Iscontour 2023 Tourism Research Perspectives E-Book

Christian Maurer

• Herausgeber: Books on Demand
• Kategorie: Fachliteratur
• Sprache: Englisch
• Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2023

Seitenzahl: 668

Beschreibung

The International Student Conference in Tourism Research (ISCONTOUR) offers students a unique platform to present their research and establish a mutual knowledge transfer forum for attendees from academia, industry, government and other organisations. The annual conference, which is jointly organized by the IMC University of Applied Sciences Krems and the Management Center Innsbruck, takes place alternatively at the locations Krems and Innsbruck. The conference research chairs are Prof. (FH) Mag. Christian Maurer (University of Applied Sciences Krems) and Prof. (FH) Mag. Hubert Siller (Management Center Innsbruck). The target audience include international bachelor, master and PhD students, graduates, lecturers and professors from the field of tourism and leisure management as well as businesses and anyone interested in cutting-edge research of the conference topic areas. The proceedings of the 10th International Student Conference in Tourism Research include a wide variety of research topics, ranging from consumer behaviour, tourist experience, information and communication technologies, marketing, destination management, and sustainable tourism management.

Leseprobe

Preface & Acknowledgements

The 10th International Student Conference in Tourism Research (ISCONTOUR) was successfully held at the campus of the IMC University of Applied Sciences Krems, Austria, from May 15-16, 2023.

The annual ISCONTOUR was collaboratively founded in 2013 by Christian Maurer, Professor at IMC University of Applied Sciences Krems, Austria, and Roman Egger, Professor at Salzburg University of Applied Sciences, Austria. In 2019 the MCI Management Center Innsbruck became the new cooperation partner of IMC University of Applied Sciences Krems.

The aim of ISCONTOUR is to provide international students and graduates of Bachelor,Master and PhD Programmes with a platform where they can present their tourism related research papers based on their approved Bachelor theses,Master theses or work-in-progress PhD theses. In particular, ISCONTOUR strives to encourage students and graduates to engage in academic research and foster the knowledge transfer between academic education institutions and practitioners from the tourism industry.

In total 27 full research papers by 63 authors from 10 countries were submitted to ISCONTOUR 2023. Each submission went through a blind review process with three members of the ISCONTOUR 2023 Research Programme Committee assigned as reviewers. The authors then received the comments of the reviewers and had to revise the papers accordingly. Only papers of authors who adhered to this process were accepted for the conference. As a result, 22 full research papers were accepted for presentation at the conference and are included in these proceedings.

The research papers cover a wide variety of topics, ranging from consumer behaviour, tourist experience, marketing, information and communication technologies, destination management, and sustainable tourism management. This does not only indicate the variety of the tourism industry, but also how relevant and impactful applied research projects conducted by students and graduates can be for the further developments in tourism in particular and the society in general. We hope these proceedings will serve as a valuable source of information on applied tourism research for students, scholars and practitioners.

Above all, we want to thank all authors who submitted their papers for the conference. We further appreciate the considerable time invested by all members of the ISCONTOUR 2023 Research Programme Committee who ensured the high quality of the submissions.We are also grateful for the support we receive from the management board, rectorate and colleagues of both the IMC University of Applied Sciences Krems as well as the MCI Innsbruck.

We are also indebted to the conference keynote speakers Ulrike Rauch-Keschmann and Barbara Prodinger and to the research workshop presenters Markus W. Eitle, Raphaela Stadler, Roman Egger and Maria Katelieva.

We hope that ISCONTOUR will continue to establish an international community that motivates more students and graduates to engage in applied research and submit papers to ISCONTOUR 2024.

Christian Maurer & Hubert J. Siller

ISCONTOUR 2023 Conference Chairs

Innsbruck / Krems, May 2023

Table of Contents

Digital open innovation contests in tourism: An ecosystem theory approach

Precious Magtulis, Maria Soledad Godoy Muñoz, Thi Cam Ha Phan, Carlos Inga, Salzburg University of Applied Sciences, Austria

Role of virtual reality in tourism destination marketing: evidence from Morocco

Youssef El Archi, Brahim Benbba, National School of Business and Management, Abdelmalek Essaâdi University, Morocco

Connecting locals with guests before arrival at the destination using Augmented and Virtual Reality Technologies

Anna-Katharina Feih, Andreas Csar, Ali Usama, TH Deggendorf - European Campus Rottal-Inn, Germany

The steps from eTourism to smart tourism to the metaverse in the future: A scenario analysis

Nell Schmidt, Lisa Weigl-Pollack, Christopher J. J. Cunliffe, Ruslan Safarov, Beatrice Paris, Salzburg University of Applied Sciences, Austria

Analysis of visitor management strategies at protected areas: The case of Pilanesberg National Park

Bontle Nqalamba, Lisebo Tseane-Gumbi, Elmarie Slabbert, North West University, South Africa

Towards ownership of the tourism value chain in rural communities

Michael Chambwe, Andrea Saayman, North-West University, South Africa

Encouraging stakeholder involvement for sustainable tourism route development in South Africa

Mpho Ramoliki, Martinette Kruger, Marco Scholtz, TREES, North-West University, South Africa

Netnographic analysis of travellers’ perceptions on social media to predict overtourism phenomena: a case study of touristic attractions in the city of Salzburg

Nieke Dieteren, Léona Lavenka, Lana Saleh-Bacha, Celine Franch, Alicia Millennium, Salzburg University of Applied Sciences, Austria

An investigation of tourists’ experiences of dark tourism attractions: A case study of Auschwitz and Birkenau

Kadi Pidgeon, University of Plymouth, United Kingdom...

A model for accessible tourism human capital development for physical impaired persons in South Africa

Tawanda Makuyana, Engelina du Plessis, North-West University, South Africa

Visitor perspectives on accessibility of Vilakazi Street township tourism product: Covid-19 pandemic and beyond

Thokozile Selepe, Ncedo Ntloko, North-West University, South Africa

What constitutes an authentic visitor experience at liberation cultural heritage sites in South Africa? The perspectives of visitors and heritage officials

Babalwa Mgxekwa-Qumba, Martinette Kruger, Marco Scholtz, North-West University, TREES, South Africa

Wine tourism development possibilities in Georgia on the example of “Chateau Mukhrani” and “Sarajishvili”

Lizi Dzimistarishvili, Grigol Robakidze University, Georgia

Winter holidays without snow - sustainable destination development strategy using the example of Tyrol

Mihir Nayak, Lisa Thönnessen, Thomas De Palma, Hochschule Fresenius, Germany

"Does the experience of coastal tourism affect engagement in coastal conservation?” a case study of Plymouth

Thatsanawalai Imong, University of Plymouth

Should DMOs ask the locals? Young resident’s attitude towards destination promotional videos

Monica Coronel, Corvinus University of Budapest, Hungary

Requirements of service robots to meet the needs and expectations of hotel guests

Teodora Zubic, Leslie Marie Stumhofer, Paulina Nandeukeni Ester Ndilula, Salzburg University of Applied Sciences, Austria

The application of digital technologies by border and security authorities at airports and determinants of their acceptance by travellers under consideration of generational differences

Patricia Kaspar, Dorina Tosaki, Ajda Medvešek, Sofiia Semenova, Salzburg University of Applied Sciences, Austria

Team leadership and effectiveness in etudent group projects: perceptions of IMC FH Krems and RIT Croatia Dubrovnik students

Milena Kužnin, RIT Croatia, Vana Mandrapa, RIT Croatia, Luisa Lenz, IMC FH Krems, Austria

Employability of hospitality and tourism international students: a critical research review

Fa Wang, University of Plymouth, United Kingdom

Linking government role to human factors in rural tourism development: case study of Mngqesha Great Place

Nomsa Matyile, Lisebo Tseane-Gumbi, Duduzile Dlamini-Boemah, North-West University, South Africa

Research Programme Review Committee

ADAMER-König Eva, Joanneum University of Applied Sciences Bad Gleichenberg, Austria

AUBKE Florian, University of Applied Sciences for Management & Communication Vienna, Austria

BAGGIO Rodolfo, Bocconi University Milan, Italy

BERGER Sonja, IMC University of Applied Sciences Krems, Austria

BINDER Daniel, Joanneum University of Applied Sciences Bad Gleichenberg, Austria

BUHALIS Dimitrios, Bournemouth University, Great Britain

DEL CHIAPPA Giacomo, University of Sassari, Italy

DOUGLAS Anneli, University of Pretoria, South Africa

EBSTER Claus, University of Vienna, Austria

EITLE Markus, IMC University of Applied Sciences Krems, Austria

ENNEN Jens, IMC University of Applied Sciences Krems, Austria

FEDELI Giancarlo, IMC University of Applied Sciences Krems, Austria

FUCHS Matthias, Mid-Sweden University, Sweden

GRETZEL Ulrike, University of Southern California, USA

GRIESSER Philip, IMC University of Applied Sciences Krems, Austria

GROTH Aleksander, MCI Innsbruck, Austria

HAGE Roger, IMC University of Applied Sciences Krems, Austria

HUANG Rong, Plymouth University, Great Britain

KASTNER Margit, Vienna University of Economics and Business, Austria

KENNELLY James, Skidmore College, USA

KRUGER Martinette, Tourism Research in Economic Environs and Society, South Africa

LASSNIG Markus, Salzburg Research, Austria

LIEBRICH Andreas, Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts, Switzerland

MAURER Christian, IMC University of Applied Sciences Krems, Austria

MATTEUCCI Xavier, Modul University Vienna, Austria

MCCOLE Dan, Michigan State University, USA

MURPHY Jamie, University of Eastern Finland, Finland

PESONEN Juho, University of Eastern Finland, Finland

PIKKEMAAT Birgit, Institute for Innovative Tourism, Austria

POSCH Arthur, IMC University of Applied Sciences Krems, Austria

PÜHRETMAIR Franz, Kompetenznetzwerk IT zur Förderung der Integration von Menschen mit Behinderungen, Austria

ROMERO ANIA Alberto, Rey Juan Carlos University, Spain

SCHACHNER Max, IMC University of Applied Sciences, Austria

SCHOENBERG Alina, IMC University of Applied Sciences Krems, Austria

SCHWAND Christoph, IMC University of Applied Sciences Krems, Austria

SIGALA Marianna, Sheffield Hallam University, Great Britain

STANGL Brigitte, University of Surrey, Great Britain

STECKENBAUER Georg Christian, Deggendorf Institute of Technology, Germany

TISCHLER Stephanie, IMC University of Applied Sciences Krems, Austria

VOLCHEK Katerina, Deggendorf Institute of Technology, Germany

WAIGUNY Martin, IMC University of Applied Sciences Krems, Austria

WEGERER Philipp, MCI Management Center Innsbruck, Austria

ZEHRER Anita, MCI Management Center Innsbruck, Austria

Digital open innovation contests in tourism: An ecosystem theory approach

Precious Magtulis, Salzburg University of Applied Sciences, [email protected]

Maria Soledad Godoy Muñoz, Salzburg University of Applied Sciences, [email protected]

Thi Cam Ha Phan, Salzburg University of Applied Sciences, [email protected]

Carlos Inga, Salzburg University of Applied Sciences, [email protected]

Abstract

Innovation processes have become more and more important for companies and organizations in latest years in order to stay competitive and to adapt to the constant changes. The boom of information technologies brought with it more opportunities for transformation and digital open innovation (DOI) contests appear as a strong tool that could help to address these new challenges in many industries, including the tourism sector. Using a mixed-method approach (qualitative and quantitative) in the form of interviews with four experts in the field and online survey of 120 respondents, the purpose of this study is to identify the benefits and challenges that DOI contests offer to all units of the tourism ecosystem and to analyze the underlying motives which stimulate different stakeholders to participate in such contests. The main benefit of such contests is allowing an efficient way of gathering a bigger number of ideas, knowledge transfer, and development of innovative solutions, bringing together different perspectives in solving a problem. In terms of challenges, finding the right partners, resources, and effective communication channel that motivates and engages the participants during the entire process. Results of the Chi2 indicate that all four motivational factors namely, meaningful social interactions, development of skills and promotion of creative ideas, curiosity, and satisfaction with the distribution of benefits, have significant association (p<0.05) with the likelihood to join a DOI contest again and for the first time.

Keywords: Digital Open Innovation, DOI contests, motives, benefits and challenges

1 INTRODUCTION

For many years, the concept of innovation or the creation and commercialization of new ideas has been a key element in the business models of numerous industries in the commercial field. In this phenomenon, firms require and ensure the availability of skills and facilities, efficient distribution system, production and market knowledge, sufficient investment and other resources (Fagerberg, 2004). The process originated from companies generally independently leading the process with the administration of the research and development department, and following a classic technology push model (Iglesias-Sánchez et al., 2017). A change in managing the innovation activities took place when Chesbrough (2003) introduced the concept of Open Innovation (OI), wherein the company makes use of external ideas from consumers, clients, competitors, suppliers, and other stakeholders for new product development (Chesbrough & Bogers, 2014). The use of digital technology in business processes brought about crucial and paramount changes in various industries (Barlatier et al., 2020). Through this, the innovation process becomes more accessible to external actors, and in- and out-bound stream of information are promoted and managed more effectively (Gassmann & Enkel, 2004). Under the umbrella of Digital Open Innovation (DOI), web-based idea contests have specifically become a substantial tool for industries and companies to collaborate with external stakeholders to produce a great number of creative and innovative ideas for value creation, product development, or a particular problem (Moritz et al., 2018). The tourism industry is one of the many industries that has experienced massive changes brought about by this digitization. However, the COVID 19 pandemic has clearly challenged the industry and its operations. Many companies have been considerably negatively affected by important economic losses in millions of dollars and have had to deal also with losses of their workforce, who have chosen other, safer industries (Škare et al., 2021). The current situation is also affecting different communities and their destinations, which makes the entire industry re-think about problems and solutions, come up with changes and new innovations to recover, and be able to keep travelers safe and motivate them to travel to the touristic destinations (Fusté-Forné & Ivanov, 2021; UNWTO, 2020). Opportunities for transformation have arisen, and in order to recover and increase competitiveness, OI processes in the tourism industry have become significantly important more than ever. Thus, DOI competitions that generates new ideas in the shortest possible time and at comparatively low costs are great ways to not only provide solution to the impacts of the pandemic, but also to provide stakeholders an opportunity to share their ideas.

In the context mentioned above, the concept of an ecosystem is highlighted as a vital aspect of open innovation. The concept of an OI ecosystem is composed of interdependent actors connected by means of a digital platform that eases the formation of knowledge and creates opportunities for collaboration (complementary) and competition (substitute) relations (Fasnacht, 2019), as well as activities, institutions or “rules of the game”, products and technologies (Granstrand & Holgersson, 2020). The interconnected actors are not only limited to companies and consumers, but can also include governments, civil society, the private sector, universities, individual entrepreneurs. In order to understand the dynamics of economic systems and the mechanisms of innovation (Nylund et al., 2019), and enhance the development outcome of an innovative process, an ecosystems approach is required (The International Development Innovation Alliance, n.d.).

Previous studies have long recognized the importance of digital technology on co-creation and open innovation processes. However, researches about DOI contests are still very limited. A study conducted by Ek (2019) shows an interrelation between a firm’s ability to identify and internalize innovation-conducive information from user communities and its ability to create and manage products functioning as platforms for continuous development and integration of internal and external innovation in the context of digital innovation with user communities. Yet, the applicability of such capabilities of firms in settings such as the tourism industry is insufficiently investigated. One study also shed light on the engagement and communication processes between stakeholders through an OI platform facilitated by Destination Management Organization (DMO) (Lalicic, 2018). However, the underlying motivations of stakeholders who collaborate in open innovation initiatives need further examination. Through conducting a case study on a particular OI contest, a research by Yetis & Teigland (2018) shows the different processes on how such contests in the tourism industry can be undertaken in order to obtain capabilities outside an organization. Although these innovation contests are becoming more popular, evidences suggest that only very limited outcomes and ideas were realized and became actual products and services. Thus, stakeholders of such contests indeed are having challenges in organizing and managing the initiative. This aspect of the phenomenon is insufficiently investigated.

Therefore, the current research aims to discuss the research gap by investigating the degree of involvement of the key stakeholders in all the different stages of a tourism DOI contest process. Specifically, this research aims to identify the benefits and challenges that DOI contests offer to all units of the tourism ecosystem; to analyze the underlying motives which stimulate different stakeholders to participate in such contests; and to understand what kind of resources and strategies were used and can be used to enhance innovation processes in the field of tourism, and how the COVID 19 pandemic affected its implementation. Borrowing the primary theoretical lens from the ecosystems approach, the tourism-related open innovation contests and processes and how they are managed were analyzed. This would present insights into how DOI contests should be organized and hosted to promote tourism ecosystem stakeholder participation and to enhance the feasibility of realizing the innovative ideas.

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Digital Open Innovation concept, a new revolution

The industrial revolution which began in the 1800s was one of the most massive and global changes the world has seen, and it continues to shape the present times (Stearns, 2021). Technology revolution is part of these changes. Advances in digitalization and Internet technologies are creating the new paradigm of industry 4.0, which is distinguished for rapid changes such as individualization on demand, increased ability of buyers to decide about the conditions of the exchange, more flexibility in the creation of products and services, decentralization with fast decision-making processes, and efficient management of resources and sustainable approaches. It basically allows a strong technology-push in different industries and practices as well. These new processes bring a wide range of new trends related to short developing periods of production of products and services, and high innovation strategies that help many enterprises become successful (Lasi et al., 2014). Additionally, this process is highly attached to global developments, especially sustainability megatrends in society, but also new digital or technological opportunities and resource scarcity (Eisenreich et al., 2021).

The innovations introduced by entrepreneurs are the engine of the competition renewal (Schaeffer, 2015). Innovation can be understood as a process of continuous learning and research that results in exploring new ideas successfully in the market (Almeida, 2021). It also means the disruption of the present order of things, as Schumpeter acknowledged (Au-Yong-Oliveira et al., 2018). Innovation enables an increase in value for producer and/or consumer, such as new or improved products or services, new processes for creation of services, new business models, or via changes in structuring the organization or its value chain (Eriksson Lundström et al., 2013). These improvements promoted by external entities lead to a new level of collaboration named open innovation, and it is getting quite the attention from entities aiming to deliver creative and successful products to the market (Au-Yong-Oliveira et al., 2018). Open Innovation is one type for democratized platforms that allows resource allocation, and collaboration among customers, organizations, and developers (Kitsios & Kamariotou, 2019). The concept of OI explains the logic of engaging multiple stakeholders in an innovation process. Technology-oriented organizations can benefit from engaging multiple stakeholders at different stages of the innovation process (Pillmayer et al., 2021).

In the process of technological innovation, there will be information overflow in the industry, and other industries can promote technology integration and gradually narrow the technological differences among industrial sectors by taking advantage of this information overflow (Qiu et al., 2021). Digital transformation has undoubtedly become a key enabler of innovation as evidenced by numerous firms that use Digital Technologies (DTs) to manage their innovation processes. Therefore, DTs consequently play an important role in designing a multi‐sided business model (Gandia & Parmentier, 2017). The OI concept necessitates the integration of systems and technologies capable of converting the process into value (Barlatier et al., 2020). In addition, to attract a broader knowledge, technology allow companies and organizations to take this innovative process to a new level known as Digital Open Innovation (DOI). It emerges as a paradigm based on principles of integrated collaboration, co-created shared value, cultivated innovation ecosystems, unleashed exponential technologies, and rapid adoption due to network effects. This is where smart solutions are developed, and it promises significant improvements in the pace, productivity, predictability, and profitability of the collective innovation efforts (Curley & Salmelin, 2018). Digital Open Innovation is certainly a difficult concept to define as innovation processes are changing as fast as technology does. Nevertheless, a DOI process provides an unprecedented opportunity for managers and business leaders to flourish and contribute to the growing economy of digitalized products and services (Barlatier al., 2020).

Nowadays, OI is developed rapidly not only in high-tech industry but also in other industries, for it can facilitate technological innovation of enterprises, market expansion, sales revenue increase, and research and development of new products (Qiu et al., 2021). OI is actively used in various activities and in companies of various sizes. The use of such innovations radically changes the sphere of tourism (Gusakov et al., 2020). Sustainability became to be a more important topic for destination management. For that reason, the development of tourism policies to improve sustainability is based on the level of OI within the destination (Della Corte et al., 2019). However, the potential for changing smart tourism destinations to create value by engaging multiple stakeholders remains underexplored (Pillmayer et al., 2021). OI has been an important part of the Austrian government’s goals for the future for several years, and it should not be underestimated as an innovation strategy (Petruch & Walcher, 2020). To increase the level of innovation among travel companies, it is important to provide convenient forms for exchanging information, ideas, working solutions, etc. (Gusakov et al., 2020).

2.2 Ecosystem Theory

The development of innovations requires a particular and dynamic ecosystem where these creative processes will take part, and where all actors involved such as universities, governments, institutions, providers, workers, and stakeholders among others, are willing to cooperate and co-create value (Reynolds & Uygun, 2017; Granstrand & Holgersson, 2020). The ecosystem metaphor points to evolution as a central feature, where organisms change and adapt in response to each other and the physical environment, resulting in the process of evolution that plays an important role in explaining change but also progress (Benckendorff et al., 2019; Stahl, 2022). For Granstrand & Holgersson (2020) “an innovation ecosystem is the evolving set of actors, activities, and artifacts, and the institutions and relations, including complementary and substitute relations, that are important for the innovative performance of an actor or a population of actors” (p.4). In addition, the definition presented by Fasnacht (2019) is more complete and more complex, and states that an open innovation ecosystem is an open and interdependent space that is often linked through a digital platform that facilitates the sharing of knowledge, ideas and capabilities to co-innovate and collaborate. The value an ecosystem generates is larger than the combined value of what an actor could contribute individually. Stakeholders involved in such a process could be businesses, clients, communities, universities, or governments all working together to develop and distribute solutions.

For Curley and Salmelin (2018), ecosystems also include the users in quadruple helix setting. They assure that the co-creativity within ecosystems, the sharing and engagement of platforms and environments are very important when creating new markets and innovative products and services. By introducing the strand of ‘‘society’’, the Triple Helix model is transformed into a ‘‘Quadruple’’ Helix (Marcovich & Shinn, 2011). The quadruple helix model consists government, industry, academia, and civil participants who work together to co-create changes that they could not do alone. On the other hand, besides all the benefits that innovation ecosystems can generate to the tourism industry, they are difficult to manage (Curley & Salmelin, 2018).

This complex network for innovation is already in use in a wide range of industries and not only in high technology companies (Chesbrough & Crowther, 2006). The tourism industry, which becomes more competitive every day, takes advantage of these theory of co-creation in developing their own digital tourism ecosystem, which Benckendorff et al. (2019) defined as interactions between living entities such as travelers, suppliers, intermediaries, governments and communities, and the non-living technological environment, which allows these entities access to content using devices, connections, and touch points. In more recent years, many companies engage different units of an industry’s ecosystem in inbound OI processes using innovation contests.

2.3 Open Innovation Contests, a valuable knowledge source

The most promising application to address broad diverse and distributed knowledge from external and internal experts is the idea of Innovation Contests (Bullinger & Moeslein, 2010; Leimeister et al., 2009; Piller & Walcher, 2006). Such competitions have a long tradition and are considered a common trend in many enterprises in recent times as participants who are not employees of the enterprise can contribute their skills and creativity to be able to come up with the optimal solution that the enterprise is looking for (Terwiesch & Xu, 2008; Hofstetter et al., 2017). Hutter et al. (2011) acknowledged that “these idea and design contests add a great deal of value to a company’s innovation process and are evidence of the fact that people are indeed willing to share their ideas, submit their innovative solutions, give valuable feedback and provide insights for improvement” (p.5). Interested users and stakeholders are usually invited to show their skills and take part in an idea generation process of solving an issue and to compete for rewards. Adamczyk et al. (2012) believes that the most important element of OI contests is people, so in order to attract many participants to the contest, the organizers often use many channels from online to offline. The rise of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) has provided these contests the opportunity to be carried out through virtual platforms.

Innovation contests come in different forms. One is community-based contests, which involve communities of participants seeking solutions for a specific problem. ICT challenges can be addressed by hackathons, another innovation contest mainly dealing with software prototypes and coding (Doppio et al., 2020). Digital open innovation contest, on the other hand, allows digital networking of ideas and aims to develop products, services, and solutions based on digital resources. It mostly comes in the form of online collaboration and applies outside-in openness to collect inputs from different stakeholders, which can then be transformed into solutions for the specific problem after the contest (Hjalmarsson et al., 2014). Such contests also help minimize the financial, time and organizational efforts of all the people involved. A successful innovation contest requires a good design that will allow stakeholder participation. Without cooperation and competition, crucial ideas and solutions for current issues and problems will not arise. According to Adamczyk et al. (2012) framework as cited in (Yetis & Teigland, 2018), elements such as the type of medium where a contest is run (media), the organizer, the topic specificity, the degree of elaboration, the specificity of target group of participants, the participant requirements, the contest period, the rewards or prizes, and the evaluation process of ideas must be well-designed to attract experts and the crowd to willingly engage in the innovation task. Therefore, there is a need to analyze the motives behind the participation of the stakeholders and the kind of ideas submitted by users in order for the tourism institutions to organize and achieve a successful co-creation event.

There are several studies that analyzed the motivational factors for one’s participation in such contests. Self-interestmotives and own experiences influence whether someone does something or not. According to Chen (2007), social interactions can affect one’s satisfaction. In relation to idea contests, aside from interest in the topic, people participate in such initiatives to network or connect with like-minded individuals (Kozinets, 2002). Sharing expertise seems to also be a requirement in such contests especially the complex ones (Chen et al., 2014), and delivering own creative solutions are expected. In addition, curiosity about such contests can have an effect on the individual’s participation (Berlyne, 1960; Fueller, 2006). Ultimately, Franke & Klausberger (2012) suggest that one’s decision to join in idea contests is influenced by his or her perception of fairness in terms of the distribution of effects and benefits between the firm and its contributors.

Based on the literature review and previous studies, the following hypotheses are being tested in order to answer the research questions.

H1: Participants who are motivated to create meaningful social interactions are more likely to participate (again) in the contest.

H2: Participants who are motivated to develop their skills and to promote their creative ideas are more likely to participate (again) in the contest.

H3: Participants who are motivated by curiosity are more likely to participate (again) in the contest.

H4: Participants who are satisfied with the distribution of the benefits between the company and the participants are more likely to participate (again) in the contest.

3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This study analyzes the impacts of Digital Open Innovation contests to the tourism ecosystem. As shown above, since DOIs are a new and emerging concept, there is a lack of knowledge concerning the underlying motives which stimulate different stakeholders to participate in open innovation contests as well as how it is managed to enhance innovation processes in the field of tourism. To address this research gap, mixed (qualitative and quantitative) method was applied with a major focus on exploratory qualitative approach since the research questions are mainly explorative and this design provides openness and flexibility to satisfy such questions in the course of the study process. The qualitative approach was chosen to better understand the innovation experts’ experiences with reference to their specific type of institution and contexts, and to describe and understand the meaning and value attributed by them to the phenomenon. The quantitative approach, on the other hand, explains the phenomena by establishing hypotheses. It is also helpful in generalizing and comparing the relationships found in the qualitative data. Given the nature of the research area, a case study of DOI contests is applied as the basic design to gain a deeper understanding of the phenomenon being investigated in the Austrian context.

3.1 Data collection

Alongside the in-depth literature review, data collection was done by conducting a semistructured interview with four experts in field of tourism and innovation regarding the benefits and challenges of the DOI initiative, their perceived motives of the participants in joining the contests, and the strategies they applied to manage an effective and worthwhile innovation process. The study participants were contacted via email for consent and were interviewed in person and online using Microsoft Teams. The interviews were then recorded and transcribed for analysis. Additionally, in order to take into account the perspective of the other stakeholders such as the former contest participants and the potential ones, an online survey divided into two set of questions was administered. The first set is for those who had an experience in participating in a DOI contest, and the second one is for those who did not. The questions about their assessed impacts of the contests, their motivations for joining (and not joining), and their general experience in such an event were presented in written format using Google Forms and were sent via email.

3.2 Sampling

Due to scope and time constraints, convenience sampling was used. The researchers identified the four experts interviewed based on the list of organisers of open innovation campaigns in tourism suggested by the researchers’ eTourism course lecturer and the recommendations of the initial interviewees themselves. In terms of the online survey, the questionnaires were emailed using the student email distribution system of Salzburg Fachhochsschule to reach all the students from the Urstein, Kuchl, and Schwarzach campuses. The survey was also sent to researchers’ friends and acquaintances that might be of interest to the study. The researchers were able to gather 120 responses. It was ensured that at least answers from 50 respondents for each set of questions were received in order for the data to be reliable in a statistical way.

3.3 Methods of analysis

To analyze the collected data, a thematic content analysis was conducted. The literature review as well as the recorded and transcribed interviews were re-accessed to review, to make notes, and to identify common themes. The next step was to label key words or phrases with codes, which was helpful in identifying patterns and in finding connections, distinctions, and recurrences within the data. Then categories and sub-categories were created by grouping the coded data. Only the relevant themes for the research were kept during the process of linking and describing the relationship between them. Lastly, the results were summarized and linked to the collected quantitative data. In processing and analyzing the quantitative data, differentiation tests as well as descriptive statistics such as frequency, mean, and percentage distribution with the help of IBM SPSS V27 were used. Chi2 Test was used to identify the difference and its statistical significance, and Kendall‘s Tau Beta was executed to determine the level of correlation between the variables.

4 RESULTS & DISCUSSION

Findings of the qualitative analysis show that the importance given to DOI contests is related to gathering a bigger number of ideas and the possibility to get more people involved in the process from different backgrounds thanks to its nature of being open to the public. DOI contests face several opportunities and challenges in their planning, execution, and the implementation of ideas. Results show that the main benefit of these contests is the possibility to get more ideas and the chance to communicate your topic to the public and other stakeholders. In the case of tourism industry, they recognize as a main benefit the possibility to have a great mix of stakeholders and the opportunity for networking. In the case of the tourism industry, they recognize a bigger advantage in contrast to other industries because of the possibility to involve different stakeholders such as the inhabitants of a destination, the tourists or consumers, travel agencies, hotel business, restaurants, municipalities, among others bringing with this more chances for new innovative ideas. Moreover, such contests are recognized as a way to communicate and promote internally and externally what the firms and the destinations are doing as a marketing instrument. It is considered a more efficient way of gathering ideas, knowledge transfer, and development of innovative solutions, bringing together different perspectives in solving a problem. Nevertheless, the benefits of the contests still rely on people's interest in the subject and their capacity and competence to resolve the existing issues presented.

Based on the quantitative analysis, contest participants, on the other hand, cited benefits that align to this study’s formulated hypotheses on the motivational factors for participating in DOI contests. Among the 120 total participants of the online survey, 47.5% have already taken part in a tourism digital open innovation contest or idea campaigns. In their perspective, DOI contests bring together people from different backgrounds and expertise, providing an opportunity tomeet new people and establishmeaningful social interactions. It can help develop skills such as problem-solving, creativity, communication, and teamwork, as well as provide a platform for promoting and refining creative ideas. DOI contests also offer them a chance to explore new areas of interest and engage in problem-solving activities. Participants in DOI contests may receive rewards such as financial compensation, recognition, or the opportunity to work on implementing their idea, leading to a sense of satisfaction and accomplishment. This is consistent with the results of the Chi2, which indicate that all four motivational factors namely, meaningful social interactions, development of skills and promotion of creative ideas, curiosity, and satisfaction with the distribution of benefits, have significant association (p<0.05) with the likelihood to join a DOI contest again and for the first time. The information used was collected via one ordinal scale variable ranging from 1 (totally agree) and 4 (totally disagree), and one nominal scale variable answering whether the respondents will join the contest because of the motivational factor. To show the correlation, Kendall Tau-B values are shown in the table below.

Table 1. Correlations between selected independent variables pairings on likelihood to join DOI Contests

Kendall Tau-B Coefficient

Motivational Factors

Have already participated

Have not yet participated

Meaningful social interactions

-0.756

*

-0.427

*

Development of skills and promotion of creative ideas

-0.650

*

-0.369

*

Curiosity

-0.670

*

-0.693

*

Satisfaction with the distribution of benefits

-0.520

*

-0.384

*

* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)

This dataset shows that all variables have negative relationship. The strength of relationship ranges from mid-level to strong correlation. Meaning that the respondents that agree that they are motivated because of a certain factor (lowest number in the ordinal range), are more likely to join the contest. Therefore, all the hypotheses were accepted. The results match the assumptions drawn from past literatures, which describe the main motivational factors influencing the intention or likelihood of participants to take part in DOI contests. This suggests that overall, DOI contests are a viable way to engage people from different backgrounds and expertise in problem-solving activities, promoting knowledge transfer, and fostering creativity and innovation.

Regarding the challenges, the qualitative and quantitative findings both reveal difficulties that are associated with organizing and participating in DOI contests. For the contest organizers, they agree that careful and immense preparation is hugely necessary for the success of organizing DOI contests. The planning and organization takes time and a huge amount of work. Expertise is necessary to set up the process in the right way, to ask the right questions, to communicate the competition, and to involve the right partners. The organization of the initiative takes time because of the difficulty to get the right people involved, wherein the roles are well defined and effectively managed.Moreover, investment is needed as the process might cost huge amount of money and demand resources. Interviewees also revealed that the implementation of the ideas can be one of the biggest challenges and the most difficult part. People need to be prepared and be willing to go forward to realize the innovation process and the product. After the contest itself, implementation is necessary and a crucial step that also requires people in charge, time, money and proper organization. Additionally, a concern was mentioned by two of the respondents in relation to the quality of the submissions and how one can motivate people to bring in more in depth or better quality ideas. However, it is an aspect that organizers implied that they cannot fully influence or control. Finally, regarding the COVID-19 pandemic and their effects in the implementation of such contests, interviewees agreed that it has more of a positive than negative effect, because they are digital contests and the pandemic boosts the online participation.

For the respondents who had an experience joining a DOI contest, only 36.8% reported that they encountered issues and challenges during the contest. The most common issue observed revolves around communication. It includes transparency in the results, unclear or insufficient rules and problem description, user difficulty in terms of channel or platform of communication, and overall post contest communication. Difficulty of pitching the idea, opportunity to connect with other participants, rewards, complexity of the entire process, time zone differences and language barrier compose the rest of the main problems the respondents faced during their participation in a DOI contest. This aligns to the perceived pain points of the organizers, which need further planning and improvement on the strategies necessary to avoid such issues to the participants. Generally, contest organizers need to invest in careful preparation, define roles, and effectively manage resources. Contest participants need to be aware of the complexity of the entire process, and they need to invest in pitching ideas that are in-depth and of good quality. Overcoming these challenges will lead to the success of DOI contests in promoting an effective collaboration of the stakeholders in tourism ecosystem.

Analyzing the individuals’ reasons for not participating in DOI contests in the past is also essential to determine the strategies necessary to improve the initiative’s organization, implementation, and management. Of the 63 participants who have not participated in any DOI contest in the past yet, more than half of them (54%) reported that it was because of their lack of awareness of the initiative. It is then followed by absence of interest in the topic (19%) and the complexity of the process (14.3%). To address such hindrances, the contest organizers’ perspective highlights the importance of defining clear and specific questions, providing effective communication channels, and carefully selecting rewards and incentives that will motivate participants to submit high-quality ideas. Interviewees recognize that people get involved easily when they have a personal connection to the problem and a high interest in the solution presented. Strategies to motivate participants include effective interaction with internal colleagues and partners to identify the most advantageous way to organize the contest itself, effective communication channels to inform and promote the contest, and careful selection of rewards and incentives. The use of monetary rewards is considered a fundamental motivator for participation; however, some experts believe that this approach may encourage people to submit as many ideas as possible without regard for relevance and quality. Therefore, it is important to cautiously select rewards and incentives that will make participants feel motivated and connected to the subject of DOI, which allows them to be creative and submit relevant and high-quality ideas.

In conclusion, both perspectives emphasize the need for effective organization, communication, and incentivization in order to increase participation and engagement in DOI contests. A clear and specific problem statement, simplified process, and careful selection of rewards and incentives are all key factors in motivating individuals to participate in DOI contests.

5 CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

This study helps to advance the knowledge and understanding of how DOI contests can benefit the tourism ecosystem, the motives that stimulate participation, and the resources and strategies used to enhance innovation processes. It also provides information to help tourism organizations to create more effective and efficient contests that are more likely to attract and engage a diverse range of stakeholders. Furthermore, the findings could help to identify the types of resources and strategies that are most effective in supporting innovation processes in the tourism industry.

The research findings suggest some design recommendations for DOI contests in the tourism industry. These recommendations include a clear definition of the contest's objectives and scope to ensure that participants understand the purpose and expected outcomes. In addition, offering incentives such as prizes or recognition can encourage participation and reward innovative ideas. Providing access to resources such as data, tools, and expertise can also support the development and implementation of innovative solutions. It is also essential to ensure transparency and fairness in the selection and evaluation of submissions to maintain trust and credibility.

Fundamentally, good communication, appreciation of good ideas, and creation of a friendly atmosphere wherein people feel rewarded and supported seem to be crucial aspects that can help achieve a critical and valuable crowd, and thus lessen the risk of their disinterest, which can cause failure of the contests. By following these design recommendations, DOI contests in the tourism industry can become a powerful tool for promoting innovation, collaboration, and co-creation among tourism stakeholders, ultimately leading to a more sustainable and competitive industry.

6 LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

The research has several limitations and prospects for further research. First limitation is that the study is based only in the case of Austria and only in the tourism industry. Therefore, it can be country- and industry-specific and might not be significant for other contests. Secondly, the sample size for the online survey is only 120 and only four experts were interviewed. Although the main results are statistically reliable, this size can be rather small and a bigger number might improve the generalizability of the results. The sampling and data collection strategymight also have led to self-selection bias wherein people who are more interested in the research topic were more likely to participate, while others may have declined. Additionally, since the sample for the online survey were mostly comprised of students, it might lack diversity in terms of demographics, experiences, and perspectives, leading to limited insights and potential blind spots in the research. The construction of the questionnaire and specification of survey responses also limited the ability to have a main single dependent variable that is related to all independent variables for motivational factors, making it implausible to perform regression analysis. This limitation can make it more challenging to draw meaningful conclusions from the data and may require alternative statistical methods such as correlation-based analysis, which is the method employed in this research. This is an avenue for future research to analyze the interaction of the several motivational factors and their effects on one’s likelihood to join DOI contests through a more robust test such as regression analysis. Lastly, theremight be other motivational factors that were not taken into account in this study. It would be interesting to include other elements that could possible affect the likelihood of one’s participation in such contests.

REFERENCES

Adamczyk, S., Bullinger, A., & Möslein, K. (2012). Innovation Contests: A Review, Classification and Outlook. Creativity and Innovation Management. 21(4). 335–360. doi:10.1111/caim.12003

Almeida, F. (2021). Open-Innovation Practices: Diversity in Portuguese SMEs. 7(3). 169. doi: 10.3390/joitmc7030169

Au-Yong-Oliveira, M., Almeida, M., Mendes, F., & Van Geenhuizen, M. (2018). Reshaping society with open innovation - The seeding of a new open and innovative mindset. Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Innovation and Entrepreneurship, ECIE 2018. 68-77. Academic Conferences. Retrieved March 31, 2022, from TU Delft Research Portal: https://research.tudelft.nl/en/publications/reshaping-society-with-open-innovation-the-seeding-of-a-new-open-

Barlatier, P., Mention, A., Misra, A., & Torkkeli, M. (2020). The Interplay of Digital Technologies and the Open Innovation Process: Benefits and Challenges. World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Pierre-Jean Barlatier & Anne-Laure Mention (ed.), Managing Digital Open Innovation.1. 1-34. World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd. Retrieved March 31, 2022, from https://ideas.repec.org/h/wsi/wschap/9789811219238_0001.html

Benckendorff, P., Xiang, Z., & Sheldon, P. (2019). Chapter 2: The Digital Tourism Landscape. Tourism Information Technology (3rd. Ed.). 22-44. CABI Tourism Texts.

Berlyne, D. E. (1960). Conflict, Arousal, and Curiosity. McGraw-Hill, New York. doi: 10.1037/11164-000

Bullinger, A. &.Moeslein, K. (2010). Innovation Contests – Where are we? Proceedings of the Sixteenth Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS) Proceedings. Paper 28. 1-8. Retrieved March 31, 2022, from: http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2010/28

Chen, I.Y.L. (2007). The factors influencing members’ continuance intentions in professional virtual communities – a longitudinal study. Journal of Information Science. 33(4), 451–467. doi: 10.1177/0165551506075323

Chen, P.Y., Pavlou, P., & Yang, Y. (2014). Determinants of Open Contest Participation in Online Labor Markets. Fox School of Business Research Paper No. 15-074. Retrieved December 03, 2022, from SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2510114

Chesbrough, H. (2003). The era of open innovation. MIT Sloan Management Review. 44(3). 35–41.

Chesbrough, H. & Crowther, A. (2006, May). Beyond high tech: early adopters of open innovation in other industries. R & D Management. 36(3). 229-236. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9310.2006.00428.x

Chesbrough, H., & Bogers, M. (2014, April). Explicating Open Innovation: Clarifying an Emerging Paradigm for Understanding Innovation. Henry Chesbrough,Wim Vanhaverbeke, and Joel West, eds. New Frontiers in Open Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, Forthcoming. 3-28. Retrieved March 31, 2022, from: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2427233

Curley, M. & Salmelin, B. (2018). Open Innovation 2.0, The new mode of Digital Innovation for Prosperity and Sustainability. Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-62878-3

Della Corte, V., Del Gaudio, G., Sepe, F., and Sciarelli, F. (2019). Sustainable Tourism in the Open Innovation Realm: A Bibliometric Analysis. Sustainability 2019. doi:103390/su11216114

Doppio, N., Väinämö, S., & Haukipuro, L. (2021). Design elements of innovation contests supporting Open Innovation in SMEs - An action research study. Journal of Innovation Management, 8, 26-56. Doi: 10.24840/2183-0606_008.004_0003.

Eisenreich, A., Füller, J., Stuchtey, M. (2021) Open Circular Innovation: How Companies Can Develop Circular Innovations in Collaboration with Stakeholders. Sustainability 2021. doi: 10.3390/su132313456

Ek, P. (2019). Managing Digital Open Innovation with User Communities. A Study of Community Sensing and Product Openness Capabilities in the Video Game Industry. Doctoral thesis / Företagsekonomiska institutionen, Uppsala universitet. Uppsala: Department of Business Studies. Retrieved March 31, 2022, from https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1302190/FULLTEXT01.pdf

Eriksson Lundström, J.,Wiberg,M., Hrastinski, S., Edenius,M.,&Ågerfalk, P. (2013). Managing Open Innovation Technologies. Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-31650-0

Fagerberg, J. (2004, October). Innovation: A Guide to the Literature. The Oxford Handbook of Innovation. 1-26. Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199286805.003.0001

Fasnacht, D. (2019, January). Open Innovation Ecosystem: The Winner Takes It All. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3311236

Franke, N. &Klausberger, K. (2012). Exploitation or fair deal? The impact of fairness on users’ decision to contribute to “crowdsouring” business models.

Fueller, F. (2006). Why Consumers Engage in Virtual New Product Developments Initiated by Producers. Advances in Consumer Research. 33. 639–646. Retrieved December 2, 2022, from The Association from Consumer Research: https://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/12362/volumes/v33/NA-33

Fusté-Forné, F., & Ivanov, S. (2021). Robots in service experiences: negotiating food tourism in pandemic futures. Journal of Tourism Futures. 7(3). 303-310. doi: 10.1108/JTF-10-2020-0179

Gandia, R., & Parmentier, G. (2017). Optimizing value creation and value capture with a digital multi-sided business model. Strategic Change. 26(4). 323–331. doi: 10.1002/jsc.2134

Gassman, O. & Enkel, E. (2004). Towards a theory of open innovation: Three core process archetypes. Proceedings of the R&D Management Conference, Lisbon, Portugal, July 6–9. Retrieved March 31, 2022, from https://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/274/1/Gassmann_Enkel.pdf

Granstrand, O. & Holgersson, M. (2020). Innovation ecosystems: A conceptual review and a new definition. Technovation. Vol. 90(91). 1-12. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2019.102098

Gusakov, A., Haque, A., & Jogia, A. (2020). Mechanisms to support open innovation in smart tourism destinations: Managerial perspective and implications. Polish Journal of Management Studies. 21(2). 142–161. doi: 10.17512/pjms.2020.21.2.11

Hjalmarsson, A., Johannesson, P., Juell-Skielse, G., & Rudmark, D. (2014). Beyond innovation contests: A framework of barriers to open innovation of digital services. ECIS 2014 Proceedings - 22nd European Conference on Information Systems. Retrieved June 1, 2022, from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262933531_Beyond_innovation_contests_A_framework_of_barriers_to_open_innovation_of_digital_services

Hofstetter, R., Zhang, J., & Herrmann, A. (2017). Successive Open Innovation Contests and Incentives: Winner-Take-All or Multiple Prizes?. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 35(4). 492– 517. doi: 10.1111/jpim.12424

Hutter, K., Hautz, J., Füller, J.,Mueller, J., &Matzler, K. (2011). Communitition: The Tension between Competition and Collaboration in Community-Based Design Contests. Creativity and Innovation Management. 20(1). 3–21. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8691.2011.00589.x

Iglesias-Sánchez, P., Correia, M., & Jambrino, C. (2017, November). Challenges of Open innovation in the Tourism Sector. Tourism Planning and Development. 14(1). 1-21. doi: 10.1080/21568316.2017.1393773

Kitsios, F., & Kamariotou, M. (2019). Digital Innovation and Open Data Hackathons Success: A Comparative Descriptive Study. Proceedings of the 2019 European Triple Helix Congress on Responsible Innovation & Entrepreneurship (EHTAC2019). 20-25. Thessaloniki, Greece. Retrieved March 20, 2022, from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336830343_Digital_Innovation_and_Open_Data_Hackathons_Success_A_Comparative_Descriptive_Study

Kozinets, R. (2002). The Field Behind the Screen: Using Netnography for Marketing Research in Online Communications. Journal of Marketing Research. 39(1), 61–72. doi: 10.1509/jmkr.39.1.61.18935

Lalicic, L. (2018). Open innovation platforms in tourism: how do stakeholders engage and reach consensus? International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management. 30(13). 2517-2536. doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-04-2016-0233

Lasi, H., Fettke, P., Kemper, H-G., Feld, T., & Hoffmann, M. (2014). Industrie 4.0. Business and Information Systems Engineering the International Journal of Wirtschaftsinfomatik. 56(4). 261-264. doi: 10.1007/s11576-014-0424-4.

Leimeister, J. M.; Huber, M.; Bretschneider, U. & Krcmar, H. (2009). Leveraging Crowdsourcing - Theory-driven Design. Journal of Management Information Systems, 26(1), 197-224. doi: 10.2753/MIS0742-1222260108

Marcovich, A., & Shinn, T. (2011). From the Triple Helix to a Quadruple Helix? The Case of Dip-Pen Nanolithography. Minerva. 49. 175–190. doi: 10.1007/s11024-011-9169-z

Moritz, M., Redlich, T., & Wulfsberg, J. (2018). Kollaboration und Wettbewerb bei Ideenwettbewerben – eine Userperspektive, In: Moritz, M., Redlich, T., & Wulfsberg, J. (Hrsg.). Interdisziplinäre Perspektiven zur Zukunft der Wertschöpfung. Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-658-20265-1_24

Nylund, P. A., Brem, A., & Agarwal, N. (2021). Innovation ecosystems for meeting sustainable development goals: The evolving roles of multinational enterprises. Journal of Cleaner Production, 281, Article 125329. doi:10.1016/j. jclepro.2020.125329

Petruch, M., &Walcher, D. (2020). Innovation Contests as a Measure to generate new Impulses for the ForestBased Sector - The Case of “Neue Holzwege” in Salzburg. Open Innovation Competence Platform Salzburg. doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11896.06401

Piller, F. T. & Walcher, D. (2006). Toolkits for idea competitions: a novel method to integrate users in new product development. R & D management, 36(3), 307-318. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9310.2006.00432.x

Pillmayer, M., Scherle, N. & Volchek, K. (2021). Destination Management in Times of Crisis - Potentials of Open Innovation Approach in the Context of COVID-19? Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism. 517-529. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-65785-7_49

Qiu, P., Zhou, Z., & Kim, D. (2021). A New Path of Sustainable Development in Traditional Agricultural Areas from the Perspective of Open Innovation—A Coupling and Coordination Study on the Agricultural Industry and the Tourism Industry. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity. 7(1). 16. doi: 10.3390/joitmc7010016

Reynolds, E.&Uygun, Y. (2017, June). Strengthening advanced manufacturing innovation ecosystems: The case of Massachussetts. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 136(7). doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.06.003

Schaeffer, V. (2015). Corporate entrepreneurship and creativity in large firms: the practice of start-up contests. Journal of Innovation Economics & Management. 18(3). 25–51. doi: 10.3917/jie.018.0025

Škare. M., Riberio Soriano, D. & Porada-Rochoń, M. (2021, February). Impact of COVID-19 on the travel and tourism industry. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. Vol. 163. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120469

Stahl, B. (2022). Responsible innovation ecosystems: Ethical implications of the application of the ecosystem concept to artificial intelligence. International Journal of Information Management (Vol. 62). doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102441

Stearns, P. (2021). The Industrial Revolution in World History (5th Ed.). Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.

Terwiesch, C., & Xu, Y. (2008). Innovation Contests, Open Innovation, and Multiagent Problem Solving. Management Science. 54(9). 1529–1543. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1080.0884

The International Development Innovation Alliance. (n.d.).What is an Innovation Ecosystem? Retrieved December 18, 2021, from The International Development Innovation Alliance https://www.idiainnovation.org/ecosystem

UNWTO (2020). “International tourism and COVID-19”. Retrieved December 15, 2021, from UNWTO: www.unwto.org/internationaltourism-and-covid-19

Yetis, Z. & Teigland, R. (2018). Study of the design and execution of an open innovation contest on visualization designs in the tourism industry. Retrieved March 5, 2022, from: https://bfuf.se/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Paper-3_Study-of-the-design-and-execution-of-an-open-innovation-contest-on-visualization-designs-in-the-tourism-industry.pdf

Role of virtual reality in tourism destination marketing: evidence from Morocco

Youssef El Archi National School of Business and Management, Abdelmalek Essaâdi University, [email protected]

Brahim Benbba National School of Business and Management, Abdelmalek Essaâdi University, [email protected]

Abstract

Virtual reality (VR) is a rapidly advancing technology that has gained considerable attention in the tourism industry as a tool for destination marketing. This study has been carried out using a qualitative method via manual coding in the form of 36 interviews to understand what Moroccan tourism stakeholders think about VR techniques in destination marketing. The following questions will be answered: (1) What do tourism stakeholders in Morocco think about the possibilities of using VR technologies in destination marketing? (2) In what ways do tourism stakeholders believe that VR technology can be used to attract more tourists to Morocco? (3) What are the advantages and disadvantages of employing VR technology in marketing and advertising? The findings of the study suggest that the stakeholders generally have a positive perception of VR as a marketing tool for tourism destinations and identified several benefits of using VR in tourism destination marketing, including enhancing the customer experience and improving the competitiveness of Morocco's tourism industry. The study also identified several challenges associated with the use of VR in destination marketing. These include the high cost of implementing VR technology, the lack of technical expertise in VR development, and the potential for VR to be perceived as a substitute for real travel experiences.

Keywords: Virtual reality; tourism; destination marketing; digital technology; Morocco.

1 INTRODUCTION

Virtual reality (VR) is presented as a role-playing technology with a realistic 3D virtual environment where users can explore and interact with objects, providing a strong sense of 3D awareness. VR technology enables the participant to be immersed in a digital environment, where the user activates two of his five senses and feels physically present in another location representing real or fictional spaces (Sarkady, Neuburger and Egger, 2021).

Virtual reality (VR) can be a powerful tool for destination marketing in the tourism industry. VR technology allows potential tourists to experience a destination before they book a trip, which can help them make more informed decisions about where to travel. Additionally, VR can be used to create immersive and engaging marketing campaigns that showcase the unique features and attractions of a destination. This can include virtual tours of hotels, restaurants, and other local businesses, as well as virtual experiences of outdoor activities, cultural events, and other local attractions. Furthermore, VR has the potential to significantly enhance destination marketing efforts and help attract more visitors to a particular location.

The use of VR technology in destination marketing is becoming increasingly prevalent, but there is a lack of research on its specific application in the context of the MENA region. Through a qualitative research method, this study aims to understand how tourism stakeholders in Morocco perceive the possibilities of using VR technologies in destination marketing and how they believe it can be used to attract more tourists to the country. The study also examines the advantages and disadvantages of using VR technology in marketing and advertising in the tourism industry and provides valuable insights into the potential of VR technology in destination marketing, and its specific application in the Moroccan context. It offers an important contribution to the literature on the use of VR technology in the tourism industry and its potential to enhance destination marketing.

During the COVID pandemic, virtual tourism became more popular around the world, but it is not just a reaction to the COVID pandemic; it has been and is being developed before (Sarkady, Neuburger and Egger, 2021). There are various activities in virtual tourism in many parts of the travel and tourism industry, driven by technological advances and internet usage around the world and strongly linked to the concept of virtual tourism (Beck, Rainoldi and Egger, 2019). During the COVID pandemic, these types of tourism grew in popularity among the tourism industry around the world; for example, to commemorate the 500th anniversary of Leonardo da Vinci's death in 2019, the Louvre Museum used virtual reality tours. With the rapid advancement of technology, VR has become an increasingly popular tool for destination marketing, allowing for the creation of immersive experiences for potential tourists. However, little research has been conducted on the specific application of VR technology in destination marketing in the context of Morocco.

To address this gap in the literature, this study employs a qualitative research method and conducts interviews with a variety of tourism stakeholders in Morocco to gain an understanding of their perceptions and attitudes towards the use of VR technology in destination marketing. The study aims to answer the following research questions: What do tourism stakeholders in Morocco think about the possibilities of using VR technologies in destination marketing? In what ways do tourism stakeholders believe that VR technology can be used to attract more tourists to Morocco? What are the advantages and disadvantages of employing VR technology in marketing and advertising in the tourism industry?

The first chapter contains empirical and theoretical studies related to the subject, which in turn supported the results of the study. The second chapter of the study explains the methods that were chosen and used to reach the results of the study. The third chapter is the results part, and it describes the results that the authors reached through the interviews that were carried out. The discussion chapter is the fourth part of the study, and within it, the authors combine the results part with the theoretical background of VR in tourism destination marketing, to see if there is an agreement or contradiction between them

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

Digital technologies have contributed to providing great opportunities to develop many different technologies within the tourism industry. In addition, it has influenced the perceptions of visitors who plan their trips through technology, which in turn has contributed to tourism quickly adapting to new developments (Kumar et al., 2015).

(Magál and Slivka, 2017) believe that through the continuous development of technology, virtual reality technology is flourishing in the tourism industry and see that the desire to travel and learn about different countries in the world is increasing greatly. In addition, it is necessary for tourism companies to keep pace with the existing digital and technological developments of our time, in order to attract new generations that rely mainly on technology throughout their lives (Magál and Slivka, 2017).

(Hojeghan and Esfangareh, 2011) describe that through the use of modern technology and VR technologies in the tourism industry, one can contribute to the development of tourism and take it to another level, also explaining that in this digital age, employment opportunities will increase greatly by applying information technology. (Ying et al., 2022) consider VR technology as a relatively new technology, and note that very extensive research is required before the technology can be introduced and used by DMOs. They also describe that the challenge lies in finding models that lead to the generation and increase of revenues for companies that use VR technology in the long term.

(Marasco et al., 2018) present the profits that VR technologies can create in tourism marketing. VR-technician testing before or while travelling both inspires and increases tourists' appreciation of their surroundings. The DMOs that have used VR technology in their marketing have developed and improved their sales (Devasia et al., 2022).

2.1 Applications of VR technologies in tourism industry