波羅的海周邊島嶼的目標(biāo)市場(chǎng)定位

波羅的海周邊島嶼的目標(biāo)市場(chǎng)定位——基于一種靈活的市場(chǎng)細(xì)分方法分析博恩霍爾姆就是這樣的一個(gè)島嶼，位于波羅的海，居住著45000人，以傳統(tǒng)旅游為主。每年有50萬游客被這島嶼的海灘、農(nóng)場(chǎng)和自然風(fēng)景所吸引。95%的觀光客通過丹麥、德國和瑞典這三個(gè)國家的航班抵達(dá)這個(gè)小島。通常，旅游營銷專家認(rèn)為一個(gè)以旅游為目的的小島會(huì)因旅游發(fā)展的成熟而導(dǎo)致環(huán)境的惡化。減少對(duì)住宿和景點(diǎn)的投資，在幾年內(nèi)保持最佳的旅客總?cè)藬?shù)、入住率和日均參觀人數(shù)。目前，這個(gè)島嶼的景點(diǎn)大約可從當(dāng)?shù)卣@得280萬美元（394，000達(dá)喀爾）用于旅游策劃和市場(chǎng)推廣。波羅海的外部區(qū)域相對(duì)于營銷人員和研究人員是具有重要意義。首先，本研究強(qiáng)調(diào)的是一種方法論，用這個(gè)可以評(píng)估其它景點(diǎn)的相對(duì)優(yōu)勢(shì)和劣勢(shì)，以服務(wù)于其它景點(diǎn)的市場(chǎng)細(xì)分。要針對(duì)不同的游客進(jìn)行定期評(píng)估，描繪ROI線以研究發(fā)現(xiàn)客戶的需求并提供優(yōu)惠。其次，本研究以民族作為細(xì)分的相關(guān)變量。不久的將來會(huì)迎來世界會(huì)球化，國家的文化效應(yīng)帶來的問題將超過社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)和生活方式的因素的問題。1.市場(chǎng)細(xì)分的相關(guān)理論Botha，Crompton和Kim(1999)主張以地區(qū)為主的營銷理念，以游客心中的所想的為出發(fā)點(diǎn)，加強(qiáng)主要服務(wù)功能，而不是在以發(fā)展的營銷計(jì)劃的基礎(chǔ)上，以景區(qū)提供的服務(wù)為出發(fā)點(diǎn)。雖然這樣做會(huì)被認(rèn)為是一種過度推銷的方法，但是RiesandTrout(1982)發(fā)展改變我們思想會(huì)是一項(xiàng)極其困難的任務(wù)。這使得利用人們已經(jīng)存在的思想更容易(p.193)。因此，這就變成對(duì)已存在思想的優(yōu)缺點(diǎn)的識(shí)別，并以此進(jìn)行營銷，這樣可以減少對(duì)游客的態(tài)度和行為改變，滿足他們期望并獲得認(rèn)同。這就意味著市場(chǎng)定位的細(xì)分過程是以正確的細(xì)分游客為目的。市場(chǎng)細(xì)分運(yùn)用在旅游方面已經(jīng)得到公認(rèn)，并被認(rèn)為十分的管用(Kastenholtz,Davis,&Paul,1999;Kotler,Bowen,&Makens,1998;Cha,McCleary,&Uysal,1995)。以市場(chǎng)細(xì)分的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)劃分的鮮明性和共識(shí)性，還包括心理、地理、人口和行為特征等因素。一旦確定，將會(huì)以確定每塊的吸引力、選擇目標(biāo)細(xì)分市場(chǎng)和發(fā)展合適職位這三混合變量，以達(dá)到實(shí)現(xiàn)目標(biāo)期望(Kotleretal.,1998)。這種細(xì)分市場(chǎng)的方法可以使景點(diǎn)經(jīng)銷商通過有效的分配現(xiàn)有的資源吸引和留住原有旅游者。Dann(1993)提出了一些界定旅游市場(chǎng)的產(chǎn)生和接收群體的市場(chǎng)細(xì)分方法。其中最主要的市場(chǎng)細(xì)分變量是民族、社會(huì)層次和旅游的角色，具有民族性是最具爭議(Pizam&Sussmann,1995)。對(duì)相對(duì)有爭論的中心民族為市場(chǎng)細(xì)分變量，確定它在全球化的趨勢(shì)下，文化同質(zhì)化和分化是否有長期性。Wishard(1999)假定在經(jīng)濟(jì)收斂過程中，與歐洲聯(lián)盟（歐盟）的形成只有一小部分的關(guān)聯(lián)。而不是假定在營銷策略的創(chuàng)新的基礎(chǔ)上，論證地理或政治的關(guān)聯(lián)性變小，Wishard認(rèn)為社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)、生活方式和環(huán)境因素具有密切聯(lián)系，應(yīng)被當(dāng)作一個(gè)整體來考慮。但是許多研究者對(duì)這個(gè)論點(diǎn)有爭議，認(rèn)識(shí)歐盟是一個(gè)同質(zhì)化的歐洲社會(huì)。這似乎是在支持跨文化研究者，消費(fèi)者的消費(fèi)模式、價(jià)值觀和生活方式有顯著的差別(Wierenga,Pruyn,&Waarts,1996)。這個(gè)研究的變量是國籍、家庭收入、教育程度、年齡、旅游聚會(huì)成分和旅行目的，這將取代對(duì)預(yù)期游客、游客滿意度和多次旅游率的市場(chǎng)細(xì)分變量。我們主張的是市場(chǎng)細(xì)分和定位的目標(biāo)是確定在一個(gè)現(xiàn)有的細(xì)分市場(chǎng)中，發(fā)現(xiàn)最具潛力的客戶，并培育和迎合他們。在丹麥的大多數(shù)地區(qū)，都用這樣的一個(gè)靈活的探索方法只是統(tǒng)計(jì)游客曲線圖，去證明收集到的數(shù)據(jù)的可用性。本研究的目的是識(shí)別來博恩霍爾姆島的細(xì)分市場(chǎng)和更好地了解在參觀島時(shí)對(duì)旅客的滿意度、提供價(jià)值和影響力。最終，我們希望這一研究將有助于旅游策劃者和營銷人才的培養(yǎng)，他們及時(shí)的滿足目標(biāo)市場(chǎng)的需要。2.調(diào)查方法本研究的研究獲得的二手?jǐn)?shù)據(jù)資料是從1995年～1997年到丹麥博恩霍爾姆的游客問卷調(diào)查。在這一年，研究人員隨機(jī)調(diào)查了到小島的1500位游客。游客的響應(yīng)度相當(dāng)高，平均為95%。一般有渡輪上載娛樂最低，如填寫調(diào)查乘客普遍歡迎改道。這項(xiàng)調(diào)查是在四個(gè)不同的語言版本，一般需時(shí)約五分鐘才能完成。在調(diào)查問題的設(shè)計(jì)，以確定游客的來源國，社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)特點(diǎn)，行程目的，住宿使用，支出，評(píng)價(jià)旅游服務(wù)，以及重復(fù)探視措施的可能性。受訪的4004組成的數(shù)據(jù)庫提供了一種手段在其中定義的細(xì)分市場(chǎng)，并估計(jì)在確保他們的目的地重復(fù)探視的相對(duì)優(yōu)勢(shì)和弱點(diǎn)。需要重視這項(xiàng)研究的是游客普遍的評(píng)價(jià)——“博恩霍爾姆作為假期和娛樂目的地”，以及游客在“物有所值“的問題上關(guān)注，這些都曾發(fā)生在博恩霍爾姆島上對(duì)游客的訪問。沿著五點(diǎn)量表測(cè)量探討不久的將來游客到博恩霍爾姆島的可能性。此外，主要變量是每人每天的支出、旅行團(tuán)中成年人和兒童的數(shù)量。本研究以假期旅游目的地為目標(biāo)，每人每天花費(fèi)在島上的價(jià)值評(píng)估，以及作為因變量重復(fù)訪問的可能性。結(jié)論總之，這三種型號(hào)顯示了四個(gè)因變量的解釋隨著變異量的增加而增加。因此，模型1包括原產(chǎn)國（在這種情況下，與丹麥，德國和瑞典的對(duì)比）解釋了其本身就是一個(gè)重要的變化量。包括原籍國和人口變量和社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)變量這三個(gè)變量，在Model2中添加了一個(gè)變異解釋量有助于解釋。此外，在收益模式Model3中解釋變異也取得了顯著的，包括前面提到的“旅游的作用”這個(gè)變量。在這一點(diǎn)上，Nagelkerke的R平方測(cè)量的模型，充分地解釋力了，4%的“博恩霍爾姆游客作為節(jié)日和休閑目的地評(píng)價(jià)”的問題的評(píng)價(jià)，29%的“每人每天花了多少錢”問題評(píng)價(jià)，34%的“物有所值“的問題的評(píng)價(jià)，32%的“回歸博恩霍爾姆可能性”。因此，完整的Model3中作為因變量的方差解釋充其量是66%。因此，新的研究應(yīng)該包含變量以外研究，包括當(dāng)前的研究。最后，應(yīng)該注意到，Block3（旅游角色）也影響了在不久的將來再次游玩博恩霍爾姆島的可能性。參照組團(tuán)旅游的游客，獨(dú)自旅行的表現(xiàn)出消極的態(tài)度。這些團(tuán)體中的表現(xiàn)從37%～51%的賠率相對(duì)效果顯著減少。與此相反，Purpose4（假日/探親訪友或家庭）和Purpose5（探親訪友或家庭獨(dú)資）顯示了在10%～15%之間的影響。因此，旅游的行為上表現(xiàn)突出的回報(bào)率受到博恩霍爾姆島的獨(dú)特和重要的影響。相對(duì)于單獨(dú)旅行的游客，組團(tuán)參加的游客不太可能再來游玩。當(dāng)游客看到在博恩霍爾姆游玩的家人和朋友，他們極有可能于近期到游玩博恩霍爾姆島。4.建議“價(jià)值”就是能給游客他們想要的東西，以此定義它是將其當(dāng)成實(shí)現(xiàn)營銷者目的的試金石。但只有當(dāng)它作為是一個(gè)精心選擇和設(shè)計(jì)的適合自己的目標(biāo)市場(chǎng)時(shí)，并以此策劃和服務(wù)來達(dá)到預(yù)期。在這個(gè)例子中，探討了細(xì)分市場(chǎng)在嚴(yán)峻的兩難局面，分析揭示了其中的“旅游營銷細(xì)分市場(chǎng)”最滿意，“物有所值”和“最重復(fù)的概率”是相同的。市場(chǎng)上最典型的一天是每人每段游客滿意度最低，報(bào)道的是金錢的價(jià)值和可能性的重復(fù)的訪問。這些研究結(jié)果表明，需要另外的研究來確定潛在因素的不滿和價(jià)值貧乏的訪客報(bào)道在更高的支出的細(xì)分市場(chǎng)。對(duì)于這個(gè)波羅的海地區(qū)的研究之外，可以說是本研究的最有啟發(fā)性的發(fā)現(xiàn)是，最考慮因素之間的高低的消費(fèi)者是本地居民，游客游客滿意度和重復(fù)惠顧受歧視的相關(guān)性小。此外，在這組數(shù)據(jù)，國籍被證明是一個(gè)比家庭收入、教育程度、年齡、旅游和旅行的目的更大的影響。雖然我們同Dann（1993年）和其他研究者一致認(rèn)為，在全球化和國內(nèi)文化多樣性的背景下，影響可以少建一個(gè)比國籍有用。這項(xiàng)研究的結(jié)果表明，它是不太成熟的下降完全建構(gòu)。而實(shí)際的情況是，沒有社會(huì)、經(jīng)濟(jì)和生活方式的作用可以適用于所有的研究。相反，研究人員應(yīng)該利用自己的所有分析方法和確定的因素分析和探討特殊情況。PositioninganislanddestinationintheperipheralareaoftheBaltics:aflexibleapproachtomarketsegmentationBornholmisonesuchdestination.BornholmisanislandintheBalticSeainhabitedby45,000peopleandoneofthemoretraditionaltourismdestinationsinDenmark.Anestimated500,000peoplevisittheislandeachyearmainlyforitsbeaches,natureandpicturesquefishingvillagesandfarmsthatdottheisland.Danes,GermansandSwedesmakeup95percentofalltheislandvisitors,andaccesstheislandbyferriesandcommercialairflights.Thegeneralconsensusoftourismmarketingspecialistsisthattheislandasatouristdestinationisinamaturestageofitsdevelopmentnotsomuchbecauseofenvironmentaldegradation(theoppositeistrue),butbecausevisitorarrivals,occupancyratesandaveragedailyrateshaveatbestbeenflatforseveralyearswhichinturnhascontributedtodeclininginvestmentsinlodgingandattractions.Currentlytheisland'sdestinationmarketingorganizationreceivesapproximately2.8millionDKr(US$394,000)annuallyfromthegovernmentandlocalindustryfortourismplanningandmarketingpurposes.TheimplicationsofthisresearchtotourismmarketersandresearchersoutsidethisregionoftheBalticaretwofold.First,theresearchhighlightsamethodologyotherdestinationscanusetoassesstheirrelativestrengthsandweaknessesinresearchingandservingpreferredmarketsegments.Notallgroupsoftouristsarealikeanditisimportanttoperiodicallyassesswhichsegmentsprovidethegreatestreturn-on-investmentsandwhosedestination'sprovidevalueandgaintheirrepeatpatronage.Secondly,thisresearchcontributestothedebateastotherelevanceofusingnationalityasasegmentationvariable.Inaworldthatisquickly‘‘Globalizing,’’theutilityofnationalculture—whencomparedtoothersocio-economicandlifestylevariables—forsegmentationpurposesisoftenbroughtintoquestion.1.TheconceptsofpositioningandmarketsegmentationBotha,Crompton,andKim(1999)introducedtourismmarketerstotheconceptofpositioningadestination.Theycontendthatinsteadofdevelopingamarketingplanbaseduponwhattourismmarketersbelievethedestinationhastooffer,thestartingpointistoidentifywhatexistsinthemindsofvisitorsandreinforcethesekeyfeaturesintheirminds.Thoughsuchanapproachcanbecriticizedasanoverlyreactiveapproachtomarketing,RiesandTrout(1982)noted,“Changingmindsinourover-communicatedsocietyisanextremelydifficulttask.Itismucheasiertoworkwithwhatisalreadythere”(p.193).Hencethetaskistoidentifytheareasofexistingstrengthsandweaknessesandactonthem,andavoidthedifficultandexpensivetaskofchangingvisitorprospectsattitudesandbehaviors.Thepositioningprocessalsoimpliesasegmentationprocesswhereadestinationtargetstherightkindofvisitor.Marketsegmentationhaslongbeenrecognizedasausefultechniqueinthetourismliterature(Kastenholtz,Davis,&Paul,1999;Kotler,Bowen,&Makens,1998;Cha,McCleary,&Uysal,1995).Marketsegmentationinvolvesdividingthemarketintodistinctandhomogenousgroupsintermsofgeographic,socio-demographic,psychographicand/orbehavioralcharacteristics.Oncedefined,therefollowsaprocessofascertainingeachsegment'sattractiveness,selectionofthetargetsegment(s)anddevelopingtheappropriatepositionsupportedbyappropriatemarketingmixvariablestoreachandinfluenceprospects(Kotleretal.,1998).Theapproachallowstourismmarketerstoefficientlyallocatescarceresourcestowardsattractingandretainingpreferredtouristsegments.Dann(1993)hassuggestedseveralapproachestodefiningmarketsegmentsinbothtouristgeneratingandreceivingcommunities.Chiefamongthemarenationality,socialclassandtouristrole,withnationalitybeingthemostcontroversialsegmentationvariabletoinclude(Pizam&Sussmann,1995).Thedebateastotherelevanceofnationalityformarketsegmentationpurposescentersontheissueastowhetherornotthereisalong-termglobaltrendtowardshomogenizationordifferentiationincultures.Wishard(1999)haspostulatedthattheprocessofeconomicconvergenceassociatedwiththeformationoftheEuropeanUnion(EU)hasmadenationalityalessthanusefulsegmentationconstruct.Insteadofcreatingamarketingstrategybaseduponincreasinglyirrelevantgeographicorpoliticalborders,Wishardarguesthatahostofothersocio-economic,lifestyleandsituationalfactorsgermanetotheregionasawholeshouldbeconsidered.However,manyresearchershavedisputedthisargumentaswishfulthinking,statingthattheEUisnotproducingonehomogenousEuropeansociety.Thisseemstobesupportedbycross-culturalstudies,whichhaveshownsignificantdifferencesinconsumerspendingpatterns,valuesandlifestylesamongEUcountries(Wierenga,Pruyn,&Waarts,1996).Thoughitwasnottheintentofthisstudytofocussolelyonthisissue,byincludingnationalityintheanalysis,thisstudyprovidesinsightsrelativetotheconvergence–divergencedebate.Nationality,householdincome,education,age,travelpartycompositionandtrippurposeswereselectedastheindependentvariablesforthissegmentationstudy.Thesealternativeapproachestomarketsegmentationweretestedfortheirabilitytopredictvisitorspendingpatterns,visitorsatisfactionandprobabilitytorepeatvisitationmeasures.Wecontendthatthepointofmarketsegmentationandpositioningistoidentifywithinanexistingmarketthemarketsegmentsthatbestmaximizevaluetothedestinationandfind,nurtureandcatertothem.Suchaflexibleexploratoryapproachcanonlybepursuedwiththeavailabilityoflargerepresentativedatasetsthatprofilevisitorstoanareaandtheuseofmultivariatestatisticaltechniques.DatabasesofthisnaturecurrentlyexistinmostregionsofDenmark.Thepurposeofthisstudywasto(1)identifytheimportantmarketsegmentscurrentlycomingtotheislandofBornholmand(2)betterunderstandthedestination'srelativeabilitytosatisfy,providevalueandinfluencevisitorstovisittheislandagain.Ultimately,itishopedthatthisinformationwillhelptourismplannersandmarketingprofessionalstodevelopoffersbetteradaptedtotheneedsoftheirtargetmarkets.Furthermore,itishopedthatthetechniqueitselfprovesusefulinothertourismdestinationsattemptingtobetterunderstandtheirpositioninthemarketplace.2.MethodThedataforthestudywassecondarydataobtainedfromthe1995through1997SurveyofVisitorstoBornholm,Denmark.Throughouttheyear,trainedresearcherssurveyedover1500visitorpartiestotheislandafterdepartureonrandomlyselectedferriesonrandomlyselecteddays.Theresponseratesweregenerallyquitehigh,averaging95percent,duemainlytotheinterpersonalskillsoftheresearchersandthefactthatferriesgenerallyhavetheminimumofon-boardentertainmentandpassengersaregenerallyopentodiversionssuchasfillingoutsurveys.Thesurveyisavailableinfourdifferentlanguagesandgenerallytakesabout5mintocomplete.Questionsinthesurveyaredesignedtoascertainvisitors’countryoforigin,socio-economiccharacteristics,trippurposes,lodginguse,expenditures,evaluationoftourismservices,andprobabilityofrepeatvisitationmeasures.Thedatabasecomposedof4004respondentsprovidedameansinwhichtodefinemarketsegmentsandestimatethedestinationsrelativestrengthsandweaknessesinsecuringtheirrepeatvisitation.Ofparticularimportancetothisstudywastheinformationgatheredonthevisitors’evaluationsof“Bornholmasadestinationforholidaysandrecreation”,andhowthevisitorsevaluatedtheissueof“valueformoney”regardingtheplaceatwhichtheyhadstayedduringthevisitstoBornholm.Responseswererecordedalongafive-pointscalewherefiveequalsexcellentandoneequalspoor.QuestionsalsoprobedthelikelihoodofrespondentsvisitingBornholminthenearfutureasmeasuredalongafive-pointscalefromcertaintocertainlynot.Inaddition,expendituresperpersonperdaycouldbederivedfromresponsestolengthofstay,totalexpendituresandnumberofadultsandchildreninthetravelparty.ThepresentstudyusedtheevaluationsofBornholmasadestinationforholidays,theamountofmoneyspentperpersonperday,theevaluationofvalueformoney,andtheprobabilityofrepeatvisitsasdependentvariables.Datawereanalyzedbymultiplelogisticregressiontoassesstheeffectsoftheindependenteffectsofeachvariableonthedependentoutcomevariables.Thestatisticaltechniqueprovidedameanstotesttheabilityofseveralcompetingvariablestodiscriminatebetweenoutcomevariablessimultaneouslyaswellastoexploretheirinteractionwithoneanother.Theresponsestothedependentvariablesweredichotomized.Forthevariables“Bornholmasadestinationforholidays”,andthe“Overallvalueformoney”,thecategoryof“Excellent”wasusedasthepositivegroup,andtheremainingcategoriesasthereluctant,negativeorleastsatisfiedgroup.Thevariable“Moneyspentperpersonperday”wasalsodichotomized,usingtheupperthirdasthehighspendinggroup,andtherestasthelowspendinggroup.Thevariable“ProbabilityofreturningtoBornholminnearfuture”,wasalsodichotomized,usingthecategory“Certain”asthepositivegroup,andtheremainingcategoriesastheuncertainandnegativegroups.TheapproachisconsistentwithNoe(1998)andHeskett,Sasser,andSchlesinger's(1997)contentionthatonafive-pointscale,itisthecustomerswhorecordthe‘highfivesofsatisfaction’thatmattersincetheyconstituteafirm'smostprofitablecustomersduetotheirrepeatvisitsandlikelihoodofrecommendingthefirmtoothers.3.ResultsInsum,allthreemodelsgavesignificantincreaseintheamountofexplainedvarianceinallofthefourdependentvariables.Thus,Model1includingsolelycountryoforigin(inthiscasethecontrastsbetweenDenmark,GermanyandSweden)explainsasignificantamountofvariancebyitself.Whenincludingboththecountryoforiginvariablesandthedemographicandsocio-economicvariables,Model2addedasignificantincreaseintheamountofexplainedvariance.Moreover,asignificantgaininexplainedvariancewasalsoachievedinModel3byincludingalsotouristrolevariablesamongpredictorsmentionedpreviously.Atthispoint,theexplanatorypowerofthemodelsasmeasuredbyNagelkerke'sRsq,wasstillmodesttomoderate,rangingfrom4percentintheissuesof“thevisitorsevaluationofBornholmasadestinationforholidaysandrecreation”,29percentforinformationon“amountofmoneyspentperpersonperday”,34percentfortheevaluationoftheissueof“valueformoney”,and32percentforthe“PossibilityofreturningtoBornholm”.Thus,thefullmodel(Model3)leavesatbest66percentofthevarianceinthedependentvariablesasunexplained.Thus,newstudiesshouldincludevariablesotherthanthoseincludedinthepresentstudy.AtlastitshouldbenoticedthatBlock3(touristrole)alsoinfluencedthepronouncedlikelihoodofreturningtoBornholminthenearfuture.Negativeattitudeswerefoundforalltypesoftravelingpartycompositionscomparedtothereferencegroupofvisitorstravelingalone.Thesegroupsshowedsignificantreductionsinrelativeeffectsontheoddsrangingfrom51to37percent.Contrarytothis,Purpose4(holidays/visitingfriendsorfamily)andPurpose5(visitingfriendsorfamilysolely)showedasignificantincreaseineffectsontheoddsby634and1139percent,respectively,whichwerethestrongesteffectsseeninthisstudy.Thus,touristrolesshoweduniqueandsignificanteffectsonthepronouncedprobabilityofreturnstoBornholminthenearfuture.Alltravelingpartycompositionswerelesslikelytoreturn,comparedtothereferencegroupofvisitorstravelingalone.VisitorsgoingtoseefamilyandfriendsatBornholm,maybeincludingsomeholidays,weredefinitelylikelytoreturninthenearfuture.Theseobservedrelationshipswereuniqueandsignificantwhencontrollingfornationalityanddemographic/socio-economicvariables.4.Discussion“Value”,theabilitytogivevisitorswhattheywantanddenominatingittoenrichacommunity'sstakeholdersisatouchstoneofmoderndestinationmarketingpractices.Butonlyifitwasaseasyascarefullyselectingone'stargetmarketsanddesigningstrategiesinwhichtoreachandservethem.InthecaseoftheislandofBornholm,theanalysisrevealedacriticaldilemmafortourismmarketerswherethemarketsegmentsthatreportthemostsatisfaction,