Testing segment quality in rural

tourism

Juho Pesonen

juho.pesonen@uef.fi

University of Eastern Finland

6th World Conference for Graduate Research in Tourism, Hospitality and Leisure, Fethiye, Turkey, 24 – 29 April 2012

Presentation structure

6.6.2012Juho Pesonen 2

What?

Why?

How?

So what?

Segmentation

•One of the cornerstones of marketing: rightproduct for the right customers

•Finding homogenous groups of customers thatbehave in a similar way

– Data driven and common sensesegmentation

•Focus of earlier research has been on findingthe segmentation solution and profilingsegments -> clustering

6.6.2012Juho Pesonen 3

Literature review- However, there exists several pitfalls when

clustering customers (Dolnicar, 2002).

- A “correct” solution is always found.

- There are always differences between segments

- What are the most meaningful segments for practitioners?

- Dibb & Simkin (2010): six segment quality themes: homogenous segments, segment size and potential profitability, segment stability, segment accessibility, segment compatibility and segment actionability.

6.6.2012Juho Pesonen 4

- In this study the focus is on segment size and segment stability.

- Using qualitative criteria to evaluate quality of the segments (Dibb & Simkin, 2010).

- Pesonen (forthcoming)

- Tell me who you are and I will tell you where to go (Gretzel et al. 2004).

- Overlapping market segments:

- Clustering does not allow overlapping segments.

- Baloglu and Uysal (1996) found significant overlap between segments using canonical correlation analysis.

6.6.2012Juho Pesonen 5

Rural tourism- Segmentation also popular in rural tourism (Park &

Yoon, 2009; Molera & Albaladejo, 2007; Frochot, 2005; Kastenholz et al. 1999).

- Motivation segmentation

- Clustering methodology

- Very important form of tourism in Finland

- Cottages and nature

- Finnish and foreign tourists

- Most of the rural accommodation is reserved online: largest website www.lomarengas.fi.

6.6.2012Juho Pesonen 6

Three research questions:

•How well can Finnish rural tourists relate themselves to the rural tourist segments?

•How does the segments overlap each other? and

•How does two different samples from the website differ regarding travel motivations and demographics? -> Stability

6.6.2012Juho Pesonen 7

6.6.2012Juho Pesonen 8

Data and methods•Pesonen (forthcoming) and Pesonen and Komppula (2010) found

four different rural tourist segments in Finland.

•Data collected using banner advertisement

•Summer 2009: 727 usable answers from users of www.lomarengas.fi

•Summer 2011: 1778 usable responses from users of www.lomarengas.fi

•12 travel motivations were measured in both studies using seven point likert-scale.

•Data was analysed using cluster analysis and segments validated using ANOVA and chi-square.

•How well can tourists relate themselves to segments? (Gretzel et al. 2004).

Descriptions of the four segments

6.6.2012Juho Pesonen 9

Segment name Description

Social travellers

(N=213, 29.3 %)

During your holiday you want to meet interesting people, be active andmaybe even have a feeling of romance. You appreciate destination that has arich history and culture and where you can meet new people outside yourown family. You also like to have control over your own holiday. You prefertravelling with friends.

Family travellers

(N=202, 27.8 %)

You enjoy travelling with your family. Having fun, being together with yourfamily, new "once in a lifetime" experiences and all new and exciting motivateyou to travel. You want the destination to be safe for the family and that yourchildren enjoy the destination. You also appreciate environmental friendlinessof a destination.

Well being tourists

(N=164, 22.6 %)

You want to escape the busy everyday life to the peace and quiet of thecountryside. You want to relax from the ordinary and hassle of the cities andenjoy privacy and comfort. You appreciate that there are no timetables foryou, peaceful atmosphere, good possibilities for outdoor activities andbeautiful landscapes.

Home regiontraveller

(N=148, 20.4%)

You are interested in travelling to the region where your family comes from.

Something else,what?

If none of the above options does not describe you as a rural tourists you candefine your own rural tourism behaviour here.

Ta

6.6.2012Juho Pesonen 10

Segments size and overlap in 2011 study

Segment name Rural tourists relating themselves to segments

Social ruraltourists

170 (9.6 %)

Family travellers 643 (36.2 %)

Well beingtourists

606 (34.1 %)

Home regiontraveller

75 (4.2 %)

People belongingto two segments

180 (10.1 %)

People belongingto three segments

28 (1.6 %)

People belongingto four segments

8 (0.4 %)

Something else 68 (3.8%)

Comparing data setsMotivations: Statistically significant differences in many travel motivations. All the motivations that differ have higher mean score in the study conducted during summer 2009 expect for one. However, seven point Likert is an ordinalSimilarities in relative importance of items.

Demographics:In the study conducted in 2009 17 per cent of respondents were male. In the current study 26.3 per cent are male (χ2=24.35, p<0.001). The respondents are also younger in this study with average age of 39 years compared to 43 years in 2009 study. (F=40.37, p<0.001).

6.6.2012CBTS 2011/ Juho Pesonen 11

6.6.2012Juho Pesonen 12

So what?•Segment sizes obtained from clustering are not very

reliable.

•Only little overlap between segments.

– Not a problem in segmentation.

•Cluster descriptions were quite accurate.

– Good stability.

•Differences between samples

– How useful is a questionnaire in segmenting online customers?

– RSE?

•Limitations in data collection (Internet).

Questions, comments?Thank you!

www.uef.fi