VISITOR SATISFACTION AND LOYALTY MEASUREMENT OF A LOCAL FOOD FESTIVAL: APPLICATION OF THE FESTPERF SCALE Suzana Marković, PhD, Associate Professor Faculty

VISITOR SATISFACTION AND LOYALTY VISITOR SATISFACTION AND LOYALTY MEASUREMENT OF A LOCAL FOOD MEASUREMENT OF A LOCAL FOOD

FESTIVAL: FESTIVAL: APPLICATION OF THE FESTPERF SCALE APPLICATION OF THE FESTPERF SCALE Suzana Marković, PhD, Associate ProfessorFaculty of Tourism and Hospitality Management, Opatija

Jelena Dorčić, M. A., AssistantFaculty of Tourism and Hospitality Management, Opatija

Monika Krnetić, M. A., StudentFaculty of Tourism and Hospitality Management, Opatija

ToSEE - Tourism in South East Europe 3rd International Scientific Conference Sustainable Tourism, Economic Development and Quality of LifeUniversity of Rijeka, Faculty of Tourism and Hospitality Management Opatija

MAIN POINTS OF PRESENTATION• CONCEPTUAL BACKGROUND• Local food festival• Festival quality• Dimensions of festival quality• Satisfaction• Loyalty

• METHODOLOGY• Research objectives • Sample design and administration• Measurement instrument• Data analysis

• STUDY RESULTS• CONCLUSION


CONCEPTUAL BACKGROUND


Local food festival• FESTIVALSFESTIVALS = „themed, public celebrations” ,Getz (2005)

• FESTIVALFESTIVAL = “an organized set of special events on a specific cultural manmade theme taking place on a specific day or period normally on a specific place gathering people in mutual and direct contact to the festival theme”, Lyck (2012)

• FOOD FESTIVALS FOOD FESTIVALS = „public events that are open to both locals and outsiders”, Hu (2012)

• FOOD FESTIVALS FOOD FESTIVALS = “festivals that purport to center on and revolve around food”,Lewis (1997)


Festival quality

• SERVICE QUALITY SERVICE QUALITY = “overall evaluation that results from comparison between a customer’s expectation and service received from a provider”, Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1985)

• FESTIVAL QUALITY FESTIVAL QUALITY = „predictor of satisfaction and behavioral intention” , Wu et al. (2014)

• FESTIVAL QUALITY FESTIVAL QUALITY = „multi-dimensional construct”, (Baker and Cromton, 2000; Lee et al., 2008; Yoon et al. 2010)


Dimensions of festival qualityResearchers Country Sample size Dimensions of festival qualityBaker and Crompton (2000) USA 369

generic features, specific entertainment features, information sources, comfort amenities

Lee et al. (2008) South Korea 472 convenience, staff, information, program content, facility, souvenirs, food

Cole and Chancellor (2009) USA 177 programs, amenities, entertainment

Yoon et al. (2010) Korea 444 informational service, program, souvenirs, food, facilitiesTkaczynski and Stokes (2010) Australia 308 professionalism, core service, environment

Lee et al. (2011) Korea 400 festival program, informational service, festival product, convenient facility, natural environment

Grapp and Montanari (2011) Italy 449 program content, staff behavior, place and atmosphere, information and

facilities, hotel and restaurant, souvenir availability

Mason and Paggiaro (2012) Italy 380 food, comfort, fun

Chen et al. (2012) Taiwan 439 facilities, staff, comfort amenities, information, availability, convenience, programs

Anil (2012) Turkey 352 festival area, staff, food, souvenir, information adequacy, convenience

Mensah (2013) Ghana 471 ancillary services, participation in festival, festival information, festival activities, security and duration of festival

Wan and Chan (2013) Macau 40 location and accessibility, food, venue facility, environment/ambiance, service, festival size, entertainment, timing

Wu et al. (2014) Macau 450 interaction quality, physical environment quality, outcome quality, access quality


Festival satisfaction

• TOURISTS' SATISFACTION TOURISTS' SATISFACTION = „the post consumption evaluation of specific product or service” , Westbrook and Oliver (1991)

• FESTIVAL SATISFACTION FESTIVAL SATISFACTION = „a sum of the experiences the attendees had at the festival” , McDowall (2011)

• FESTIVAL SATISFACTION FESTIVAL SATISFACTION = „overall festival value evaluated by the composite of quality dimensions” , Yoon at al. (2010)


Festival loyalty

• LOYALTYLOYALTY = „repeating purchase behavior and is characterized in terms of repurchase intentions, word-of mouth-communication, and recommendations” , Lee, et al. (2006)

• FESTIVAL LOYALTY FESTIVAL LOYALTY - „deeply held commitment to re-visit, spread positive word of mouth about and willingness to recommend festival” , Anil (2012)


METHODOLOGY


Research objectives

• to explore variables and dimensions of festival quality that have significant impact on visitors’ satisfaction and future behavioral intentions

The purpose of this study was:

The research aimed: • to identify levels of visitors’ perceptions, satisfaction and

loyalty, and determine the visitors’ motivations to consume local food

• to identify perceived service quality factors


Sample design and administration

CHARACTERISTICS DESCRIPTION

1. Type of research: descriptive, empirical

2. Target population and research object: Visitors of 14th Festival of Asparagus, Lovran

3. Type of data: Primary data

4. Sample: Convenient, N=145

5. Respondent rate: 36.25% (N=400, n=145)

6. The period of data collection: one-day festival's central event, 12th April 2014, Lovran (Croatia)


Measurement instrumentYoon at al. (2010) Anil (2012) Markovic et al (2014)

FESTPERF scale (modified)

Informational service (4 items) Informational adequacy (3 items) Informational adequacy (3 items)

Program (5 items) - Program (3 items)

Souvenir (3 items) - -

Food (3 items) Food (3 items) Food (4 items)

- Staff (4 items) Staff (4 items)

- Festival area (2 items) Festival area (1 item)

Facilities (3 items) Convenience (3 items) Facilities (2 items)

Festival value (3 items) - Festival value (3 items)

Festival satisfaction (3 items) Visitors 'satisfaction (3 items) Festival satisfaction (3 items)

Festival loyalty (3 items) Visitors’ loyalty (3 items) Festival loyalty (5 items)

Total : 27 items Total : 21 items Total : 28 items


Data analysis

Descriptive statistical analysis•to describe respondents’ demographic characteristics•to evaluate visitors’ festival service quality perceptions.

Exploratory factor analysis•to derive factors from 28 festival quality attributes •to identify the main dimensions of perceived festival service quality, using the principal component method with a varimax rotation

Reliability analysis•to test the reliability of the scale and to assess the inner consistency of each extracted factor


STUDY RESULTS


Study results: respondents profile

DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE RESPONSES

1. Country of residence: 84.1% domestic visitors

2. Gender: 51.7% females 48.3% males

3. Age: 44.8% between 20 and 29 years old

4. Education: 45.5% high school diploma55.7% university degree

5. Frequncy of town visit: 81.4% more than five times

6. Frequency of festival visits: 54.5% first time

7. Number of previous visits: 64.2% never before

8. Motivations to visit festival:47.0% hanging out with family and/or friends26.0% tasting local food21.0% escaping from routine/relax

Table: Demographic profile of the respondents (N=145)

Source: Authors


Study results: descriptive statisticsPerceived festival service qualityPerceived festival service quality

DIMENSIONS AttributesFESTPERF

Mean

INFORMATION ADEQUACYwell prepared pamphlets 3.77signboards provide sufficient information 4.01signs showing festival provide sufficient information 4.23

PROGRAMvariety of program 4.38well managed program 4.49well organized program 4.66

FOOD

good quality of food 4.99variety of food 4.50good taste of food 5.22reasonably priced food 4.82

STAFF

staff is kind 5.73staff has enough knowledge about the festival 5.46quick staff response 5.39staff is willing to help 5.70

LOCATION adequate size of festival area 5.14

FACILITIESconvenient parking 4.60convenient restroom 3.90

Table: Mean scores for attributes of perceived festival quality

Source: Authors


Study results: descriptive statisticsFestival value, visitors’ satisfaction and loyaltyFestival value, visitors’ satisfaction and loyalty

Table: Mean scores for attributes of festival value, visitors’ satisfaction and loyalty

Source: Authors

DIMENSIONS Attributes FESTPERF

Mean

FESTIVAL VALUEfestival is worth the money, time, effort 4.68festival offered more value than expected 3.90festival offered more value than other gastro festivals 3.80

VISITORS’ SATISFACTIONfeeling very good with festival 4.95satisfied with decision to visit festival 5.19overall satisfaction 5.03

VISITORS’ LOYALTY

recommend festival 5.01spread positive word-of-mouth about festival 5.21visit festival again 5.04keep attending festival 4.92first choice of gastro event in the future 3.63


Study results: descriptive statisticsTable: Mean scores of dimensions

Source: Authors

DIMENSIONS MEAN

INFORMATION ADEQUACY 4.00PROGRAM 4.51

FOOD 4.88STAFF 5.57

LOCATION 5.14FACILITIES 4.25

FESTIVAL VALUE 4.13VISITORS’ SATISFACTION 5.06

VISITORS’ LOYALTY 4.76TOTAL 4.73


Study results: exploratory factor analysis

• The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure verified the sampling adequacy for analysis, KMO=0.907, which is well above the minimal criterion of 0.50 (Kaiser, 1974).

• Bartlett's test of sphericity is significant (χ2= 3937.580; df=378; Sig. =0.000), showing that there is strong correlation among the variables.


Study results: exploratory factor analysis

FACTOR % of Variance

Cronbach alpha

Number of items

Satisfaction and loyalty 19.201 0.949 9

Program and facilities 18.094 0.918 9

Staff 18.075 0.909 5

Information 10.373 0.856 3

Food 8.956 0.835 2

TOTAL 74.699 0.961 28

Table: Results of factor analysis

Source: Authors


CONCLUSION


Conclusion• The highest assessed festival attributes are related to staff and food – this

represent the strong points of festival offering and should be maintained in the future as well.

• Adequacy of information and facilities were the worst rated – these areas of service requires more attention.

• Despite the failure of the festival to offer more value than expected or in comparison with other festivals, visitors indicated that they would recommend the festival, spread positive word-of-mouth and revisit this festival again.

• Similar extracted dimensions as Yoon et al. (2010) and Anil (2012).

• Modified version of the FESTPERF scale is reliable and suitable for use by destination managers to enhance understanding of visitor festival satisfaction and loyalty in the context of small local food festivals.


Practical implications• festival organizers should focus on promoting the festival in

nearby countries (Italy, Slovenia, Hungary, Serbia and Bosnia and Hercegovina);

• local hotels could offer special packages during the period of the festival ;

• provide more activities for visitors, such as workshops about the health benefits of asparagus, culinary workshops and competition, children and family activities, asparagus tours, picnics and sport activities.


Limitations

• Small sample size in comparison to with previous research.

• Study focused on only one festival of particular type and findings could not be generalized.

• There could also be other relevant items that are likely to influence visitors’ satisfaction and future behavioral intentions.


Future research• conduct similar studies in other local food festivals in Croatia;

• continue to refine, test and even modify the developed measurement scale;

• analyze the effect of different factors, constructs or scales on local food festival quality;

• examine differences between tourist and local resident perception of festival service quality;

• use structural equation modeling to investigate the relationship between festival service quality, visitors’ satisfaction and loyalty.

Thank you for your attention!Thank you for your attention!

Jelena DorčićFaculty of Tourism and Hospitality Management in OpatijaE-mail: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Documents

VISITOR SATISFACTION AND LOYALTY MEASUREMENT OF A LOCAL FOOD FESTIVAL: APPLICATION OF THE FESTPERF SCALE Suzana Marković, PhD, Associate Professor Faculty