Market segments of push and pull motivations: a canonical correlation approach

Transcription

1 pull motivations: a canonical Seyhmus Baloglu Research Associate, and Professor of Tourism Research, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Department of Hospitality and Tourism, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA Evaluates a technique which allows the simultaneous examination of push and pull motivations. The relationship between these two motivations for overseas pleasure travel has been studied for a German sample of 1,212 respondents. Argues that the information generated from this analysis could provide significant insight and marketing advantage when segmenting travellers, designing promotional programmes and packages, and in making decisions about destination product development. MCB University Press [ISSN ] [ 32 ] Introduction Motivation for pleasure travel has received considerable attention in the tourism literature[1-6]. Although motivation is only one variable explaining tourist behaviour, it is regarded as one of the most important variables because it is an impelling and compelling force behind all behaviour[3,5]. The study of tourist motivations based on the concepts of push and pull (destination attributes) factors has been generally accepted[3,4,6,7). While much has been written on the concept of push and pull factors, few researchers have examined the relationship between the two dimensional forces as factors of tourist motivations[8,9]. To effectively market a particular destination, it is necessary to understand both push and pull factors and the relationship between them. Knowledge about the interaction of these two dimensions of tourist motivation can help marketers and developers of tourist destination areas determine the most successful coupling of push and pull factors as tourism product bundles[10]. This interaction based on tourism motivations may then provide a basis for segmenting those travelling for pleasure. Study objectives This article has two objectives. The first is to delineate and understand existing product bundles as a function of motivation factors by utilizing canonical correlation analysis. Canonical analysis is a technique for finding the correlations between one set of variables (multiple dependent variables) and a second set of variables (multiple independent variables). It is a method of analysing the number, magnitude, and composition of independent dimensions of the relationship between two sets of variables[11]. Second, the study explores and illustrates the usefulness of the relationship between push and pull motivations based on the delineated variates of these items by assigning respondents to identified product bundles in order to form market segments, and provide marketing implications. Push and pull factors of motivation Most discussions in the tourist motivation literature have tended to revolve around the concept of push and pull factors. This concept involves the theory that people travel because they are pushed and pulled to do so by forces. These forces (motivational factors) describe how individuals are pushed by motivational variables into making a travel decision and how they are pulled (attracted) by the destination area[6]. Traditionally, the push motivations have been thought useful for explaining the desire for travel while the pull motivations have been thought useful for explaining the actual destination choice[3,11]. The push factors are considered to be socio-psychological motivations that predispose the individual to travel, while the pull factors are those that attract the individual to a specific destination once the decision to travel has been made. Most of the push factors which are originrelated are intangible or intrinsic desires of the individual travellers such as the desire for escape, rest and relaxation, health and fitness, adventure, prestige, and social interaction. Pull factors are those that emerge as a result of the attractiveness of a destination as it is perceived by the traveller. They include tangible resources such as beaches, recreation facilities and historic resources as well as travellers perception and expectation such as novelty, benefit expectation and marketed image of the destination[6]. Crompton[3] empirically identified nine motivations of pleasure vacationers which influence the selection of a destination. He also developed a conceptual framework that would integrate such motivations. These motivations were classified as socio-psychological: escape from a perceived mundane environment, exploration and evaluation of self, relaxation, prestige, regression, enhancement of kinship relationships, and facilitation of social interaction. The two remaining motivations: novelty and education, formed the alternate cultural category. In his study, the pull category of motivations was termed cultural. This approach to examining motivation implies that the destination then can have some degree of

2 influence on vacation behaviour in meeting an aroused need. Yuan and McDonald[12] also examined the motivations for overseas travel using the concept of push and pull factors. Data were examined from four countries: Japan, France, West Germany, and the UK. They identified five push factors from 29 motivational items: escape, novelty, prestige, enhancement of kinship relationships, and relaxation/hobbies. Seven pull factors were identified from 53 attraction items: budget, culture and history, wilderness, ease of travel, cosmopolitan environment, facilities, and hunting. Novelty was ranked as the most important push factor in the decision for an overseas vacation, followed by escape. The results indicated that individuals from each of the four countries might travel for similar reasons; however, reasons for choosing particular destinations and the level of importance attached to the factors might differ among the countries. Uysal and Jurowski[9]studied the nature and extent of the reciprocal relationship between push and pull factors of tourist motivations for pleasure travel by using the data from the Canadian Tourism Attribute and Motivation Survey (CTAMS). The study showed that a reciprocal relationship existed between the push and pull factors, which can have product development implications in tourism. From the literature review, it is accepted that motivation is multidimensional. Tourists seek to satisfy not one single need but a number of distinct needs simultaneously. Tourists are not motivated by the individual qualities of the destination. They want to experience more than one attribute in a destination. For example, Mannel and Iso- Ahola[13] proposed that two dimensions of motivational forces operate simultaneously to bring about tourist behaviour: first, the desire for change from one s daily routine (i.e. escaping) and, second, the desire to obtain intrinsic personal and interpersonal rewards from tourist behaviour (i.e. seeking). Thus, it can be inferred that it is not only reasonable but also possible and useful to explore and examine the reciprocal interaction between the push and pull items of motivation in the same context. For example, Pyo et al.[14] attempted to explain the relationship between motivations and attraction attributes by utilizing canonical correlation analysis. Four underlying dimensions of the US touring trip market were identified from the four canonical variate pairs. In the first variate, attraction attributes, such as cultural components and first class super-structure were matched with motivation variables such as visiting a dreamed place, novelty need, and being pampered. However, this study did not attempt to assign respondents to variates in order to form segments. On the other hand, van Veen and Verhallen[15] utilized canonical correlation analysis to establish the relationship between consumer characteristics and consumer response in order to form and profile possible market segments. Most recently, Oh et al.[16] also examined the nature and usefulness of the relationship between push and pull factors of motivation for an Australian sample of 1,030 respondents by utilizing canonical correlation analysis. Their study demonstrated that respondents could be assigned to delineated motivation variates in order to form overlapping market segments. The authors, however, concluded that since different variates may emerge due to differences in demographics, socio-psychological variables, destination attributes, and tourist culture, research with different samples should be conducted. In this study, the concept of product bundles will be used to refer to the perceived importance of the interaction between push and pull items of motivations for German pleasure travellers. This implies that certain reasons for travel may correspond to certain benefits that are to be valued and obtained at the destination site. Therefore, marketers and destination promoters in tourism should keep in mind that the most successful products are those which respond best to a bundle of needs within a given market segment, and should give more marketing efforts to matching a destination s major attributes to the tourist s diverse psychological needs. Methodology Data sources The study used data from a research study sponsored jointly by Tourism Canada and the US Travel and Tourism Administration (USTTA) and prepared by Market Facts of Canada Limited (1989)[17]. A total of 1,212 personal in-home interviews averaging 50 minutes in length were conducted throughout West Germany. Respondents were 18 years of age or older who took a vacation trip of four nights or longer by plane outside of Europe and the Mediterranean in the past three years, or who intended to take such a trip in the next two years. Questionnaire The 30 push and 53 pull items of motivation for overseas pleasure travel were rated on a 4- point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (not at all important) to 4 (very important)[18]. For the push items, respondents were asked to [ 33 ]

3 rate how important each reason was when considering an overseas vacation trip. For pull items, respondents were asked to rate how important each item was when choosing a destination for an overseas vacation trip. Data analysis Canonical correlation analysis was used to reveal any relationship and identify existing variates between the two sets of variables: 53 criterion variables (pull items) and 30 predictor variables (push items). The underlying logic involves the derivation of a linear combination of variables from each of the two sets of variables called canonical variates so that the correlation between the two linear combinations is maximized[19]. The maximum number of canonical variates (functions) that can be extracted from the sets of variables equals the number of variables in the smallest set of variables. The MANOVA procedure in the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) was utilized for the canonical analysis. Finally, respondents were assigned to identified product bundles (canonical variates) to form market segments. Table I Overall results of canonical correlation analysis Variate number Canonical Eigenvalue Percentage of variance explained Pull items Cumulative % Push items Cumulative % Redundancy Pull items Cumulative % Push items Cumulative % Note: Table includes those variate pairs with a redundancy index greater than 2 per cent for both the push and pull factors used in the final analysis, because low redundancy indicates that little variation in one set of variables can be accounted for by the other variable set [ 34 ] Results A demographic profile of German overseas pleasure travellers indicated that 581 respondents (47.9 per cent) identified themselves as female and 631 (52.1 per cent) as male. A descriptive analysis of the respondents revealed that respondents were more likely to be single (59.4 per cent), and most had received junior high school education (29.4 per cent). They represented all age groups (43.3 per cent under 36; 30.8 per cent 36-50; and 25.9 per cent over 50). Most of the respondents (42.3 per cent) fell into 39,000-65,000 (German Mark) income bracket. Canonical correlation analysis Canonical correlation analysis of both push and pull motivation items resulted in 21 canonical functions significant at the 0.01 probability level. The canonical correlations ranged from to The pull motivation (destination attribute) variance that could be recovered from push motivations was per cent (redundancy), and per cent (redundancy) of push motivation variance could be recovered by destination attribute variance. Only variate pairs with a redundancy index greater than 2 per cent for both the push and pull variates were considered in the final analysis, because low redundancy indicates that little variation in one variate can be accounted for by the other variate (see Table I). To determine which variables were most important in a given pair of canonical variates, standardized canonical coefficients and/or canonical loadings (correlations between each variable and canonical variate) can be used. In most instances, however, the canonical loadings are used to interpret the meanings of canonical variates[19]. Moreover, to avoid multicollinearity problems, canonical loadings are used to discern the relationships between pairs of variates. In this study, only variables with a canonical loading greater than 0.40 were considered for the interpretation of the variates in Table II. Variates product bundles Table II gives a picture of the four significant variates with their associated push and pull items that are used to define possible product bundles, and thus implicated as segments. The variates of canonical correlations are analogous to product bundles in that they indicate combinations of attributes that are related to one another. The first variate pair as a possible product bundle shows that the sports activity pull items in general are directly related to sports push items, and had relation to beach-resort items. The major destination attributes include water sports, fast food restaurants, cruises, nightlife and entertainment, and outdoor activities. In such attraction settings, major needs that travellers may fulfil are

4 Table II Canonical loadings for push and pull items of motivations Variates Mean Pull items (destination attributes) Nightlife and entertainment Amusement or theme parks Outdoor activities such as hiking/climbing Water sports Fast food restaurants Cruises of one or more nights Culture different from my own Wilderness and undisturbed nature Outstanding scenery High quality restaurants Historical/archeological/military sites Opportunities to increase knowledge Standard of hygiene/cleanliness Warm welcome for tourists Manageable size to see everything Personal safety, even when travelling alone Museums and art galleries Variety of short guided excursions/tours Seaside Reliable weather Beaches for swimming and sunning Exotic atmosphere Push items Going places friends haven t been Participating in sports Being physically active Roughing it Experiencing new and different lifestyles Seeing and experiencing a foreign destination Travelling to historically important places Learning new things, increasing knowledge Indulging in luxury Travelling to safe/secure places Seeing as much as possible Being free to act the way I feel Finding thrills and excitement Getting a change from a busy job Being daring and adventuresome Escaping from the ordinary participating in sports, and being physically active. The second variate pair indicates that this product bundle is about novelty in overseas pleasure travel. Push motivations such as learning new things, seeing and experiencing foreign destinations, and experiencing new and different life styles are matched with destination attributes that provide opportunities to increase knowledge. The third variate pair consists of urban-life experience in overseas pleasure travel. This bundle is defined by such attributes as high quality restaurants, historical sites, warm hospitality, guided tours, museums and art galleries, and safety and cleanliness. The corresponding motives are indulging in luxury, travelling to historical places, seeing as much as possible, and travelling to safe and secure places. The fourth variate pair describes beachresort vacation for overseas pleasure travel. The implied product bundle in this variate can be characterized by the following push motivations: being daring and adventuresome, finding thrills and excitement, and escaping from the ordinary. On the other hand, the corresponding pull motivations include beaches for swimming and sunning, exotic atmosphere, seaside, and reliable weather. [ 35 ]

5 Formation of market segments Once variates and their characteristics have been assessed and defined, respondents were assigned to the delineated variates which in turn define the size and type of segments. These segments were labelled as sports/activity seekers, novelty seekers, urban-life seekers, and beach/resort seekers. The names of the segments are a reflection of canonical correlation variates of push and pull motivations. These segments were defined by using one canonical variate at a time. By allowing individuals to belong to more than one segment, the individual differences in product bundles are retained[15, p. 50]. The remaining respondents were assigned to a given segment if they scored positively on all push and pull items that make up the content of a given product bundle. Based on this assignment rule the study was able to assign almost 84 per cent of the respondents (n = 1,014) to four segments as suggested by delineated variates of canonical correlations. However, this assignment also resulted in respondent overlaps in segments. The overlap between the segments and the size of the segments are given in Table III. Table III shows that approximately 11 per cent (110/1,014) of the German overseas visitors belong to only one segment. The magnitude of overlaps showed variation from segment to segment. By allowing overlaps between the segments, it is possible to account for the large variety in vacations with a small number of segments[15, p. 50]. Marketing implications Sports/activity seekers Travellers who may fall in this category want to be active, competent, and participate in sports. The destination should provide facilities for water and outdoor sports, cruises, and nightlife and entertainment. This segment of the German overseas pleasure traveller makes up 31.2 per cent (316/1,014) of the total assigned respondents. However, this segment had the lowest uniquely defined market size (0.06 per cent) among the four segments, suggesting this segment seek a variety of benefits in pleasure travel. This segment had the highest overlap with the beach/resort seekers segment (89.9 per cent), and had the lowest overlap with the novelty seekers and urban-life seekers segments (4.7 per cent each). Destinations wanting to target this group should develop products that would feature beach and resort amenities and related vacation benefits in their promotional efforts. Novelty seekers This segment of the German overseas pleasure travellers makes up almost 27 per cent of the total assigned respondents, and approximately 17 per cent of this segment is uniquely defined, suggesting that these travellers belong to only one segment. This segment had the highest overlap with the beach/resort seekers segment (37.6 per cent), followed by the sports/activity seekers segment (33.9 per cent), and had the lowest overlap with the urban-life seekers segment (11.1 per cent). When selecting an overseas destination, this segment gives importance to such destination attributes as opportunity to increase knowledge, experiencing a culture different from their own, and undisturbed nature. The main characteristic of this segment is the emphasis on novelty nature of travel experiences. Destinations with such attributes Table III Market segments with overlaps Sports/activity Novelty Urban-life Beach/resort seekers seekers seekers seekers Segments n = 316 (31.2%)* n = 271 (26.7%) n = 224 (22.1%) n = 203 (20.0%) Sports/activity seekers 2** (0.06) (33.9) (26.3) (20.2) Novelty seekers (4.7) (17.3) (13.4) (17.7) Urban-life seekers (4.7) (11.1) (15.6) (49.3) Beach/resort seekers (89.9) (37.6) (44.6) (12.8) Notes: 83.7% (1,014/1,212) of total respondents were assigned to four segments * Percentage of total assigned sample, n = 1,014 (e.g. 316/1,014 = 31.2%) ** The diagonal (underlined) elements indicate the uniquely defined pleasure travellers for each segment. Column percentages are indicated in the parentheses (e.g. 47/271 = 17. 3%) [ 36 ]

6 Table IV Profiles of uniquely defined German travellers should attempt to develop products that would emphasize a unique experience and cater to the educational motivations of travellers. Urban-life seekers This segment consists of almost 22 per cent of the total assigned respondents. The main characteristic of this segment is the emphasis on comfort and variety of attractions in an urban setting. Almost 16 per cent of this segment is uniquely defined, suggesting that these travellers belong to only one segment. As one may expect, this segment had the lowest overlap with the novelty seekers segment (13.4 per cent), and the highest overlap with the beach/resort seekers segment (44.6 per cent). Destinations wanting to target this segment should emphasize safety and comfort, and destination attributes such as cleanliness, high quality restaurants, warm hospitality, and a variety of urban activities at the destination site. Segment Characteristics Novelty seekers 42% age 26-35, 24% age % professional, 21% managerial 33% high school, 30% university 49% living together, 39% single 36% income > 39,000-65,000DM, 30% > 65,000DM 52% male, 48% female 36% spend two months, 32% spend two weeks 46% travel in summer, 32% in spring 65% use travel agents, 60% friends/relatives recommendation, 50% articles/books 36% take city trip, 32% touring trip Urban-life seekers 63% age 51 and over, 27% age % retired, 21% professional 58% high school, 27% primary school 61% single, 33% living together 44% income 39,000-65,000DM, 32% 26,000-39,000DM 60% female, 40% male 36% spend three weeks, 25% two weeks, 25% one month 43% travel in spring, 39% in summer 78% use travel agents, 54% friends/relatives recommendation, 46% brochures 57% take touring trip Beach-resort seekers 45% age 26-35, 22% age under 25 34% professional, 13% owner 60% high school, 31% primary school 52% single, 35% living together 42% income 39,000-65,000DM, 29% 26,000-39,000DM 51% male, 49% female 40% spend two weeks, 22% one week 34% travel in summer, 27% in spring 71% use travel agents, 56% friends/relatives recommendation, 59% brochures, 30% tour operators 41% take resort trip Beach/resort seekers This segment of the German overseas pleasure travellers makes up 20 per cent of the total assigned respondents. Almost 13 per cent of this segment is uniquely defined, suggesting that these travellers belong to only one segment. This segment had the highest overlap with the urban-life seekers segment (49.3 per cent), followed by sports/activity (20.2 per cent) and novelty seekers (17.7 per cent). The main needs of these travellers are escape and excitement and they are attracted to destinations which provides reliable weather, exotic environment, and beaches. Destinations wanting to target this group could develop products that would emphasize resort vacations which provide escape and excitement. Demographic and trip profiles of segments The uniquely defined segments were profiled based on selected socio-demographic and trip characteristics (see Table IV). The sports/activity seekers segment is omitted from this analysis due to the small number of uniquely defined segment members. From Table IV, the following profiles were obtained for the remaining three segments. Noveltyseekers are generally middle-aged professionals and managers, couples living together, and high school and university graduates with high incomes. They usually travel in summer and stay longer at the destination. They are more likely to take city and touring trips and use promotional (travel agents), word-of-mouth, and non-promotional (books and articles) information sources in planning their trips. Urban-life seekers tend to be single retired seniors with lower education and middle incomes. They usually travel in spring and summer and spend up to one month at the destination. They are more likely to take touring trips and use promotional (travel agents and brochures) and word of mouth as information sources before taking a trip. Beach/resort seekers are mostly single, young professionals and owners with middle incomes. They normally travel in summer and spend one to two weeks at the destination. They are more likely to take resort trips and use professional agents (travel agents and tour operators) and promotional materials (brochures) in planning their trips. Conclusions The findings of this study suggest that there is a significant relationship between destination attributes and motives. This implies that a successful matching of push and pull items is possible for a marketing strategy in [ 37 ]

7 [ 38 ] destination areas. The four variates have matched important attraction attributes with motives. The simultaneous examination of push and pull motivations would be more useful in segmenting markets, designing promotional programmes and packages, and decision making about destination development. If destination marketers have a clearer understanding of why their products are in demand for each market segment group, they will not only be able to tailor their products more closely to the needs of their customers, but also will be better able to select advertising and sales messages to inform and persuade tourists to buy products[1]. If several destinations have the same attraction attributes, preference is likely to be given to a destination which is perceived as most likely to match push motivations with pull destination attributes. A limitation of this study concerns the nature of the secondary data. The push and pull items considered in the instrument do not include all possible dimensions of motivation. Also, the respondents answers regarding the importance of the push and pull items are not for a specific destination, but for overseas pleasure travel. Therefore, a comparison of the motivations for respondents who travelled to different destinations was impossible. Another limitation lies in the application of these results to a destination s marketing decisions. Motivation is only one of many variables which explains tourists destination attraction attribute preference behaviour. Therefore, marketers in destinations should also consider other variables, such as travellers perceived inhibitors and situational constraints in their decision-making process. Notes and references 1 Holloway, J.C. and Plant, R.V., Marketing for Tourism, Pitman Publishing, London, Goodrich, J.N., The relationship between preferences for and the perceptions of vacation destinations: application of a choice model, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 17 No. 2, 1978, pp Crompton, J.L., Motivations for pleasure vacation, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 6 No. 4, 1979, pp Dann, G., Tourism motivation: an appraisal, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 8 No. 2, 1981, pp Iso-Ahola, S.E., Toward a social psychological theory of tourism motivation: a rejoinder, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 12 No. 1, 1982, pp Uysal, M. and Hagan, L.A.R., Motivation of pleasure travel and tourism, in Khan, M., Olsen, M. and Var, T. (Eds), Encyclopedia of Hospitality and Tourism, 1993, pp Jamrozy, U. and Uysal, M., Travel motivation variations of overseas German visitors, Journal of International Consumer Marketing, Vol. 6 Nos. 3/4, 1994, pp Cha, S., McCleary, K. and Uysal, M., Travel motivations of Japanese overseas travellers: a factor-cluster segmentation, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 34 No. 1, 1995, pp Uysal, M. and Jurowski, C., An empirical testing of the push and pull factors of tourist motivations, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 21 No. 4, 1993, pp Goodrich, J.N., Benefit bundle analysis: an empirical study of international travellers, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 26 No. 2, 1977, pp Christensen, J.E., An exposition of canonical correlation in leisure research, Journal of Leisure Research, Vol. 14 No. 4, 1983, pp Yuan, S. and McDonald, C., Motivational determinants of international pleasure time, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 24 No. 1, 1990, pp Mannel, R.C. and Iso-Ahola, S.E., Psychological nature of leisure and tourism experience, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 14 No. 3, 1987, pp Pyo, S., Mihalik, B. and Uysal, M., Attraction attributes and motivations: a canonical correlation analysis, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 16 No. 2, 1989, pp van Veen, W. and Verhallen, T., Vacation market segmentation: a domain-specific value approach, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 13 No. 1, 1986, pp Oh, H.C., Uysal, M. and Weaver, P., Product bundles and market segments based on travel motivations: a canonical correlation approach, Hospitality and, Vol. 14 No. 2, 1995, pp Throughout this work the study population is called Germans, although it is drawn from the West Germany (1989) population. The authors would like to acknowledge the research co-operation and assistance of Tourism Canada. Neither the collector of the original data nor Tourism Canada bear any responsibility for the analysis or interpretations presented here. 18 Some caution is in order when examining these push and pull motivations. First, the specific motivational components were preselected by the data collectors, and motivation was inferred from attitude measurement scales. These motivations did not come from open-ended questions. Second, motivations dealing with self-actualization and the consistency-complexity continuum were absent. Therefore, the list of travel motivations may not be exhaustive. 19 Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., and Black, W.C., Multivariate Data Analysis with Readings, Macmillan Publishing Company, New York, NY, 1992.