Inter-stakeholder collaboration in event management

Int. J. Hospitality and Event Management, Vol. X, No. Y, xxxx

1

Inter-stakeholder collaboration in event management: a case study of Kerala Travel Mart Shobha Menon* SCMS School of Technology and Management, Muttom, Kochi – 683106, Kerala, India Email: [email protected] *Corresponding author

Manoj Edward School of Management Studies, Cochin University of Science and Technology, South Kalamassery, Kochi – 682022, Kerala, India Email: [email protected]

Babu P. George Fort Hays State University, 600 Park St., Hays, KS 67601, USA Email: [email protected] Abstract: Employing the framework of inter-stakeholder collaboration in tourism proposed by Wang and Xiang (2007), this study reviews a highly successful international travel trade event that has been happening annually for the last several years in Kerala, India. In the Kerala Travel Mart, the collaboration brings together a large number of tourism firms in the Indian state of Kerala, the local state government, the tourism non-profits, the media, among others. This case study discusses the circumstances, motivations, processes, and results of the collaboration. It also introduces a new outcome, i.e., sustainable tourism, as a desired outcome of event partnerships. Keywords: destination marketing; collaboration; trade show; sustainable tourism; collaborative marketing; Kerala. Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Menon, S., Edward, M. and George, B.P. (xxxx) ‘Inter-stakeholder collaboration in event management: a case study of Kerala Travel Mart’, Int. J. Hospitality and Event Management, Vol. X, No. Y, pp.xxx–xxx. Biographical notes: Shobha Menon is an Associate Professor of Marketing at SCMS School of Technology and Management, Kerala, India. She holds a PhD in Management and her main interest areas are services marketing, consumer behaviour and tourism research. She has over 20 years of industry experience, including in the tourism domain and six years of management teaching experience.

Copyright © 20XX Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

2

S. Menon et al. Manoj Edward is an Associate Professor in the School of Management Studies, Cochin University of Science and Technology. His educational qualifications are: PGDM from TAPMI, BTech in Mechanical Engineering and PhD from Cochin University of Science and Technology. Apart from his industry work experience, he has over 18 years of teaching and research experience. His main research and teaching interests include digital marketing, consumer behaviour, tourism research, and services marketing. His publications have appeared in Services Marketing Quarterly, Journal of Services Research, among others. He has taken up several consultancy projects and training assignments for the government and industry. Babu P. George is an Associate Professor of Management at Fort Hays State University, USA. Event tourism is one of his areas of expertise. He is the Editor of the International Journal of Qualitative Research in Services. He holds a PhD in Management and a Doctor of Business Administration degree.

1

Introduction

Collaboration among tourism firms has become a common strategy in tourism marketing (Pastras and Bramwell, 2013). Destination marketing is increasingly seen as a collaborative effort that requires various organisations in a limited geographic area to jointly work together for a common purpose (Czernek, 2013). Collaborations can take many different forms. As noted by Selin and Chavez (1995), a study of these collaborations, their varying structures, their objectives and review of their performance will provide valuable inputs to the tourism industry. There is a strong market interdependence between tourism organisations in a destination, as suppliers pass customers from one organisation to another in order to provide a comprehensive tourist experience (Fyall and Garrod, 2006; Pavlovich, 2003). While there exists a great deal of generalised literature on collaboration, it is surprising that the nature and dynamics of collaborative marketing in a destination promotion event has not received much attention. The present researchers try to partially fill this gap by using an exploratory case study to examine the formation and evolution of collaboration in a destination marketing event, the Kerala Travel Mart (KTM) Society, India. Kerala, located at the far southern tip of India, is one of the most popular tourism destinations in the country: it boasts of a rich blend of nature and culture and is rated high in terms of the superior quality of services it offers to tourists (Edward and George, 2008; Vasudevan, 2008). Kerala has got a long term track record of successful cooperative movements and network oriented developments in various industrial sectors, including tourism (George, 2007). Kokkranikal and Morrison (2002) highlights that Kerala’s model of tourism development largely subsumes that one key means of achieving sustainable tourism is through the effective engagement of local communities. This paper takes a structural approach from life cycle theory and describes the evolution of this collaboration between multiple key stakeholders in tourism. The aim this case study ist o examine the dynamics of a specific collaboration in the form of a trade show, the KTM, in the context of the existing literature on the formation of collaborations. The objectives specifically are:

Inter-stakeholder collaboration in event management a

To identify the conditions which results in a destination collaboration.

b

To identify the motives for firms to join the collaboration. PRESS.

c

To describe the evolution and the process of collaboration.

d

To find the outcomes of the collaboration on the destination.

3

As a reference framework, the paper uses Wang and Xiang’s (2007) well cited theoretical model for destination collaboration given in ‘Toward a theoretical framework of collaborative destination marketing’ published in Journal of Travel Research, 2007. This framework integrates the preconditions, motivations, processes, and outcomes of destination marketing alliances and networks based upon theories of inter-organisational relations, to understand the processes of collaboration in a destination. However, there is a need to test the model in various other nuanced socio-cultural contexts, notes Wang and Xiang (2007). Collaboration does not follow universal prescriptions (Kim and Bonk, 2002). The factors constituting the model are context determined and qualitative differences in contexts might make the applicability of the model problematic. Also, our use of qualitative data offers opportunities for methodological triangulation: we believe this will test the robustness of the model. Given this, we believe that the live realities of inter-organisational relationships in the context of the event management in India are likely to help enrich the model.

2

Theoretical background

Collaboration is a process where individuals or firms come together to achieve a common purpose. Inter-organisational collaboration facilitates cost-effective diffusion of information, observes Fantino et al. (2012). Collaborations can facilitate market co-creation and market expansion, according to Panagopoulos et al. (2015). It can help firms to foresee the unexpected and proactively deal with novelty (Dodgson, 1993). Also, it stimulates more sustainable forms of consumption of resources (da Silva et al. (2013). Yet, diversity of players and shorter product lifecycles make collaboration problematic in tourism (Piboonrungroj and Disney, 2015). Despite challenges, firms are increasingly collaborating in their marketing activities: thanks to globalisation, the same competitive space is now required to be shared by firms of all varieties and there is often no choice but to work together (Etemad et al., 2001). In the context of tourism, Wang (2008) defines collaborative destination marketing initiatives as voluntary arrangements between tourism organisations involved in managing and promoting destinations. The key to building collaborative relationships is an understanding of the processes by which those relationships can be nurtured and managed. Life cycle models have often been used as an apt metaphor to understand the process of collaborative process. The well-known models of Gray (1985), Waddock (1989), Selin and Chavex (1995), Caffyn (2000) have helped to explain the process of collaboration. However, the integrated theoretical framework developed by Wang and Xiang (2007) gives a comprehensive picture of the collaborative process by building upon the interorganisational theories of resource dependency, transaction cost, strategic management and network /relational exchange. This framework is used in this study as a reference framework. The framework is defined by four major constructs that describes

4

S. Menon et al.

the nature and dynamics of the collaborative marketing of destinations: precondition, motivation, process, and outcome.

2.1 Precondition Construct refers to those conducive environmental factors in an environment which facilitates the birth of a collaboration. These could be rapid changes in technology, dynamic economic environment resulting in uncertainties, an unexpected crisis, competition and organisational support which includes such factors as leadership, human and financial resources.

2.2 Motivation Construct refers to the reasons why firms desire to join a collaboration. These may be strategy oriented that have an effect on the long run competitiveness of a firm or transaction cost oriented where efficient operations and cost reduction may be the main factors or organisation learning oriented reasons when organisations enhance their knowledge-base through imbibing information from competitors, suppliers and other stakeholders.

2.3 Process Construct highlights the dynamics of the collaboration process. These include the processes or stages through which an alliance evolve (assembling, ordering, implementation, evaluation stage and the transformation stages), the ‘form’ of collaboration which refers to the characteristics of the collaboration (affiliation, cooperation, coordination, collaboration, or strategic networks), the ‘mode’ of collaboration referring to the nature of relationships among the members involved in a collaboration which may be market oriented, hierarchical or networks oriented. Conflicts are present among tourism organisations in the collaboration whose resolution generally follows sequences of cooperation-conflict-compromise mechanisms.

2.4 Outcome Construct outlines the results of the collaborative marketing efforts which include strategy realisation of enhanced competitive advantage, organisation learning through increase in domain knowledge, collaborative skills and practices and social capital building relating to benefits of enhanced relationships and trust translated to future business opportunities and enhanced spirit of collaboration.

3

The study

It was felt a qualitative case study approach was the best approach to provide insights into the process of collaborative marketing, given the great diversity and complexity of collaborative tourism structures in destinations around the world. Eisenhardt (1989) defines case study as a research strategy which focuses on understanding the dynamics present within single settings. In the language of Stake (2000), this is an instrument case

Inter-stakeholder collaboration in event management

5

study: the case is examined mainly as an instrument to verify some broader level of knowledge. The case study for this paper is the destination collaborative marketing event, the KTM in India, a trade show which has been in operation since its inception in 2000. The main objective of the study is to understand the nature and dynamics of tourism marketing alliances in a destination, in the form of a trade show, in the tourism destination. In particular, the case study describes the larger environment in which KTM was created, the motivations of tourism firms to join the collaboration, the process issues related to the evolution of KTM, and examines the outcomes and impacts of the KTM event.

3.1 The study setting KTM is a destination marketing collaboration in the southern state of India, Kerala. This collaboration was selected for several reasons. First, Kerala is often cited as one of the best success stories of tourism and has been included as ‘one of the must see 50 destinations’ by National Geographic in 2012. The state has created successful products out of its natural and traditional strengths that compete with international destinations in marketing. E.g., Kerala’s ‘backwaters’ and ‘Ayurveda’ are globally identified and uniquely positioned. Second, this destination has been successful in terms of its tourism marketing and promotion owing to the joint efforts of the local state government and the active involvement of the local tourism industry. Lastly, KTM is a unique destination trade show which is collaborative in nature and one of the few tourism trade shows in the world focusing on only one destination. KTM is a buyer seller trade show in Kerala which is held every two years. KTM came into being in 2000 after the industry leaders felt there was a need for a separate trade show to showcase solely the Kerala destination, patterned on international trade shows like World Travel Mart, London and International Tourism Bourse, Berlin. KTM society was registered under The Travancore – Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Act, 1955 as a non-profit making charitable society with registered office at Cochin. For the first time in India, a single destination hosted a buyer-seller meet in 2000 which included almost every entrepreneur who had a tourism product to sell in Kerala and gave the buyer a first-hand experience of the products. Public private partnership was evident by the government acting as a facilitator-cum-catalyst and the travel trade fostering entrepreneurship in the larger interest of sustaining and building the tourism sector for the good of all. The first KTM was held in Cochin in 2000 and since then has been held regularly every two years. Eight KTMs have been held till date, the next one to be held in 2016. As on 31 March 2014, there were 609 members which is a big increase from the initial 89 in 2000. Income is mainly from stall rent, financial assistance from department of tourism, sponsorships, interest on deposits and sale of additional passes.

3.2 The interview process This case study used personal interviews of representatives from both the state government of Kerala, the KTM society, and local tourism industry for obtaining data on the collaborative process. Based on the constructs in the theoretical framework, interview templates were developed to guide the semi structured interviews. These templates were reviewed by an academic and a practitioner with experience in tourism to ensure the questions were comprehensible and unambiguous.

6

S. Menon et al.

For this study, the Tourism Secretary, the highest-ranking bureaucrat in the Tourism department and the CEO of KTM society were interviewed individually to get the perceptions of the government and the KTM society on the collaboration. Interviews were also held with representatives from the local tourism industry who was also members of KTM society. Selection of industry participants was done with the help of the CEO of KTM due to his knowledge and expertise of the local tourism industry in the destination. This is a convenience sample; yet, the choice was guided by the purpose of the study. A total of 15 interviews were conducted representing five different sectors of the local tourism industry: 1

accommodation (e.g., hotels and resorts and homestays

2

houseboats

3

Ayurveda

4

tour operators

5

misc. e.g., museums, etc.

The industry representatives were mainly owners of their businesses except in a few cases, where the firms were represented by senior managers. The meetings, lasting approximately 60 to 75 minute each and were recorded.

4

Data analysis

The recorded interviews were fully transcribed. The audiotapes, transcripts and field notes enabled limitless opportunities to return to the original data and redefine the categories as the analysis progressed. The method of analysis chosen for this study was the hybrid approach of the qualitative methods of thematic analysis or abductive coding (Onwuegbuzie and Combs, 2010). This approach complemented the research objective by allowing the main aspects of destination collaboration to be integral to the process of deductive thematic analysis while allowing for themes to emerge direct from the data using inductive coding. Core themes were thus identified that were felt to capture the phenomenon of process of destination collaboration in the raw data. The template or code manual was developed a priori, based on the theoretical framework of Wang and Xiang (2007) which provided a clear trail of evidence for the credibility of the study. Please see Table 1 for an example of the coding. The data were then summarised and initial themes identified. Using the template analytic technique, the codes were manually applied, from the codebook to the text, with the intent of identifying meaningful units of text. During the coding of transcripts, inductive codes were assigned to segments of data that described a new theme observed in the text. See Tables 2 and 3 for examples of deductive and inductive coding.

Inter-stakeholder collaboration in event management Table 1

Example of codes developed a priori from the template of codes

Label

OUTC (main theme)

Definition

Outcomes from participation as an exhibitor in KTM

Label

OUTCs (sub-theme)

Definition

Strategy related outcomes from participation as an exhibitor in KTM

Label

OUTCs1

Definition

Increased product portfolio

Description

Increase in range of tourism products of Kerala offered to the visitors to KTM

Label

OUTCs2

Definition

Destination competitiveness

Description

Ability of the destination Kerala to compete effectively in the marketplace.

Table 2

Applying theory-driven codes to data

Theory-driven code

Data from interviews

OUTCs1

Unique Kerala products like Wayanad and Houseboat have benefited by KTM. Traditional Ayurveda has benefited to some extent.

OUTCs2

The conversation shifted from ‘The golden triangle’ and Goa to India’s hottest destination. The brand entity gained considerable strength through KTM.

Table 3

7

Example of data-driven code with segments of text from the transcripts

Name of data-driven code (MOTIVr)

Relationship building

Explanation of code

Motivation of building of new relationships with visitors and exhibitors and strengthening of old bonds

Examples of responses

There is a great relevance for an eye to eye contact and a hand shake. We have never competed in the KTM space. It is a time for networking. New agents can be met, contracts can be renewed and problems if any can be sorted out. No point in going to KTM without building relationships with buyers, other sellers.

Connecting codes is the process of discovering themes and patterns in the data. Similarities and differences between transcripts were emerging at this stage, indicating areas of consensus in response to the research question and areas of potential conflict. Themes were also beginning to cluster, with differences identified between the responses of groups with varying demographics; for example, differences were expressed by less experienced and more experienced tourism professionals. Frequency coding was then adopted which transforms codes into variables taking into consideration the frequency, or the number of occurrences of a particular code within a given theme, context of the researcher, the research subject and the nature of the non-numerical material. The frequency counts of the coded material about the phenomena under investigation were then linked to the research objective and the context within which the material is located (Bergman, 2010).

8

S. Menon et al.

Bazely (2010) state counting is one form of description, reflecting the ‘numbered nature of phenomena’ and effectively communicate the frequency of occurrence of some feature in the text and summarise patterns in the data and helps to maintain analytical integrity (countering biased impressions), with benefit also for identifying relationships and hypothesis testing. The interaction of text, codes, and themes in this study involved several iterations before the analysis proceeded to an interpretive phase in which the units were connected into an explanatory framework consistent with the text. Archival data like documents and records (e.g., minutes of meetings, various reports of committees during the Trade shows, annual financial reports) from KTM office were also accessed which gave an inside view of the collaboration process throughout the year and helped to validate the information obtained from the interviews to a great extent. Four overarching or core themes were thus identified that were felt to capture the phenomenon of process of destination collaboration in the raw data.

5

Findings

Depth interviews with industry leaders and representatives of KTM society and the local government brought out the nature and dynamism of the tourism collaboration i.e., KTM, which can be best understood by examining the sequence of events of marketing alliance formation. The sequence of events includes: a

the preconditions which trigger collaboration in a destination

b

the motivations for firms to join the collaboration

c

the dynamic evolutionary stages of the alliance as the collaboration develops over time

d

the outcomes as performance indicators to sustain the collaboration in the long run.

The findings of this study validate the theoretical framework of Wang and Xiang (2007) to a great extent, except for some important differences. The four remarkable stages of collaboration that we identified are briefly described below.

5.1 Development of preconditions to collaboration Experiences from past collaboration perceived and anticipated cost-benefits, in addition to various environmental forces marketing collaboration in tourism (Jantarat, 1996). The opportunities for integration and control are some of the key success factors. Observe Mohr et al. (1996). A company is known by the company it keeps and choice of partners is critical in image management, too (Simonin and Ruth, 1998). However, at times, companies are known to engage in learning oriented collaboration: a willingness to suffer short term losses if the same will help the firm learn skills valuable in the future characterise such collaborations (Chi and McGuire, 1996). In this study, the essential conditions preceding the collaboration or drivers of collaboration of a destination collaboration have been identified as market imperatives, shared vision among stakeholders, and strong product as a USP, visionary leadership and government support. Leadership played a very important role during the formation stages of the collaboration as it was the initiative and the long term vision of a few industry


9

leaders which started KTM in Kerala. As one key tourism representative stated about the important role played by a tourism leader; “he commands respect from everybody. When he says something, there are people to do what has to be done”. Shared vision, goals and objectives help in forging a collaborative venture faster. Another interviewee said “people in Kerala (the tourism fraternity) implicitly realize that we have to work together to make things happen. There is a strong sense of purpose. There is no other alternative”. There is a common goal of development of the destination. Better positioning of the destination Kerala and necessity to bring the international buyers to the destination were the main marketing compulsions for the emergence of a trade show like KTM as a strategic marketing promotional tool. As the government representative noted, “it (Kerala) needed its own space. It was felt that to be noticed by the world, it was essential to hold the Mart in Kerala and make the world to come to Kerala”. Without the crucial support of the government during the early years KTM would not have taken off which indicates the growing realisation of governments of a public private participation (PPP) for growth of the destination. An industry leader openly admitted, “government’s full support and assurance to meet any shortfalls in revenues gave sufficient strength to go forward”. The destination must be distinctive and should have unique attractions for the tourists. Kerala with its natural splendours and myriad art forms is a strong product to market through a destination trade show. One industry veteran confirmed this, “it was felt that Kerala was sufficiently a powerful product which might induce people to come if a Mart was held specifically for Kerala”. Leadership, shared vision and market imperatives have been noted earlier in research studies (Selin and Chavez, 1995; Fyall and Garrod, 2006). Strong product and government support emerged as preconditions from this study which appears to be a reflection of the nature of the promotion tool adopted to promote the destination.

5.2 Stakeholder recognition of the value of collaboration It is found from the study that the motivations of tourism organisations entering marketing alliances can be explained from four broad perspectives: strategic oriented, transaction cost oriented, organisation learning oriented and relationship oriented. Expansion of the customer market for Kerala, increasing the portfolio of products offered, and gaining access to new markets is seen as strategic benefits which exhibitor firms perceive in a destination trade show. As the government spokesman said, “wisdom of the industry lies in the fact that they implicitly recognize that unless KTM happens, success will be difficult”. Access to a large international market at a minimum cost and spreading the cost of marketing over a larger base was perceived as the transaction cost benefit. A hotelier interviewee stressed the cost effectiveness aspect. “So many home stays are there, they have benefited from this. They have got an opportunity. They cannot spend a lot of money and go to London; they come here, they get an opportunity to showcase their product”. Hansen (1999) noted that information exchange at trade shows helps companies choose better trading partners reduces legal and contracting costs, and helps to decide which parts of the business can be spun-off or kept in-house. Organisation learning oriented motivation is the opportunity to learn new practices and updating of knowledge.

10

S. Menon et al.

The study confirmed that exhibitors believed that KTM was cost effective as it helped in collecting information about competitors and benchmarking competitive position. By attending the seminars and through interactions, firms learn about new trends. As one leading tour operator said, “it is an opportunity to listen to international speakers on industry issues”. However, it was apparent the firms were not fully exploiting the learning opportunity the trade shows gave. “the people who are entrusted in the stall will not leave the stall to attend the seminar”, an industry representative said. The study findings highlight the important function of trade shows in building relations. Networking opportunities leading to building new relationships and strengthening old bonds is a much desired objective in trade shows, including KTM. “Reinforcing existing contacts” is how one boutique property owner put it. “An opportunity to interact with them on all 3 days through networking dinner” is what one leading tour operator had to say about KTM. This important motivation has been reconfirmed in literature on trade shows (Kerin and Cron, 1987; Kijewski et al., 1993; Rolf Seringhaus and Rosson, 1998; Herbig et al., 1993; Sashi and Perretty, 1992; Shipley et al., 1993; Hansen, 2004).

5.3 Dynamic evolution of alliance There was much consensus among the collaboration partners about how the KTM developed over time. The interviewees were associated with the collaboration process at different times in its life cycle. Hence, different aspects were highlighted by the interviewees depending at which time period they were closely associated with KTM. Each of the stages represented in the framework is characterised by certain activities that distinguish it from preceding or subsequent stages. However, there is also a considerable overlap of activities among the stages which reflects the nature of the collaboration. In the early assembling stage, the main challenges the collaborative partnership faced were working collaboratively across a fragmented industry with a large number of partners with diverse interests. Another challenge was to build an identity for KTM. These challenges were surmounted by the unique attributes of the destination Kerala and the spirit of collaboration and shared vision which made the first KTM a great success. As pointed out by an industry veteran, “very early on, the tourism officials and the government realized that the usual government hierarchy does not work. There was already a strong public private participation in place”. In the ordering and implementation stage, two phases of the collaboration were identified. In the first phase from 2000 to 2010, KTM society was established and processes streamlined. In the second phase, technology was leveraged through online registration of buyers and more transparency was brought in the election process. The study showed that the promotion efforts of KTM through direct mail and through website are more effective than the official machinery of the government. An industry veteran recounted “A society, KTM society, was constituted and rules were created only for one purpose – creating a market where buyers and sellers of Kerala can meet”. During the evaluation stage, the study reveals there is no formal strategic evaluation process though evaluation is seen to be taking place informally and continuously among members about the future directions for KTM. Caffyn (2000) argues that, typically after nine years of operation, collaborations tend to reach a point where their purpose is explicitly or implicitly revaluated. Though the implementation of KTM has been successful there is dissatisfaction with the quality (in terms of the nature and value of expected business) and quantity of sales leads generated.


11

One representative stated “how many buyers came from newer markets, what sort of deals KTM is bringing to the state, these are some of the evaluation factors”. The study suggests a high probability of a change in the format of KTM during the transformation stage. There are indications that the present form of KTM may continue in the short term but in the long term, unless changes are made in the format of KTM, continued participation by firms is uncertain. The government representative stated “but what you do from an omnibus Kerala oriented trade mart – whether you would like to make it more national or scale down and do more focused initiatives those are things that a call is needed”. At each stage the mode of governance within the collaboration differed. At the assembling stage, the network mode dominated, during the assembling stage a hierarchy was established through a formal KTM society, and in the implementation stage there was a mix of hierarchy and informal networks. The market structure again dominated the evaluation and the transformation stage. One boutique tour operator said candidly, “we are always benefited. Because of the background work we do, buyers come based on the input KTM is giving”. The collaboration process is thus a very dynamic process. PPP emerged as a governance structure distinct from a partnership or collaboration. One representative describes the relationship with the government thus, “The temperament is different. Here government gives us the freedom to do it. There are three people from government in KTM. We consult them in everything. We go as a team. They support us in everything. It is an excellent example of PPP”. Conflicts that are natural to any collaborative effort are seen in KTM also. However, they are managed well within the organisation by bringing out a good balance between individual and common benefits through good cooperation and a sense of commitment. An examples is what the KTM representative said, “we manage conflicts out of experience. You have your set agenda, your principles. Know how to run KTM. People might bring in personal influences when I will try to make them understand the broader perspective. Listen carefully”. What emerges is that conflicts are resolved amicably within the collaboration and not allowed to vitiate the collaborative spirit which is a notable achievement and may have contributed to the longevity of this collaboration.

5.4 Outcomes of the marketing collaboration An effective collaboration of tourism firms in a destination will result in strong linkages and positive outcomes in the economy and society. Four important outcomes of collaboration which emerged from the study include strategy oriented, organisation learning oriented, social capital building oriented, and sustainable tourism oriented. •

Strategy – oriented outcomes were mainly reflected by tourism organisations being able to enhance theirs and the destination’s competitiveness through collaboration. The positioning and brand image of the product, Kerala, has benefited through KTM. The government representative said, “what KTM has done is to carve out an identity that Kerala is different. The conversation shifted from ‘The golden triangle’ and Goa to India’s hottest destination. The brand entity gained considerable strength through KTM”.

•

Learning-oriented outcomes concentrates on knowledge transfer, organisation change and innovation through learning various types of skills required for collaboration. The study highlights the learning outcomes through information

12

S. Menon et al. related activities of exhibitors such as collecting information on competitors, doing market research, giving information about company’s products and services. An industry leader said, “there is a valuable feedback on about the perceptions of travellers to Kerala. Seminars held during the Mart ignites interest among buyers and sellers and is a barometer or litmus test of buyers”.

•

Social capital-oriented outcomes refer to the development of collective consciousness as a result of comradery. The study also highlights the big advantage for the participants at KTM viz. the relationships they make or build upon during the three days of the KTM, The houseboat operator stated, “no point in going to KTM without building relationships with buyers, other sellers, colleagues, co-operators. We have an excellent rapport with at least 500 agents. We know each one by name. That is our strength”.

•

Sustainability – oriented outcomes refer to how an even like KTM further inclusive growth by providing a platform for the small and local tourism firms of Kerala. KTM has been successful in bringing the global players to Kerala which give the local firms an international exposure and a foothold in the global market. A resort owner, one of the pioneers of responsible tourism said, “you need the KTM to bring the world to the smaller players. That social equity, social concern will always remain”.

6

Discussion

This study has attempted, in part, to fill a gap in the literature by applying the well cited theoretical framework of collaborative destination marketing of Wang and Xiang (2007) to an emerging destination with a different market structure. The framework highlights a number of important issues related to the formation process of tourism marketing alliances within a destination. This research study has attempted to refine the existing categories and dimensions in the framework by examining in detail the situational characteristics and dynamics in a destination collaboration in the form of trade shows in Kerala, one of the fastest growing destinations in India. The research study has also attempted to fill the gap in trade show literature by highlighting the role of trade shows as a destination promotion tool. The results of the study indicate that certain preconditions set the tone and provide the necessity for tourism organisations to work with each other in order to achieve their ultimate goals. Some of the findings like market imperatives, shared vision and visionary leadership have been highlighted in many research studies as important drivers of collaboration. The other two factors viz. strong product and government support demonstrate the importance of contextual differences in a marketing collaboration. The government support may be in many forms but it is increasingly an essential precondition for a collaborative effort in an emerging destination. The helping hand of the government during the early years was very clearly brought out in the study. Without this crucial support from the beginning, the KTM would not have taken off. The destination must be distinctive and should have unique attractions for the tourists. The study brought out this aspect clearly as the success of KTM Kerala appears partly due to the fact of it being a strong product to market through a destination trade show.


13

In defining alliance formation, it is found from the study that the motivation of tourism organisations entering marketing alliances can be explained from four broad perspectives: strategic oriented, transaction cost oriented, organisation learning oriented, and relationship oriented. The study findings highlight the important motivation of relationship building as the most unique feature of trade shows. The exhibitors get the opportunity to meet key decision makers who are otherwise inaccessible, and, establish personal contact with customers. This important motivation of trade shows has been corroborated in many research studies on trade shows (Helms et al., 2003; Rolf Seringhaus and Rosson, 1998). It is seen that tourism marketing alliances go through four distinctive developmental phases – assembling, ordering and implementation, evaluation and transformation stages. The kind of activities in which a tourism alliance is engaged is a good indication as to where it is in its development (Caffyn, 2000). The study highlights that sometimes a tourism alliance may even appear to be operating in two stages at once. This has occurred in KTM where the trade show is held every two years. So every time KTM is organised, the second and third stages i.e., ordering, implementation and evaluation take place. When this happens, it is important to remember that the success of each stage depends on the effectiveness of the resolution of issues in the previous stages. Improving the effectiveness with which crucial tasks are carried out at each stage will serve to make the collaboration more advantageous for the participants. KTM was able to devise a formal structure to smoothly conduct the trade show or Mart every two years. The structure aided shared decision making and helped the KTM to continuously evolve. As a result, the partnership created a spirit of cooperation within the tourism industry. The study results suggest that at each stage the mode of governance within the collaboration differed which highlights the dynamism of the collaboration process. PPP emerged as a governance structure distinct from a partnership or collaboration. Public private partnership is a very distinct form of governance seen in many destination collaborations across the world as the destination benefits from both the private sector initiatives and the government machinery. The study indicates the presence of conflicts of interests in the KTM society which manifests during committee meetings. The key is to recognise the functional role of conflict and to learn to harness it towards meeting the objectives of the collaboration. What emerges is that it is important conflicts are resolved amicably within the collaboration and not allowed to vitiate the collaborative spirit. This is seen as a notable achievement for KTM and may have contributed to the longevity of this collaboration. An effective collaboration of tourism firms in a destination will result in strong linkages and positive outcomes in the economy and society (Weidenfeld, 2013). This study suggests that strategy realisation can be understood as the short-term outcome of collaboration whereas knowledge sharing, social capital building and sustainable tourism are important long term outcomes in the collaborative relationships. One of the most important findings has been the outcome of sustainable tourism through participation in KTM. This singular contribution of KTM is a crucial finding. When environmentally unsustainable development of tourism is creating a backlash against the tourism industry the world over, this sustainable tool of tourism promotion available to a destination needs wider recognition. Building partnerships and networks is a viable and tactical tool for organisations to improve their capabilities (Graci, 2013). This study suggests that it is not enough to start a collaboration process: how to manage this process and make these relationships

14

S. Menon et al.

enduring and aligned to the common goal is even more crucial. Successful collaborations hinge on mutual understanding and trust and a sense of commitment, a sense of equitable participation in the activities of the collaboration, and the existence of an efficient management structure. The examination of the various sequential events in marketing alliance formation is expected to give an insight into the behaviour of organisations as they form alliance which will be of key strategic interest to stakeholders especially the government.

7

Conclusions

As KTM has become an integral part of the tourism strategy of Kerala, it needs to be established whether KTM represents an instrument to promote destination Kerala or if it is merely a stage to showcase the tourism related businesses that attend the event. Since the government of Kerala is a key supporter of the event, it is natural to expect that the objective of promoting the entire state tourism is respected. Komppula (2014) notes this to be one of the founding objectives of any publicly funded destination management organisation (DMO). However, private interests of the event sponsoring businesses often work against this (Hall, 1999). From the point of view of these businesses, it is often justified that they spend the money but everyone, even their competitors who do not participate in the event, gets to reap the benefits. This strain has to be resolved for the longer term sustenance of KTM. Fortunately, this study also indicates that sustainable tourism is as a stakeholder desired outcome of event partnerships. Performance evaluations of the event should be carried out, keeping the above in mind, as a routine element of the ongoing management process. This study has made a beginning in the evaluation process by providing a framework for the same. By providing a comprehensive and integrated view of the collaborative process in an emerging destination, this study demonstrates the importance of such research studies by focusing on tourism organisations and destinations within a marketing context. The research study has thrown up some interesting new aspects in the extant theory, especially the outcome of sustainable tourism. Of course, this requires further research and validation in other types of partnerships and networks in other tourism destinations in other regions. Emerging tourist destinations have unique characteristics, which differentiate them from matured destinations or destination at their decline stage (George et al., 2013). Hence this study is useful in increasing the understanding of collaborative marketing in tourism through trade shows in a destination from an emerging and fast growing region. That said, there are some limitations of the study. The results are valid for one destination and could reflect the unique behaviour of individuals in a local/regional culture that is different from those in other destinations. The study has also focussed on the members of the KTM society who are active participants in the biennial trade show KTM. The study has not considered the inactive members of the Society. Inclusion of their views may have given a different perspective to the collaborative process. So also are stakeholder perspectives taken more longitudinally.


15

References Bazely, P. (2010) ‘Computer-assisted integration of mixed methods data sources and analyses’, in Tashakkori, A. and Teddlie, C. (Ed.): SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioural Research, 2nd ed., pp.431–467, SAGE Publications, USA. Bergman, M.M. (2010) ‘Hermeneutic content analysis-textual and audiovisual analyses within a mixed methods framework’, in Tashakkori, A. and Teddlie, C. (Ed.): SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioural Research, 2nd ed., pp.379–396, SAGE Publications, USA. Caffyn, A. (2000) ‘Is there a tourism partnership life cycle?’, in Bramwell, B. and Lane, B. (Eds.): Tourism Collaboration and Partnerships – Politics, Practice and Sustainability, Indian edition, pp.333–341, Viva Books Private Ltd, New Delhi. Chi, T. and McGuire, D.J. (1996) ‘Collaborative ventures and value of learning: integrating the transaction cost and strategic option perspectives on the choice of market entry modes’, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp.285–307. Czernek, K. (2013) ‘Determinants of cooperation in a tourist region’, Annals of Tourism Research, January, Vol. 40, pp.83–104. da Silva, M.E., de Oliveira, A.P.G. and Gómez, C.R.P. (2013) ‘Can collaboration between firms and stakeholders stimulate sustainable consumption? Discussing roles in the Brazilian electricity sector’, Journal of Cleaner Production, May, Vol. 47, pp.236–244. Dodgson, M. (1993) ‘Learning, trust, and technological collaboration’, Human Relations, Vol. 46, No. 1, pp.77–95. Edward, M. and George, B.P. (2008) ‘Tourism development in the state of Kerala, India: a study of destination attractiveness’, European journal of tourism research, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp.16–24. Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989) ‘Building theories from case study research’, Academy of Management Review, October, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp.532–550. Etemad, H., Wright, R.W. and Dana, L.P. (2001) ‘Symbiotic international business networks: collaboration between small and large firms’, Thunderbird International Business Review, Vol. 43, No. 4, pp.481–499. Fantino, D., Mori, A. and Scalise, D. (2012) ‘Collaboration between firms and universities in Italy: the role of a firm’s proximity to top-rated departments’, Italian Economic Journal, October, No. 884, pp.1–33. Fyall, A. and Garrod, B. (2006) Tourism Marketing A Collaborative Approach, First Indian Edition, Viva Books Private Limited, New Delhi. George, B.P. (2007) ‘Alleppey tourism development cooperative: the case of network advantage’, The Public Sector Innovation Journal, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp.1–10. George, B.P., Henthorne, T.L. and Williams, A.J. (2013) ‘The bells within the bell curve: destination visitation model revisited’, Tourism Recreation Research, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp.341–348. Graci, S. (2013) ‘Collaboration and partnership development for sustainable tourism’, Tourism Geographies, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp.25–42. Gray, B. (1985) ‘Conditions facilitating interorganizational collaboration’, Human Relations, Vol. 38, No. 10, pp.911–936. Hall, C.M. (1999) ‘Rethinking collaboration and partnership: a public policy perspective’, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 7, Nos. 3–4, pp.274–289. Hansen, K. (1999) ‘Trade show performance: a conceptual framework and its implications for future research’, Academy of Marketing Science Review, No. 8, pp.1–12. Hansen, K. (2004) ‘Measuring performance at trade shows scale development and validation’, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 57, No. 1, pp.1–13. Helms, M.M., Mayo, D.T. and Baxter, J.T. (2003) ‘Experiential learning the benefits of trade shows for marketing students and faculty’, Marketing Education Review, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp.17–25.

16

S. Menon et al.

Herbig, P., O’Hara, B. and Palumbo, F. (1993) ‘Measuring trade show effectiveness: an effective exercise?’, Journal of Promotion Management, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp.77–88. Jantarat, J. (1996) A Study of Interorganisational Collaboration in Tourism Marketing: A Case of Analysis of Critical Preconditions, Doctoral dissertation, Lincoln University. Kerin, R.A. and Cron, W.L. (1987) ‘Assessing trade show functions and performance: an exploratory study’, The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 51, No. 3, pp.87–94. Kijewski, V., Yoon, E. and Young, G. (1993) ‘How exhibitors select trade shows’, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 22, No. 4, pp.287–298. Kim, K.J. and Bonk, C.J. (2002) ‘Cross-cultural comparisons of online collaboration’, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp.1–14. Kokkranikal, J. and Morrison, A. (2002) ‘Entrepreneurship and sustainable tourism: the houseboats of Kerala’, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp.7–20. Komppula, R. (2014) ‘The role of individual entrepreneurs in the development of competitiveness for a rural tourism destination – a case study’, Tourism Management, February, Vol. 40, pp.361–371. Mohr, J.J., Fisher, R.J. and Nevin, J.R. (1996) ‘Collaborative communication in interfirm relationships: moderating effects of integration and control’, The Journal of Marketing, July, Vol. 60, No. 3, pp.103–115. Onwuegbuzie, A.J. and Combs, J.P. (2010) ‘Emergent data analysis techniques in mixed methods research – a synthesis’, in Tashakkori, A. and Teddlie, C. (Ed.): SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioural Research, 2nd ed., pp.397–430, Sage Publications, USA. Panagopoulos, A., Desyllas, P. and Pitelis, C.N. (2015) ‘International collaboration through market co-creation: strategies for emerging country firms’, Academy of Management Proceedings, Academy of Management, January, No. 1, p.17341. Pastras, P. and Bramwell, B. (2013) ‘A strategic-relational approach to tourism policy’, Annals of Tourism Research, October, Vol. 43, pp.390–414. Pavlovich, K. (2003) ‘The evolution and transformation of a tourism destination network: the Waitomo Caves, New Zealand’, Tourism Management, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp.203–216. Piboonrungroj, P. and Disney, S.M. (2015) ‘Supply chain collaboration in tourism: a transaction cost economics analysis’, International Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp.8–22. Rolf Seringhaus, F.H. and Rosson, P.J. (1998) ‘Management and performance of international trade fair exhibitors: government stands vs independent stands’, International Marketing Review, Vol. 15, No. 5, pp.398–412. Sashi, C.M. and Perretty, J. (1992) ‘Do trade shows provide value?’, Industrial Marketing Management, August, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp.249–255. Selin, S. and Chavez, D. (1995) ‘Developing an evolutionary tourism partnership model’, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 22, No. 4, pp.844–856. Shipley, D., Egan, C. and Wong, K.S. (1993) ‘Dimensions of trade show exhibiting management’, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp.55–63. Simonin, B.L. and Ruth, J.A. (1998) ‘Is a company known by the company it keeps? Assessing the spillover effects of brand alliances on consumer brand attitudes’, Journal of Marketing Research, February, Vol. 35, No. 1, pp.30–42. Stake, R.E. (2000) ‘Case studies’, in Norman, K.D. and Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.): Handbook of Qualitative Research, pp.435–453, Sage, Thousand Oaks. Vasudevan, S. (2008) ‘The role of internal stakeholders in destination branding: observations from Kerala tourism’, Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp.331–335. Waddock, S. (1989) ‘Understanding social partnerships: an evolutionary model of partnership organizations’, Administration & Society, May, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp.78–100. Wang, Y. (2008) ‘Collaborative destination marketing – understanding the dynamic process’, Journal of Travel Research, November, Vol. 47, No. 2, pp.151–166.


17

Wang, Y. and Xiang, Z. (2007) ‘Toward a theoretical framework of collaborative destination marketing’, Journal of Travel Research, August, Vol. 46, pp.75–85. Weidenfeld, A. (2013) ‘Tourism and cross border regional innovation systems’, Annals of Tourism Research, July, Vol. 42, pp.191–213.