Ecolodge Patrons’ Perceptions of Service Quality and Facilities
A Study of Belize Ecolodges Paul F. J. Eagles Pia Kwan Department of Recreation and Leisure Studies University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. Ecotourism and Sustainable Tourism Conference October 27-29, 2008 Vancouver, BC, Canada
Introduction Ecolodges are small-scale, nature-based accommodations and attractions that attempt to practice ecological, economic and cultural sustainability through recreation and education. A relatively new phenomenon where service offerings and price vary tremendously. In the absence of standards, price may be an indicator of quality. There are few marketing studies on ecolodges, including a lack of knowledge about ecolodge patrons. Belize has a large and rapidly-developing ecolodge industry, with a range of price levels.
Purpose of the Study This study investigated and compared ecolodge patronsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;: Sociodemographic characteristics. Travel characteristics. Perception of importance and performance amongst three price categories: Budget Category (< 40 USD per person per night) Mid-Price Category ( 40 USD to 100 USD per person per night) Upscale Category (> 100 USD per person per night)
Case Study : Cayo District in Belize
Cayo
Budget Segment
Mid-Price Segment
Upscale Segment
Sampling Methods & Survey Instrument Six randomly-selected ecolodges in the Cayo District of Belize participated. Â&#x2122;
4-page questionnaire asked demographic, travel behaviour information, and perception of importance and performance on 41 ecolodge attributes.
Â&#x2122;
Questionnaires distributed by receptionists upon check in to one person in each room. Respondents put the completed questionnaire in a drop box upon check out. A small painted rock was given as thanks.
Results : Response Rate Survey period: 15 weeks (Feb through May 2004) Responses: 333 responses from 474 surveys. Overall response rate: 70.2% Upscale: 132 responses (response rate: 82.5% ) Mid-Price: 129 responses (response rate: 53.8%) Budget: 72 responses (response rate: 90%)
Major Findings: Total Population Socio-demographics Gender: Females (59%). Age: 36 to 55 (45.9%). Country of Residence: United States (73.3%), Canada (12%), European Countries (9%). Education: University degree (76.8%). Employment Status: Employed (67.2%) and retired (14.1%). Annual household income: over $140,000 US (19.2%), ($30,000 to 50,000 (16.2%).
Major Findings: Total Population Trip Characteristics Length of stay in Belize: 8 to 11 days (32.4%) Length of stay at ecolodge: 3 nights (24.9%) to 4 nights (19.5%). Previous experience with ecolodge: Yes (48.9%). Party Composition: Spouse (35.1%), Children (15.9%) Travel motivation to Belize: learn and explore nature or explore a new country or culture. Major Sources of Information: Internet, travel guide books, and recommendations from friends and relatives.
Major Findings: Total Population Knowledge of the term ‘ecolodge’ Please describe in your own words what you think an ecolodge is. Respondents showed no agreement on the concept of “ecolodges”, using this open-ended question.
Importance â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Performance for Top 12 of 41 Attributes
Attributes
Importance Performance Rating Rating
IP Ratio
Friendliness of staff
4.37
4.78
0.41
Scenery
4.37
4.70
0.33
Quality of the environment and landscape
4.31
4.69
0.38
Decent sanitary condition
4.32
4.62
0.30
Staff provide efficient services
4.18
4.61
0.43
Cleanliness
4.20
4.60
0.40
Availability of trees and wildflowers
4.11
4.59
0.48
Knowledgeable guides
4.02
4.56
0.54
Design sensitive to natural and cultural environment with minimal negative impact
4.18
4.51
0.33
Value for money
4.38
4.40
0.02
Availability of wildlife
4.09
4.20
0.11
Price
4.07
4.13
0.06
Overall Sample Patrons showed high levels of satisfaction with virtually all attributes of the ecolodges. Of 41 attributes ranked in 3 categories (41 x 3 = 123), 34 had positive IP ratios. Only 7 showed dissatisfaction through a negative IP ratio. Those seven are presented on the next slide.
Comparison amongst Segments Dissatisfaction in Upscale Clients occurred with: – value for money, (-0.01) – price, (-0.05), and – bed comfort (-0.02).
Dissatisfaction in Mid-range Clients occurred with: – availability of wildlife (-0.04), – bed comfort (-0.06), – recycling programs (-0.17), and – value for money. (-0.13)
Factor Analysis on Overall Sample A six factor solution, including 31 of the 41 attributes, explained 63.3% of the variance. – – – – – –
Service quality - 33.7% Physical environment - 9.7% Ecotourism principles - 6.2% Amenities and Services - 5.5% Price and Value - 4.4% Design - 3.8%
We will now look at these 6 factors for each of the three price segments
Upscale Segment Legend 4.50
'
Concentrate Here
'
Keep Up the Good Work
95% Upper Interval Line
4.30
F2
4.10
F5
'
3.90
Importance
'
CONCENTRATE HERE
3.70
'
F3
'
'
F3
Low Priority
F6
,
3.30
'
'
3.10
Possible Overkill
;
'
POSSIBLE OVERKILL
'
F4
2.70
;
F2Physical Environment F3Ecotourism Principles
'
2.90
2.50
F1
'
'
3.50
'
F1 – Service Quality
ACCEPTABLE RANGE .
95% Lower Interval Line
F4 – Amenities/ Services F5 – Value/Price
'
,
3.20 3.30 3.40 3.50 3.60 3.70 3.80 3.90 4.00 4.10 4.20 4.30 4.40 4.50 4.60 4.70 4.80
Performance
F6Design
Ecotourism Principles Uses alternative, sustainable means of water acquisition and reduces water consumption Meets its energy needs through renewable energy resources Recycling of glass, paper and plastic Nature interpretation center of conservation education programs Benefit local communities through provision of jobs
Mid-Price Segment Legend 4.50
'
Concentrate Here
Keep Up the Good Work 95% Upper Interval Line
4.30
F5
F5
4.10
'
Importance
'
'
3.70
'
'
'
F6
F3
'
Low Priority
'
,
3.30 ;
'
2.90 2.70 2.50
Possible Overkill
'
'
3.10
F1
F2
CONCENTRATE HERE
3.90
3.50
'
POSSIBLE OVERKILL
'
ACCEPTABLE RANGE
F4
;
.
95% Lower Interval Line
F1 – Service Quality F2Physical Environment F3Ecotourism Principles F4 – Amenities/ Services F5 – Value/Price
,
3.20 3.30 3.40 3.50 3.60 3.70 3.80 3.90 4.00 4.10 4.20 4.30 4.40 4.50 4.60 4.70 4.80
Performance
F6Design
Value and Price Price Convenient location Easy accessibility Value of money Reputation of lodge
Budget Segment Legend
4.50
'
Concentrate Here
Keep Up the Good Work
95% Upper Interval Line
4.30 4.10
Importance
'
'
F2
F5 CONCENTRATE HERE
3.90
'
'
3.70
'
'
F3
'
3.50
'
'
Low Priority
Possible Overkill '
,
F1
3.30
'
'
F6 POSSIBLE 3.10
'
;
2.90
'
F4 ACCEPTABLE RANGE
2.70 2.50
OVERKILL 95% Lower Interval Line
.
;
'
,
3.20 3.30 3.40 3.50 3.60 3.70 3.80 3.90 4.00 4.10 4.20 4.30 4.40 4.50 4.60 4.70 4.80
Performance
F1 – Service Quality F2Physical Environment F3Ecotourism Principles F4 – Amenities/ Services F5 – Value/Price F6Design
We will now compare the 6 Factor Groupsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; IP Ratios by Price Segments 1. Service quality 2. Physical environment 3. Ecotourism principles 4. Amenities and Services 5. Price and Value 6. Design
1.0 Service Quality Mean Importance
Mean Performance
IP Ratio
Upscale
4.20
4.56
0.35
Mid-Price
4.14
4.47
0.33
Budget
3.36
4.15
0.79
2.0 Physical and Natural Environment Mean Importance
Mean Performance
IP Ratio
Upscale
4.28
4.58
0.30
Mid-Price
4.11
4.34
0.23
Budget
4.05
4.55
0.49
3.0 Ecotourism Principles Mean Importance
Mean Performance
Difference (Satisfaction)
Upscale
3.59
4.05
0.45
Mid-Price
3.51
3.76
0.25
3.52
4.31
0.79
Budget
4.0 Amenities and Services Mean Importance
Mean Performance
IP Ratio
Upscale
2.72
3.66
0.94
Mid-Price
2.69
3.32
0.63
Budget
2.82
4.06
1.24
5.0 Value and Price Mean Importance
Mean Performance
IP Ratio
Upscale
4.14
4.35
0.21
Mid-Price
4.09
4.17
0.08
Budget
4.01
4.45
0.44
6.0 Design Mean Importance
Mean Performance
IP Ratio
Upscale
3.53
4.36
0.83
Mid-Price
3.53
4.22
0.69
Budget
3.18
4.19
1.01
Conclusions The budget clients had much higher positive IP ratios than the other two groups on 4 of the 6 major factor groupings of attributes.
Comparisons The ecolodge patrons were much more satisfied than the patrons of parks as found in other studies, such as: â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Ontario Provincial Parks, and â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Kilimanjaro National Park.
Serengeti National Parkâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s IP Ratios Variable
Mean Importance
Mean Performance
Difference
Knowledge of Guide
4.52
4.28
-.24
Friendliness of Guide
4.50
4.43
-.07
Security from Theft
4.35
3.60
-.75
Low Level of Crowdedness
4.30
3.91
-.39
Group Harmony
4.16
4.08
-.08
Cleanliness of Washrooms
3.98
2.67
-1.31
Security From Wildlife Attack
3.95
3.88
-.07
Friendliness of TANAPA staff
3.88
3.94
+.06
Accommodation
3.82
3.80
-.02
Availability of Information
3.76
2.84
-.92
Visitor Centre
3.57
3.20
-.37
Quality of Roads
3.33
2.22
-1.11
Ontario Parksâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; IP Ratios Importance
Performance
IP Ratio
Cleanliness of Washrooms Sense of Security Condition of Campsite Condition 0f Facilities Level of Privacy Responsiveness of Staff to Concerns Helpfulness of Staff Control of Noise Availability of Showers Condition of Beach Value for Fee Ease of Campground Registration
4.53 4.40 4.39 4.32 4.30 4.27 4.23 4.25 4.23 4.22 4.20 4.14
3.79 4.19 4.05 3.92 3.86 4.16 4.21 3.97 3.74 4.01 3.95 4.15
Control of Pets 3 R's Initiatives Adequacy of Signs Condition of Trails Availability of Information Ease of Access to Services Upkeep of Park Roads Recreational Thing to Do Availability of Firewood Quality of Firewood Quality of Picnic Areas Availability of Groceries / Supplies Availability of Heritage Educational
4.12 4.10 3.97 3.96 3.93 3.87 3.83 3.82 3.81 3.75 3.65 3.38 3.32
3.91 3.98 3.90 3.95 3.96 3.86 3.91 3.87 3.90 3.54 3.92 3.15 3.67
-0.74 -0.21 -0.34 -0.40 -0.44 -0.11 -0.02 -0.28 -0.49 -0.21 -0.25 +0.01 -0.21 -0.12 -0.07 -0.01 +0.03 -0.01 +0.08 +0.05 +0.09 -0.21 +0.27 -0.23 +0.35
Park Services & Facilities
Conclusions The ecolodge business is immature. Clients are highly satisfied with the product. Consumers are not familiar with the sustainability principles underlying ecolodges. Accommodation service quality is the most important attribute. The quality of the natural environment is the second most important attribute. Families with children are entering the upscale market.
Selected References Chu, R. K. S.,& Choi, T. (2000). An importance-performance analysis of hotel selection factors in the Hong Kong hotel industry: A comparison of business and leisure travellers. Tourism Management 21(4), 363-377. Kwan, Pia, Paul F. J. Eagles and Amber Gebhardt. (2009). Ecolodge Patronsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Characteristics and Motivations: A Study of Belize. Journal of Ecotourism (In press). Kwan, Pia and Paul F. J. Eagles.(2009). A Comparison of Ecolodge Patrons Characteristics and Motivations Based on Price Levels: A Case Study of Belize. Journal of Sustainable Tourism (In press). Hawkins, D. E., Wood, M., & Bittman, S. (Eds.)(1995). The Ecolodge Sourcebook. North Bellington, VT: The International Ecotourism Society. Martilla, J., & James, J. (1977). Importance-performance analysis. Journal of Marketing 41, 7779. Mehta, B., Baez, A., & Oâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Loughlin, P. (2002). International Ecolodge Guidelines. North Bellington, VT: The International Ecotourism Society Mount, D. J. (2000). Determination of significant issues: Applying a quantitative method to importance-performance analysis. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality and Tourism 1(3), 49-65. Patton, M., Stevens, P., & Knutson, B. J. (1994). Internationalizing LODGSERV as a measurement tool: A pilot study. Journal of Hospitality and Leisure Marketing 2(2), 39-55.