tack in general.
This wunder-answer that will show us that the world is great - to simple for the nuances of experince and RT. We need to look for indications and tendencies, not wunder-solutions.
So, should I be looking at just sticking these things in pigeon holes?
It would be easy, but i guess it will need to flow.
I guess first up - what is RT? Define, track, describe, RT
Then who uses it? Soft-adventure. What is soft adevnture, how big is the market? Do the parent companies have CSR policies? Where does CSR fit into things? Dead end.
Back to the product. Drill into the product -some part of it is RT?
Scales? Satisfaction?
More direct approaches? Where have RT studies placed RT?
Whay has this been flawed? Examples.
Experience.
Me!
Look for a bit of info about what exactly it is, and then look for an angle.
I guess peopl have been looking for this angle for some time, but all the approaches are flawed. that is what i ultimately want to show.
CSR macro is flawed - what has been done by harold etc is flawed, what has been done by scalers and satisfaction is flawed (too mass), and so has the tack in general.
This wunder-answer that will show us that the world is great - to simple for the nuances of experince and RT. We need to look for indications and tendencies, not wunder-solutions.
So, should I be looking at just sticking these things in pigeon holes?
It would be easy, but i guess it will need to flow.
I guess first up - what is RT? Define, track, describe, RT
Then who uses it? Soft-adventure. What is soft adevnture, how big is the market? Do the parent companies have CSR policies? Where does CSR fit into things? Dead end.
Back to the product. Drill into the product -some part of it is RT?
Scales? Satisfaction?
More direct approaches? Where have RT studies placed RT?
Whay has this been flawed? Examples.
Experience.
Me!
Friday 17 October 2008
Friday 17/10
Have a live version! Caught up with John N
sngogo is live!
sadly Jimbo is away til 27th monday. 1 week
This will allow me to get on top of next two priorities - 1. the lit review/ methodology 2. understanding what on earth I will do with this data.
Shouldn't be the end of the world. will work on a draft tonight. Lit review. What is it?
sngogo is live!
sadly Jimbo is away til 27th monday. 1 week
This will allow me to get on top of next two priorities - 1. the lit review/ methodology 2. understanding what on earth I will do with this data.
Shouldn't be the end of the world. will work on a draft tonight. Lit review. What is it?
Thursday 16 October 2008
Thursday 16/10
hockey yesterday
need to sharpen up on blogging
only takes two mins
managed to get snap survey up to date with all changes.
need to hunt down nightingale tomorrow
and then fire off an email to jimbo.
and start to work on this masterplan tomorrow.
need to sharpen up on blogging
only takes two mins
managed to get snap survey up to date with all changes.
need to hunt down nightingale tomorrow
and then fire off an email to jimbo.
and start to work on this masterplan tomorrow.
Tuesday 14 October 2008
tuesday 14/10
email john nightingale to check he is aboot
make changes to tool and update from what jimbo said
then email jim after changes have gone live, and ask him to give it the once over.
need to be sure of the changes first.
make changes to tool and update from what jimbo said
then email jim after changes have gone live, and ask him to give it the once over.
need to be sure of the changes first.
Monday 13/10
Had meet with XF - fairly positive - general feel of urgency and very little to stop the show.
Within one week - have instrument live - need to get in touch with John nightingale and JIM
make sure they are about.
And also start to think abou the natural progression of the whole shebang.
Why previous research has been flawed, where CSR fits in, when my models came from, whay they are better, etc.
Looking to start lit review and methodology, while waiting for data to come in.
Within one week - have instrument live - need to get in touch with John nightingale and JIM
make sure they are about.
And also start to think abou the natural progression of the whole shebang.
Why previous research has been flawed, where CSR fits in, when my models came from, whay they are better, etc.
Looking to start lit review and methodology, while waiting for data to come in.
Friday 10 October 2008
friday 10/10
need to finish up looking at Prentice - i feel i am onto something very strong to back up what i am talking about re: the summer.
Gaze - visuals romance - education
and critically they touch upon something greater linked to personal links and conscience.
I will elaborate and propose itmes for the cale - then need to move onto RT model.
big day.
need to get car. work from home.
Gaze - visuals romance - education
and critically they touch upon something greater linked to personal links and conscience.
I will elaborate and propose itmes for the cale - then need to move onto RT model.
big day.
need to get car. work from home.
Thursday 9 October 2008
Thursday 9/10
picked up maccanell - the tourist - but don't want to get bogged down in too much detail.
it is important to define the stage and why pine and gilmore is relevant - i.e. the breakdown of the experience, and this will come.
the real nitty gritty needs to be looked at today. what exactly are pine and gilmore getting at, and what is it that i can take and work with?
how much leeway do i have?
today is crucial to producing for monday.
it is important to define the stage and why pine and gilmore is relevant - i.e. the breakdown of the experience, and this will come.
the real nitty gritty needs to be looked at today. what exactly are pine and gilmore getting at, and what is it that i can take and work with?
how much leeway do i have?
today is crucial to producing for monday.
Wednesday 8 October 2008
wednesday update
varsity today -
need to finish up cit to some degree
and then start to pick up on the experience model - pulling it apart, putting it back toghether, and writing it up.
no worries.
fairly spaced out - have some sort of spiel about cit - need to concise for monday
starting to get into pine and gilmore a little - will pick up book on way home
take a brief look at Maccannell as well.
3/10 need to knuckle down tomorrow to pull this model apart.
need to finish up cit to some degree
and then start to pick up on the experience model - pulling it apart, putting it back toghether, and writing it up.
no worries.
fairly spaced out - have some sort of spiel about cit - need to concise for monday
starting to get into pine and gilmore a little - will pick up book on way home
take a brief look at Maccannell as well.
3/10 need to knuckle down tomorrow to pull this model apart.
Tuesday 7 October 2008
Goals for Tuesday
Print off the instrument and chart exactly what it is trying to ask...
Looking at the three different aspects.
3 tools.
Factor analysis will need to be addressed soon.
Best to look for close allignment with the original experience model.
outline the rationale for using this model - what am i trying to answer - what is the gap?
Clear breakdown of the SNAP model. where does it breadown? do i actually understand where the analysis comes from??
by the end of the day, at least something to think around...
Update by 5pm.
Well, turns out I have 4 different aspects - forget about loyalty aspect.
I have started to put togehter a document regarding the four different themes.
I have managed to local the main articles for 3 I think (RT - does not really have any).
Going to start to add more text
Have printed the snap survey and will beging to delve into it tomorrow.
Tuesday - 6/10
Looking at the three different aspects.
3 tools.
Factor analysis will need to be addressed soon.
Best to look for close allignment with the original experience model.
outline the rationale for using this model - what am i trying to answer - what is the gap?
Clear breakdown of the SNAP model. where does it breadown? do i actually understand where the analysis comes from??
by the end of the day, at least something to think around...
Update by 5pm.
Well, turns out I have 4 different aspects - forget about loyalty aspect.
I have started to put togehter a document regarding the four different themes.
I have managed to local the main articles for 3 I think (RT - does not really have any).
Going to start to add more text
Have printed the snap survey and will beging to delve into it tomorrow.
Tuesday - 6/10
Friday 2 May 2008
Factor Analysis
The first step in factor analysis is for the computer to select the combination of variables whose shared correlations explain the greatest amount of total variance. This is called factor 1. Factor analysis will then extract a second factor. This is the combination of variables that explains the greatest amount of variance that remains, that is, variation after the first factor has been extracted. This is factor 2.
Supervisory meet
discussed meeting with Jim
need to analyse data - SPSS
need to pilot more
using data from SPSS
and then contact JIM re confidentiality agreement
and look into piloting with different questionnaires, by switching the link.
discussion of experience economy - hg not too impressed - but I think he thought we were looking at RT - even i find it difficult to get RT into exp economy.
next step get analysed - get into snap - sort out confidentiality - get links to snap- sps sorted.
said best to use all destinations - then filter by them.
need to analyse data - SPSS
need to pilot more
using data from SPSS
and then contact JIM re confidentiality agreement
and look into piloting with different questionnaires, by switching the link.
discussion of experience economy - hg not too impressed - but I think he thought we were looking at RT - even i find it difficult to get RT into exp economy.
next step get analysed - get into snap - sort out confidentiality - get links to snap- sps sorted.
said best to use all destinations - then filter by them.
Monday 28 April 2008
Value
The reason I cannot really look at value is because the tourist does not really know the cost of individual components of his/her holiday - so the only way is to look at overall value, which could link in with CIT - does the normal questionnaire look at value at all?
I don't think so - need to ascertain whether the normal questionnaire is up for grabs...
Three levels
Attributional - Overall - Loyalty measures.
Need to be clear on which relates to which...
I don't think so - need to ascertain whether the normal questionnaire is up for grabs...
Three levels
Attributional - Overall - Loyalty measures.
Need to be clear on which relates to which...
more
need to clarify the link to satisfaction/value etc - where did this break down exactly?
i guess the link to service was lost with the jump to experience... although the link to loyalty remains. so the link is from critical incident to experience to rt(experience) to loyalty
each of them seem theoretically sound (apart from RT)
CIT (? used by Petrick- need to check)
Experience Economy (Pine & Gilmore)
Loyalty (Zeithaml)
Leaning towards more of an orthodox look at RT - with standard questions. (allows for benchmarking).
i guess the link to service was lost with the jump to experience... although the link to loyalty remains. so the link is from critical incident to experience to rt(experience) to loyalty
each of them seem theoretically sound (apart from RT)
CIT (? used by Petrick- need to check)
Experience Economy (Pine & Gilmore)
Loyalty (Zeithaml)
Leaning towards more of an orthodox look at RT - with standard questions. (allows for benchmarking).
more
what are each of CIT
EXP ECON
RT
LOYALTY
going to bring to the party?
and how can links between them give me knowledge?????
EXP ECON
RT
LOYALTY
going to bring to the party?
and how can links between them give me knowledge?????
Where are we at?
Piloted the questionnaire - got about 30 back, which is reasonable - just need to get SPSS fired up to do some factor analysis. The IT guy is supposed to be coming today/tomorrow.
I really want to look at the quaetionnaire critically - what are the different elements and what exactly am I supposed to be looking for/at?
4 parts I guess - CIT, experience economy, RT, Loyalty
each of these makes up a critical element.
I need to delve more into these, and especially the RT - have I been too ambitious with my questions on the pilot? Is it too contrived and complicated? Should I have moved so far from the tried and tested (Mintel)? What about the experience economy and the incorporation of RT? If I am trying to conceptualise Rt and experience as nearly one, then why am I separating them?
Bottom line is that I don't understand the maths enough to understand what I may be capable of finding out. Can I really find links between these things? I simply don't know!
Should I focus on conceptualising Rt within an experience economy framework? Where am I getting my RT definition from? - are there just generally accepted rt initiatives?
I really want to look at the quaetionnaire critically - what are the different elements and what exactly am I supposed to be looking for/at?
4 parts I guess - CIT, experience economy, RT, Loyalty
each of these makes up a critical element.
I need to delve more into these, and especially the RT - have I been too ambitious with my questions on the pilot? Is it too contrived and complicated? Should I have moved so far from the tried and tested (Mintel)? What about the experience economy and the incorporation of RT? If I am trying to conceptualise Rt and experience as nearly one, then why am I separating them?
Bottom line is that I don't understand the maths enough to understand what I may be capable of finding out. Can I really find links between these things? I simply don't know!
Should I focus on conceptualising Rt within an experience economy framework? Where am I getting my RT definition from? - are there just generally accepted rt initiatives?
Monday 10 March 2008
Questionnaire Breakdown
So - I have giventhe questionnaire out to a few peeps.
and got a little bit of feedback - mainly about technical detail - layout etc.
useful, because I didn't know that bits of the form did not work, and also because the repetition was quite obvious.
I now need to look at the 4 different areas in detail - as well as factor analysis - just to clarify why I am doing these four things in tandem.
Exp
Rt
Loyalty
CIT
as well as biographical stuff.
Need to ask some key questions - summarise the key points from each method, and then look at synergies.
Exp - really need to look at Oh's battery - maybe expand the remit - the questions are sooo repetitive - Pine & Gilmore
RT - need to integrate the points from other RT questions - ?
Loyalty - just clarify why I am using this and if it is possible to expand the options - Zeithaml
CIT - need to clarify how I am going to use this - how is it normally analysed? petrick
and got a little bit of feedback - mainly about technical detail - layout etc.
useful, because I didn't know that bits of the form did not work, and also because the repetition was quite obvious.
I now need to look at the 4 different areas in detail - as well as factor analysis - just to clarify why I am doing these four things in tandem.
Exp
Rt
Loyalty
CIT
as well as biographical stuff.
Need to ask some key questions - summarise the key points from each method, and then look at synergies.
Exp - really need to look at Oh's battery - maybe expand the remit - the questions are sooo repetitive - Pine & Gilmore
RT - need to integrate the points from other RT questions - ?
Loyalty - just clarify why I am using this and if it is possible to expand the options - Zeithaml
CIT - need to clarify how I am going to use this - how is it normally analysed? petrick
Friday 15 February 2008
Latest on Questionnaire
So,....
I like the experience economy stuff - I've been thinking about how tourism experiences fit into their model.
It is a little bit difficult, so I fugure I will go through a maybe a hundred more on RT.com and come up with a list of experiences that people come up with and see where the commonalities lie.
Then develop my own model - probing at the 3/4 different areas - anticipated to be landscape/ learning/ interaction (verbal)/ interaction (natural)
I like the experience economy stuff - I've been thinking about how tourism experiences fit into their model.
It is a little bit difficult, so I fugure I will go through a maybe a hundred more on RT.com and come up with a list of experiences that people come up with and see where the commonalities lie.
Then develop my own model - probing at the 3/4 different areas - anticipated to be landscape/ learning/ interaction (verbal)/ interaction (natural)
chhetri 2004
Determining hiking experiences in nature-based tourist destinations
Heavily statistical - quite focussed on landscape features
good lit review, worth following up on.
They look for differences between hilly/rocky/enclosed/forest etc.
definitely one aspect of what i want to look at, but not the whole thing.
Heavily statistical - quite focussed on landscape features
good lit review, worth following up on.
They look for differences between hilly/rocky/enclosed/forest etc.
definitely one aspect of what i want to look at, but not the whole thing.
Adib 2001
The experience of tour reps in maintaining and losing control of holidaymakers
Maybe interesting in that it concerns CIT - what happens when it all goes wrong!
Not useful at this point in time however
Maybe interesting in that it concerns CIT - what happens when it all goes wrong!
Not useful at this point in time however
Petrick 2006
The Utilization of Critical Incident Technique to Examine Cruise Passengers' Repurchase Intentions
Very strong article - Led me to think of CET - Critical experience theory
does it make sense?
where does RT fit into this?
Key diagram on page 278
Do I want to consider negatives in the same way as positives?
Very strong article - Led me to think of CET - Critical experience theory
does it make sense?
where does RT fit into this?
Key diagram on page 278
Do I want to consider negatives in the same way as positives?
Quan 2004
Towards a structural model of the tourist experience: an illustration from food experiences in tourism
Good lit review - approaches some new and strange aspects of the tourism experience
looks at 'peak' vs 'supporting experiences' and comparisions with the daily routine.
I don't really agree with a lot of what is said - I think mainly becasue it doesn't really fit with SA Tourism - There is an assumption that people only go for one thing - 'peak' whatever that may be - and other stuff just happens. I would make such an assumption about SATourism. i think, for example, food may be one of several main reasons why people go to a foreign land.
There is also the comparison with the daily routine - this isn't really what i want to consider - I want to look at the comparison between different types of experience. The comparision with home - recycling etc. is not really what i want to look at.
Good lit review - approaches some new and strange aspects of the tourism experience
looks at 'peak' vs 'supporting experiences' and comparisions with the daily routine.
I don't really agree with a lot of what is said - I think mainly becasue it doesn't really fit with SA Tourism - There is an assumption that people only go for one thing - 'peak' whatever that may be - and other stuff just happens. I would make such an assumption about SATourism. i think, for example, food may be one of several main reasons why people go to a foreign land.
There is also the comparison with the daily routine - this isn't really what i want to consider - I want to look at the comparison between different types of experience. The comparision with home - recycling etc. is not really what i want to look at.
Monday 11 February 2008
Latest on Questionnaire
so, I am in a pretty strange place - I need to write this questionnaire,
and the focus is on experience.
I want it to be pretty open, especially in the pilots
but I guess my main concern is the lack of literature on experience.
I have read around this experience economy - but haven't found a huge amount to support it.
Why isn't there more looking at tourism experiences?
and the focus is on experience.
I want it to be pretty open, especially in the pilots
but I guess my main concern is the lack of literature on experience.
I have read around this experience economy - but haven't found a huge amount to support it.
Why isn't there more looking at tourism experiences?
Friday 8 February 2008
Meeting with HG and XF 7/2
odd meeting
i had preped a 38 pg document on what is out there on Rt, but i really didn't want to talk about it.
HG was interested in Imtrav - so I said it might be a goer - as Jim had said.
Where is the questionnaire?
I was supposed to have this by early Jan - where is it?
They basically said go do it. which i agree with. it can be tested anywhere.
HG mentioned Experience economy which I am all over now. Looks excellent. Harvard.
I asked about getting out and speaking to few souls - They said Footprints man in Ilkley
Exodus man Simon, Fran at Explore.
I asked about ITB - need to check availability.
Get questionnaire written. and test it by next meet.
i had preped a 38 pg document on what is out there on Rt, but i really didn't want to talk about it.
HG was interested in Imtrav - so I said it might be a goer - as Jim had said.
Where is the questionnaire?
I was supposed to have this by early Jan - where is it?
They basically said go do it. which i agree with. it can be tested anywhere.
HG mentioned Experience economy which I am all over now. Looks excellent. Harvard.
I asked about getting out and speaking to few souls - They said Footprints man in Ilkley
Exodus man Simon, Fran at Explore.
I asked about ITB - need to check availability.
Get questionnaire written. and test it by next meet.
Thursday 31 January 2008
Update
Putting together RT paper on all work done in the area -
with summary of each paper - then look to key indicators coming out of the papers -
env - guilt - ethical consumerism - social - economic - etc.
try to marry up the papers and the indicators
by wednesday next. tall order.
with summary of each paper - then look to key indicators coming out of the papers -
env - guilt - ethical consumerism - social - economic - etc.
try to marry up the papers and the indicators
by wednesday next. tall order.
Monday 14 January 2008
Kozak 2001
Chapter nineteen ACritical Review of Approaches to Measure Satisfaction with Tourist Destinations
excellent review of literature in satisfaction
tracks all the interesting trends and does not commit to one or the other.
goes into good debates about lots of pertinent topics
CS/D
Importance
perf
scales
attibutes
sampling
multiple member of groups
first and repeat
timing of data collection
all very useful
excellent review of literature in satisfaction
tracks all the interesting trends and does not commit to one or the other.
goes into good debates about lots of pertinent topics
CS/D
Importance
perf
scales
attibutes
sampling
multiple member of groups
first and repeat
timing of data collection
all very useful
Sunday 13 January 2008
Experience
Starting to look more closely at the experience side of the holiday
how is this usueally measured?
the literature seems to move towards CIT
asking people about their most positive and negative experiences...
the natural follow up is then to ask what the consumer attributes this credit/blame to....
(Attribution theory)
this is a key area for Soft-adventure tourism, as i want to know what people think of the TO when all sorts of things happen - do they look at themselves - or luck - or the TO - ar the destination? The group I am with - does that mean i am lucky or the TO is good?
how is this usueally measured?
the literature seems to move towards CIT
asking people about their most positive and negative experiences...
the natural follow up is then to ask what the consumer attributes this credit/blame to....
(Attribution theory)
this is a key area for Soft-adventure tourism, as i want to know what people think of the TO when all sorts of things happen - do they look at themselves - or luck - or the TO - ar the destination? The group I am with - does that mean i am lucky or the TO is good?
Friday 11 January 2008
Dalton 2007
A survey of tourist operator attitudes to renewable energy supply in Queensland, Australia
Good leads to follow up on
pretty much all about RES - renewable energy supply - but links are to consumers opinions.
need to follow up.
Good leads to follow up on
pretty much all about RES - renewable energy supply - but links are to consumers opinions.
need to follow up.
Martin 2000
Attitudes Towards Package Holidays and ABTA–2000, MORI
Pages 8-9 has the key question
How important is it to you that your holiday should...?
Not damage the environment
Include visits to experience local culture and food
Benefit the people of the destination you are travelling to (for example, through jobs and business opportunities)
MORI
Another interesting point - satisfaction with holidays in general has gone up significantly since 1988
Pages 8-9 has the key question
How important is it to you that your holiday should...?
Not damage the environment
Include visits to experience local culture and food
Benefit the people of the destination you are travelling to (for example, through jobs and business opportunities)
MORI
Another interesting point - satisfaction with holidays in general has gone up significantly since 1988
Miller 2003
Consumerism in Sustainable Tourism: A Survey of UK Consumers
Good piece - from 2000
Asks all the usual kinds of questions. Some good references to follow up on.
The aim of the survey is to gain an indication as to whether consumers were willing to use a wider spread of information in the purchase of their future tourism products.
Good piece - from 2000
Asks all the usual kinds of questions. Some good references to follow up on.
The aim of the survey is to gain an indication as to whether consumers were willing to use a wider spread of information in the purchase of their future tourism products.
Bargeman 2005
The role of routines in the vacation decision-making process of Dutch vacationers
No real link to what I am looking at - the article looks at routines and I thought that maybe RT behaviour might have been approached, but it wasn't really.
No real link to what I am looking at - the article looks at routines and I thought that maybe RT behaviour might have been approached, but it wasn't really.
Wednesday 9 January 2008
Interview with Claudia
Spoke to Claudia at length about her 86 day trip in South America.
the trip was with Exodus in august-sept-october 2007
the trip ran from rio to quito.
In general Claudia was not particularly happy with Exodus, although she enjoyed the trip inmmensely.
1. from day one, the trip notes provided were from quito to rio and so no precise notes were available for the inverse trip. This meant that some of the timings were out, in particular the was pretty much no time in Rio, while the inverse trip had 3 days!
2. the tour was supposed to have 1 tour leader and 1 assigned driver, but it turned out that it was more like 2 drivers - they didn't seem too interested in the TL part.
3. There was no real initial briefing - this left people a little unsure as to how things would run. Claudia also felt there was a lack of info in general - the expertise of the tour was a big let-down.
It was more diffiult to "engage with the places you were" because of the TL.
4. The bus broke down on the way out of Rio - for several hours and this happened a number of times in the first 3 weeks - this was seen as unacceptable, especially as they got to see buses from other companies liek Tucan and Budget which seemed far superior. The drivers told the group that the vehicles were to be sold after the tour, as the coompany was no longer going to run these types of trip. This basic failing was seen as particularly galling.
5. The guides along the way were very good, especially thse at Machu Pichu in Peru - some were better than others, but in general very good.
6. The group had 16 people - 2 aussies, 2 kiwis and the rest British. 1 man was somewhat older, and all people seemed to be in some sort of transition - fitting in with the idea of a 3 month trip.
The group seemed to get on well - and were happy that they were not with the likes of the BEX group they came across - it seemed to be a more 18-30 trip. Although the group was mainly mid 20s - mid 30s.
7. The local payment was not explained properly as the group suspected it was to pay for things along the way, which it was not. When 'over-budget' the group wondered where the local payment money had gone. I guess there was a general lack of understanding about where the money was going/ had been.
8. Hidden extras were linked to the local payment issue as people began to question what they were getting for their money - there is a huge list of includeds in the trip notes, but the group did not feel there was so much included.
9. the drivers offered the option of restaurants, but the ones they went to as a group were not so good and were generally more expensive - this led to further issues with the drivers. On one occasion they had trouble dividing a group bill, and it turned out that the TL had ordered 2 bottles of wine, and that was the difference - again fuelling the fire.
10. the bus was more of a truck, with the drivers 'up front' and separate from the group. this alienated them a little.
11. one of the drivers 'hooked up' with one of the girls on the trip - seen as unprofessional by some group members.
12. No mention of RT or environmental considerations at all. By all accounts, unlikely with the drivers thay had.
13. On the whole the group and Claudia would not recommend Exodus, and would travel with Explore instead having previous experience with them. The lack of expertise and basic failings of the bus were too much to overcome.
the trip was with Exodus in august-sept-october 2007
the trip ran from rio to quito.
In general Claudia was not particularly happy with Exodus, although she enjoyed the trip inmmensely.
1. from day one, the trip notes provided were from quito to rio and so no precise notes were available for the inverse trip. This meant that some of the timings were out, in particular the was pretty much no time in Rio, while the inverse trip had 3 days!
2. the tour was supposed to have 1 tour leader and 1 assigned driver, but it turned out that it was more like 2 drivers - they didn't seem too interested in the TL part.
3. There was no real initial briefing - this left people a little unsure as to how things would run. Claudia also felt there was a lack of info in general - the expertise of the tour was a big let-down.
It was more diffiult to "engage with the places you were" because of the TL.
4. The bus broke down on the way out of Rio - for several hours and this happened a number of times in the first 3 weeks - this was seen as unacceptable, especially as they got to see buses from other companies liek Tucan and Budget which seemed far superior. The drivers told the group that the vehicles were to be sold after the tour, as the coompany was no longer going to run these types of trip. This basic failing was seen as particularly galling.
5. The guides along the way were very good, especially thse at Machu Pichu in Peru - some were better than others, but in general very good.
6. The group had 16 people - 2 aussies, 2 kiwis and the rest British. 1 man was somewhat older, and all people seemed to be in some sort of transition - fitting in with the idea of a 3 month trip.
The group seemed to get on well - and were happy that they were not with the likes of the BEX group they came across - it seemed to be a more 18-30 trip. Although the group was mainly mid 20s - mid 30s.
7. The local payment was not explained properly as the group suspected it was to pay for things along the way, which it was not. When 'over-budget' the group wondered where the local payment money had gone. I guess there was a general lack of understanding about where the money was going/ had been.
8. Hidden extras were linked to the local payment issue as people began to question what they were getting for their money - there is a huge list of includeds in the trip notes, but the group did not feel there was so much included.
9. the drivers offered the option of restaurants, but the ones they went to as a group were not so good and were generally more expensive - this led to further issues with the drivers. On one occasion they had trouble dividing a group bill, and it turned out that the TL had ordered 2 bottles of wine, and that was the difference - again fuelling the fire.
10. the bus was more of a truck, with the drivers 'up front' and separate from the group. this alienated them a little.
11. one of the drivers 'hooked up' with one of the girls on the trip - seen as unprofessional by some group members.
12. No mention of RT or environmental considerations at all. By all accounts, unlikely with the drivers thay had.
13. On the whole the group and Claudia would not recommend Exodus, and would travel with Explore instead having previous experience with them. The lack of expertise and basic failings of the bus were too much to overcome.
Tuesday 8 January 2008
Schwarz 2006
Feelings and Phenomenal Experiences
Seriously in-depth look at social psychology.
If I ever need to go deeper - this is probabaly the way to go.
Seriously in-depth look at social psychology.
If I ever need to go deeper - this is probabaly the way to go.
Churchill 1982
An Investigation into the Determinants of Customer Satisfaction
Strange old paper - good because it gives an accurate explanation of disconfirmation/satisfaction/expectation
Points to performance as a KEY VARIABLE
I think it is this article that is oft-cited as the first real
cited 636!
Strange old paper - good because it gives an accurate explanation of disconfirmation/satisfaction/expectation
Points to performance as a KEY VARIABLE
I think it is this article that is oft-cited as the first real
cited 636!
Tse 1988
Models of Consumer Satisfaction Formation: An Extension
Trying to unrvel CS/D, performance, satisfaction
Pretty deep and not sure if at all helpful
probably one to avoid.
Trying to unrvel CS/D, performance, satisfaction
Pretty deep and not sure if at all helpful
probably one to avoid.
Bigne 2004
Emotions in segmentation An Empirical Study
Amazing piece of work. Explains the emergance of affect and how marketeers need to start integrating emotions!
Very key article I must follow up on.
Link to Xavier as well
Amazing piece of work. Explains the emergance of affect and how marketeers need to start integrating emotions!
Very key article I must follow up on.
Link to Xavier as well
Ravald 1996
The value concept and relationship marketing
Interesting article - really the start of an idea - maybe good to check how many have cited this article.
nice idea of value - not just adding things on/in, but looking at the sacrifices - how can it be reduced - not juct by lowering the price but by reducing the other "hassle factors"
275 citations - very popular!
Interesting article - really the start of an idea - maybe good to check how many have cited this article.
nice idea of value - not just adding things on/in, but looking at the sacrifices - how can it be reduced - not juct by lowering the price but by reducing the other "hassle factors"
275 citations - very popular!
Sirakaya 2004
The Role of Mood on Tourism Product Evaluations
Interesting piece - points to 'mood' as influencing people's views on satisfaction, without staggering results. may be something to consider - petrick seems to have just included one item on his questionnaire of cruise.
Interesting piece - points to 'mood' as influencing people's views on satisfaction, without staggering results. may be something to consider - petrick seems to have just included one item on his questionnaire of cruise.
Benkenstein 2003
Emotional and cognitive antecedents of customer satisfaction in leisure services: the case of the Rostock Zoo
Extols the virtues of Emotion-based measures of satisfaction. Looks at combinations of cognitive and affective. Looks at integrating them. Initially mentions Gronroos Nordic model.
Points to the need to come up with an integrated approach.
Extols the virtues of Emotion-based measures of satisfaction. Looks at combinations of cognitive and affective. Looks at integrating them. Initially mentions Gronroos Nordic model.
Points to the need to come up with an integrated approach.
Carman 1990
Consumer perceptions of service quality: an assessment of the SERVQUAL dimensions
Critique of SERVQUAL - all a bit convoluted, but does discuss the role of expectations and the role of importance and how it can be used.
still unsure of the role of importance and expectations in my research - are they built into perf evaluations?
Critique of SERVQUAL - all a bit convoluted, but does discuss the role of expectations and the role of importance and how it can be used.
still unsure of the role of importance and expectations in my research - are they built into perf evaluations?
Oh 2001
Revisiting importance–performance analysis
A detailed loko at IPA with a full grid of all articles looking at the subject. Points out key issues; definition of importance / difference between expectations and importance.
Still not sure about IPA - pretty sure that I don't want to use it, as it is a simple tool for TOs, but I am still grappling with the intricacies of importance vs expectations and how they affect satisfaction.
A detailed loko at IPA with a full grid of all articles looking at the subject. Points out key issues; definition of importance / difference between expectations and importance.
Still not sure about IPA - pretty sure that I don't want to use it, as it is a simple tool for TOs, but I am still grappling with the intricacies of importance vs expectations and how they affect satisfaction.
Pizam 1978
Dimensions of tourist satisfaction with a destination area
The most basic study to date on customer satisfaction. possibly the pre-cursor to all satisfaction - factor analysis work. Nice explanation of why we use factor analysis - maybe able to use the battery as well - although it is designed for Cape Cod, USA.
The most basic study to date on customer satisfaction. possibly the pre-cursor to all satisfaction - factor analysis work. Nice explanation of why we use factor analysis - maybe able to use the battery as well - although it is designed for Cape Cod, USA.
Bitner 1994
Critical Service Encounters: The Employee's Viewpoint
Interesting kind of article - not particularly relevant though - looking at employee views of incidents
Uses CIT - Critical Incident Technique
And offers useful management implications.
(May have jumbled the order of the journals)
Interesting kind of article - not particularly relevant though - looking at employee views of incidents
Uses CIT - Critical Incident Technique
And offers useful management implications.
(May have jumbled the order of the journals)
Mohr 1991
Mutual understanding between customers and employees in service encounters
Building on Mohr and Bitner's previous work - The idea that when employee and customer understand each other, then satisfaction can be gained.
This isn't really what I want to look at.
Building on Mohr and Bitner's previous work - The idea that when employee and customer understand each other, then satisfaction can be gained.
This isn't really what I want to look at.
Wednesday 2 January 2008
Update 2008
I have been looking through the articles I have with a different set of questions in mind. My first run-through showed the emergence of factor analysis as the prefered approach, and the lack of consensus on satisfaction, quality, value.
My first impressions are that some authors are looking at quite different things:
the SERVQUAL approach and many of its buddies are really geared towards services made up of one encounter, or closer to one encounter than a tourism product, defined more through time than anything else (2 weeks for example).
The models that consider 'overall' satisfaction etc. are perhaps more applicable to the 'walking into the bank' style services than a complex jumble of encounters. This leads me more towards a division of the tour product into parts! but how should this be structured? Chronologically? or by function? or outcome? or encounter? or by feelings? cognitive / affective?
The danger of overally things is that the nuances of a tourism product may be lost - even a hotel attribute model is not spread over time like a series of encounters. A hotel is made up of a series of features, whilst an adventure tour is made up of a series of encounters over time - so it makes sense to divide the tour by encounters over time. to some extent.
One big light-bulb today was the realisation that value is a kind of non-starter, as each encounter would need to have a price associated with it - this may be possible for excursions, but not really in general. An overall value assessment may be possible, but not divided up.
Am I going to consider the tour as a series of encounters? a series of people? what about tangibles?
The more I think about it, it is more like a theatre production 'an experience' how is this assessed in the literature?
My first impressions are that some authors are looking at quite different things:
the SERVQUAL approach and many of its buddies are really geared towards services made up of one encounter, or closer to one encounter than a tourism product, defined more through time than anything else (2 weeks for example).
The models that consider 'overall' satisfaction etc. are perhaps more applicable to the 'walking into the bank' style services than a complex jumble of encounters. This leads me more towards a division of the tour product into parts! but how should this be structured? Chronologically? or by function? or outcome? or encounter? or by feelings? cognitive / affective?
The danger of overally things is that the nuances of a tourism product may be lost - even a hotel attribute model is not spread over time like a series of encounters. A hotel is made up of a series of features, whilst an adventure tour is made up of a series of encounters over time - so it makes sense to divide the tour by encounters over time. to some extent.
One big light-bulb today was the realisation that value is a kind of non-starter, as each encounter would need to have a price associated with it - this may be possible for excursions, but not really in general. An overall value assessment may be possible, but not divided up.
Am I going to consider the tour as a series of encounters? a series of people? what about tangibles?
The more I think about it, it is more like a theatre production 'an experience' how is this assessed in the literature?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
