f&b supply in tourism sight locations · f&b supply in tourism sight locations ... first...

F&B Supply in Tourism Sight Locations development of an ideal product with the methodology of conjoint

analysis

Case study: Tourism Sight Location Kahlenberg

Bachelor Thesis for Obtaining the Degree

Bachelor of Business Administration

Tourism and Hospitality Management

Submitted to:

Dr. Ivo Ponocny

MRes Florian Aubke

Sandra STANIEK

0711535

Gloria SCHNEIDER

0711536

Vienna, 31st May 2010

F&B Supply in Tourism Sight Locations

I

DDEECCLLAARRAATTIIOONN OOFF AAUUTTHHOORRSSHHIIPP

I declare that this dissertation is my own unaided work. I have not included any material or

data from other authors or sources, which are not acknowledged and identified in the pre‐

scribed manner. I have read the section in the exam regulations on plagiarism and under‐

stand that such offences may lead the Examinations Board to withhold or withdraw the

award of Bachelor of Business Administration.

______________________________ _______________________________

Date Signature

______________________________ _______________________________

Date Signature


II

AABBSSTTRRAACCTT

Driven by the fast changing preferences of the tourist and competitive market environ‐

ment, the following study has engaged into the product development process necessary to

keep a destination attractive and competitive in regards to its supporting F&B offers. The

destination in this case is the tourism sight location Kahlenberg, which is well‐known for its

stunning view over the rooftops of Vienna. In this study, the researchers focus on the F&B

offers available at this destination, as they have discovered the need to improve these of‐

fers in order to adjust them to the fast changing preferences of the visitors.

The researcher’s intrinsic motivation for this study developed out of their own experience

and the fact that they have spent a lot of time at the tourism sight location. They visited the

different F&B outlets several times and encountered different problems in regards to the

offers and services provided. In the following paper, the authors discuss two questions. The

first one aims to determine if F&B services are critical components for the destination. The

second question deals with the product development of the ideal F&B product that can

satisfy the needs of the visitors.

In order to set up the basis for their research, the authors first engaged in the new product

development process. The following paper first gives an overview on the product develop‐

ment process in general and the different methods on how to generate new product ideas.

As the product development process includes the idea generation by using the customer’s

voice, the researchers felt the need to incorporate the Kahlenberg visitors’ into their new

product development process.

After evaluating the different methods used to gain information from the customers, the

researchers chose the conjoint analysis with the intention to create a “realistic decision

making situation” similar to the environment in the consumers’ real market place.

The following paper includes an overview of the different conjoint methods and identifies

the method that was the most suitable for the purpose of this study. The authors chose to

conduct a Partial‐Full‐Profile‐Conjoint‐Analysis, as this method had several advantages, and,

most importantly, made it possible to conduct a paper and pencil survey.

The researchers created a questionnaire including three different types of questions rang‐

ing from conjoint questions, structured questions to open response questions. The main

challenge was to identify the conjoint questions. The researchers conducted a pre‐study in

order to help them with the determination of criteria, attributes and levels of the conjoint

analysis. This pre‐study comprised a benchmarking analysis of the main competitors.


III

The results of the current study have shown that there is a demand for F&B services at the

tourism sight location Kahlenberg, but that the existing offers do not effectively support the

location. The findings have illustrated that there is a preference for F&B outlets offering

coffee, dessert, pastries and snacks instead of a full‐service restaurant. Furthermore, the

study has identified different clusters of target customers who could be addressed indi‐

vidually.

The current paper gives a comprehensive overview of all the findings and their significance.

Additionally, the authors identify the ideal combination of food offers, setting and atmos‐

phere and provide recommendations in regards to the future development of F&B offers at

the tourism sight location Kahlenberg.


IV

TTAABBLLEE OOFF CCOONNTTEENNTTSS

1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 1

2 Problem statement/Situational Analysis ........................................................ 2

3 Description and development of key concept .................................................. 4

3.1 Definition product development ........................................................................ 4

3.2 The key elements of product development ........................................................ 5 3.2.1 Definition of product ........................................................................................................ 5 3.2.2 Differences between product and service ....................................................................... 6 3.2.3 The product life cycle ....................................................................................................... 7

3.3 Product Development Process ........................................................................... 8 3.3.1 The idea generation process .......................................................................................... 11

3.3.1.1 Sources of idea generation .................................................................................... 12 3.3.1.2 The voice of the customer ..................................................................................... 14

3.3.2 Research Tools ............................................................................................................... 14

4 Case studies .................................................................................................. 16

4.1 The courtyard by Marriott study ...................................................................... 16

4.2 Development of a new interpretive centre ...................................................... 19

5 Empirical study ............................................................................................. 22

5.1 Situational analysis – tourism sight location Kahlenberg .................................. 22

5.2 Research rationale ........................................................................................... 25

5.3 Research Objectives ......................................................................................... 26

5.4 Research Methodology behind product development ...................................... 27 5.4.1 Conjoint Analysis ............................................................................................................ 27 5.4.2 Chosen Conjoint Methodology ....................................................................................... 29 5.4.3 Conjoint attributes and levels ........................................................................................ 31 5.4.4 Generation of attributes and levels ............................................................................... 34

5.5 Pre‐study – Benchmarking analysis .................................................................. 34 5.5.1 Approaches and types of benchmarking ........................................................................ 35 5.5.1 Benchmarking Analysis of Kahlenberg’s main competitors ........................................... 36 5.5.2 Main differences between Kahlenberg and its competitors .......................................... 37

5.6 Determination of criteria, attributes and levels of conjoint analysis ................. 39

5.7 Questionnaire design ....................................................................................... 41 5.7.1 Types of questions used ................................................................................................. 41 5.7.2 Structure of the questionnaire ....................................................................................... 42

5.8 Limitations ....................................................................................................... 44

6 Data Collection ............................................................................................. 45

7 Presentation of findings................................................................................ 46

7.1 Results of descriptive analysis .......................................................................... 46

7.2 Results of the conjoint analysis ........................................................................ 57 7.2.1 Results of significance tests with conjoint variables ...................................................... 59 7.2.2 Results of correlations with conjoint variables .............................................................. 62


V

7.3 Results of the cluster analysis .......................................................................... 64 7.3.1 Results of significance tests with cluster variable .......................................................... 67

8 Conclusion .................................................................................................... 72

9 Recommendations ........................................................................................ 74

10 Bibliography .............................................................................................. 75

10.1 Literature: ........................................................................................................ 75

11 Appendix ................................................................................................... 78

11.1 Questionnaire .................................................................................................. 78

11.2 SPSS Output ..................................................................................................... 82 11.2.1 Frequency table age distribution ............................................................................... 82 11.2.2 Kruskal Wallis tests with “coffee, pies and pastries” variable ................................... 83 11.2.3 Kruskal Wallis tests with “full service restaurant offer” variable .............................. 84 11.2.4 Kruskal Wallis test with “bistro setting” variable ....................................................... 84 11.2.5 Kruskal Wallis test with “traditional Viennese atmosphere” variable ....................... 85 11.2.6 Kruskal Wallis test with “stylish and modern atmosphere” variable ......................... 85 11.2.7 Correlations “full service restaurant” – “average expenditures” .............................. 86 11.2.8 Correlation “fast food, sausages & sandwiches” – “average expenditures” ............. 86 11.2.9 Correlation “traditional Viennese atmosphere” – “age distribution” ....................... 87 11.2.10 Results of the cluster analysis .................................................................................... 87


VI

TTAABBLLEE OOFF FFIIGGUURREESS

Figure 1: Layers of a product ................................................................................................... 5

Figure 2: The product development process ........................................................................... 9

Figure 3: Sources of information ........................................................................................... 12

Figure 4: Map tourism sight location Kahlenberg .................................................................. 22

Figure 5: Würstelstand Source: http://www.oe‐journal.at .................................................. 23

Figure 6: Coffee shop “Coffee To Go” Source: http://www.kahlenberg‐coffeetogo.at/ ...... 23

Figure 7: Café Restaurant Kahlenberg Source: http://kahlenberg.eu ................................... 24

Figure 8: Kahlenberg Lounge Source: http://kahlenberg.eu/de/lounge ............................... 24

Figure 9: Conditions of attributes and levels ......................................................................... 33

Figure 10: Main differences between Kahlenberg and its competitors ................................ 37

Figure 11: Conjoint variables and levels ................................................................................ 40

Figure 12: Reasons of visit coded ........................................................................................... 51

Figure 13: Average importance values of conjoint variables ................................................. 57

Figure 14: Part worth utilities of conjoint variable levels ...................................................... 58

Figure 15: Results KW tests with “coffee, pies and pastries” variable .................................. 60

Figure 16: Results KW tests with “full service restaurant offers” variable ............................ 61

Figure 17: Results KW tests with “bistro setting” variable .................................................... 61

Figure 18: Results KW tests with “traditional Viennese atmosphere” variable .................... 62

Figure 19: Results KW test with “stylish and modern atmosphere” variable ........................ 62

Figure 20: Correlation “full service restaurant offers” – “average expenditures” ................ 63

Figure 21: Correlation “fast food, sausages & sandwiches” – “average expenditures” ........ 64

Figure 22: Correlation “traditional Viennese atmosphere”– “age distribution” ................... 64

Figure 23: Results of the cluster analysis ............................................................................... 66


VII

TTAABBLLEE OOFF CCHHAARRTTSS

Chart 1: Gender distribution .................................................................................................. 46

Chart 2: Country/federal state of origin of respondents ....................................................... 47

Chart 3: Occupation of respondents ...................................................................................... 47

Chart 4: Histogram of age distribution .................................................................................. 48

Chart 5: Age distribution coded ............................................................................................. 48

Chart 6: Means of transportation used ................................................................................. 49

Chart 7: Most important criteria for the visit ........................................................................ 50

Chart 8: Average time spent at the platform ......................................................................... 52

Chart 9: Frequency of visit ..................................................................................................... 53

Chart 10: Accompaniment of visitors .................................................................................... 53

Chart 11: Consumption of food and beverages ..................................................................... 54

Chart 12: Preferred type of food ........................................................................................... 55

Chart 13: Average expenditures ............................................................................................ 55

Chart 14: Other motivating offers of interest ........................................................................ 56

Chart 15: Events of interest ................................................................................................... 56

Chart 16: Cluster Membership ............................................................................................... 65

Chart 17: CT cluster variable – means of transportation ....................................................... 67

Chart 18: CT cluster variable – accompaniment .................................................................... 68

Chart 19: CT cluster variable – frequency of visit .................................................................. 69

Chart 20: CT cluster variable – criteria of visit ....................................................................... 70

Chart 21: CT cluster variable – average time spent ............................................................... 71


VIII

LLIISSTT OOFF AABBBBRREEVVIIAATTIIOONNSS

F&B Food and Beverages

USP Unique selling proposition

Q Question

KW‐test Kruskal Wallis test

CT Cross Tabulation

Partial‐FPCA Partial‐Full‐Profile‐Conjoint‐Analysis

Two‐Way ANOVA Two‐Way‐Analysis‐of‐Variance


1

11 IInnttrroodduuccttiioonn

Imagine you are driving up to one of Vienna’s most beautiful and breathtaking sightseeing

locations called Kahlenberg with its 484 meters of altitude, connecting the city of Vienna

with the surrounding Vienna Woods in Lower Austria. You are planning to spend some re‐

laxing time there and after enjoying the marvellous view over the rooftops of Vienna, the

fresh air up the hill makes you feel hungry. So you decide to have some food and start

searching for a place to eat. What you can find are three distinct food providers which dif‐

fer from each other regarding offered products, services, price levels and location.

On the way from the car park to the platform, first of all you will find a “Würstelstand” that

offers typical Viennese snacks, like sausages, Schnitzel burgers and much more. Directly on

the left side of the platform, you will find a coffee shop called “Coffee to Go” where you can

have coffee, strudel, pastries and other snacks. Once you decide to have a hot meal includ‐

ing starter, main course and dessert, you would be likely to choose the Restaurant called

“Café Restaurant Kahlenberg”, which is the largest service provider on top of the hill. Below

the “Café Restaurant Kahlenberg” in the same building you will find the “Kahlenberg

Lounge”, a modern and stylish place where you can relax in comfortable chairs and have a

cocktail or two.

The researchers of MODUL University, which is located directly at the Kahlenberg, have

spent a lot of time in all three outlets while trying out the food and beverages and observ‐

ing the overall situation. During their visits they were able to make their own experiences

and get a deeper insight in all three concepts. These experiences and the observations

made them identify several problems in regards to the F&B supply offered. The problems

they encountered were the initial drivers that motivated the researchers to investigate in

the improvement of the tourism sight location Kahlenberg.

With the present paper, the authors intend to conduct the first stages of a new product

development process which aims to generate new product ideas by identifying the needs of

the visitors. By understanding the visitor’s needs and expectations, the authors aim to iden‐

tify the ideal F&B product that can help to improve the overall performance of the tourism

sight location. The outcome of the following study shall lead to a solution for improving the

image, attractiveness and average occupancy of the F&B outlets in the long run. Research

methodology behind product development includes the conduction of a Partial‐Full‐Profile‐


2

Conjoint‐Analysis conducted via the statistical program SPSS. Furthermore, the authors will

identify different target groups via the approach of cluster analysis.

22 PPrroobblleemm ssttaatteemmeenntt//SSiittuuaattiioonnaall AAnnaallyyssiiss

The tourism sight location Kahlenberg is a day trip destination that welcomes a large num‐

bers of tourists and locals every day. As mentioned by Crouch (1995), tourism relies on the

ancillary services that are provided at a destination such as food services, because these

services help the destination to work more effectively and enables them to be more com‐

petitive in comparison to similar destinations. Therefore, the authors see the existing F&B

outlets at the sight location as facilitation services, which should enhance the attractiveness

and the competitiveness of the tourism sight location Kahlenberg. As already mentioned in

the introduction, the researchers have identified problems in regards to F&B supply, during

their own visit. The major challenge all F&B providers are facing is a fluctuating demand,

which depends heavily on the weather conditions. During peak times, when the weather is

nice and sunny, all kinds of tourists as well as locals visit the sightseeing platform to enjoy

the marvellous view and to take advantage of the food and beverage offers. On the other

hand, when the weather conditions change from nice and sunny to windy and cloudy, far

fewer visitors find the motivation to spend time on Kahlenberg. Even the food and bever‐

age facilities offered do not seem to be attractive enough to motivate people to drive up

the hill.

The researchers have visited the different F&B suppliers several times during different

weather conditions. According to their experiences, the largest outlet called „Café Restau‐

rant Kahlenberg” is facing serious problems. Even though the restaurant possesses the best

location on top of the hill, including attractive facilities like a sun terrace, separate bar, ball

room and lounge area, the average occupancy throughout the year is not satisfying. Al‐

though the restaurant opened several years ago, it seems that they have not yet managed

to identify what the visitors are looking for. After extensive observations, the researchers

felt that the concept of the restaurant does not harmonize with the tourism sight location

Kahlenberg. Not only the „Café Restaurant Kahlenberg” is facing this problem, but also the

other F&B outlets do not create a complete picture. The “Coffee to Go” shop offers differ‐

ent kinds of coffees and some snacks. What is critical is the atmosphere, which does not

necessarily invite customers to stay, sit down and relax.


3

According to Howie (2005, p.1), “a destination is more than the sum of its parts”. He sug‐

gests that destination managers should contribute positively to the synergy that can

emerge when all components are functioning together as a harmonious whole.

After the reflection of the different challenges and problems the “tourism sight location

Kahlenberg” is facing, the researchers of the current paper claim that the day trip destina‐

tion Kahlenberg is a great location for tourists and local visitors, but is missing an overall

and coherent F&B product that is adjusted to the location and the target segments.

The research questions emerging from the problems the sight location is facing are:

Are F&B offers critical components for the tourism sight location Kahlenberg? As

mentioned before, food services are considered to be facilitations, because they

support the destination. In the present study, the researchers are interested to see

how important these F&B services are for the destination and if there is a need to

improve them.

What would be the ideal F&B product visitors are looking for? As mentioned in

the problem statement, the existing F&B services are facing several problems and

seem not to satisfy the visitors. Therefore, researchers want to identify the ideal

F&B concept and gain a deeper knowledge about the different visitors in order to

match the product to their needs and expectations.

After the analysis of the problem, the researchers engaged in the literature of new product

development in order to understand the process involved as well as the critical factors that

determine the success of a new product or service.


4

33 DDeessccrriippttiioonn aanndd ddeevveellooppmmeenntt ooff kkeeyy ccoonncceepptt

In order to create a new F&B concept, the researchers first engaged in the product devel‐

opment literature to find the pillars on which they can base their research. First they will

define product development in general and look at the key elements dealing with the prod‐

uct itself and which are essential to consider when starting a new project. Furthermore,

they will briefly describe the product development process and explain the different stages.

Finally, they will emphasise on the idea generation process to find out which methods can

be used to generate new product ideas. Their goal is not only to learn about the different

methods used to generate new product ideas, but also to find a way to create a concept

with high chances of success.

33..11 DDeeffiinniittiioonn pprroodduucctt ddeevveellooppmmeenntt

Product development encompasses many different fields that all work together in order to

create a new product. These fields include the design, creation and marketing of a new

product or service. The design and the creation of a new product or service can include

completely new features or a differentiation of existing characteristic that can offer new or

additional benefits to the customers (Kotler et al., 2006). In product development, there are

various possibilities like modifying the existing product in order to adjust it to the custom‐

ers evolving needs or to create an entirely new product that can cater to a newly defined

customer segment or market niche. As stated by Cooper and Edgett (1999), product devel‐

opment is an essential tool in today’s combative business environment as, according to

them, a service organization has only two choices. Either they will succeed to develop new

service product or they will fail as a company. A company’s products or services that are

adequate for yesterday’s and today’s markets might not resist tomorrow’s competitive

challenges. According to John Banham cited in Johne & Snelson (1990), Director General of

the Confederation of British Industry, every product needs constant attention in order to be

in front of the competition. Nowadays, everyone is affected by the fast and instant changes

in the industry and its trends. As a matter of fact, managers today cannot afford to hide

from technological and market changes and it is an indicator of the company’s success how

they adapt to the changes by creating and developing their products and services (Johne &

Snelson, 1990).


5

33..22 TThhee kkeeyy eelleemmeennttss ooff pprroodduucctt ddeevveellooppmmeenntt

In order to truly get into the field of product development and understand the different

aspects and processes involved in a product development procedure, the researchers have

to first look at the initiating subject, which is the product itself. Without studying and un‐

derstanding the features and characteristics of their product, managers and researchers

would not be able to improve or develop new products or services.

3.2.1 DDeeffiinniittiioonn ooff pprroodduucctt

From a market perspective, a product is an object of exchange. Producers or suppliers offer

products to potential customers in exchange for something else that is usually perceived as

equivalent or even greater value. It is evident that, in order to exchange a product between

suppliers and consumers, a demand for the product in question and the willingness to ex‐

change other assets must exist. When this criterion is met, markets can be developed that

then open the opportunities for suppliers and customers to meet and negotiate a mutually

satisfying exchange relationship (Baker & Hart, 1998). Kotler et. al. (2003) define a product

as anything that is offered to a market for attention, acquisition, use or consumption. As

shown in Figure 1, a product can be divided into three different levels. According to Kotler

et. al. (2003), each level has the power to add more customer value to the product.

The first and most basic level is called the core product. The core product represents the

product which the customer is really buying and stands at the center of the total product. It

is important to see that the core product includes the main benefits the consumer is seek‐

ing for. Therefore, product planners must first look at the core benefits of their product and

evaluate which benefits it will provide to their consumers. The marketers’ challenge is to

Augmented Product

Actual Product

Core Product

•adds additional services and benefits

•the way how the product is delivered

•combines characteristics and attributes of the product

•aims to deliever the benefits of core product

•identifies what the customer is really buying

•requires facilitating products

Figure 1: Layers of a product


6

not only sell the features of the product, but to sell the benefits to the consumer. Core

products require facilitating products, which can be services or goods that must exist in

order to use the core product. As an example in the service industry, a restaurant must

have a nice and functional setting to accommodate the guest, employees to serve the

guests, a menu, telephones to receive reservations and much more. Core products can also

have supporting products in order to add value and differentiate the product from others.

To create supporting products is optional, but if marketers succeed in developing a support‐

ing product that helps the product to stand out from a crowd of products, it will definitely

create a competitive advantage (Kotler et al., 2003).

The second level of a product is called the actual product. For the actual product, product

planners must successfully combine all the products characteristics and other attributes in

order to deliver the benefit of the core product. Possible characteristics of a product can be

the packaging, brand name or quality level, which all have to be combined to deliver the

actual product. Around the actual and core products, the product planners have to develop

an augmented product that offers additional consumer services and benefits. In regards to

consumer values, these augmentations become a very important part of the total product.

In the service industry, the augmented product can include the atmosphere, the customer’s

interaction with the service provider or with each other. According to Gronroos (1990),

cited in Kotler et al. (2003), the actual product, which includes the core, facilitating and the

supporting products, determines what the customer receives but not how they receive it. It

is the augmented product or service that is essential in combining what is offered with how

it is delivered. Especially in the service industry, the augmented product is of high impor‐

tance, as the customer is able to influence and co‐produce the service by interacting with

the service provider and/or other customers. From a consumer perspective, the total prod‐

uct is not just a simple set of tangible features, but also a complex bundle of benefits that

should satisfy their needs (Kotler et al., 2003).

3.2.2 DDiiffffeerreenncceess bbeettwweeeenn pprroodduucctt aanndd sseerrvviiccee

As we can see, there are major differences between a physical product and a service or

product with little or no physical content. Services have different characteristics than physi‐

cal products. Unlike physical products, customers cannot try out a service before they pur‐

chase it. Physical products can be touched, smelled and seen, but a service, on the other

hand, can only be visualized and perceived in the consumers mind. As an example, if a cus‐

tomer buys a vacation package at a travel agency, the customer does not know in advance


7

what exactly he/she should expect. The travel agent can show pictures of the hotel and the

destination and give recommendations and feedback about the location, but the customer

cannot be sure if the service will completely satisfy his/her needs. Another example would

be when visiting a restaurant. The guest will not know about the quality and taste of the

food at the restaurant until he/she has ordered and tried it. In order to reduce these uncer‐

tainties, customers look for something that can provide them upfront information and con‐

fidence about the service that they are interested in. In the case of the restaurant, the exte‐

rior appearance can be a good indicator. Customers might look at the conditions of the

ground and the overall cleanliness to get an idea of the image of the restaurant. (Kotler et

al., 2006).

Another special characteristic of most services is the fact that both the service provider and

the customer must be present at the time of a transaction. Marketers refer to inseparability

of services and customers. The employees of the service providers are a crucial part of the

whole concept of inseparability. They can influence the experience of the customer in a

positive or negative way, depending on the effort they put into customer service. Further‐

more, the customer itself can influence the experience. As mentioned before, customers

are interacting with the service provider as well as with other customers. This can influence

their personal experience and the experience of others. In fact, the characteristic of insepa‐

rability places a challenge for hospitality managers not to only manage their employees, but

also their customers.

The third characteristic is the variability of services. The quality of a service can fluctuate

depending on the person providing the service or the time the service is provided. Fluctuat‐

ing demand can be a great challenge in keeping the quality to the same standards. The

problem of variability is linked to the guest’s satisfaction. If guests are satisfied with the

service, they will be more likely to return to the same service provider. If the quality of the

service is not consistent, they probably will not return, and in some cases, even spread a

negative word of mouth (Kotler et al., 2006).

3.2.3 TThhee pprroodduucctt lliiffee ccyyccllee

In this part of the research, the authors will look at a product lifecycle to better understand

the evolution of a product or service and to emphasize the need of developing new services

in order to stay competitive and be attractive for potential customers. As mentioned by

Baker and Hart (1998), the concept of product lifecycle provides an insight into the evolu‐

tionary change process. They divide the lifecycle into four different stages. The first stage is


8

the introduction of the product to the market, which is also known as the launch of a prod‐

uct. In this stage, the marketers seek to create awareness for the product and establish the

product on the market.

The second stage is called the growth stage, where the goal is to increase the market share

and create a product preference in the consumer’s mind. In the maturity stage, the third

stage, a reduction in the sales growth can be tracked. During this stage, the competition

might have come up with a similar product or service that could reduce the market share.

Therefore, the main objective during this stage is to defend the market share while con‐

tinually increasing profits. The last product lifecycle stage is the decline stage, where sales

decrease. While the decline stage is taking place, markets have several options. One possi‐

bility would be to rejuvenate the product and make it more attractive to a wider range of

potential customers by adding new features and characteristics. Another solution can en‐

compass the creation of a niche segment by reducing the costs and continue to offer the

product on a smaller scale. The ultimate possibility would be to liquidate all the remaining

stock or sell it to another firm that is willing to continue to market the product (Baker &

Hart, 1998).

33..33 PPrroodduucctt DDeevveellooppmmeenntt PPrroocceessss

As mentioned by Kotler et al. (2003), all hospitality and tourism destinations have to inte‐

grate new product development into their strategic planning by observing new trends that

arise on the market and invest in trying out new products or services. They suggested that

every company should have a new product development program, which is split into eight

different stages as seen in Figure 2.


9

As the risk of failure of a new product can be accounted as high, a strong and systematic

new product development process is a helpful tool to success. The first stage when a com‐

pany wishes to incorporate a strategic development process is to determine the need for a

new product or service by doing a situational analysis and/or market research. This will set

the basis for the new product objectives (Rochford, 1991). After the opportunities are de‐

termined, the next stage is the generation and collection of ideas. In practice, a company

has to generate many ideas to be able to filter the ones with a great potential. In order to

figure out which ideas have the greatest potential and to match the ideas with the business

objectives, the search for new ideas should be systematic. A company’s product develop‐

Figure 2: The product development process

Strategic Planning

Determination of needs

Opportunity identification

Generation and collection of ideas

Idea screening

Commercialization

Test Marketing

Product Development

Establishment of prototype

Business Analysis

Plan Marketing Strategy Plan Marketing Strategy

Concept Development and Testing


10

ment strategy should include the products or services they wish to focus on and the objec‐

tives of these products or services. Furthermore, a company has to state the amount of

effort that will be made to develop new products or change, upgrade or modify existing

products. One way a company can find its way to develop products is by setting up its own

research. When researching for new potential product ideas, a company has the possibility

to use different sources of information in order to help them with the idea generation.

These different idea generation methods will be discussed in more detail in chapter 3.3.1.

The next step, which goes hand in hand with the idea generation process, is the idea

screening. The critical issue here is to evaluate the new product ideas and reduce the num‐

ber of ideas. By screening all the generated ideas, the poor ideas can be dropped and the

good ones are identified for future use. The purpose of idea screening is to filter the ideas

that have the highest potential of success, as it would not be profitable for a company to

proceed with the further stages of product development if the products have a low chance

of succeeding on the market. When screening all new product ideas, the responsible peo‐

ple, for example a new product committee, will consider a range of criteria by which they

will evaluate and rate the new product ideas. Some of the criteria are market size, the

competition, product price, development time and costs and the target market. Further‐

more, some essential questions are answered in regards to the matching of the product

idea with the company’s objectives and strategies. Another fundamental question to an‐

swer is if the company possesses the necessary people, skills, equipment and resources

needed to realize the idea in question and make it succeed (Kotler et al., 2003).

The third stage is the concept development and testing. At this stage, the surviving ideas

can be developed into a product concept. This concept has to be a detailed version of the

idea stated in meaningful consumer terms. The next step in the new product development

process is to plan the marketing strategy, which includes the design of an initial plan on

how to present and introduce the new product to the market (Kotler et al., 2003).

After all these steps are successfully completed, next comes the business analysis, the fifth

step in the developing process. The business analysis has the goal to evaluate the business

attractiveness. In this stage, all the essential components that play together to develop a

new successful product are reviewed and evaluated in order to find out if they are able to

meet the company’s objectives. Relevant factors in this stage are the review of the sales

forecasts, an evaluation of all costs included and the projection of profits that might be

made. If all these factors are evaluated and the results are satisfying, the product can move

to the next step, which is the product‐development stage. So far, the product has existed


11

only on the paper, and now time has come to produce a prototype. This prototype is a

physical version of the product’s concept and should meet three criteria. The first criterion

has to satisfy the consumer’s perception of the product; the second has to assure that the

product is working safely; and the last one deals with the cost factors. The downside of a

prototype is that it is reduced to the core product, and therefore the intangible aspects of

the product or service cannot be assessed (Kotler et al., 2003).

In case the product passes all the tests, marketers can move to the next level, which is the

market testing. At this stage, the product and its marketing concept are tested within a

realistic market setting. The goal is to test all aspects of the marketing strategy, which can

include the positioning strategy, distribution, branding, packaging, advertising and pricing.

After receiving the results, marketers have the chance to make more accurate sales and

profit forecasts. The final stage in the product development process is the commercializa‐

tion. If all previous steps were assessed and the company is satisfied with the results, they

will go ahead and launch the product (Kotler et al., 2003).

3.3.1 TThhee iiddeeaa ggeenneerraattiioonn pprroocceessss

In this paper, the researchers focus on the first two stages of the product development

process, which are very crucial in the early stage of development. According to Rochford

(1991), the ideas are the raw material for the development process. In order to develop a

successful product, the quality of the idea search and the screening process are important

for the whole future planning process. Rochford (1991) also mentions that the idea genera‐

tion and screening processes are less costly than any other step of the product develop‐

ment process and can therefore be a very efficient and effective way to ensure the future

success of the development process. Mathot (1982) identified different steps within the

strategic planning process of new idea generation and screening. The first step comprises

the determination of the need for innovation. This need can be identified by the conduction

of a situation analysis and market research. By looking at the company’s environment,

competition and internal strengths and weaknesses, the management can determine if

there is a need for innovation and new product development. If there is a need, the man‐

agement has to determine in which fields to search for new product ideas. These fields can

be identified by situation analysis, the firm’s corporate mission statement and the firm’s

new product objectives. In most cases, new ideas exist in areas that suit the opportunities

of the market and the strong points of the company (Rochford, 1991).


12

The idea generation and collection process is the actual process of coming up with potential

new ideas. Different sources like the internal and external sources as well as many different

techniques can be used to identify new ideas.

33..33..11..11 SSoouurrcceess ooff iiddeeaa ggeenneerraattiioonn

To successfully complete the idea generation process, marketers can use different sources

of information, as shown in Figure 3.

Internal Sources External Sources

Formal research and development Customer questions and complaints

Company brainstorm sessions Interaction with customers

Feedback from company’s salesperson Consumer research

Feedback from guest‐contact employees Competitors / Benchmarking

The first source that can be used is the internal source. As mentioned by Kotler et al.

(2003), a study found out that many ideas for new products can come from within the

company. Some examples of internal sources are company brainstorm sessions where em‐

ployees such as salespersons, guest‐contact employees, and midlevel to top level managers

contribute their ideas and thoughts. In the hotel and tourism industry, new product deci‐

sions are made at the corporate and the property level. At the corporate level, top manag‐

ers will make the decisions and in some cases, external stakeholders like bankers, consult‐

ants and lawyers will also be involved in the process. At the property level, decision makers

might include the owners of the institution, as many hospitality companies are family

owned and operated (Kotler et al., 2003). For Baker & Hart (1998), all major functions

within an organization can account for internal sources of information. They include the

research and development department, design, marketing and sales, production and engi‐

neering, and technical and customer service as possible sources for information on new

product ideas.

The customers are the external source that can offer supporting functions in the idea gen‐

eration of new product or services. Integrating customers in the process of new product

development is often seen as a formula of success (Förster & Kreuz, 2004). Watching and

listening to customers’ needs and wants can help decision makers to evaluate which ideas

Figure 3: Sources of information


13

have high potential to succeed on the market. As mentioned by Baker & Hart (1998), much

literature in regards to new product development has already suggested the involvement of

the customers in the development process. They mention a research project done by

Rothwell R. et al. (1972) where the focus of the study was to find out the differences be‐

tween successful and unsuccessful product innovations. They found out that successful

innovative products were seen to have a much better understanding of the consumers’

needs and wants.

There are several ways how a company can touch base with their customers. Through con‐

sumer surveys, the company can examine the exact needs and wants of their customers. In

order to find out which product would best fit to those needs and wants, a company can

also analyze customers’ questions and complaints. Another option can be a face‐to‐face

meeting between the company’s management and the customers to obtain useful informa‐

tion (Kotler et al., 2003). An interesting example on how customers are involved in the idea

generation is a current commercial of an Austrian home center / furniture store. They

launched a campaign where customers have the possibility to design their own crockery

and bed linen. Interested customers can submit their ideas online and take part at the so‐

called “design award” (Anon., 2010). The idea that gets the largest number of votes will

then be produced for sales in all of the stores. That way, information about customer’s

ideas and preferences can be collected and implemented immediately.

According to Walder et al. (2006), the changing preferences of guests in the tourism indus‐

try have to be taken very seriously due to a change from a seller’s to a buyer’s market. An‐

other advantage of including the consumers in the product development process is that the

price sensitivity and elasticity can be evaluated before the launch of the product. In order

to create the perfect product, marketers have the possibility to find out about the tourist’s

knowledge concerning potential substitute products and their price perceptions

(Montgomery & Rossi, 1999).

Another external source for generating ideas is the competitors. Kotler et al. (2003) state

that 27 percent of new product ideas are generated by observing and analyzing what the

competitors are doing. Companies have the possibility to buy competing new products or

use a new service the competitor is offering and evaluate their features and analyze the

sales in order to figure out if they should also bring out a new product of their own. There is

one rule that a company should always have in mind when copying a product or service

from its competitors that says that they should do it at least as well as the originator be‐

cause customers will not hesitate to compare the products, and if this comparison is nega‐

tive, then the products is likely to fail (Kotler et al., 2003).


14

33..33..11..22 TThhee vvooiiccee ooff tthhee ccuussttoommeerr

According to Moskowitz (2001), one of the main reasons why research has become more

important is the fact that it can reduce the risks of product failure. It is evident that it is the

company’s interest to learn as much as they can about what they will invest in before they

start a new project. As mentioned before, this development process includes customer

research, whereby different aspects of the product or service can be identified by looking at

the perceived customer’s needs and wants. This idea is also supported by Cooper et al.

(1999) who state that a critical step of successful product development includes a strong

market orientation and the incorporation of the customer’s voice into the development

process. The critical issues that are addressed here include the understanding of the cus‐

tomer’s needs, wants and buying behavior as well as the testing of the customer’s response

to the service concept and strategy. In order to determine the customer’s needs and wants,

companies have to invest in marketing research, for example, by carrying out in‐depth in‐

terviews. Research can involve many different aspects, and according to Moskowitz (2001),

the key issues are the type of problem the researcher wants to answer and the tool which

will be used to answer the question correctly. Moskowitz (2001) mentions that in previous

years, companies made their decision based mostly on their intuition and that systematic

research was considered a luxury. Today, however, the business environment has changed

and knowledge is considered to be a powerful tool. This tool has become so important that

many companies have recognized that research is not efficient enough when is it only con‐

ducted once in a while; but rather, it needs to be an ongoing business process in order to

create strategic advantages though knowledge (Moskowitz, 2001). Knowledge can be

gained by using different research tools.

3.3.2 RReesseeaarrcchh TToooollss

Hart (1996) states that research to identify the customer’s needs can be done by conduct‐

ing focus‐group interviews, or one‐on‐one interviews. According to Malhotra et al. (1999),

focus groups and in‐depth interviews are the major techniques.

A focus group usually consists of a group of participants of six to ten people and a trained

moderator. The intention of a focus group is to stimulate discussions in a non‐structured

and natural manner, led and developed by the moderator. Researchers can choose if they

want to use the direct or the indirect approach. When using the direct approach, partici‐

pants know the purpose of the research or they are made aware through the questions

they are asked. The indirect approach is used when the purpose of the project is totally


15

disguised. Researchers use this approach to see the participants behave as natural as possi‐

ble. The main goal is to create a nice atmosphere where participants feel relaxed and talk

about their feelings and thoughts (Malhotra & Birks, 1999). According to Morgan et. al.

(1993), the value of focus groups lies in discovering unexpected findings that can be ob‐

tained from a free‐flowing discussion and are mostly used in new product development,

advertising development and image studies.

Another technique would be to conduct an in‐depth interview that involves one single par‐

ticipant and an experienced interviewer. The goal of the interviewer is to find out about

how the participant thinks and feels about a certain topic. The main goal of in‐depth inter‐

views is to get a deeper understanding of the participant’s mind by interpreting what

he/she tells the interviewer during the conversation. A certain amount of social and inter‐

personal interaction also plays an important role, because in‐depth interviews build upon

intimacy in order to be really effective and meaningful. While in‐depth interviews are con‐

ducted with only one individual, they have the opportunity to uncover more detailed and

greater insights than focus groups (Malhotra & Birks, 1999).

Conducting descriptive research is another possibility to gain knowledge about the custom‐

ers’ needs and wants. There are several ways on how to conduct this research. Researchers

can use different survey techniques like telephone interviews, street interviews, computer

based interviews, postal surveys, email or Internet surveys. All of these different survey

techniques are based upon a structured questionnaire. The variety of questions depends on

the purpose of the research project, but usually aims to find out about the customer’s be‐

havior, attitudes, awareness, intention and motivation in regards to a certain topic, product

or service. A survey can be conducted verbally, in writing and also by using a computer

(Malhotra & Birks, 1999).

According to Brady et al. (1993), even though companies carry out the above mentioned

research activities, some company’s newly developed products still fail. A reason for that

can be the misunderstanding of the customer needs because the real problem lies in un‐

derstanding the right customer needs (Brady & Davies, 1993). There are also other research

methods that focus on identifying the right customer’s needs. Orme (2006) suggests the

method called conjoint analysis. This type of method is based on the customer’s evaluation

of different product profiles which are composed of multiple conjoined elements, also

called attributes. Via the derivation of weights customers have given to different individual

features, researchers are able to identify the ideal customer product.


16

Orme identified three different steps to design a useful conjoint analysis. The first step

deals with the development of initial hypotheses regarding the final product or service. The

second step determines which attributes and levels have to be tested to find out if the hy‐

potheses have a great potential for future implementation into the market or if there is no

acceptance of the hypotheses by the customers. The third step is to test the attributes and

levels to filter the hypotheses that have the greatest potential.

The following chapter will give an insight on two cases where conjoint analysis has been

applied successfully in the fields of tourism research and development.

44 CCaassee ssttuuddiieess

In order to get an insight on how companies have integrated a conjoint analysis into their

product development process, the researchers have looked at two different cases. In one

case, a well know hotel company has used a conjoint analysis to develop a new hotel chain,

and in the other case, a recreational facility has integrated a conjoint analysis to develop a

new interpretive center.

44..11 TThhee ccoouurrttyyaarrdd bbyy MMaarrrriiootttt ssttuuddyy

The following case dates back to the 1980’s, when Marriott Corporation was looking for a

new hotel concept. The reason why they wanted to create a new concept was their impres‐

sion that they had run out of good locations to build a “typical‐design Marriott Hotel at a

high enough rate to assure the firm’s continued high rate of growth” (Wind et al., 1989).

Their idea was to create a new hotel chain for a specific segment of travellers who were not

satisfied with the current hotel offerings. In order to do so, Marriot did not choose the tra‐

ditional way, which would have been to consult designers, architects, R & D engineers or

artists, but rather, they decided to look at it from the customer’s point of view. To include

the customer’s voice in their product development process, Marriott used conjoint analysis

to design a new hotel chain and, at the same time, they illustrated the power of marketing

science in the early stage of new product development.

Marriott hired outside consultants to conduct a large‐scale consumer study. They used a

hybrid categorical conjoint analysis augmented by computer simulations and a number of

related analyses. Hybrid models combine features of self‐explicated utility measurement

with more traditional conjoint analysis to reduce the complexity of the data collection

process. By using the hybrid methodology, researchers can accommodate larger numbers

of attributes and more levels within the attributes, which is essential in large‐scale indus‐


17

trial research (Green, 1984). According to Mr. Bryan who was at that time Jr. Executive

Vice‐President and General Manager of Courtyard by Marriott, the research allowed them

to focus on the items customers wanted and not only on things that were important to the

management.

Marriott decided to focus on two different segments, which were the business travellers

who travel a minimum of six times a year and stay in mid‐level hotels or motels, and leisure

travellers who travel at least twice a year and chose to stay in hotels or motels. After defin‐

ing these two target segments, Marriott’s aim was to find out what type of hotel facilities

and services they need to offer in order to attract these specific customers. In order to posi‐

tion and design the hotel in a way that the management objectives are met, Marriott came

up with essential criteria that needed to be included in the development process.

The first criterion was to offer good value for their money to the customers; the second one

was the minimization of cannibalization of Marriott’s other hotel offerings; and the third

one was to establish a market positioning. According to these criteria, Marriott formulated

a set of questions. The first question that needed to be answered was the demand ques‐

tion. Is there an existing demand for a new hotel concept that will be targeted to the low

business and pleasure segment, and will the demand meet growth and financial objectives?

The second issue Marriott wanted to elaborate was the question on how to position the

new hotels correctly in order to be competitive.

In order to get started with the hybrid categorical conjoint analysis, Marriott created a list

including seven facets of hotel features and services. Related to these facets, they defined

50 factors and 167 associated levels that describe these facets in terms of different options

and possibilities which could be offered.

This list gives a brief overview of the seven facets and examples for possible factors and

levels:

External factors: building shape, pool type and location (indoor or outdoor), land‐

scape design and hotel size;

Rooms: size, décor, facilities and amenities;

Food‐related services: type and location of the restaurant , vending services and

stores, room service and in‐room kitchen facilities;

Lounge facilities: location, atmosphere and type of clientele;


18

Services: different possibilities to make reservations, registration and check‐out,

transportation services, bellman, message center, business center services, car

rental and maintenance;

Recreational facilities: sauna, gym, racquetball courts, tennis courts, game room,

children’s playroom and yard

Security factors: security guards, smoke detectors, 24‐hour video camera and

more.

The study was designed to provide explicit answers to the questions mentioned above and

to establish the “optimal” hotel design. The consumer study for Marriott Management sur‐

veyed 263 mid‐level business travellers, 83 high‐end business travellers and 255 non‐

business travellers who were selected within four metropolitan areas.

As mentioned before, the hybrid conjoint analysis enables researchers to use a very com‐

plex system to accommodate larger numbers of attributes and more levels within the at‐

tributes. Respondents received a complete stimulus profile that was drawn from a much

larger master design. This stimulus profile is evaluated by the respondents on some type of

likelihood‐of‐purchase or intentions‐to‐buy scale. By using this method, Marriott was able

to find out which preferences the consumer had in regards to hotel features and design.

The study found out that some travellers were dissatisfied with the current hotel offerings

because either the value for money perception was not satisfying or the hotel was cheaper

but did not offer enough desirable features. Furthermore, a lack of personalization of fea‐

tures was detected by the study. Thus, what Marriott needed to do was to realize a new

hotel concept tuned to the travellers needs at a reasonable price. The respondents’ price

sensitivity combined with the set of amenities they selected as most desirable suggested

the chosen positioning of “a special little hotel at a very comfortable price”. This was rein‐

forced by the travellers’ choice of the following description of the most preferred hotel –

“an informal, quiet relaxing hotel or motel with charm and personality”.

In order to implement the findings of the study, development teams from different corpo‐

rate departments got involved in the direct translation of the research results into the final

product design. The resulting new hotel chain almost follows all the recommendations of

the study. Every one of the features and services they incorporated into the new concept

were previously selected by the consumers and were those with the highest values. After

the launch of the new hotel chain, The Courtyard by Marriott, the researchers and Marriott

Management agreed that the study was a complete success. It had a major impact on the

profitability and growth of Marriott Corporation and also changed Marriott’s approach to


19

new product development. Marriott has since developed even more accommodation facili‐

ties and related products successfully using similar procedures. (Wind et al., 1989)

For the researchers of the current paper, the above case study has given them a good over‐

view on how to structure a study in the field of new product development using a conjoint

analysis. They found the case was comprehensive and useful for their current study. In the

early stage of their research, Marriott choose to determine if there is an existing demand

for a new hotel chain, and if there is one, how to position this new chain in order to avoid

cannibalization of the other Marriott brands. This approach has shown the researchers of

the current study the importance of determining if there is an existing need for a new

product in the first place.

44..22 DDeevveellooppmmeenntt ooff aa nneeww iinntteerrpprreettiivvee cceennttrree

In the following case, the researchers used a conjoint analysis to determine the preferences

of visitors for a new interpretive centre. An interpretive centre is similar to a museum but

usually includes interactive programs to give the visitors the possibility to experience and

learn about the topics presented more lively and playfully.

Before starting the conjoint analysis, the researchers reviewed many different aspects of

the development of the interpretive centre. In their paper, they cite literature from various

marketing researchers, stating the importance of including the visitor in the planning proc‐

ess. According to the paper, the target customers include a wide range of people varying in

demographics, interests, attitude, experience and the amount of time they have available.

Consequently, they also differ from each other with regard to their preferences, behaviour

and expectations (Ross et al., 2003). Thus, the challenge of developing a new interpretive

center was to meet all the diverse needs of this wide range of target customers and to

make it an enjoyable and educational experience for all visitors. Another challenge they

faced was that professional exhibit planners are often very much engaged with the topics

they are working with; and therefore, it might be difficult for them to present the topics in

a way that the content is easily understandable for a broad audience. According to the arti‐

cle, a poor knowledge of the public can result in the misjudgement of visitor knowledge,

attitudes, interests and expectations. In the case of an interpretive centre, misjudging the

visitors can have a highly negative impact on the performance of the centre, as visitors

might become bored or confused and will not profit from a visit at the interpretive centre.

It is crucial to understand the visitors’ needs in order to find the right techniques and suit‐


20

able methods to communicate the interpretive information in a way to stimulate the visi‐

tors’ interest and convey valuable knowledge (Ross et al., 2003).

The management of the new interpretive centre recognized the need for a strategic new

product development process in order to face the above mentioned challenges. As the visit

of a recreation facility, in this case – the interpretive centre, is mostly an experiential jour‐

ney for the visitor, it is difficult to apply a traditional product development process, as the

product is often intangible and can hardly be simulated for product testing. Nevertheless, in

order to successfully develop a new product, one aspect of the traditional product devel‐

opment process is highlighted, which is the importance of involving the public in the devel‐

opment process. According to the paper, the incorporation of the public helps to ensure

that the planned facilities cater to the needs, preferences and interests of the visitors. The

benefit of knowing which attributes are important to the visitors is high, because the

knowledge will enable professionals to develop facilities that comprise the optimal combi‐

nation of these attributes and create the opportunity to enhance the visitors experience

and future visitation behaviour (Ross et al., 2003).

The management of the new interpretive centre chose to use the conjoint analysis, because

this method allows respondents to indicate their preferences by rating relatively complete

product descriptions rather than individual attributes of a product. The aim of the study

was to support the design and development of the interpretive centre, to identify the key

attributes of the interpretive centre, and to determine the most preferred feature combi‐

nations for the proposed facility. The conjoint analysis was divided into three steps. The

first step in developing the conjoint analysis was to identify the attributes consumers con‐

sider when choosing between product or service classes offered. The techniques used to

identify these attributes included the research and review of literature and the interviewing

of state agency representatives associated with the project. The result was a list of seven

attributes, each including between three to four levels.

The second step was the data collection, which first started with the creation of the ex‐

perimental design and the according profiles. Using the fractional factorial design, thirty‐

two profiles were created. A total of 110 questionnaires were completed, where respon‐

dents had the task to rate each of the 32 profiles on a 7‐point likert‐type preference scale.

In the third step, the collected data was analysed using ordinary least squared regression

with effect coding in order to estimate the regression coefficients called part‐worths. This

method allowed the researchers to estimate separate coefficients for each attribute and

the levels there within.


21

According to the descriptive information that was also included in the questionnaire, the

respondents had an average age of 38.6 years, were married and had an annual income

level between $40.000 and $59.000, and were well educated. The result of the regression

coefficient or part‐worths produces a utility scale from which the importance of each at‐

tribute can be seen. The utility scale for each attribute is expressed in common units and

can therefore be used as a good index of importance of the attributes. The study has found

out that the price feature is the most important determinant in the mind of the average

respondents. Ranking second in importance was the length of stay, so the numbers of

hours the respondents prefer to spend at the interpretive centre. Third and fourth were the

exhibit type and the educational opportunities. When including the specific attributes, the

findings of this study have shown that the average respondents attaches the highest value

to the inclusion of a one‐dollar entrance fee, two‐hour stay and live animal touch tanks,

educational boat trips, an information desk and a picnic area. By evaluating these results,

the management of the new interpretive centre gained a lot of useful information about

the customer needs and wants, which were implemented in the planning and development

process of the new centre (Ross et al., 2003).

The goal of the above case was to determine which characteristics of an interpretive center

are most important to the visitors. This case has illustrated very well that the deeper under‐

standing of the customer’s needs and wants is crucial for the success of the facility. Cus‐

tomers are involved and are interacting with the service provider. The visitor’s behavior can

have an influence on the perception and the overall performance of the facility. Therefore,

the recreational facility aims to include the findings of the study into their strategic plan‐

ning process. To the researchers of the current study, this case has proved the importance

of the incorporation of the customer’s voice into the new product developing process.

In the next part of this paper, the authors move to the empirical study of their research.

First they conduct a situational analysis followed by the formulation of the research rational

and the research objectives of their study.


22

55 EEmmppiirriiccaall ssttuuddyy

The first step of the empirical study is an analysis of the current situation at the tourism

sight location Kahlenberg.

55..11 SSiittuuaattiioonnaall aannaallyyssiiss –– ttoouurriissmm ssiigghhtt llooccaattiioonn KKaahhlleennbbeerrgg

The tourism sight location Kahlenberg has a long history and has been redesigned several

times in the last few decades. The Kahlenberg has always been a preferred day trip destina‐

tion for the Viennese as well as visitors from Austria and abroad.

The Kahlenberg with its 484 meter of altitude offers an incredible view over Vienna and its

surroundings. The natural environment and the accessibility make the Kahlenberg the per‐

fect location for spending a few hours away from the hectic city life. Over the past decades,

the picture of the sight location has changed its appearance. F&B suppliers have opened

Figure 4: Map tourism sight location Kahlenberg

W Ü R ST E L S T A N D Parking space


23

Figure 5: Würstelstand Source: http://www.oe‐journal.at

different facilities to host the visitors and a new viewing platform had been designed and

built to improve the infrastructure of the Kahlenberg. As shown in Figure 4, the location

offers a large parking lot and three different F&B outlets, which will be described in more

detail. From the viewing platform, visitors have a breathtaking view over the city of Vienna.

The core products that are offered include different types of food and beverages ranging

from a “Leberkässemmel” to a high priced main course. As mentioned in the literature re‐

view, the core products require facilitating products, which can be services or goods that

must exist in order to use the core product. In the case of the tourism sight location

Kahlenberg, there are various facilities that are offering different services.

On the way to the main platform, visitors can find a

traditional Viennese “Würstelstand” with its core

product, the Viennese sausage. Many other traditional

dishes can be found there as well as drinks. The tradi‐

tion of such a “Würstelstand” is to grab some food

and eat it while standing at the booth. It is not usually

typical to sit down and stay long, as all the dishes are

easy to take away and usually include a sausage and

some bread. Despite this fact, the owner of the “Wür‐

stelstand” has set up some tables and chairs besides

the booth to give visitors the opportunity to sit down and enjoy the food. The researchers

assume that this sitting arrangement has mainly been set up to cater to the needs of the

tourist from abroad, as the Austrian visitors are used to the traditional way of eating while

standing at the booth.

Directly on the viewing platform, visitors can find the coffee shop called “Coffee to Go”. As

mentioned in the problem statement, this coffee shop is a self‐service restaurant that of‐

fers a variety of coffees that

are claimed to be biological

products and a small selec‐

tion of snacks ranging from

Viennese sausages to apple

strudel. The core product is

the coffee in different variations. The facilitating products are the employees behind the

counter who take the orders of the guest.

Figure 6: Coffee shop “Coffee To Go” Source: http://www.kahlenberg‐coffeetogo.at/


24

The board above the counter that displays all the F&B products offered as well as the tables

and chairs accommodating their guests can also be seen as facilitating products. An aug‐

mented product is the terrace, which provides a marvelous view over the city away from

the crowded platform.

On the other side of the viewing platform is the Café Restaurant Kahlenberg, the largest

service provider at the tourism sight location. The core products include a wide range of

food and beverages that range from traditional Austrian dishes to international cuisine. The

menu of the restaurant, which is a facilitating product, displays all the F&B products includ‐

ing their prices. Interesting in

the case of the Café Restaurant

Kahlenberg is the augmented

product which, according to the

literature, offers additional

consumer services and benefits.

The augmented products in‐

clude facilities like the big out‐

door terrace, which offers the possibility to enjoy a meal outside while enjoying the view.

Several facilities for meetings and conferences are also available and can be rented for dif‐

ferent purposes. The style of the restaurant and the size of the facilities even provide a

good setting for events like weddings and other social events. As mentioned in the problem

statement, the facility has a great potential due to the great location and the appealing

exterior of the facility. Unfortunately, the service at the restaurant and the F&B products

offered have a low quality for a relatively high price. As mentioned in the problem state‐

ment, the concept of the restaurant does not meet the needs of the visitors of the tourism

sight location Kahlenberg.

Below the restaurant, there is another

terrace hosting the Kahlenberg Lounge.

The lounge can only be accessed by the

main entrance of the restaurant. The loca‐

tion seems to be perfect, as it has a won‐

derful and large terrace including the fabu‐

lous view, but the downside is that the

lounge is hidden below the restaurant; and

therefore, many visitors do not even real‐

Figure 7: Café Restaurant Kahlenberg Source: http://kahlenberg.eu

Figure 8: Kahlenberg Lounge Source: http://kahlenberg.eu/de/lounge


25

ize that the lounge exists. The setting of the lounge communicates a relaxed and laid back

atmosphere. The decoration and the furniture are modern and stylish and not comparable

to the setting of the other F&B suppliers. Food and beverages are offered on a small menu

and range from cocktails to classical snacks.

As the researchers see the Kahlenberg as tourism sight location, they need to focus on the

actual product. According to the literature, product planners must successfully combine all

the products’ characteristics and other attributes in order to deliver the benefit of the core

product to the customers. The actual product is the mixture of the core products and the

supporting products.

In other words, the F&B products and services need to be matched to the tourism sight

location and its visitors in order to sell the full experience to the customer. Not only should

the wonderful view be enjoyed, but also the culinary aspect of the visit.

55..22 RReesseeaarrcchh rraattiioonnaallee

Considering the potential of the location and all the people visiting the viewing platform,

the wish of improving the F&B products and services came to the researchers’ minds and

they decided to investigate in this topic.

As mentioned in the problem statement, food services are considered to be facilitations,

because they support the destination. Before investigating in developing a new ideal F&B

offer for the tourism sight location Kahlenberg, the researchers’ first step was to find out if

there really is an existing demand for such facilitation services at a day trip destination, how

important the F&B services are for the day trip destination, and if there is a need to im‐

prove them.

After the elaboration of these questions, and if there a demand and a need to improve the

existing F&B offers, the researchers will investigate in the product development process

because, as mentioned in the literature, the researchers agree that a company should have

an effective development process in place in order to successfully develop new products

and services (Cooper & Edgett, 1999). It is interesting to see that, in general, the service

industry is not as eager as manufacturing firms are in executing such development proc‐

esses. The result of a best‐practice report shows that the service industry is putting less

effort into each stage of the developing process than the manufacturing firms do. As an

example, Cooper et al. (1999) refer to the results of a statistical study conducted by Griffin

A., which shows that about 60 percent of the service organizations claim that they either do


26

not have a product development process or just use an informal approach. This result

shows that there is a great potential for companies to incorporate a product development

process into their strategic plans, which can increase their chances to succeed in the com‐

petitive environment they face today.

Cooper et al. (1999) have determined a few critical steps for successful product develop‐

ment that “differentiate winning new services from losing ones”. The first critical factor

deals with the preparation before the projects proceeds to development. They state that

this preparation is vital for the whole project’s success and that many projects fail because

of deficiency during this stage. Cooper et al. (1999) suggest that companies should do the

“the up‐front homework”, which includes the screening of the market, customers and

competitors. Therefore, the researchers of the current study will put their focus on generat‐

ing new product ideas by incorporating the voice of the customer into the process.

Much literature has covered the importance of involving the customer into the product

development process. Rothwell et al. (1972) have reinforced the link between understand‐

ing the user’s needs and the success of an eventual new product. Baker and Hart (1998)

state that at some point of the development process, the customers’ view on the product

or service will be a potential source of ideas for future development. The researchers will

take a deeper look at the different visitor clusters in order to understand their target mar‐

ket and to be able to respond to their specific needs and expectations.

The researchers decided to incorporate the principles and ideas stated in the successful

work of the above mentioned scientists in the present study. Therefore, their goal is to gain

knowledge from the potential Kahlenberg visitors and integrate this knowledge into the

product development process.

55..33 RReesseeaarrcchh OObbjjeeccttiivveess

The objectives of the present study are to elaborate on the need of improving the F&B of‐

fers at the tourism sight location Kahlenberg. If there is an existing demand for new and

improved F&B services, the researchers intend to develop an ideal product that satisfies

customers’ needs and desires and encourages visitors to spend their spare time at the top

of the hill.

The researchers’ goal is to support the owners as well as the managers of the tourism sight

location Kahlenberg and to develop F&B outlets that will be profitable in the long run. Via

the outcome of this study, the researchers intend to create a solution that improves image,


27

attractiveness and daily revenue. Furthermore, the researchers intend to identify different

target groups of the site location that shall lead to a more effective future marketing.

As mentioned in the problem statement, “a destination is more than the sum of its parts”,

and there should be a synergy that can emerge when all components are functioning to‐

gether as a harmonious whole” (Howie, 2005, p.1).Therefore, the aim is to improve the

entire experience by providing services that match the visitor’s needs and wants.

After the statement of research rationale and objectives, the next chapter will give insight

into the research methodology behind product development.

55..44 RReesseeaarrcchh MMeetthhooddoollooggyy bbeehhiinndd pprroodduucctt ddeevveellooppmmeenntt

Methodologies for the development of products have changed within the last decades.

Marketers who want to develop a product successfully have to identify characteristics,

needs, desires and buying behaviour of customers. Thus, the decision as to which product

to develop is one of the most difficult questions to answer. Dependent on the complexity of

the product, marketers are interested in the characteristics, design, price, and demand the

product should have in order to gain revenue.

As already mentioned in the idea generation process in chapter 3.3.1, the analysis of these

important variables, which answer the question whether a product should be developed

and sold, can be identified via intuition and recommendation of experts via the analysis of

competitors’ performance and the test of product prototypes through concept (market)

test. Although all approaches are useful and still in use, they are marked by high costs and

low efficiency. Furthermore, as mentioned in chapter 3.3.2, these classical studies lack in

identifying and understanding the right needs of the customers.

An approach that identifies actual needs as well as demand and characteristics of a product

before the prototype is actually designed and supports marketer through easy usability and

high reliability was missing (Orme, 2006). In 1970, a new approach called conjoint analysis

was a major finding in academic research at that time.

5.4.1 CCoonnjjooiinntt AAnnaallyyssiiss

Conjoint analysis is a cost effective survey research approach that provides company man‐

agers with useful information concerning product development. Derived from the fields of

mathematics, psychology and statistic, it sets a milestone in today’s marketing research.

The term conjoint derives from the word “to conjoin” and indicates simply the fact of “be‐

ing together”. According to Orme (2006, p.25), “the key characteristic of conjoint analysis is


28

that respondents evaluate product profiles composed of multiple conjoined elements (at‐

tributes of features)”. Based on the idea of simple additivity where the sum of the value is

equal to its parts, respondents evaluate the product concepts and researchers are able to

derive the weight they have given to individual features and attributes.

The first concept of conjoint analysis was established in 1970 by marketing professor Paul

Green. Based on major findings of the mathematical psychologists and statisticians Luce

and Tukey (1964), he published his work on a full profile card‐sort conjoint analysis in the

Journal of Marketing Research. It was the first time that complex buying decisions and buy‐

ing behaviour could be analyzed and thus also predicted (Green & Rao, 1971) cited in

(Orme, 2006).

All characteristics, features and attributes of a product that the researchers were interested

in were collected and combined in product concepts on around eighteen different conjoint

cards. In order to evaluate preferences, respondents were asked to put them in order from

the most to the least preferred product concept. As long as the number of attributes did

not get too large, researchers were able to deduce the most important attributes via the

approach of statistical analysis. Relatively soon after the method of ordering conjoint cards,

the researchers identified the possibility to establish preference scales on the cards, e.g. via

a ten‐point scale (Orme, 2006).

In 1974, Richard Johnson, a practitioner, published the next important findings in the field

of conjoint analysis in the Journal of Marketing Research. In his article on trade off matri‐

ces, he introduced a method where more complex problems could be solved via the ap‐

proach of pair wise trade‐offs. Instead of the use of multiple attributes used in the full pro‐

file conjoint analysis, he forced respondents to evaluate just two different attributes at the

same time. His approach did not cover all combinations as offered in the approach of Paul

Green, but in total, he was able to analyze a larger number of total attributes (Orme, 2006).

Parallel to Green and Johnson, another researcher called Jordan Louviere was working on a

third approach. Based on findings in the 1970’s by Brian Mc. Fadden, he established an

analysis where respondents are neither required to rank cards nor attributes. His model of

discrete choice analysis, later also known as CBC (Choice Based Conjoint Analysis), provided

respondents with a more realistic and natural environment. They simply had to make a

choice out of a set of alternatives. In comparison to the other approaches, CBC developed

slowly over time. Due to the fact that the model was confronted with several problems that

could only be solved through complex constructions, it was only used by a few researchers

for more than fifteen years (Orme, 2006).


29

In 1980, the era of software based conjoint analysis programs started. The two approaches,

full‐time conjoint analysis as well as pair wise tradeoffs, were realized first by two different

software companies. Steve Herrmann and Bretton Clarke Software realized Paul Green’s full

profile conjoint analysis, later also known as CVA (Conjoint Value Analysis). Sawtooth

Software realized Richard Johnson’s trade‐off matrices and established a computer soft‐

ware called ACA (Adaptive Conjoint Analysis). From that point on, computer systems were

able to collect and administer data in a more efficient way. Furthermore, it was the first

time that “what if” simulations could be conducted. Based on the simulation of a competi‐

tive environment, it became possible to test the acceptance of one’s own products in com‐

parison to competitive ones. The computed preference scores, also known as part worth

utilities, could be converted in important figures indicating product shares.

According to a study by Vriens et al. (n.d.) cited in Orme (2006), ACA became the most

widely used system of conjoint analysis until the mid‐1990’s. Although all approaches are

designed for different types of problems, ACA was able to extend its position. In 1993

Sawtooth realized Jordan Louviere’s concept of discrete choice analysis and established the

software system CBC, relieved ACA, and became the new most used software.

Today after more than thirty years of development, conjoint analyses are IT versions on a

much higher level. Based on important developments concerning computer speed, memory

capacities and graphic designs, the 21st century offers possibilities to create a much more

realistic picture. Animated 2D and even 3D versions, where questions can be reduced to a

minimum, collection can be done via web, and real time adoptions can be done, represent

our decade. According to a statistic released by Sawtooth Software (2005) cited by Orme,

(2006), Full Profile Conjoint Analysis, also known as CVA (Conjoint Value Analysis), is used

by 10 percent and ACA is by 20 percent of clients. The major winner is still CBC, which is

used by around 30 percent of clients. After a detailed analysis of the different conjoint

methods, the next chapter will give insight in the chosen conjoint methodology.

5.4.2 CChhoosseenn CCoonnjjooiinntt MMeetthhooddoollooggyy

The decision as to which conjoint methodology to use, was based on the intention to create

a “realistic decision making situation” similar to the environment in the consumers’ real

market place. As consumers are always confronted with product choices among different

brands offered, the researchers have decided to use the most widely used “Full‐Profile‐

Conjoint Analysis” technique, but with a partial design. Since they want to predict product

choices at Kahlenberg’s F&B outlets, they perceive the respondents’ “choice” among differ‐


30

ent attributes as natural. Beside the provision of a natural environment for consumers,

Partial‐FPCA offers several advantages.

Advantages of Partial‐Full‐Profile‐Conjoint‐Analysis

In comparison to other conjoint methods, Partial‐FPCA respondents are neither forced to

rate nor rank products. They are provided with a subset of total attributes from where they

are required to choose the option that applies most. According to Orme (2006, p.40), “the

attributes are randomly rotated into the tasks, so across all tasks in the survey each re‐

spondent typically considers all attributes and levels”. As respondents are confronted with

a subset and not with the total set of attributes, an information overload, and thus a bias,

can be avoided.

Another advantage is the variation of questionnaire design. Some researchers require re‐

spondents to select specific products and others decide to force them to choose the best

and worst option. Another possibility is to force interviewees to consider the next five to

ten purchases. Also known as chip allocation, this approach enables the evaluation of a

future purchase intention. For the case that no option would satisfy the interviewees, also

the option “none” has to be provided.

An additional advantage is the increased number of attributes that can be evaluated. In

comparison to the total number of six attributes that can be evaluated via Full Profile Con‐

joint Analysis, Partial‐FPCA offers the possibility to include a higher number of attributes

(factors) and levels (sub categories of attributes). Beside the increased number of attrib‐

utes, a further advantage is the method’s potential to measure interactions between at‐

tributes effectively.

Finally the most important benefit for the current study is the possibility to conduct a paper

and pencil administration. Partial‐FPCA is the only conjoint method which can be used

without computer support during interview process in an efficient way. Beside several ad‐

vantages researchers have identified also important disadvantages (Orme, 2006).

Disadvantages of ‐Full‐Profile‐Conjoint‐Analysis

One of the most difficult challenges of Partial‐Full‐Profile‐Conjoint Analysis can be the sta‐

bility of the method. In comparison to other conjoint methods, stability is highly dependent

on the size of the sample. Although individual parameter levels are marked by a lower sta‐

bility, researchers accept larger standard errors in order to be able to achieve an accurate

simulation of the market situation.


31

Another important problem can be the selection of the sample. Sampling errors where the

sample of respondents is deviating from the underlying population may lead to a wrong

outcome. Based on random selection of the sample, sampling errors may appear by chance

and systematic deviation from population may be avoided.

The third challenging problem is the possibility of arising measurement errors. This type of

errors is usually reduced by an increase of displayed choice questions in the questionnaire.

However, it can lead to important problems. As conjoint analysis studies tend to be com‐

prehensive in nature, a respondent’s attention can get lost after a specific amount of time

and interviewees start to become tired. Therefore, researchers are forced to identify the

respondent’s personal limit of adequate and useful responses (Orme, 2006).

After an investigation in the disadvantages and challenges of Partial‐FPCA Analysis, the re‐

searchers came to the conclusion that data collections as well as data analysis have to be

done in a careful way in order to avoid potential bias and errors. However, they believe that

the chosen type of conjoint analysis, together with the simulation of a realistic decision

making situation, will lead to useful results.

After a description of the chosen conjoint analysis method and its advantages and chal‐

lenges, the researchers will start with the first steps of the empirical part of the research. In

the following chapter, they will provide insight into the different steps of the conjoint

analysis development process.

5.4.3 CCoonnjjooiinntt aattttrriibbuutteess aanndd lleevveellss

The questionnaire of the conjoint study will be based on the simulation of a realistic deci‐

sion making situation. Out of a subset of determined variables, respondents will be forced

to choose the option that applies most. Nearly all researchers who conducted conjoint

analysis in the past agree that the determination of attributes is even the heart of the

study. According to Orme (2006, p.43), ”defining proper attributes and levels is arguably

the most fundamental and critical aspect of designing a good conjoint study”. The right or

wrong definition of attributes can lead to the success or failure of the whole study. Derived

from these important assumptions, the researchers intend of course to place special em‐

phasis on the selection of conjoint attributes and its different levels.


32

Characteristics of attributes and levels

The attributes of a conjoint analysis, also called “factors”, indicate the different characteris‐

tics of the product that is intended to be developed. According to Gustaffson et al. (2000,

p.73), “factors do not only describe a product or service, but also differentiate the product

or service from its competitors”. The different attributes, which vary from product to prod‐

uct and thus from study to study, can be based on the size, colour, consistency and location

of a product (Orme, 2006). As mentioned in a study by Moskowitz (2001), characteristics of

the development of a new type of hamburger were based on meat‐, bun‐, and condiment

description. However, attributes are not the only characteristics that have to be deter‐

mined. Beside the total number of factors, also the different levels of attributes have to be

identified. Explained again by Moskowitz’s development of hamburgers, respondents were

able to choose between different weights of meat, grill marks, fat and non‐fat condition,

butter flavoured taste and different types of sauce or mayonnaise. Each attribute should

not exceed a total amount of five levels, as an information overload shall be avoided under

all circumstances.

In general, researchers who conduct a conjoint analysis can choose between three different

types of attributes. They can be nominal, ordinal or quantitative in nature. According to

Orme (2006), researchers who decide to use nominal attributes are not able to identify

respondent’s choice in advance. They are not able to estimate the consumer’s choice of

one brand over another, for example. Concerning ordinal attributes, researchers can esti‐

mate in advance what respondents usually prefer, e.g. home delivery vs. pick up from store.

Furthermore, attributes can be quantitative in nature. Respondents are forced to choose

between different amounts of speed, money, time, or length of stay (Orme, 2006).

Once the stage of attribute determination is reached, several conditions have to be considered.

Conditions of attributes and levels

The consideration of all the conditions of attributes and levels is crucial to ensure a useful

outcome of a conjoint analysis. As you can see in Figure 9, first of all the length of attribute

description is an important part. The formulation of attributes should be done in a very

short and precise way. Respondents, who evaluate a question within a few seconds, should

be provided with the receipt of a clear message. Unclear and broad definitions, e.g. ade‐

quate weight or superior performance, should be avoided as every interviewee would as‐

sume a different meaning. In addition a simplification strategy of the respondent could be

the consequence.


33

The second important aspect concerns the number of attributes and levels used. The num‐

ber of attributes varies between different types of conjoint analysis methods from a mini‐

mum of six attributes used in the full profile method to a total of fifteen attributes used in

the adaptive conjoint analysis type. For the Partial‐Full‐Profile‐Conjoint‐Analysis, it is rec‐

ommended to achieve a limited but balanced amount of a maximum of five attribute levels.

Furthermore, it is highly important to cover the full range of possibilities. Attributes should

be based on existing products, but they should also cover characteristics that do not exist

by now and that researchers want to find out.

The fourth important aspect concerns the independency of attributes. If attributes are not

independent, an overlapping as well as a “double counting” of attributes could be the con‐

sequence. Especially the chosen Partial‐Full‐Profile‐Conjoint‐Analysis can be subject to this

type of problem and therefore needs a high degree of “economization”.

The fifth important condition requires a definition of mutually exclusive attribute levels.

Bryan Orme (2006) explained this important attribute condition based on a simple car ex‐

ample. If respondents are provided with simple “one three‐level attributes” they have to

choose one option out of the pool of given possibilities. According to his example, inter‐

viewees had to choose between a car with sunroof, extended warranty or GPS. Although

the answers would be of value, conjoint analysis tries to use a different perspective. Instead

of the identification of one single attribute, researchers are interested in the evaluation of a

combination of attributes. Thus instead of “one three‐level attributes”, researchers should

provide respondents with “one eight‐level attributes”. Therefore, interviewees should be

forced to choose between a car with a sunroof, warranty and GPS, or sunroof, no warranty

Conditions of attributes and levels

1. To ensure adequate length of the attribute description

2. To ensure adequate number of attributes and levels used

3. To cover the full range of possibilities

4. To ensure independency of attributes

5. To ensure mutually exclusive attribute levels

Figure 9: Conditions of attributes and levels


34

and no GPS, and so on. An option to avoid information overload is the possibility to use

“binary attributes”, where respondents are forced to evaluate the existence of an attribute

versus its absence. In Orme’s example, guests were forced to choose a sunroof versus no

sunroof and GPS versus no GPS.

After the description of the different conditions, the researchers will provide an insight into

the generation of attributes.

5.4.4 GGeenneerraattiioonn ooff aattttrriibbuutteess aanndd lleevveellss

The practical determination of attributes is generally based on the development of a sys‐

tematic initial process. Child (1995) cited in Gustaffson et al. (2000, p.70) defines this sys‐

tematic way of thinking as “hypothesis”. According to him, “the most efficient way to iden‐

tify customer needs is to be hypothesis driven”. Gustaffson et al. (2000) agree that it is im‐

portant to have a systematic approach behind the collection of consumer information and

behind the identification of their potential needs. For the development of a “hypothesis”,

they have identified five important activities. According to them, the identification of cus‐

tomer needs can be based on internal brainstorming sessions, focus groups with customers

and experts, external interviews, and an analysis of the same or of similar markets.

For the identification of needs and attributes of the current conjoint analysis, the research‐

ers decided to derive their systematic initial process from the research mentioned above. In

compliance with the approach of Gustaffson et al. (2000), the conduction of an analysis of

similar markets done in a pre‐study shall lead to the generation of the relevant variables

used for the development of the product. Through the conduction of this type of compara‐

tive analysis, the researchers intend to identify important differences between the tourism

sight location Kahlenberg and its rival competitors. With the identification of these signifi‐

cant differences, they wanted to derive the core attributes and levels of the conjoint ques‐

tionnaire.

In the following chapter, the researchers will provide an insight into the conducted pre‐

study – benchmarking analysis.

55..55 PPrree‐‐ssttuuddyy –– BBeenncchhmmaarrkkiinngg aannaallyyssiiss

Benchmarking is an approach of comparative analysis that has gained high importance in

the last decade of the 20th century. Spendolini (1992) cited in Wöber (2002, p.1) defined

benchmarking as “a continuous systematic process for evaluating the products, services

and work of organizations that are recognized as representing best practices for the pur‐


35

pose of organizational improvement”. Today, the term is used by a wide variety of manag‐

ers in all kinds of different industries. Manufacturing business till service companies, they

all became interested in the performance of the most “successful” competitors and started

to investigate this subject. Thus, also the tourism industry started to implement this type of

analysis. Based on a systematic evaluation of competitor’s performance, “windows of op‐

portunity” shall be identified and one’s own performance shall be improved. In the follow‐

ing chapter, the researchers give insight into the different approaches of benchmarking.

5.5.1 AApppprrooaacchheess aanndd ttyyppeess ooff bbeenncchhmmaarrkkiinngg

Benchmarking in the tourism industry can be categorized into three different fields. Accord‐

ing to Wöber and Fesenmaier (2002), the majority of benchmarking studies can be found

between profit oriented companies that have the major goal of staying profitable in the

long run. Accommodations suppliers, airlines, or restaurants conduct studies on a high level

of quality in order to receive a competitive advantage. The second approach of benchmark‐

ing concerns non‐profit oriented companies. Tourism Boards as well as attractions run by a

country’s government intend to evaluate their performance in comparison to their com‐

petitors. Finally, also tourism destinations investigate this topic and have started to evalu‐

ate performance on a national, regional and local scope.

Regarding the different types of benchmarking, Wöber (2002) mainly identifies an internal

and external type. The internal approach focuses mostly on a comparison of the different

departments, divisions and units of a single company. The external approach is mainly

based on the evaluation of rival firms (that belong to the same industry) or non‐rival firms

that belong to a different type of industry. Rival firms compare themselves primarily via the

approach of competitive benchmarking, while non rival firms focus on “best in class” or

“best practice benchmarking approach” (Wöber, 2002).

Furthermore, an important differentiation has to be done between process based and non‐

process based benchmarking. Through the quantitative analysis of non‐process based

benchmarking, companies are able to identify the “critical success factors” of their winning

competitors which is paving the way towards a future improvement of the performance of

their own company. The analysis of business processes, where a clear understanding of the

underlying concept shall be achieved, is more qualitative in nature. Although the last years

have been marked by a strong trend towards the analysis of processes, both approaches

have to be combined in order to achieve useful comparative results.


36

The choice of benchmarking partners is ideally done via the conduction of statistical ap‐

proaches. Wöber and Fesenmaier, (2002, p.7) suggest e.g. the use of a Data Evolvement

Analysis (DEA), “an approach to measure relative efficiency of operating units with the

same goals and objectives”. Via DEA it is possible to separate efficient an inefficient units

based on the orientation of the best unit which is also known as “efficiency frontier”.

For the benchmarking analysis of the current study researchers decided to conduct a proc‐

ess based conjoint analysis which is qualitative in nature. In the following chapter research‐

ers give insight in the conducted benchmarking analysis.

5.5.1 BBeenncchhmmaarrkkiinngg AAnnaallyyssiiss ooff KKaahhlleennbbeerrgg’’ss mmaaiinn ccoommppeettiittoorrss

The first important step in the conducted benchmarking analysis involved the identification

of the main competitors of tourism sight location Kahlenberg. In order to conduct a bench‐

marking study efficiently, it is important to identify benchmarking partners with similar

locations, objectives, facilities and target groups.

Therefore, Vienna and its geographical surroundings had to be analyzed in order to find

other F&B suppliers that are located on top of a hill and provide guests with different food

and beverage offers. Although statistical approaches as Data Envelopment Analysis are

usually recommended to gain a final set of main competitors, the researchers were not

required to apply a statistical approach. Beside the tourism sight location Kahlenberg, only

two further rival competitors provide guests with the same product of sightseeing and F&B

supply.

The first competitive benchmarking partner is “Schloss Wilhelminenberg”. The 4* hotel is

owned by the hotel chain “Austria Trend Hotels” and is located on Wilhelminenberg, a hill

in the 14th district of the city of Vienna. The second competitive benchmarking partner is

“Gerer’s Magdalenenhof”, a privately owned restaurant that is located on Bisamberg, a hill

in the surroundings of the city of Vienna. Both rival locations have been analyzed based on

an analysis of the company website as well as through a personal visit by the researchers.

The assessment was based on an analysis of:

the types of F&B outlets offered

the overall impression and image provided

the location and facilities offered

the F&B offers provided

the entertainment offers provided


37

In the following chapter, the researchers will give insight into the results of the conducted

benchmarking analysis.

5.5.2 MMaaiinn ddiiffffeerreenncceess bbeettwweeeenn KKaahhlleennbbeerrgg aanndd iittss ccoommppeettiittoorrss

The analysis of the homepage as well as the personal visits to the two competitive tourism

sight locations led to the identification of important differences between Kahlenberg and

its rival competitors.

As can be seen in Figure 10, the first important difference between the tourism sight loca‐

tion Kahlenberg and its competitors concerns location and facility offered. While Kahlen‐

berg offers a real “sightseeing platform” that is accessible without being forced to enter a

private hotel facility, it also offers the best view. The low air miles to the city centre enable

a fantastic view over all areas of Vienna.

Guests who visit Schloss Wilhelminenberg have to enter the hotel facility in order to be able

to admire the view. On the one hand, guests who may not want to consume food of a hotel

F&B outlet may be prohibited from entering. On the other hand, the possibility to dine in a

palace increases attractiveness of the location. Through special wedding offers and the

establishment of a yearly Christmas market and ice skating offers, the hotel management

company tries to market the impressive building effectively.

Gerer’s Magdalenenhof is the only tourism sight location that is located away from the city

centre in the surroundings of Vienna. In comparison to the other two competitive locations,

Bisamberg does not offer a total view over Vienna, but rather a view over several parts of

the city. It is possible to admire the Danube and some other interesting directions, but it is

not possible to see the whole city of Vienna. Therefore, guests do not have the often de‐

sired feeling of being on top.

Main differences between Kahlenberg and its competitors

1. Location and facility offered

2. Number and types of F&B outlets

3. Type of food and prices offered

4. Atmosphere offered

Figure 10: Main differences between Kahlenberg and its competitors


38

The second important difference concerns the number and types of F&B outlets. While

Kahlenberg offers four different types of F&B outlets – a coffee shop, a full‐service restau‐

rant, a lounge as well as a Würstelstand – the competitive locations offer just one F&B out‐

let. Schloss Wilhelminenberg offers a typical hotel restaurant outlet that combines full‐

service restaurant offers, coffee shop and bar in one single location. Depending on the time

of the day, different types of F&B offers are served. Gerer’s Magdalenenhof also offers just

one F&B outlet.

The third important difference, which is of course closely related to the type of F&B outlets,

concerns the type of food and prices offered. Kahlenberg offers coffee and cakes, full‐

service offers with international cuisine, as well as typical Viennese fast food. Depending on

hunger and budget, guests have the possibility to choose among the different products. The

concepts of the other restaurants are different. Schloss Wilhelminenberg offers interna‐

tional cuisine with normal quality but on a typical high hotel price level. As useful methods

to overcome seasonal problems, they promote different types of themed brunches at

weekends throughout the year.

Gerer’s Magdalenenhof offers the F&B outlet with the best dining offers. The top high qual‐

ity cuisine is prepared by the famous chef himself. As Reinhard Gerer is well known for his

famous kitchen, prices are significantly above the Viennese average but are still affordable

for normal people. Therefore, in comparison to Kahlenberg and Wilhelminenberg, Bisam‐

berg is a real F&B location where guests mainly go up the hill in order to enjoy the fantastic

food. The view is an additional advantage but not the main reason for the visit.

The fourth important difference concerns the atmosphere offered. While Kahlenberg’s

Würstelstand and coffee shop are marked by a simple and functional touristic atmosphere,

which is characterized by rushing day trip visitors, also the atmosphere of the restaurant

does not really invite customers to stay. The outside terrace is of course amazing, but

mainly because of the view. The atmosphere within the restaurant has a simple, functional

touch. Only table cloths and a few high leather sofas create the impression that the owner

wanted to establish a modern atmosphere. Schloss Wilhelminenberg offers also a very

functional atmosphere. Although guests are dining in a real palace, the “magic” is hardly

transferred by the simple table and chair setting. The management emphasizes functional‐

ity and multi‐use possibilities of the location rather than the creation of a pleasant atmos‐

phere.


39

Gerer’s Magdalenenhof offers the most distinct atmosphere in comparison to the other com‐

petitors. The modern but cosy interior creates the typical Viennese atmosphere and invites

guests to stay.

After the completion of the benchmarking study, researchers were forced to derive attrib‐

utes and levels from the identified differences between Kahlenberg and its competitors. In

the following chapter, they will briefly explain the determination of criteria, attributes and

levels.

55..66 DDeetteerrmmiinnaattiioonn ooff ccrriitteerriiaa,, aattttrriibbuutteess aanndd lleevveellss ooff ccoonnjjooiinntt aannaallyyssiiss

The identification of the major differences between Kahlenberg and its competitors laid

down the basis for the establishment of the conjoint variables used in the product devel‐

opment process. Based on the four important differences, the researchers tried to establish

a pool of attributes and related levels. Although it seemed to be simple to derive variables

from the benchmarking study, it was a major challenge to incorporate and fulfil all condi‐

tions and criteria required.

As shown in Figure 11, the four important differences identified during benchmarking

analysis had to be broken down into three different conjoint variables with three levels

each. Although the researchers would have been interested in the establishment of a con‐

joint analysis with five or six variables of interest, technical limitations and the intention to

conduct paper and pencil interviews forced them to use a maximum number of three at‐

tributes and levels. Furthermore, the length of attribute description was a difficult issue. In

order to avoid long readings and the threat of respondent’s simplification strategy, the

researchers decided to use a maximum number of four words per level. One of the most

difficult challenges concerned the establishment of mutually exclusive and independent

attributes. All combinations of variables and levels had to be feasible, useful and should

avoid a double counting under all circumstances. Last but not least, the core challenge was

to incorporate the full range of possibilities, where researchers had the possibility to iden‐

tify a potential product that they did not think about by now.

As can be seen in the final set of conjoint attributes and levels (Figure 11), the researchers

intended to identify Kahlenberg’s ideal F&B product based on the evaluation of food, set‐

ting and atmosphere. With the first category of “type of food offered”, the researchers

wanted to identify the preferences between full‐service restaurant offers, coffee, pies and

pastries as well as fast food offers. It is important to mention here that the researchers did

not define “fast food” as typical McDonald’s offers. The idea behind this variable was to


40

give respondents the option of choosing a quick service that can be unhealthy as well as

healthy.

Conjoint variables and levels

Attributes Levels

TYPE OF FOOD OFFERED full service restaurant offers

coffee, pies, pastries

fast food, sausages, sandwiches

SETTING OFFERED lounge chairs, chill out area

bistro setting

traditional restaurant setting

ATMOSPHERE OFFERED stylish and modern atmosphere

traditional Viennese atmosphere

simple and functional atmosphere

The second category of “setting offered” was created to identify respondents’ preferences

between a lounge setting with cosy sofas and corners, a bistro setting with stools and a bar,

and a traditional restaurant setting with tables and chairs. With the third and final category

of “atmosphere offered”, the researchers intended to identify preferences between a styl‐

ish and modern atmosphere, a traditional Viennese atmosphere and a simple and a re‐

duced simple and functional atmosphere.

All other variables of interest that were important to the researchers but had to be ex‐

cluded from the conjoint questions due to technical limitations have been included in the

design of the other parts of the questionnaire, which will be described in the following

chapter.

Figure 11: Conjoint variables and levels


41

55..77 QQuueessttiioonnnnaaiirree ddeessiiggnn

The careful design of the questionnaire was a core issue in the present study. It has signifi‐

cant influence on the total number of respondents that can be asked as well as on the qual‐

ity of data that can be gained. As conjoint questions are in general comprehensive in nature

and since the researchers did not have large experience in the topic, they decided to design

a questionnaire that can be used for a written as well as oral interview based survey

method. Concerning the type of questions, the researchers decided to use three different

types of questions ranging from conjoint questions, structured questions to open response

questions. The following chapter will give insight into the different types of questions used.

5.7.1 TTyyppeess ooff qquueessttiioonnss uusseedd

The first type of questions that was used is the pool of the core conjoint questions was

established via the technical support of SPSS. Through the SPSS function “ORTHOPLAN”, the

researchers were able to establish an orthogonal design that was used to get the required

“plan cards” respondents had to evaluate. Once all variables and related levels were en‐

tered, SPSS considered automatically all rules of the Partial‐Full‐Profile‐Conjoint‐Analysis

and rotated all attributes randomly between different cards. Out of the three different at‐

tributes with three variables each, SPSS created nine plan cards that were displayed in the

SPSS output. The researchers imported the cards in a word document and wrapped them in

complete statements. For the establishment of answer possibilities to the different conjoint

cards, the researchers decided to use rating scales. This type of questions requires respon‐

dents to make single or multiple choice ratings on a scale. On the one hand, single item

scales have the advantage that they involve only one item to measure a construct. On the

other hand, multiple item rating scales are a way to measure a sample of beliefs towards a

desired object (Aaker et al., 2004).

In order to assess conjoint questions in an effective way, the researchers decided to use the

most famous multiple item rating scale also known as the Likert scale. The five‐item scale

ranges from “strongly agree”, over “somewhat agree”, “neutral” and “somewhat disagree”

to “strongly disagree” and usually consists of two parts – the item part and the evaluative

part. The item part indicates the statement to test, whereas the evaluative part accommo‐

dates the five different response categories. Due to the fact that the researchers really

wanted to encourage respondents to indicate a degree of agreement or disagreement to‐

wards a wide variety of product concepts, they decided to remove the centred part of the


42

scale. Through the exclusion of “neutral”, they intended to avoid the respondents’ possibil‐

ity to tick the value in the middle, due to a simple lack of interest or laziness.

For the second type of questions, the researchers decided to use structured questions, also

known as closed response questions. Structured questions have the advantage that they

are easier to answer, require less effort of the interviewer and make evaluation with SPSS

easier. Furthermore, the interview process is less time consuming and gained answers are

directly comparable. Therefore, the researchers decided to design all structured questions

as single response questions where respondents were forced to choose only one answer

out of an offered pool of questions.

Last but not least, the researchers used also open response questions. Through the use of

this type of questions they intended to be able to receive in‐depth answers and opinions

that they did neither expect nor think about in advance.

For the establishment of a clear and logical structure of the questionnaire, the researchers

came to the conclusion to create three different and independent parts. As shown in the

appendix in chapter 11.1, the first part deals with simple starting questions that were used

to identify reasons of visit as well as important other information regarding duration of stay

and intention to consume food and beverages. The second part of the questionnaire ac‐

commodates the nine conjoint questions ordered according to the given structure deter‐

mined by the SPSS output. Two additional questions were added to evaluate accompani‐

ment of respondents as well as additional motivating offers. The third and final part of the

questionnaire includes demographical questions that were used to gain some personal

information of respondents.

After a brief overview, the researchers will now give a detailed insight into the structure of

the questionnaire.

5.7.2 SSttrruuccttuurree ooff tthhee qquueessttiioonnnnaaiirree

The first part of the questionnaire (see appendix chapter 11.1) starts with a brief introduc‐

tion, a statement of the aim of the research as well as an announcement of the average

duration of ten minutes.

The first question (Q1) is used as a simple starting question where respondents are forced

to state their purpose of visit in an open form. Through the use of this open type of ques‐

tion, the researchers want to identify important reasons to visit that they did not expect in

advance. A later coding in closed variables enabled an easier statistical analysis.


43

The second question (Q2) evaluates the different means of transportation Kahlenberg visi‐

tors may use in a closed way. The aim of this question was to identify whether people pre‐

fer to come up with the car, public bus, tour bus, bicycle or simply by foot.

The third question (Q3) aims to identify the important criteria for the visit in a closed way.

Through this question, the researchers wanted to identify whether visitors come up the hill

because of the little distance to the city centre and the good connection, the well known

“brand Kahlenberg”, the height of the platform, or if they come up because of the offered

F&B products. The following question four (Q4) evaluates the average frequency of visits in

an open way, whereas question five (Q5) deals with the average time spent on the plat‐

form.

Question six (Q6) is the first question that deals with an F&B issue and was used to identify

whether Kahlenberg visitors intend to consume/have consumed food and beverages at the

platform. For the case that the respondents implied that they did not want to consume F&B

products, the researchers agreed that they were still asked to complete the questionnaire

in order to find out what type of product they would desire. Therefore, the following open

question seven (Q7), which forced respondents to indicate the desired kitchen in an open

way, was closely related.

The second part of the questionnaire starts with question eight (Q8) and consists of the

nine different conjoint cards that the respondents were asked to evaluate in a closed way.

The conjoint part is followed by the closed social question (Q9) regarding the accompani‐

ment of visit as well as the interest question number ten (Q10). Through the evaluation of

this type of closed question, the researchers wanted to identify other motivating offers that

visitors may be attracted to in order to visit the tourism sight location Kahlenberg.

The final third part of the questionnaire evaluates demographical data such as age (Q11),

country of origin (Q12) and gender (Q13). In addition, question fourteen (Q14) was estab‐

lished to also analyze the average expenditure for F&B products a person may spend at the

platform. The final question fifteen (Q15) was added to also gain an insight into the occupa‐

tion of the respondents.

After a detailed analysis of the questionnaire, the next chapter will give an overview of the

most important limitations the study is facing.


44

55..88 LLiimmiittaattiioonnss

In the present study, the researchers had to deal with three major limitations concerning:

the total number of conjoint attributes

the language used to conduct interviews

analysis of target groups via cluster analysis

The first important problem regarding the total number of attributes is caused by the cho‐

sen paper and pencil version of the questionnaire design as well as the intended time frame

of interviews. Due to the fact that a maximum length of ten minutes per interview was

planned, the researchers were required to reduce the total number of conjoint cards to a

minimum of around ten cards. Therefore, they decided to place special emphasis on a care‐

ful identification of the small number of nine attributes that should lead to a useful out‐

come.

The second problem concerns the language of conduction of interviews. Due to the fact

that the majority of respondents will be characterized by a German mother tongue, the

researchers decided to translate the questionnaire.

The third and final problem concerns the description of target groups, which will be done

via cluster analysis. As it is usually difficult to establish clusters based on all demographical

data of interest, the researchers decided to identify them on the smallest amount of data

necessary and conduct significance tests (cross tabulations) afterwards. Furthermore, the

researchers decided to recode the current answer possibilities in zero‐one variables that

will lead to an easier analysis of given mean values.

After a brief description of the most important limitations, the following chapter will give

insight into the field phase of the study.


45

66 DDaattaa CCoolllleeccttiioonn

The data collection of the present study was conducted by both researchers directly at the

tourism sight location Kahlenberg. The total sample sized consisted of ninety randomly

chosen respondents who came up the hill to visit the sightseeing platform and who have

been addressed as random as possible. Regarding the date, the researchers decided to

conduct the survey on weekdays as well as weekends with beautiful weather, due to the

fact that a high frequency of visit could be expected. Therefore, data collection was done

between 14th May and 24th on six different days with a total collection of fifteen question‐

naires on each day. During calendar week 19, data was collected on Friday 14th May as well

as Saturday 15th May. During the following calendar week number 20, data was collected

over the extended Whitsun holiday period on Thursday, 20th May; Friday, 21st May; Satur‐

day, 22nd May and Sunday, 23rd May.

As already mentioned in chapter 5.6, the questionnaire was designed for a simple paper

and pencil method with the aim to conduct both structured interviews as well as written

surveys. Therefore, the chosen survey method consisted of a mixture of personal interviews

conducted by the researchers as well as written surveys where respondents took a seat and

filled out the questionnaire on their own. The method chosen was decided on the spot de‐

pending on the time availability of Kahlenberg visitors. Respondents who indicated time

pressure were asked in an oral form by the researchers. Interviewees who did not commu‐

nicate stress and who were interested in a visiting the high terrace of MODUL University

Vienna agreed to invest some more time and were asked to fill out the questionnaire on

their own. As MODUL University Vienna is located directly beside at the tourism sight loca‐

tion, it did not take a long time to persuade respondents to support the study.

After a description of the data collection method, the following chapter will give insight into

the core data analysis phase of the study.


46

77 PPrreesseennttaattiioonn ooff ffiinnddiinnggss

The presentation of findings is separated in three different parts. The first part includes a

descriptive analysis of data where researchers intended to identify the characteristics of the

typical Kahlenberg visitors. The second part provides information about the results of the

conducted conjoint analysis. The third and final part of the data analysis deals with the

identification of different target segments, done via cluster analysis. All results which will

be displayed in the following chapters were identified via the statistical program SPSS as

well as with a further analysis in Microsoft Excel.

77..11 RReessuullttss ooff ddeessccrriippttiivvee aannaallyyssiiss

The first important characteristic the researchers were interested in concerned the demo‐

graphical information of respondents. Therefore, they decided to start with the analysis of

the gender of respondents.

As shown in Chart 1, the distribution of gender was relatively equal. The share of 52,2%

male respondents was just slightly larger than the share of female ones.

After the identification of gender, the next interesting information concerned the country

of origin. As you can see in Chart 2, more than two‐thirds of the respondents come from

Austria. Vienna represents the largest share of visitors with 48 respondents, followed by a

fifth of Austrians who come from other federal states. Germany represents the most impor‐

tant share of foreign respondents with approximately 13 visitors. Switzerland, the United

Chart 1: Gender distribution


47

States, United Kingdom, Italy and Russia represent a very small share of respondents with a

share of between one and two visitors each.

Concerning the occupation of respondents (Chart 3) it is interesting to see that the share of

twenty‐eight retired visitors is equal to the share of twenty eight‐working people (em‐

ployed as well as self employed). The share of students is with one quarter also an impor‐

tant group of visitors, followed by housemen and housewives as well as unemployed visi‐

tors.

Chart 3: Occupation of respondents

Chart 2: Country/federal state of origin of respondents


48

For the display of the age distribution, the researchers decided to show two different

Charts. The most useful display method for the visualization of the open question regarding

distribution of age is a histogram. As shown in Chart 4, the distribution of ages is spread

between twenty and eighty‐six years. The cumulative percentages displayed in the fre‐

quency table (see appendix chapter 11.2.1) show that two‐thirds of the respondents are

younger than fifty‐seven years.

Based on the histogram, the researchers decided to code the open question into four dif‐

ferent age groups. This coding procedure enabled an easier statistical testing and increased

data visualization. In Chart 5, a more concise demonstration of the distribution of ages is

shown.

Chart 4: Histogram of age distribution

Chart 5: Age distribution coded


49

After a description of demographics of the respondents, the researchers decided to con‐

tinue with a descriptive analysis of the important information regarding the visit of the

tourism sight location Kahlenberg. The first variable of interest involved an analysis of the

chosen means of transportation. As shown in Chart 6, nearly half of the respondents used a

car to come up the hill, followed by a little bit more than a quarter who decided to use the

public bus. The share of sports fans who came up the hill by foot is also very interesting

with total number of thirteen respondents. The share of visitors who came up the hill via

tour bus or bicycle is very small in comparison to the other means of transportation used.

The first question regarding the criteria of visit was closed in nature. As displayed in Chart 7,

the most important criterion that led to the respondent’s intention to visit the tourism sight

location Kahlenberg was the combination of height of the platform and the marvellous view

for more than three‐quarters of the visitors. The share of ten visitors who came up the hill

because of the well known brand lies significantly behind the view. Furthermore, also the

small distance to the city centres as well as the good connection to public transportation

were relatively unimportant. Concerning F&B offers it is important to mention that only

one person indicated to come up the hill because of the Viennese dishes provided.

Regarding the low share of sportive respondents who came up the hill to enjoy sports ac‐

tivities, it is important to mention that the researchers experienced a much larger share in

reality. However, as the majority did not spend more than five minutes at the platform, the

conduction of interviews was very difficult. Also the share of observed bikers who just pass

by the platform without stopping and admiring the view was not unimportant.

Chart 6: Means of transportation used


50

A second interesting question regarding the reason of visit was asked in an open form to

identify motivations the researchers would not have expected from the early beginning.

After the analysis of the open answers, the researchers decided to code the results in 15

overall reasons.

As shown in Figure 12, the beautiful view was, also in this question, the prevailing reason to

visit with a share of more than one‐third of the respondents. The share of visitors who

combine sports in nature with admiring of the beautiful view was significantly larger in

comparison to the closed question before with a share of fourteen visitors. Due to the fact

that the open form of the question was removing emphasis from the main reason of view

and height, the researchers got an interesting insight into other reasons.

A surprising answer the researchers did not think about in advance was the share of ten

visitors who came up the hill to show the view to friends and relatives of other federal

states and foreign cities that spend their holidays in the city.

Furthermore, the researchers identified that people come up the hill because of the par‐

ticipation in a guided tour or an excursion, to take time to relax, to experience a revival of

nostalgia or to simply enjoy the beautiful weather. Interesting was also the answer of visit‐

ing Kahlenberg as a “confirmed habit”. Two respondents answered that they have come up

every week for years due to the fact that the visit is already a part of their regular habits.

Chart 7: Most important criteria for the visit


51

Another interesting question to analyze concerned the average time respondents tend to

spend at the platform. As shown in Chart 8, the majority of nearly half of the interviewees

indicated that they spend between thirty minutes and one hour at the platform. A further

share of a little bit more than one‐third tends to stay even less. The number of respondents

who spend between one and three hours or even more is significantly lower with less than

one‐sixth of the respondents.

Why did you visit tourism sight location Kahlenberg?

Reason of visit Frequency in

absolute figures

beautiful view 33

view and sports in the nature 14

to show friends/relatives who visit Vienna the view

10

view is part of guided tour 5

view & relaxation 5

excursion 5

sightseeing in Vienna 3

nostalgia 3

beautiful weather 3

likes/interested in tourism sight location Kahlenberg

3

confirmed habit 2

view & to take a cup of coffee 1

romantic evening 1

on recommendation from Viennese friend 1

on invitation 1

Figure 12: Reasons of visit coded


52

Regarding the frequency of Kahlenberg visitors, the researchers detected a considerable

share of repeat visitors they did not expect in advance. In Chart 9, it is shown that around

one‐third of the ninety visitors comes between one to three times a year. Another third

also comes between four to six times a year or even more often. The most surprising share

is definitely the amount of repeat guests who come at least one to three times a month.

Beside the important share of repeat guests, it is also important to mention the share of

16,7% of visitors who came up the hill for the first time. These guests do not have any pre‐

knowledge about Kahlenberg offers and could be attracted by interesting F&B offers. Fur‐

thermore, it is important to mention that the share of “first time” visitors will be even lar‐

ger in reality. Due to the fact that the visitors of many Czech, Polish or Romanian tour

groups, for example, did not speak any German or English language, interviews could not

be conducted. Therefore foreign visitors are systematically underestimated.

Chart 8: Average time spent at the platform


53

The result of the question concerning accompaniment of Kahlenberg visitors shows a sig‐

nificant share of couples who come up the hill. As displayed in Chart 10, nearly a half of the

respondents came up the hill with a second person, followed by nearly a quarter of visitors

who came up together with a group. The share of families was relatively low with 14.4%,

probably due to the fact that no offers for children are provided. Surprising was a share of

13,3% of visitors who came up alone or just with their dogs.

Chart 9: Frequency of visit

Chart 10: Accompaniment of visitors


54

Another surprising result was gained by the researchers through the analysis of the ques‐

tion regarding the intention to consume food and beverages. As shown in Chart 11, more

than half of the respondents did not intend to consume F&B products at the platform. The

reasons being that they could not find any interesting offer, the coffee shop was over‐

crowded and the waiting times of the Würstelstand were simply too long, were mentioned

very often.

The reason that the researchers have identified visitors who were unsatisfied with the cur‐

rent offers led to the decision to continue the interview process also with the majority of

respondents who did not intend to consume food and beverages at the platform. They be‐

lieved that a careful identification of needs and wants may lead to the establishment of the

ideal product.

Therefore, special emphasis was placed on the identification of the preferred type of food

and was evaluated via an open question. However, the results shown in Chart 12 are not

really surprising. The Austrian kitchen, including specialties from all different federal states,

is the most preferred type of food with a share of more than one‐third. The Viennese

kitchen, including the typical dishes such as Schnitzel and Apfelstrudel is close behind. Be‐

side Italian cuisine, the remaining share of respondents also prefers Japanese, Thai, Asian,

vegetarian cuisine and simple snacks, breakfast as well as coffee and cakes.

Chart 11: Consumption of food and beverages


55

Regarding the averages expenditure per person for F&B products (Chart 13), the majority of

respondents is willing to spend between eleven and twenty Euros per person. Nearly a third

is willing to spend less on even cheaper products that cost between five and ten Euros. The

share of eleven visitors who want to enjoy a delicious meal and are prepared to spend be‐

tween twenty‐one and forty Euros is relatively low.

Chart 12: Preferred type of food

Chart 13: Average expenditures


56

The final descriptive analysis of interest concerns the other motivating offers that would

attract respondents to come up the hill even if the weather would be bad. The results dis‐

played in Chart 14 show that around half of the respondents would definitely come up for

interesting events. A closer analysis of interests displayed in Chart 15 shows that concerts

would be the most preferred events, followed by exhibitions and other different varying

event offers.

In addition, a dinner provided by a famous chef would also attract a quarter of visitors to

come up the hill. Surprising were the answers by several respondents who indicated that

they do not need other motivating offers except the view. Furthermore, the researchers did

not expect that celebration offers for wedding, baptisms and birthday parties would be

relatively unimportant to visitors.

Chart 14: Other motivating offers of interest

Chart 15: Events of interest


57

After a detailed descriptive analysis of data, the following chapter will give insight in the

results of the conducted conjoint approach.

77..22 RReessuullttss ooff tthhee ccoonnjjooiinntt aannaallyyssiiss

The outcome of the conducted conjoint is the heart of the total study. Through the analysis

of the different part worth utilities of conjoint attributes and levels, the researchers in‐

tended to derive the ideal F&B product for the tourism sight location Kahlenberg. Although

the researchers expected to gain a clear outcome, the final results vary significantly from

the expectations. The overall sample of respondents was highly fragmented (see also re‐

sults of cluster analysis found in chapter 7.3), which leads to the outcome that Kahlenberg

visitors do not favour one ideal product. Due to the fact that different target groups are

characterized by different needs and wants, also their preferences regarding the ideal F&B

product are different. Therefore, the standard errors shown in Figure 6 do not show signifi‐

cant differences between different conjoint variable levels. As a result, the researchers

have to conclude that they are not allowed to interpret part worth utilities as a significant

outcome. However, they have the possibility to identify and describe a general trend that

will be explained in the following paragraph.

The first important step during the analysis of conjoint results is to examine the averaged

importance score of the importance values of the conjoint attributes. As shown in Figure

13, differences among the importance values of food, setting and atmosphere offered are

minor. Therefore, the researchers can conclude that the importance of the different attrib‐

utes is relatively equal.

Importance values of conjoint variables

Attribute Averaged importance score

Food offered 36,432

Setting 29,046

Atmosphere 33,411

The second important step is to analyse part worth utilities of attributes. Although results

shown in Figure 14 can just be interpreted as general trend, it is possible to derive interest‐

ing information. As the used answer possibilities, derived from the Likert scale, have been

coded from 1 strongly agree to 4 strongly disagree, the most preferred attribute levels are

characterized by high negative values.

Figure 13: Average importance values of conjoint variables


58

Regarding the variable “food offered”, it is evident that coffee, pies and pastries are the

most preferred type of food, followed by fast food, sausages and sandwiches. Full‐service

offers with dishes chosen from a traditional restaurant menu are definitely the least pre‐

ferred offer.

Concerning the variable “setting offered”, the researchers were really surprised by the

overall preference of lounge chairs and chill out areas. Due to the fact that a lounge is al‐

ready offered and that the average occupancy seems to be very low, the outcome is really

surprising and requires further investigation (see chapter 9 recommendations for Restau‐

rant Kahlenberg). Beside lounge areas, the second preferred type of setting is a modern

bistro setting with high tables and bar stools. A traditional restaurant setting, which is of‐

fered at the outlets by now, is by far the least preferred setting. This important outcome

doubts of course the current “positioning strategy” of the different Kahlenberg outlets

where only a traditional restaurant setting is offered.

Conjoint variables and levels

Attributes Levels Utility

Estimate Std. Error

TYPE OF FOOD OFFERED

full service restaurant offers

,149 ,203

coffee, pies, pastries ‐,232 ,203

fast food, sausages and sandwiches

,083 ,203

SETTING OF‐FERED

lounge chairs, chill out area ‐,132 ,203

bistro setting ‐,080 ,203

traditional restaurant set‐ting

,212 ,203

ATMOSPHERE OFFERED

stylish and modern atmos‐phere

‐,091 ,203

traditional Viennese at‐mosphere

‐,010 ,203

simple and functional at‐mosphere

,101 ,203

Constant 2,654 ,143

Figure 14: Part worth utilities of conjoint variable levels


59

The results of the final important variable concerning “atmosphere offered” shows that the

majority of respondents would prefer a stylish and modern atmosphere followed by a typi‐

cal Viennese atmosphere. A simple and functional setting was the least preferred option.

In general, the researchers identified a trend of consumer preferences towards a coffee and

pastry shop with lounge chairs, chill out area as well as a stylish and modern atmosphere.

After a description of the conjoint output, the following chapter will give an insight into the

conducted significance tests.

7.2.1 RReessuullttss ooff ssiiggnniiffiiccaannccee tteessttss wwiitthh ccoonnjjooiinntt vvaarriiaabblleess

For a further analysis of the conjoint variables and the identification of significant differ‐

ences with other variables of the data, authors decided to analyze the between group dif‐

ferences. The adequate measure for the analysis of more than two independent groups is

the Kruskal Wallis test. This type of significance test is based on the analysis of ranked data

(Field, 2005).

Researchers conducted Kruskal Wallis test between all relevant demographical variables

and the different conjoint variables. To avoid type one error inflation, all results which will

be described in the following paragraph are based on a significance value below the signifi‐

cance border of 0.05 and include at least the minimum number of five respondents. A few

values slightly above 0.05 are individually significant.

In addition data integration was checked via the approach of Two‐Way‐ANOVA.

The first interesting results originate from Kruskal Wallis tests with the food conjoint vari‐

able of “coffee, pastries and desserts offered”.

As you can see in Figure 15 as well as in chapter 11.2.2 of the appendix, foreign visitors

originating from Germany prefer coffee, pies and pastries most. Visitors from other Aus‐

trian countries are with a higher mean rank significantly lower dessert fans. For locals,

originating from the city of Vienna, pastries are the least food of preference. Regarding the

differences of gender, it is not unusual that women prefer desserts much more than men.

Concerning the different reasons of visit it is significant to see that sweets are preferred by

visitors who participate at a tour or excursion as well as by sports freaks. The least consum‐

ers of sweets are visitors who want to enjoy simply the view, either alone or with guests

from abroad.

Finally it is interesting to see that coffee, pies and pastries are mainly preferred by visitors

who come up the hill by travel bus, followed by visitors who come up with public bus or car.


60

Visitors who come up by foot tend to avoid the consumption of sweets. During chats with

respondents researchers identified here that they either have lunch packages or that they

simply prefer real food.

Coffee, pies and pastries

Attribute Preferences based on mean values

Country of Origin Sign. 0.038

Germany (‐0,5043)

Other Austrian Countries (‐0,2804)

Vienna (‐0,1435)

Gender Sign. 0.046

Women(‐0,3307)

Men (‐0,1418)

Reason of visit Sign. 0.005

View is part of guided tour (‐0,7556)

Excursion (‐0,442)

View and sports in the nature (‐0,3968)

View and relaxation ( ‐0,3556)

To show view to friends and relatives (‐0,3333)

Beautiful view (‐0,1246)

Means of transportation Sign. 0.056

Travel/tour bus (‐0,844)

Public bus (‐0,1991)

Car (‐0,1835)

By foot (‐0,1538)

The second part of results originates from Kruskal Wallis Tests with the conjoint variable

“full service restaurant offers provided”. Due to the fact that it is the only significant result

of significance tests with full service restaurant variable, researchers have to assume that

result is “individually significant”.

As you can see in Figure 16 as well as in chapter 11.2.3 of the appendix, it is interesting to

see that full service offers are mainly preferred by visitors who spend between five and ten

Euros on average at the platform. Here it is also important to mention that chats with re‐

spondents have shown that they would prefer small menus with all kinds of snacks, rather

than regular heavy meals.

Furthermore regular restaurant offers would be preferred by visitors who are willing to

spend between eleven and twenty Euros. The most interesting outcome concerned the

visitors who are willing to spend between twenty one and forty Euros. As visible in Figure

16, full service restaurant are no real preference for this clientele.

Figure 15: Results KW tests with “coffee, pies and pastries” variable


61

Preference of full service restaurant offers provided


Average expenditures Sign. 0.010

5€ to 10€ (‐0,0667)

11€ to 20€ (‐0,2778)

21€ to 40€ (0,2828)

The third part of the results originates from Kruskal Wallis tests with the conjoint variable

“bistro setting offered”. The result is also here “individually significant”.

As seen in Figure 17 as well as in chapter 11.2.4 of the appendix, a bistro setting with high

tables and high chairs is mainly preferred by visitors who come up the hill because of the

well known brand “Kahlenberg”. Furthermore, this type of setting is valued by visitors who

simply want to enjoy the view.

Preference of “bistro setting offered”


Visit criteria Sign. 0.039

Well known brand/name (‐0,2000)

Height of the platform/view (‐0,0508)

Low distance to the city centre (0,2000)

The fourth part of the results originates from Kruskal Wallis tests with the conjoint vari‐

able “traditional Viennese atmosphere offered”. As displayed in Figure 18 as well as chap‐

ter 11.2.5 of the appendix, the traditional Viennese atmosphere is mainly preferred by

houseman and housewives, followed by self‐employed and employed workers as well as

students. Retired people who have generally more time to visit the platform have the low‐

est preference scores. The results show that they usually do not prefer a traditional Vien‐

nese atmosphere.

Figure 16: Results KW tests with “full service restaurant offers” variable

Figure 17: Results KW tests with “bistro setting” variable


62

Preference of “traditional Viennese atmosphere”


Occupation Sign. 0.004

Houseman/housewife (‐0,3333)

Self employed (‐0,1250)

Employed (‐0,0556)

Student (‐0,0278)

Retired (‐0,2609)

The fifth and final part of the results originates from Kruskal Wallis tests with the conjoint

variable “stylish and modern atmosphere offered”. As shown in Figure 19 as well as in

chapter 11.2.6 of the appendix, a stylish and modern atmosphere of F&B outlets is mainly

preferred by visitors who come up the hill because of the small distance to the city centre.

Also, guests who come up because of the view tend to favour a stylish and modern atmos‐

phere. Only visitors who come up because of the well known brand tend to prefer it less.

After a description of results of the conducted Kruskal Wallis tests, the following chapter

will provide details about the performed correlations with conjoint variables.

7.2.2 RReessuullttss ooff ccoorrrreellaattiioonnss wwiitthh ccoonnjjooiinntt vvaarriiaabblleess

Beside the analysis of significant differences between conjoint and other variables, the re‐

searchers were also interested in the analysis of existing linear relationships. Through the

use of correlations, they tried to identify the strength and direction of a linear relationship

between two variables. The underlying assumption of correlations emphasizes on the de‐

viation of variables from the mean. According to (Field, 2005), variables are related if

“changes in one variable are met with similar changes in the other variable. Therefore, if

Preference of “stylish and modern atmosphere”


Visit criteria Sign. 0.042

Low distance to the city centre (‐0,1333)

Height of the platform/view (‐0,1079)

Well known name/brand (‐0,1667)

Figure 19: Results KW test with “stylish and modern atmosphere” variable

Figure 18: Results KW tests with “traditional Viennese atmosphere” variable


63

one variable deviates from its mean, we could expect the other variable to deviate from its

mean in a similar way”.

Regarding the type of correlation coefficient to use, the researchers decided to conduct the

bivariate “Spearman Correlation”. Due to the fact that the measure should be robust to

potential outliers, they decided to use converted rank scores rather than original values

used in the Pearson correlation. In the current study, the researchers were especially inter‐

ested in correlations between part worth utilities of the conjoint analysis and variables that

involve data that is ordered by size. Therefore, they conducted correlations for the identifi‐

cation of a linear relationship between conjoint variables and age distribution of sample as

well as average time spent on the platform. Although researchers tried to conduct a wide

variety of correlations, they were only able to identify three types of correlations that are

unfortunately not really strong but a trend can be assumed.

The first linear relationship could be detected between the conjoint variable “full service

offers provided” and the average expenditures Kahlenberg visitors are willing to make.

As shown in Figure 20 as well as in chapter 11.2.7 of the appendix, the correlation is very

small with 0,305. However, the results are significant; and therefore, an unexpected trend

is detectable. Based on the displayed results, the researchers have to assume that the more

people are willing to pay, the less full‐service restaurants are preferred. Therefore they

come to the conclusion that results are counterintuitive and cannot be interpreted.

Correlation full service restaurant offers provided & average expenditures

Correlation Significance two tailed

0,305 0,003

The second important linear relationship could be detected between provided „fast food,

sausages and sandwiches offers” and the average expenditures of Kahlenberg visitors.

As displayed in Figure 21 as well as in chapter 11.2.8 of the appendix, the researchers have

to assume that the more fast food is preferred, the more people are willing to spend. Also

here researchers come to the conclusion that results are counterintuitive and cannot be

interpreted.

Figure 20: Correlation “full service restaurant offers” – “average expenditures”


64

The third and final trend of a linear relationship could be detected between “traditional

Viennese atmosphere offered” and age distribution of visitors. As displayed in Figure 22 as

well as in chapter 11.2.9 of the appendix, the researchers have to assume that the younger

the average age of Kahlenberg visitors, the higher the preference of traditional Viennese

atmosphere. Researchers were surprised by the fact that the group of older Kahlenberg

visitors who would like to enjoy a traditional Viennese atmosphere is really lacking.

Correlation traditional Viennese atmosphere provided & age distribution


0,360 < 0,001

After a very detailed analysis of the outcome of the conjoint analysis, the following chapter

will give you an insight in the outcome of the conducted cluster analysis.

77..33 RReessuullttss ooff tthhee cclluusstteerr aannaallyyssiiss

The cluster analysis was the final important analysis method the researchers applied.

Through this type of method, the researchers wanted to identify important target groups of

the tourism sight location Kahlenberg. In order to be able to receive a useful output, the

researchers decide to base clusters on the most important demographical variables and to

conduct significance tests afterwards. For an easier analysis of outputs, they decided fur‐

thermore to adapt demographical data and to use recomputed zero – one variables.

As you can see in the display of cluster membership in Chart 16 (appendix chapter 11.2.10),

the researchers were able to identify three different types of clusters. Cluster two has the

highest share of Kahlenberg visitors with a total number of forty‐four members. Cluster one

Correlation of fast food, sausages, sandwiches & average expenditures


0,331 0,001

Figure 22: Correlation “traditional Viennese atmosphere”– “age distribution”

Figure 21: Correlation “fast food, sausages & sandwiches” – “average expenditures”


65

accommodates around one‐third of guests with a share of 27 members. The third and final

cluster three includes around a fifth of visitors with a total number of 19 members.

In Figure 23, you can see all demographical variables which have been included in the clus‐

ter analysis and on which cluster membership is based on. As you can see all three clusters

show significant differences in characteristics and preferences. Therefore researches can

conclude that they were able to identify three different types of target groups for the tour‐

ism sight location Kahlenberg.

Cluster one are the typical “bus visitors” who come up the hill mainly via public bus. They

have the highest share of female members, tend to have middle age and spend more than

half an hour at the platform. Furthermore they intend to consume food and beverages and

have the highest preference of Austrian cuisine. Via Two‐Way‐Analysis‐of‐Variance, re‐

searchers identified also that women tend to prefer a bistro setting. In addition members

are also characterized by an employed status of occupation and a low preference of sports

activities

Cluster two is characterized by typical “car visitors”. They tend to a lower share of female

visitors, are younger than other target groups and spend less than one hour at the plat‐

form. They also intend to consume food and beverages and also mainly Austrian cuisine.

However, maybe because of the car use this type of cluster is marked by a lower intention

Chart 16: Cluster Membership


66

to consume F&B products. Regarding occupational status, you can see that car visitors are

marked by a significantly larger share of self‐employed people.

Cluster three is characterized by typical “walking visitors” who have the highest preference

of sports. They do not use car or public bus and come up the hill by foot. They tend to have

the lowest share of female visitors, are older than the other target groups and spend less

than half an hour at the platform. Furthermore they have the lowest preference of food

and beverage consumption as well as Austrian cuisine. It is important to mention here that

researchers have identified a large share of visitors who indicated to prefer the consump‐

tion of food they brought along in their lunch packages. Concerning occupational status you

can see that this cluster is marked by the largest share of retired people. However the clus‐

ter includes also employed as well as self employed people.

Results of the Cluster Analysis

Variables Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 3

Car ,00 ,98 ,00

Public bus ,89 ,00 ,00

By foot ,00 ,00 ,68

Visit one to three times a month ,15 ,11 ,47

Average time spent: half an hour ,15 ,39 ,63

Sports ,04 ,05 ,58

Consumption of food ,63 ,52 ,42

Preference of Austrian cuisine ,41 ,39 ,26

Occupational status: self employed ,04 ,27 ,16

Occupational status: employed ,41 ,23 ,37

Occupational status: retired ,26 ,23 ,32

Age distribution ,76 ,69 ,79

Gender: female ,63 ,43 ,37

Figure 23: Results of the cluster analysis


67

After a description of clusters, the results of the conducted significance tests displayed in

the following chapter will give a further insight into the differences between target groups.

7.3.1 RReessuullttss ooff ssiiggnniiffiiccaannccee tteessttss wwiitthh cclluusstteerr vvaarriiaabbllee

For a further analysis of different target groups, the researchers decided to conduct signifi‐

cance tests with the cluster variable and the original demographical variables. An adequate

measure that displays information in a useful way is the cross tabulation.

All results that will be displayed in the following paragraph are based on Cramer’s p value

(Cramer’s V), which is of course lower than the significance border of 0.05.

The first cross tabulation researchers were interested in concerned the means of transpor‐

tation used (Chart 17). As already described before, the “bus visitors” of cluster one are

characterized by the use of the public bus. The “car visitors” of cluster two are marked by

the use of their car, and the smaller number of members in the “walking cluster” is coming

on up by foot only.

Chart 17: CT cluster variable – means of transportation


68

Beside the fact how visitors came up the hill, they were also interested in whom they came

up with. As displayed in Chart 18, “bus visitors” of cluster one either came up with a second

partner, their families or a group. Only a very small amount of visitors came alone. The “car

visitors” of cluster two also mainly came up with a second person. The researchers identi‐

fied here a large share of couples. Furthermore, this cluster is marked by a larger share of

visitors who participate in a group visit.

The members of the “walking cluster” three mainly came up with a second person or even

alone.

The third cross tabulation concerns frequency of visit. As displayed in Chart 19, the visits of

“bus visitors” of cluster one are spread between high and low frequency. Although the ma‐

jority is coming up between one to three times a year or even more often, the share of

visitors who came up the first time is also not to be ignored. The visits of “car visitors” take

place mainly between one to three times a year and also more often. The smaller cluster of

“walking visitors” is characterized by the highest frequency of between one to three times a

month.

Chart 18: CT cluster variable – accompaniment


69

The fourth cross tabulation concerns the criteria of visit. As seen in Chart 20, “bus visitors”

mainly visit the platform because of the height and the marvellous view. A few respondents

also come up because of the small distance to the city centre and the good connection. For

the “car visitors” of cluster two, the view is also the major reason to visit. However, it is

interesting to see that some respondents also come up because of the well known brand.

The “walking visitors” of cluster three do not show major differences to other target

groups. During their walks, they visit the platform also mainly because of the view.

All in all, it is really interesting to see that none of the target groups is coming up because of

an interest in the F&B offers. Therefore, the researchers are able to conclude that major

improvements should be made.

Chart 19: CT cluster variable – frequency of visit


70

The fifth and final cross tabulation concerns the average time spent at the platform. As

shown in Chart 21, “bus visitors” tend to spend mainly between thirty minutes to one hour

at the platform. A few members even tend to stay longer.

The “car visitors” of cluster three also tend to spend mainly between thirty minutes to one

hour and even shorter. They just come up because of the view and leave afterwards. The

“walking visitors” of cluster three are characterized by the shortest time spent, which is

mainly below thirty minutes.

Chart 20: CT cluster variable – criteria of visit


71

After the description of the final part of research findings researchers will draw their conclusion

in the following chapter.

Chart 21: CT cluster variable – average time spent


72

88 CCoonncclluussiioonn

Over decades, the Kahlenberg has been a very attractive day trip destination for tourists as

well as locals. As a destination can be seen as the sum of its parts (Howie, 2005), the

Kahlenberg offers not only a viewing platform, but also Food & Beverage outlets catering to

the tourists. These outlets are supporting products, which can help to increase the popular‐

ity of the destination and on the other hand the F&B outlets can benefit from the unique

location and the numerous tourists visiting the destination. This synergy can only be devel‐

oped if the F&B outlets are catering to the needs and preferences of the tourists.

The researchers of the current paper have observed that the F&B outlets at the tourism

sight location Kahlenberg are not fully recognized by the tourist. They saw a potential in

investigating which kind of F&B outlet the tourist would prefer and visit. Therefore they

decided to design the first stages of a product development process.

The initial step was to understand the different stages of a new product development proc‐

ess. Authors have stated that it is important to integrate a new product development strat‐

egy in order to keep up which the fast changing market environment and customer prefer‐

ences. Therefore, this study describes which stages are important to analyse the tourist

sight location Kahlenberg. The focus was set on the development of new product ideas and

on the different possibilities that can be used to generate these ideas. As the literature

suggests, the inclusion of the customers is very important and an efficient tool to elaborate

which new products or services ideas would be appreciated by them. After the discussion

and set up of a development process, the researchers needed to find the right tool that

helped them to generate new product ideas with the help of the customers. They decided

to use a conjoint analysis, which provides the opportunity to create “a realistic decision

making situation” similar to the environment in the consumers’ real market place. By using

this method, they were able to identify uncovered needs and they were able to get an idea

about which features the ideal F&B product has to offer.

The study has shown that the Unique Selling Proposition of the tourism sight location

Kahlenberg, is the combination of a peaceful place, away from the city but still easy to ac‐

cess by public transportation and the marvellous view over the rooftops of Vienna. Another

remarkable advantage is that Kahlenberg has the only sightseeing “platform” that is acces‐

sible to the public without being forced to enter a facility. The low air miles to the city cen‐

tre allows the best view over the city and the different districts of Vienna and its surround‐

ings.


73

According to the current study, many visitors are repeat visitors, who enjoy coming to the

Kahlenberg several times a year. Some visitors enjoy walking up the hill while breathing in

the fresh air and enjoying a walk along the wine gardens embedding the Kahlenberg. Oth‐

ers come by tour bus and have limited time available to enjoy the view, take a few pictures

and buy a souvenir. The researchers have found out that the visitors at the viewing plat‐

form include a wide range of target customers. By looking at the characteristics of the dif‐

ferent clusters the researchers have identified, it can be said that there are considerable

differences between them, in regards to their demographics and F&B preferences, but all of

them have the same motivation to come up the hill. The view is the number one motivator

for coming up the hill. Even though F&B offers exist, not all of the visitors are interested in

consuming food and beverages at the viewing platform. A total of 46,7% of the respondents

stated that they do not intend to consume food and/or beverages, but most of them said

that if there would be an attractive offer, they would be more likely to consume something.

It was significant that there was only one respondent who said that his/her motivation to

come up the hill was linked to the F&B supply at the location.

Nevertheless, the visitors communicated a willingness to spend money for food and bever‐

ages. 52 out of 90 respondents would be willing to spend between 11 and 20 Euros which

shows that there is potential for F&B offers. Furthermore, the study has shown that most

visitors spent between thirty minutes to one hour at the platform; therefore the research‐

ers conclude that there is time to consume something. This result very well underlines that

F&B offers are a critical component of the tourism sight location but due to the fact that

the current offers are not matching to the customer preferences, the potential of the F&B

outlets is not exploited to create a positive synergy.

According to the study, the ideal F&B product from the visitor’s point of view has to offer

coffee, pastries and snack combined with a lounge setting with sofas as well as stylish and

modern atmosphere instead of a traditional full service restaurant. The trend has shown

that the F&B outlet that meets the needs of the visitors has to offer authentic Austrian cui‐

sine in an untypical setting. Visitors want to combine the experience of traditional food

with a comfortable and relaxing atmosphere. These findings, and the fact that the respon‐

dents of the survey said that they would consume something if there would be an attractive

offer shows that the location offers potential for a repositioning of the F&B services by in‐

corporating the findings into a new developed concept.

In the following part, based on their findings, the researchers make some recommenda‐

tions to the Management of the Tourism sight locating Kahlenberg.


74

99 RReeccoommmmeennddaattiioonnss

A destination should positively contribute to the synergy of all the components in order to

create a harmonious whole. Therefore, the researchers suggest that the tourism sight loca‐

tion should incorporate the needs and expectations of their visitors into the strategic plan‐

ning process of the sight location. The F&B outlets should be accounted as a part of the

destination and should be matched to the needs of the visitors in order to help the destina‐

tion work more effectively and increase its competitiveness.

As the Café Restaurant Kahlenberg as a full service restaurant is not attractive to the visi‐

tors and the trend has shown that they prefer to choose snacks and pastries from a smaller

menu, the researchers would suggest a modern and stylish coffee and snack bar, with self

service and a comfortable and modern setting including sofas, sun chairs and umbrellas.

This F&B outlet should offer traditional Austrian coffee, desserts and snack, which do not

take long to prepare, as they visitors do not intent to spend much time at the location. The

quality of the F&B products can be high‐quality, as the visitors indicated that they are will‐

ing to spend between 11 and 20 Euros per person.

Another interesting concept would be to establish a modern and stylish take away booth

which offers traditional Austrian snacks made of high‐quality products. The challenge is to

provide products that reflect the style of the Austrian cuisine, but at the same time com‐

municate the trend of a healthy life style. Bio products and products from Austrian farmers

could be offered and promoted. As these products guarantee a high quality, the price level

can be set accordingly.

After adjusting the F&B offers to the needs of the visitors, the tourism sight location

Kahlenberg should emphasize on the marketing of the whole sight location as a destination

in order to communicate and promote the entire experience to the visitors.

The researchers agree that the sight location Kahlenberg has to enforce the view of a culi‐

nary experience of the destination. This should be done by sticking to traditional F&B offers

combined with a modern and stylish atmosphere.

In order to overcome the seasonal problem and the fact that the location is highly affected

by weather conditions, the study has shown that there is a potential for offering interesting

events like concerts. The researchers suggest that the management of the sight location

investigate further into the possibility of hosting public events in order to increase the at‐

tractiveness of the destination.


75

1100 BBiibblliiooggrraapphhyy

1100..11 LLiitteerraattuurree::

Aaker, D. A., Kumar, V., & Day, G. S. (2004). Marketing Research (8th Ausg.). (J. W. Ltd.,

Hrsg.) Hoboken.

Backhaus, K., Erichson, B., Plinke, W., & Weiber, R. (2000). Multivariate Analysemethoden

(9th ed. Ausg.). Berlin: Springer.

Baker, M., & Hart, S. (1998). Product Strategy and Management. Hertfordshire: Prentice

Hall Europe.

Brady, J., & Davies, I. (1993). Marketing's mid‐life Crisis. The McKinsey Quarterly.

Child, P. (1995). Can Marketing regain the personal touch? Quarterly, The McKinsey.

Cooper, R. G., & Edgett, S. J. (1999). Product Development forthe service Sector. Cambridge,

Massachusetts: Perseus Books.

Crouch, G. I., & Brent, R. J. (1995). Destination Competitivness and the Role of the Tourism

Enterprise (Bde. Working Paper WP 95‐19). (T. U. Calgary, Hrsg.) Calgary, Canada: The .

Field, A. (2005). Discovering Statistics Using SPSS (2nd Ausg.). London: SAGE Publications

Ltd.

Förster, A., & Kreuz, P. (2004). Erfolgsfaktor Innovation ‐ Innovative Leistungsangebote

gemeinsam mit Kunden entwickeln. Digitale Fachbibliotek, Düsseldorf.

Green, P. E. (1984). Hybrid Models for Conjoint Analysis: An Expository Review. American

Marketing Association. JSTOR.

Green, P. E., & Rao, V. R. (1971). Conjoint measurement for quantifying judgemental data.

Journal of Marketing Research Vol. 8.

Gronroos, C. (1990). Service Management Marketing . New York: Lexington Books .

Gustaffson, A., Herrmann, A., & Huber, F. (2000). Conjoint mesurement ‐ methods and

applications. Berlin u.a.: Springer.

Hart, S. (1996). New Product Development. London: The Dryde Press.

Howie, F. (2005). Managing the Tourist Destination. London: Thomson Learning.

Johne, A., & Snelson, P. (1990). Successful Product Development. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd.


76

Kotler, P., Bowen, J. T., & Makens, J. C. (2006). Marketing for Hospitality and Tourism (4

Ausg.). New Jersey: Pearson Education.

Kotler, P., Bowen, J. T., & Markens, J. C. (2003). Marketing for Hospitality and Tourism, 3rd

Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Luce, D., & Tukey, J. (1964). Simultanous coinjoint measurement for quantifying

judgemental data. Journal of Mathematical Psychology Vol. 1.

Malhotra, N. K., & Birks, D. F. (1999). Marketing Research ‐ An Applied Approach (3rd Ed.

Ausg.). Essex: Pearson Education Limited.

Mathot, G. B. (1982). 'How to Get New Products to Market Quicker', Long Range Planning.

Montgomery, A. L., & Rossi, P. E. (1999). Estimating Price Elasticities with Theory Based

Priors. Journal of Marketing Research , Vol. 36, 413‐423.

Morgan, D., & Krueger, R. (1993). 'When to use focus groups and why' Successful focus

groups: Advancing the state of the art. Newbury Park: Sage.

Moskowitz, H. (2001). Creating new product concepts for foodservice‐the role of conjoint

measurement to identify promising product features (Bd. Food Service Technology Vol. 1).

White Plains, New York, USA: Blackwell Science Ltd.

Moskowitz, H. (2001). Creating new product concepts for foodservice‐the role of conjoint

measurement to identify promising product features (Bd. Food Service Technology Vol. 1).

White Plains, New York, USA: Blackwell Science Ltd.

Orme, B. K. (2006). Getting started with conjoint analysis, strategies for product design and

pricing research. Madison Wisconsin, USA: Research Publishers LLC.

Rochford, L. (1991). 'Generating and Screening New Product Ideas', Industrial Marketing

Management. Elsevier Science Publishing Co., Inc.

Ross, S. D., Norman, W. C., & Dorsch, M. J. (2003). The use of conjoint analysis in the

development of a new recreation faclitiy. University of Minnesota and Clemsin University.

Minnesota: Taylor & Francis Ltd.

Rothwell, R., Horlsey, A., Jervis, V., Robertson, A., & Townsend, J. (1972). Factors for success

in industrial innovations. Project SAPPHO ‐ A comparative study of success and failure in

industrial innovation. University of Sussex, Brighton.

Sawtooth Software. (2005). Customer feedback results. Sawtooth Solutions Journal.


77

Spendolini, M. J. (1992). The Benchmarking Book. New York: Amacom.

Vriens, M., Huber, J., & Wittink, D. The commercial use of conjoint in North America and

Europe: preferences, choices, and self explicated data. Unpublished working paper.

Walder, B., Weiermair, K., & Sancho Perez, A. (2006). Innovation and Product Development

in Tourism. Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag GmbH & Co.

Wind, J., Green, P. E., Shifflet, D., & Scarborough, M. (1989). Courtyard by Marriott:

Designing a Hotel Facility with Consumer‐Based Marketing Models". Research Journal,

Marriott Corporation.

Wöber, K. W. (2002). Benchmarking in Tourism and Hospitality Industries ‐ The selection of

Benchmarking Partners. Wallingford, United Kingdom: CABI Publishing International.

Wöber, K. W., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (2002). A Multi‐criteria Approach to Destination

Benchmarking: A Case Study of State Tourism Advertising Programs in the United States.

Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing.


78

1111 AAppppeennddiixx

1111..11 QQuueessttiioonnnnaaiirree

Product Development Questionnaire – Tourism Sight Location Kahlenberg

Researchers: Sandra Staniek, Gloria Schneider FB Nr. __________A/E

Sehr geehrter Kahlenberg Besucher!

Wir sind Studenten der MODUL University Vienna und führen im Rahmen unserer Bachelorar‐

beit eine Studie bezüglich des Gastronomie Angebotes auf der Aussichtsplattform Kahlenberg

durch. Mit dem vorliegenden Fragebogen beabsichtigen wir ein neues Gastronomiekonzept zu

erstellen und damit das Angebot zu verbessern.

Wir würden uns sehr freuen wenn Sie uns einige Fragen bezüglich Ihres Kahlenberg Besuches

beantworten könnten! Dauer: 10 Minuten

1. Warum sind Sie auf die Aussichtsplattform Kahlenberg gekommen?

_____________________________________________________________

2. Wie sind Sie auf den Kahlenberg gekommen?

Auto Motorrad/Vespa

Linien Bus

Fahrrad

Reisebus

Zu Fuß

3. Welches Kriterium war für Ihren Besuch der Aussichtsplattform Kahlenberg ausschlaggebend?

Stadt Nähe sportliche Betätigung am Weg hinauf

der bekannte Name/der gute Ruf

Aussichtshöhe

das gastronomisches Angebot

die öffentliche Verkehrsanbindung

4. Wie oft kommen Sie auf die Aussichtsplattform Kahlenberg?

______________________________________________________


79

5. Wie viel Zeit verbringen/verbrachten Sie bei einem Besuch auf der Aussichtsplattform Kahlenberg?

0‐29 Minuten

30 min. – 1h

1‐3 h

mehr als 3 h

6. Werden/haben Sie auf der Aussichtsplattform Kahlenberg Getränke und Speisen kon‐sumieren/ konsumiert?

Nein

Ja

7. Welche Küche wäre Ihnen am liebsten? ____________________________________________________________________

8. Conjoint Fragen:

Im folgenden Teil werden wir Ihnen verschiedene Gastronomie Konzepte vorstellen.

Bitte bewerten Sie jedes Konzept aufgrund Ihrer persönlichen Präferenzen auf einer

Skala von 1 bis 4. (1=trifft sehr zu, 2=trifft zu, 3=trifft weniger zu, 4=trifft nicht zu)

Sollten Sie nicht vor haben auf der Aussichtsplattform Spei‐sen oder Getränke zu konsumieren, bitten wir Sie dennoch die weiteren Fragen zu beantworten um herauszufinden welches Angebot Sie dennoch überzeugen könnte Kahlen‐berg’s Gastronomie Betriebe zu besuchen!

Ich würde den Gastronomie Betrieb

besuchen:

trifft sehr zu trifft weniger zu

trifft zu trifft nicht zu

Konzept 1:

Kaffee, Kuchen und Desserts Bistroähnlich mit Hochtischen/Barhockern und moderner, stylischer Atmosphäre

Konzept 3:

Reichhaltiges Angebot aus Speisekarte Restaurant klassisch und praktischer, einfacher Atmosphäre


besuchen:



Konzept 2:

Fast Food, Würstel, Sandwiches Bistroähnlich mit Hochtischen/Barhockern und praktischer, einfacher Atmosphäre


besuchen:




80

9. Mit wem sind Sie auf den Kahlenberg gekommen?

alleine zu zweit

als Familie in einer Gruppe

10. Mit welchem Angebot könnte man Sie motivieren öfters die Aussichtsplattform Kah‐lenberg zu besuchen? (auch wenn das Wetter schlecht wäre)

Kulinarische Spezialitäten, die von einem Spitzenkoch zubereitet werden

Veranstaltungen

Interessensgebiet:

Konzerte Veranstaltungen Ausstellungen Lesungen

Sport Angebot (Schwimmbad mit Aussicht, Mountainbike Rental, geführte Wande‐rungen,…)

Freizeitaktivitäten für Kinder

Ich würde den Gastronomie Betrieb besuchen:

trifft sehr zu trifft weniger zu trifft zu trifft nicht zu




besuchen:



Konzept 4:

Fast Food, Würstel, Sandwiches Lounge ähnlich mit Sofas und Sonnenliegen und traditioneller Wiener Atmosphäre

Konzept 5:

Reichhaltiges Angebot aus Speisekarte Bistroähnlich mit Hochtischen/Barhockern und tradi‐tioneller Wiener Atmosphäre

Konzept 6:

Reichhaltiges Angebot aus Speisekarte Lounge ähnlich mit Sofas und Sonnenliegen und moderner, stylischer Atmosphäre

Konzept 7:

Kaffee, Kuchen und Desserts Restaurant klassisch und traditioneller Wiener Atmosphäre



Konzept 8:

mit Kaffee, Kuchen und Desserts Lounge ähnlich mit Sofas und Sonnenliegen und praktischer, einfacher Atmosphäre



Konzept 9:

Fast Food, Würstel, Sandwiches Restaurant klassisch und moderner, stylischer Atmosphäre




81

Angebot für Feiern

Interessensgebiet:

Hochzeiten Geburtstagsfeiern Taufen

Außer der Aussicht sind keine anderen Attraktionen notwendig __________________________________________________________________

Demographische Daten:

11. Alter:___________________________________

12. Herkunft: _______________________________ 13. Geschlecht: männlich weiblich

15. Beschäftigung:

Selbständig Angestellte/r Student

Pensionist Lehrling leitende/r Angestellte/r

Hausfrau/Hausmann derzeit nicht beschäftigt

Schüler

Vielen herzlichen Dank für Ihre Unterstützung!

14. Wie hoch ist der durchschnittliche Betrag, den Sie pro Person für Essen und Trinken am Kahlenberg ausgeben würden/ ausgegeben haben.

unter 5€ 5€ ‐ 10€

11€ ‐ 20€ 21€ ‐ 40€

über 40€


82

1111..22 SSPPSSSS OOuuttppuutt

11.2.1 FFrreeqquueennccyy ttaabbllee aaggee ddiissttrriibbuuttiioonn

Frequency table of age distribution

Age Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

20 1 1,1 1,1 1,1 22 5 5,6 5,6 6,7 23 4 4,4 4,4 11,1 24 3 3,3 3,3 14,4 26 2 2,2 2,2 16,7 27 2 2,2 2,2 18,9 29 3 3,3 3,3 22,2 30 2 2,2 2,2 24,4 32 2 2,2 2,2 26,7 35 1 1,1 1,1 27,8 36 4 4,4 4,4 32,2 37 1 1,1 1,1 33,3 39 2 2,2 2,2 35,6 41 2 2,2 2,2 37,8 43 2 2,2 2,2 40,0 45 1 1,1 1,1 41,1 46 2 2,2 2,2 43,3 47 2 2,2 2,2 45,6 48 4 4,4 4,4 50,0 50 4 4,4 4,4 54,4 51 1 1,1 1,1 55,6 52 1 1,1 1,1 56,7 54 2 2,2 2,2 58,9 55 4 4,4 4,4 63,3 56 2 2,2 2,2 65,6 57 1 1,1 1,1 66,7 58 1 1,1 1,1 67,8 59 3 3,3 3,3 71,1 60 3 3,3 3,3 74,4 61 1 1,1 1,1 75,6 63 2 2,2 2,2 77,8 64 2 2,2 2,2 80,0 65 2 2,2 2,2 82,2 67 2 2,2 2,2 84,4 68 5 5,6 5,6 90,0 69 2 2,2 2,2 92,2 70 1 1,1 1,1 93,3 75 1 1,1 1,1 94,4 76 1 1,1 1,1 95,6 78 1 1,1 1,1 96,7 81 1 1,1 1,1 97,8 83 1 1,1 1,1 98,9 86 1 1,1 1,1 100,0

Total 90 100,0 100,0


83

11.2.2 KKrruusskkaall WWaalllliiss tteessttss wwiitthh ““ccooffffeeee,, ppiieess aanndd ppaassttrriieess”” vvaarriiaabbllee

Kruskal Wallis Test/ANOVA coffee, pies and pastries variable ‐ country of origin

Country of origin N Mean Std.

Deviation Sign.

United Kingdom 1 ‐,5556 .

0,038

Germany 13 ‐,5043 ,49403

other Austrian countries 21 ‐,2804 ,43691

Switzerland 2 ‐,2778 ,70711

Italy 2 ‐,2778 ,07857

Vienna 48 ‐,1435 ,50683

United States 2 ,0000 ,00000

Russia 1 ,1111 .

Kruskal Wallis Test/ANOVA coffee, pies and pastries variable ‐ gender

Gender N Mean Std.

Deviation Sign.

female 43 ‐,3307 ,43676 0,046

male 47 ‐,1418 ,51583

Kruskal Wallis Test/ANOVA coffee, pies and pastries variable ‐ criteria of visit

Criteria of visit N Mean Std.

Deviation Sign.

on recommendation from Viennese friend

1 ‐1,0000 .

0,005

view & to take a cup of coffee 1 ‐,7778 .

view is part of guided tour 5 ‐,7556 ,36345

sight seeing in Vienna 3 ‐,5185 ,23130

excursion 5 ‐,4222 ,38006

view and sports in the nature 14 ‐,3968 ,41509

view & relaxation 5 ‐,3556 ,28760

to show friends/relatives who visit Vienna the view

10 ‐,3333 ,56656

on invitation 1 ‐,3333 .

beautiful view 33 ‐,1246 ,39845

nostalgia 3 ,0370 ,27962

beautiful weather 3 ,1481 ,86305

confirmed habit 2 ,4444 ,31427

likes/interested in tourism sight location Kahlenberg

3 ,4444 ,29397

romantic evening 1 ,6667 .


84

Kruskal Wallis Test/ANOVA coffee, pies and pastries variable ‐ means of transportation used

Means of transportation used N Mean Std.

Deviation Sign.

Travel/Tour bus 5 ‐,8444 ,27889

0,056

vespa/motor bike 1 ‐,7778 .

bicycle 4 ‐,3056 ,45700

public bus 24 ‐,1991 ,40259

car 43 ‐,1835 ,52559

by foot 13 ‐,1538 ,44569

11.2.3 KKrruusskkaall WWaalllliiss tteessttss wwiitthh ““ffuullll sseerrvviiccee rreessttaauurraanntt ooffffeerr”” vvaarriiaabbllee

Kruskal Wallis Test/ANOVA full service restaurant variable ‐ average expenditures

Average expenditures N Mean Std.

Deviation Sign.

below 5€ 2 ‐1,2222 ,15713

0,010 5€ ‐ 10€ 25 ‐,0667 ,54904

11€ ‐ 20€ 52 ,2778 ,56720

21€ ‐ 40€ 11 ,2828 ,57599

11.2.4 KKrruusskkaall WWaalllliiss tteesstt wwiitthh ““bbiissttrroo sseettttiinngg”” vvaarriiaabbllee

Kruskal Wallis Test/ANOVA bistro setting variable ‐ criteria of visit

Criteria of visit N Mean Std.

Deviation Sign.

connection to public transportation 3 ‐,8148 ,35717

0,039

F&B offers 1 ‐,2222 .

well known name/brand 10 ‐,2000 ,39126

height of the platform/view 70 ‐,0508 ,34400

sport in the nature 1 ,0000 .

low distance to city centre 5 ,2000 ,26527


85

11.2.5 KKrruusskkaall WWaalllliiss tteesstt wwiitthh ““ttrraaddiittiioonnaall VViieennnneessee aattmmoosspphheerree”” vvaarriiaabbllee

Kruskal Wallis Test/ANOVA traditional Viennese atmosphere variable ‐ occupation

Occupation N Mean Std.

Deviation Sign.

houseman/housewife 9 ‐,3333 ,35136

0,004

unemployed 2 ‐,3333 ,15713

self employed 16 ‐,1250 ,53190

employed 28 ‐,0556 ,50376

student 12 ,0278 ,45227

retired 23 ,2609 ,32586

11.2.6 KKrruusskkaall WWaalllliiss tteesstt wwiitthh ““ssttyylliisshh aanndd mmooddeerrnn aattmmoosspphheerree”” vvaarriiaabbllee

Kruskal Wallis Test/ANOVA stylish and modern atmosphere variable ‐ visit criteria

Visit criteria N Mean Std. Devia‐

tion Sign.

sport in the nature 1 ‐1,0000 .

0,042

connection to public transportation

3 ‐,3704 ,16973

low distance to city centre

5 ‐,1333 ,18257

height of the plat‐form/view

70 ‐,1079 ,42043

well known name/brand

10 ,1667 ,28328

F&B offers 1 ,4444 .


86

11.2.7 CCoorrrreellaattiioonnss ““ffuullll sseerrvviiccee rreessttaauurraanntt”” –– ““aavveerraaggee eexxppeennddiittuurreess””

Correlations "full service restaurant" ‐ "average expenditures"

What do you/did you spend on average per person for food and beverages at a visit of the day trip

destination Kahlenberg?

Full Service Restaurant

Offer

Spearman's rho

What do you/did you spend on aver‐age per person for food and beverages at a visit of the day trip destination Kahlenberg?

Correlation Coefficient

1,000 ,305

Sig. (2‐tailed)

. ,003

Full Service Restau‐rant Offer


,305 1,000

Sig. (2‐tailed)

,003 .

11.2.8 CCoorrrreellaattiioonn ““ffaasstt ffoooodd,, ssaauussaaggeess && ssaannddwwiicchheess”” –– ““aavveerraaggee eexxppeennddiittuurreess””

Correlations "fast food, sausages and sandwiches" ‐ "average expenditures"

What do you/did you spend on average per person for

food and beverages at a visit of the day trip destination

Kahlenberg?

Fast Food, Würstel,

Burger und Pommes

Spearman's rho

What do you/did you spend on average per person for food and beverages at a visit of the day trip destina‐tion Kahlenberg?


1,000 ‐,331

Sig. (2‐tailed)

. ,001

Fast Food, Würstel, Burger und Pommes


‐,331 1,000

Sig. (2‐tailed)

,001 .


87

11.2.9 CCoorrrreellaattiioonn ““ttrraaddiittiioonnaall VViieennnneessee aattmmoosspphheerree”” –– ““aaggee ddiissttrriibbuuttiioonn””

Correlations "traditional Viennese atmosphere” – “age distribution”

How old are you? traditional Viennese

atmosphere

Spearman's rho

age distribution


1,000 ,360

Sig. (2‐tailed)

. ,000

traditionell ‐ wienerisch


,360 1,000

Sig. (2‐tailed)

,000 .

11.2.10 RReessuullttss ooff tthhee cclluusstteerr aannaallyyssiiss

Clusters

Cluster variables Cluster 1: bus visitors

Cluster 2: car visitors

Cluster 3: walking visitors

car ,00 ,98 ,00

Public_bus ,89 ,00 ,00

on_foot ,00 ,00 ,68

one_to_three_times_a_month ,15 ,11 ,47

half_an_hour ,15 ,39 ,63

sports ,04 ,05 ,58

food_yes ,63 ,52 ,42

Austrian_cuisine ,41 ,39 ,26

selfemployed ,04 ,27 ,16

employed ,41 ,23 ,37

retired ,26 ,23 ,32

age_reduced ,76 ,69 ,79

female ,63 ,43 ,37


88

Number of Cases in each Cluster

Cluster 1 27,000

Cluster 2 44,000

Cluster 3 19,000

Valid 90,000

Missing ,000

f&b supply in tourism sight locations · f&b supply in tourism sight locations ... first...

Documents