Int. J. Business Information Systems, Vol. X, No. Y, xxxx
Web map services in tourism: a framework exploring the organisational transformations and implications on business operations and models Marianna Sigala* and Dimosthenis Marinidis Department of Business Administration, University of the Aegean, Michalon 8 GR82100, Chios, Greece E-mail:
[email protected] E-mail:
[email protected] *Corresponding author Abstract: This study aims to first analyse the functionality and the services of web map services, and then, to investigate the types of their exploitation that in turn transform the ways in which tourism firms design their business operations and business models. To that end, the paper first defines the concept of web map services and then it analyses their functionality by conducting a thorough literature review related to the field of web services, mapping services, Web 2.0 as well as their impact on the business operations. The paper then adapts Venkatraman’s (1994) model on IT-induced transformation in order to identify and classify the different levels and types of exploitation of the functionality of web map services by tourism firms. Examples of web map services’ applications from the tourism industry are used for analysing the concept, the business changes and the implementation challenges of each type-level of exploitation of web map services. Keywords: web map services; WMS; operations; business models; tourism; Web 2.0; organisational transformation; geographical information systems; GIS. Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Sigala, M. and Marinidis, D. (xxxx) ‘Web map services in tourism: a framework exploring the organisational transformations and implications on business operations and models’, Int. J. Business Information Systems, Vol. X, No. Y, pp.000–000. Biographical notes: Marianna Sigala is an Assistant Professor at the University of the Aegean, Greece. Before joining the University of the Aegean, she had been lecturing at the Universities of Strathclyde and Westminster in the UK. Her interests include productivity and service quality management, information and communication technologies (ICT) applications in tourism and hospitality and e-learning. She has professional experience from the Greek hospitality industry and contributed to several international research projects. Her work has been published in several academic journals and international conferences. She is the Co-chair of the Euro-CHRIE Special Interest Group (SIG) in ICT in Hospitality and she currently serves at the Board of Directors of I-CHRIE, IFITT and HeAIS. Dimosthenis Marinidis is a PhD candidate in Tourism and Information Systems in the Department of Business Administration at the University of the Aegean, Greece. He received his MSc in Tourism, Planning, Management and Policy and holds a Bachelor in Business Administration from the University of the Aegean. His research interests include tourism management, information technology/systems, destination management systems, technology implementation and related topics. Copyright © 200x Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.
1
2
M. Sigala and D. Marinidis This paper is a revised and expanded version of a paper entitled ‘Exploring the transformation of tourism firms’ operations and business models through the use of web map services’ presented at European and Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems (EMCIS), (2009) on Information Systems in Izmir, Turkey.
1
Introduction
Tourism by nature involves the transfer of people to places away from home, while all tourism experiences take place in certain geographical areas. Geographic locations themselves and their resources (e.g., cultural, natural) also constitute major tourists’ attractions motivating and inspiring tourists to travel to a place. Hence, as geographical resources and information play a critical role in generating, directing and organising tourism activities in destinations, geographical information systems (GIS) are widely adopted in tourism settings – from information kiosks, mobile guides and hiking maps (Duran et al., 2004; Rasinger et al., 2007) to map-based destination websites (Zanker et al., 2009). Nowadays, advances in distributed GIS, that combine the power of GIS with the ubiquity of the internet (Duran et al., 2004), have further enhanced the accessibility and dissemination of geographical capabilities and knowledge (Tait, 2005) to internet users. Actually, tourism is one of the first industries to embrace the use of GIS technology over the internet (Wang et al., 2004) and the provision of web map services (WMS) has become a widespread and expected standard for many e-tourism applications. By using WMS, tourists can more quickly, precisely and accurately find all travel information for organising their itineraries (Ilies and Ilies, 2006). As a result, GIS enabled web applications have transformed the trip planning process from a frustrating (Pan and Fesenmaier, 2006) to a more enjoyable and efficient (Pan et al., 2007) as well as a social experience (Zanker et al., 2009). However, tourism firms differ in their exploitation levels of WMS which in turn reflect various types of integration of WMS within their business operations. For example, WMS can be used for providing a simple digital representation of the location of a tourism firm on a map or for measuring and managing the number and the flow of tourists at an environmental sensitive tourism destination (Connell and Page, 2008). Nowadays, advances in free WMS [such as Google (Maps), Yahoo! (Maps), Microsoft (Virtual Earth), MapQuest and ArcWeb] have introduced new (collaborative) ways for the development, searching, reading and dissemination of geographical information and services. These cheap, web-based, multi-layer and multi-advantage WMS stimulate the creation of more sophisticated and information empowered tourists (Dickinger et al., 2008). However, despite of importance of WMS in tourism, so far, research has solely focused on examining the impact of WMS such as geotags (Zanker et al., 2009; Raggam and Almer, 2005) and geocollaborative portals (Sigala, 2009) on the information search and decision-making processes of tourism demand. On the other hand, research examining the numerous new business opportunities and operational models afforded by WMS for tourism suppliers and organisations is still lacking. Moreover, as the tourism firms are generally characterised by low levels of adoption and exploitation of new technologies, the urgency of this research is highlighted in order to explore the related literature and best industrial practices and then, to provide
Web map services in tourism
3
valuable theoretical and practical implications which are required for advancing and booming the take-up of WMS in tourism. In this vein, this study aims to fill in these gaps by first defining and analysing the functionality and the services of WMS, and then, investigating the different types of exploitation of WMS by tourism firms. Thus, the overall aim of the study is to develop a framework for categorising the types of applications of WMS that in turn can be used for: a
demonstrating the ways in which WMS can transform the business operations and models of tourism firms
b
identifying the major organisational changes and factors that need to be researched and addressed in order to successfully implement these WMS and promote their adoption in the tourism industry.
To that end, after defining WMS as a form of distributed GIS (and so, as a type of a web service), the first section of the paper debates how the capabilities of web services enable the redesign of business operations and models. The section continues by identifying and analysing the functionality of WMS that can be integrated into business operations. This section also further expands the current literature and contributes to the field by analysing how the two major capabilities of Web 2.0 (namely, social intelligence and social networking) have enhanced and created additional functionality for WMS. Having identified the functionality of WMS, the second section of the paper adapts Venkatraman’s (1994) model on IT-induced transformation in order to identify and categorise the different types of WMS’ exploitation by tourism firms. Each type of WMS represents a different level of business exploitation and it is analysed by presenting different examples of WMS’ applications from the tourism industry. The analyses of these examples also provide a good basis for identifying the impacts of WMS on the business operations and models as well as for exploring the major factors required for successfully implementing WMS. The proposed model and its examples provide a useful roadmap for guiding professional practice as well as future research and so, the practical and the theoretical implications of the former are also discussed.
2
WMS: definition, impacts and functionality
2.1 Defining WMS as web services: impacts on business operations and models GIS applications require the seamless integration of spatial data and services provided by multiple and different sources and vendors. Thus, the interoperable standard communication protocols of web services have been heavily used for solving this interoperability problem and boosting the development of distributed GIS services (Sayar et al., 2005). This is because web services represent “… a language and environment neutral programming model that will accelerate application integration inside and outside the enterprise” (Gottschalk et al., 2002). Indeed, although there is no universally accepted definition of web services, all definitions (e.g., Smith, 2001; Wusteman, 2006; Guidi et al., 2007; Moitra and Ganesh, 2005; Sayah and Zhang, 2005; Fensel and Bussler, 2002; Lau and Ryman, 2002; Vidgen et al., 2004) converge and agree on the ability of web services’ network-enabled software components to allow business processes or information to be accessed over the internet and to interact with one another
4
M. Sigala and D. Marinidis
dynamically., which in turn provides a distributed computing technology and enables the seamless interoperability of web-based applications. In other words, web services represent reusable components that can be published, located and invoked over the internet by using standard protocols and in this vein, web services allow application-to-application integration and dynamic business interactions via the internet (Daniel et al., 2004; Currie and Parikh, 2005; Wang et al., 2004; Ismail et al., 2002). Because of these features, web services have been heavily used for developing and diffusing GIS services, and this is currently evidenced by the recent boom of distributed GIS services (e.g., Tait, 2005). Indeed, the National Research Council (NRC, 1999) advocated that the internet’s infrastructure and software as well as the development of web services have empowered the GIS community to disseminate and share GIS capabilities and content/data, while Longley and Batty (2003) have shown how the web is a new medium enabling increased participation in the development of GIS services. Distributed GIS services are simply GIS technology that is built and deployed using the standards and the software of the internet (Tait, 2005). Several organisations such as the Open GIS Consortium (OGC), the International Standards Organization (ISO) and the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC), support the definition of geographic web service standards that in turn determines the publication of geographical content and functionality. By using web service standards, distributed GIS allow many GI systems to be linked and accessed as a single virtual system offering the following three major benefits: a
wide distribution, as it is easier to distribute geospatial data and applications across platforms, operating systems, computer languages, etc.
b
integration of applications and businesses operations, as it is easier for application developers to integrate geospatial functionality and data into custom applications
c
the development of a huge infrastructure being built to enable the web services architecture (including the development tools, application servers, messaging protocols, security infrastructure, and workflow definitions).
The most commonly used distributed GIS services are the GIS mapping services and the GIS data services. The OGC calls the mapping services as WMS and the data services as web feature services (WFS) and web coverage services (WCS). Geoportals [defined as websites presenting an entry to geographical content on the web (Tait, 2005)] represent a key application of distributed GIS services that combine several GIS applications and provide the following most typical geographical web service functionality: map rendering; feature streaming; data projection; geographic- and attribute-based queries; address geocoding; gazetteer/place name searches; metadata query and management; network analyses; 3D terrain visualisation; and data extraction. In other words, geoportals are built on geographical web services and give user-friendly accessibility to high-end GIS applications over the internet. Three distributed GIS components (service oriented architecture, SOA) are required to implement a geoportal (Tait, 2005); a website presenting the geographic application or portal; web services that publish geographic functionality as a web service; and data management software providing a managed relational environment for both raster and vector geographic content. (Geographical) Web service components can also comprise other web services which are all then subsumed into broader web service applications. Thus, a geographic web service application can be a distributed application, using components sourced from
Web map services in tourism
5
multiple locations over the internet. Because of this SOA of geographical web services, organisations can create or build customised or new applications for supporting their business processes by simply selecting required web services from those available over the internet. In other words, geographical web services support the migration from a systems-based IT architecture to a loosely-coupled one enabling firms to have the required agility and flexibility to adapt IT applications (and so, organisational processes and models) to the changing market and business dynamics (Hagel, 2002; Vidgen et al., 2004). For example, firms can very easily and with low cost adopt and embed WMS into their websites, e-commerce and other e-business applications in a very ad hoc and ‘plug and play’ way. Overall, because of their web service nature, WMS can support the integration and the interoperability of various technological applications and services that may exist within but also beyond and across organisational boundaries. Indeed, web services are also exploited for linking applications outside the organisation and providing the integration technology for business-to-business (B2B), business-to-employee (B2E) and business-to-consumer (B2C) transactions (Vidgen et al., 2004). By fostering and quickly realising the potential of value-chain partnerships, WMS play a significant role in enabling organisational flexibility and transforming the nature of inter-organisational commerce (e.g., Daniel et al., 2004; Vidgen et al., 2004). The use of web services for linking and integrating applications internally within a firm represents the first phase of web service implementation and it aims to assist firms to reduce their costs related to the development, the acquisition and the deployment of information systems (MetaGroup, 2003; LaMonica, 2003). An example of an internal exploitation of web services aiming to streamline and improve the performance of business operations is provided by Hannon (2001), who described how a global firm used web services for integrating the several different accounting ledgers of its geographically distributed offices that were also operating different accounting suites. Studies (e.g., MetaGroup, 2003) have also shown that the majority of firms are still in this first stage of web service implementation. On the other hand, the use of web services for integrating information systems between different organisations is viewed as the ‘second wave’ of web service adoption that is currently underway (IDC, 2002). External exploitation of web services aims to distribute and integrate online location-based services across several organisations by allowing distributed GIS users to share and use each others’ services. For example, a local government planning department can use geographical web services for sharing its local area plans with other government departments and third parties such as, utility companies (Dangermond, 2002). The utility company will then be able to overlay its own infrastructure on these shared maps by adding information such as where its pipelines are located. Tait (2005) also identified four other examples of external exploitation of WMS and demonstrated how the latter can foster and support the development of new kinds of collaborative communities that are able to share and leverage their geographic knowledge. Rinner (2006) and Aditya (2008) have also described the design of geocollaborative web services for supporting collaborative work amongst distributed users, groups and firms. Overall, geographical web services can provide an effective technological platform for supporting and fostering the development of collaborative interoganisational practices. Recently, the free availability of application programming interfaces (API) from popular web applications (e.g., GoogleMaps, YahooMaps and Microsoft LiveMaps) has
6
M. Sigala and D. Marinidis
democratised the development and use of geographical information and services by enabling internet users to: access and contribute to the development of geographical content and services; diffuse and embed WMS in websites and e-commerce applications; and create new Web 2.0 empowered applications by mashing-up various technological, geographical and business services and information. For example, users are allowed to embed and include GoogleMaps into their websites and social networks (e.g., into their Facebook profile). Moreover, by having access to the API, internet users can also manipulate and customise maps by adding (geo)tags on them which may also be enriched with user-generated content such as customer reviews, photos, videos etc. For example, at Google Earth Hacks (www.gearthhacks.com), one can find numerous customised maps developed by users or networks of users, such as a GoogleMap featuring the paths of Alexander the Great. Several recent publications (e.g., Erle et al., 2005; Scharl and Tochtermann, 2007) analyse numerous case studies illustrating how the two features of Web 2.0 (collective intelligence and social networking) have revolutionalised the participatory creation and social diffusion of geographical web services. In tourism, Dickinger et al. (2008) and Zanker et al. (2009) have also illustrated the wide usage of such Web 2.0-based geographical web services by the tourism demand. These bottom-up and user-centred approaches to the creation, dissemination and usage of geogrpahical web services have led to a new era called neogeography (Turner, 2006) or volunteered geographic information (VGI) services (Goodchild, 2007). In summary, it is evident that the characteristics of WMS, the availability of APIs and the features of Web 2.0 provide firms with numerous opportunities to incorporate geographical services and information into their operations by engaging and involving more external partners, and/or users-customers into their value chains and systems. Such applications would in turn enable firms to redesign (either internally and/or externally) and/or develop new (collaborative) operations and business models. But which is the WMS’ functionality that firms can exploit? The next section identifies and analyses the functionality of WMS that firms can adopt and integrate into their business operations and models. The section also discusses the ways in which the two major features of Web 2.0 (namely social networking capabilities and the social intelligence) have expanded and enhance the functionality of WMS.
2.2 The functionality of WMS and its enhancement by Web 2.0 Tait (2005) identified four major functionalities of distributed GIS (and so, of WMS) namely search, mapping, publishing and administration capabilities. As it was previously shown, APIs, (geo)tags and other Web 2.0 tools provide internet users with new possibilities to (co)-create, disseminate, share, read and combine (mash-up) the geographical content, metadata and services of WMS. Hence, the four original functionalities of WMS need to be expanded in order to consider the impact of the two features of Web 2.0 namely, the social networks and the social intelligence. The social networks expand the functionalities of WMS by giving them a collaborative dimension, while the features of the social intelligent enriches the functionalities of WMS with user-generated content and personalisation capabilities. Table 1 describes the expanded Web 2.0 enabled functionalities of WMS as well as it identifies the major Web 2.0 tools that enable these functionalities.
Search
Mapping
Publishing
Administration
Description
Identify the place/location of an item on a map and provision of related geographical services, e.g., calculation of distances amongst map objects
Administration (review/approval) of metadata content added on maps
Manual or automated publishing (through a web page or a web service interface) of metadata content.
Map visualisation capabilities in order to add value to the search process.
Web 2.0 enhanced functionality Social search Social mapping Mash-up map Social (collaborative) publishing of enabled services special interest maps
RSS (for alerting users for changes on maps), web-authoring, pod/ web-casting, extensions, Wikis, blogs, forums, social networking and searching, social bookmarking, etc.
Development of social collaborative practices through ‘map-based social networking’. For example, users can: • Create social networks based on themed or tasked-based geographical routes and location-items: e.g., www.mapme.com, www.upmapper.com, travel.yahoo.com (Travel Planner) • (Collaboratively) create personalised maps and share – disseminate them amongst social networks or publicly to all internet users. E.g., tourists can create routes/itineraries or directions by adding mapping layers with metadata either individually or collaboratively with their friends (by inviting friends to join their personalised map and contribute content to it). Facebook profile. The free provision of APIs enable users to administer and combine web map services with other web services and information for creating new value added mash-up web map services
APIs, mash-ups, content publishing through APIs
(geo)Tags, hotspots, points of interest (POIs), embed maps on social networks and communities
Creation of maps by allowing any user to include any location related item (hotel, attraction, monument, restaurant etc.) on a map and by enriching it with multimedia content (text, picture, artifact, video etc) that may also include tourists’ feedback and experience of the place. Users may also embed and include these personal maps on websites and social networks.
• Add and publish personalised maps on their websites and/or social networks e.g., in their
Tag-searching, vertical meta-searching, link-searching, social bookmarking etc.
Web 2.0 tools supporting the functionality
Search geographical related information based on others’ personalised maps and/or (geo)tags (social collaborative searching services): tourists can identify other users with similar profiles, interests, travel experiences and travel needs and then, search/identify location related items based on others’ personalised maps and geotags. (e.g., people with disabilities identifying hotels and attractions based on the maps and geotags contributed by users with similar profile)
Description
Table 1
Functionality
Web map services in tourism 7
Functionality of Web 2.0 enabled WMS
8
3
M. Sigala and D. Marinidis
A taxonomy WMS’ exploitation and tourism firms’ transformation: an exploratory framework
3.1 Theoretical background of the framework Venkatraman (1994) developed a framework for identifying the different stages of IT induced business transformation. Since then, this framework has been widely used for measuring the business transformation impacts enabled by IT applications in several industries as well as within the tourism sector (e.g., Sigala et al., 2001). Vidgen et al. (2004) have also used Venkatraman’s framework for identifying the opportunities created by web services’ exploitation for redesigning business operations, processes and networks as well as redefining business models. WMS are regarded as web services and so, the adaptation of this framework for investigating the former’s impact on business operations and models is warranted. Venkatraman’s (1994) framework develops along two dimensions: the range of IT’s potential benefits and the degree of IT induced organisational transformation. The framework posits that firms accrue greater benefits from their IT investments, when they accompany exploitation of IT with appropriate organisational changes. As a result, the framework identifies five levels of IT induced organisational transformation and it advocates that the IT benefits increase as firms move from the lowest to the highest levels of IT driven organisational change (Venkatraman, 1994). Thus, at the lower level of IT exploitation, the business benefits of IT deployment are marginal, because IT applications are superimposed on existing organisational structures for simply digitising (and not transforming) current operations and processes. In this vein, this study adapts Venkatraman’s (1994) framework for achieving two purposes: a
to identify the types of exploitation of WMS within the tourism industry; several examples are analysed referring to deployment of WMS at two management levels, i.e., the micro level (tourism firms’ management) and the macro level (tourism destination management)
b
to rank these types of exploitation of WMS into a taxonomy reflecting both the levels of organisational change that they induced as well as the potential business benefits that they can generate.
Moreover, the discussion of its type of WMS also identifies and analyses the major factors that need to be addressed and research for its successful implementation. To that end, the framework also provides a good basis and suggestions for directing and advancing future research.
3.2 Types and levels of exploitation of WMS According to Venkatraman’s (1994) initial framework and Vidgen et al.’s (2004) later study, this paper has also identified five types and levels of exploitation of WMS in the tourism industry (Figure 1). It is however important to underscore that these levels of exploitation should not be conceptualised as stages of evolution. In other words, the implementation of previous levels is not a prerequisite for exploiting WMS at a higher level. However, firms can generate greater business benefits when they increase their levels of exploitation from Level 1 to Level 5, but in order to materialise these benefits,
Web map services in tourism
9
firms should undertake the relevant and appropriate organisational changes as discussed below. These five levels of exploitation, their related benefits and impacts on organisational transformations and changes are discussed below by providing examples of relevant WMS applications from the tourism industry. Figure 1
Levels of exploitation of WMS and types of business transformation
High
Business scope redefinition [ Production of online mapping services and transformation of the business model ]
Business network redesign
Degree of business transformation
[ ‘Mapping’ and collaborating with other firms ]
Business process redesign [ Integration of different business processes ]
Revolutionary levels
Internal integration [ Mapping and transforming a whole business operation ]
Localised exploitation [ Integration of mapping services into existing IS applications ]
Evolutionary levels
Low Low
Range of potential benefits
High
Source: Adapted from Venkatraman (1994)
3.2.1 Level 1: types of WMS’ exploitation reflecting ‘localised exploitation’ According to Venkatraman’s (1994) framework, the simplest and the most basic IT exploitation refers to the integration of IT into existing information systems (IS) (i.e., localised exploitation). Similarly, Vidgen et al. (2004) identified a level of web service exploitation named as ‘web service enhancement’ that represents the integration of web services into existing internal (e.g., accounting systems) or external (e.g., e-commerce application) IS of the firm. Thus, the first level of exploitation of WMS also represents the integration of WMS into existing IS applications of tourism firms. The provision of geographical information and services on an interactive map is crucially important for supporting the trip planning process of tourists and making the trip planning process more efficient, effective, experiential and enjoyable. Therefore, the IT applications related to booking and travel information provision are the most obvious operations of a tourism firm and organisation that can be benefited from the inclusion of WMS. For example, a tourism firm can use GoogleMaps for creating a map and enhancing it with (geo)tags that can provide rich travel information (such as the geographic location of the firm, the driving directions to the firm, the availability, the
10
M. Sigala and D. Marinidis
location and distance of tourism attractions from the tourism firm, videos/photos from the area of the tourism firms etc.). Then by using the API of GoogleMaps, the firm can embed this customised map into its existing website and/or e-mail it to clients that have requested specific geographical information. At a macro level, the Destination Management Organisation (DMO) of Nova Scotia uses GoogleEarth for mapping its attractions on its website (http://novascotia.com/en/home/planatrip /googleearth/default.aspx). A travel cyberintermediary may also use GoogleEarth for locating the hotels that it sells into an interactive map (e.g., http://www.booking.com/ general.html?sid=e4cd05a46bf9bff6480a0abf5f9e3a96;tmpl=docs/google_earth) and so, allowing website users to easily compare and select hotels based on the hotels’ location and proximity to attractions, airports etc. Sheraton hotels enhanced the search engine and booking tool of the corporate website by adding an interactive map that allows website users to identify Sheraton hotel properties not only based on their location but also based on rich user-generated-content (e.g., customer feedback, videos, photographs about hotels they stayed at) that other clients have uploaded on the website map by adding (geo)tags. So, Sheraton guests can use the online interactive map for uploading their content for a specific hotel, while other potential customers (searching to book the most appropriate Sheraton property to spend their holidays) can search, filter and read this geographical related user-generated-content for deciding which hotel to select. In other words, the booking engine of the website has been enhanced by a Web 2.0 enabled WMS that allows its users to search and book hotels not only based on hotel prices and inventory availability, but also based on hotels’ location and geotaged user-generated content. Similarly, several tourism cyberintermediaries (e.g., travelocity.com, expedia.com and lastminute.com) as well as destination management systems (e.g., http://www.visitmorocco.com) have enhanced their online information and booking applications with interactive maps that travellers can use for searching and booking travel products as well as for uploading and sharing with others their post-trip experiences. However, this type of WMS exploitation does not require tourism firms to engage in any major organisational and operational change. Such WMS can be easily integrated within existing IS applications without requiring as well as inducing substantial changes regarding the way business operations (e.g., booking processes) take place and are organised. Although Venkatraman (1994) advocated that none type of IT exploitation at this level is strategic in its generic form, one can identify several strategic implications that such WMS may create for a tourism firm or destination. For example, strategic questions deriving from such WMS and applications may relate to the following: a
The location of hotels’ prices and room inventories as well as user-generated content on a holistic map creates great transparency and supports comparison e-shopping; in this vein, how hotel pricing strategies are impacted or should be developed in response to the prices and room availabilities of nearby competitors and/or in response to the type of the user-generated content referring to hotel reviews?
b
How can or should DMO use WMS for plotting and then managing the flow of tourists visiting attractions that are located close to each other?
c
How a DMO can use WMS for measuring and managing the tourism impacts on regions, e.g., geographically dispersing the organisation of events in order to wider diffuse tourism expenditure within a region?
Web map services in tourism
11
In other words, although such types of web service exploitation may not lead to significant organisational changes, the digitisation and generation of geographical content by WMS can and should be exploited for better informed strategic and operational decision-making processes. This confirms Venkatraman’s (1994) argument who found that even low level and standard IT applications can lead to significant business benefits, when they are used to informalise and change business operations. WMS can also gather information that can in turn be used for directing and advancing future research. For example, future research may analyse data generated from WMS for exploring the profile of tourists preferring to visit certain geographical areas and/or for analysing tourists’ behaviour while at the destination. On the other hand, the major weakness of the success of the WMS at this level is that the latter can be easily acquired and imitated by competitors, as their implementation mainly requires technical and not organisational resources and changes (Venkatraman, 1994). Thus, in the long-term or in the very immediate future, these WMS would become widely adopted and so, expected as a standard service that every tourism firm should provide. Consequently, they would be unable to provide firms with the competitive and differentiated customer value that they can offer nowadays. For this reason, as Venkatraman (1994) also claimed, before starting the implementation of any technology, managers should first determine but always re-evaluate the appropriateness of the performance criteria to be used for assessing the success of the IT application. Based on this argument and the above mentioned comments, tourism managers should not expect WMS at this first level to provide competitive and substantial long term benefits. Managers should also consider that IT performance criteria should be aligned with their business strategy, i.e., the provision of first level WMS might be required due to their impact on soft-service quality benefits and not hard-financial benefits.
3.2.2 Level 2: types of WMS’ exploitation reflecting ‘internal integration’ According to Venkatraman (1994) this stage of IT exploitation ‘internal integration’ refers to the use of IT for the digitisation of a whole business operation (i.e., the use of IT for integrating internal operations). Vidgen et al. (2004) also identified a stage of web service exploitation named as ‘application sourcing’ and referring to the use of web services for the acquisition of a suite of applications (such as ERP and CRM) supporting the provision of seamless processes. Similarly, WMS can also be used for transforming a whole business operation. This level of exploitation involves two types of integration: technical interconnectivity (dealing with the interconnectivity and interoperability of the different systems and applications through a common IT platform) and business process interdependence (dealing with the interdependence of organisational roles and responsibilities across distinct functional lines). Both types of integration are required as neither type alone is sufficient. In this vein, the implementation of these types of WMS would require not only technical changes in IS and IT infrastructure, but also cross-functional intraorganisational changes. In order to decide the viability and the business value of such applications, each firm should develop its own vision and scope for internal integration after assessing the benefits of integrating current business processes. For example, at a micro level, Yahoo!Travel (https://login.yahoo.com/config/ login_verify2?.intl=us&.src=trv&.done=http%3A%2F%2Ftravel.yahoo.com%2Ftrip%3F action%3Dcreate) has created a trip planning tool that has totally transformed the process
12
M. Sigala and D. Marinidis
referring to trip planning. By using this tool, travellers can create personalised maps by including their preferred travel itineraries and attractions, travellers can then share these maps within their social networks, friends and/or co-vacationers who can in turn be invited to comment, change and/or enhance the itineraries based on their own preferences and needs. Travellers using this platform are enabled and informed on how to design their personalised maps by searching and reading online the personalised maps, itineraries (e.g., wine tours in Italy), (geo)tags and feedback-discussions of other travellers who had shared and uploaded their own experiences and maps. Overall, this Web 2.0 enabled map provided by Yahoo! has transformed the online booking operation and the trip planning process to a collaborative and social decision-making process, whereby social networks and other travellers are incorporated into value chains and become co-creators and co-producers of travel services by providing (inter-)customer support in terms of both social and functional customer services. An interesting application of WMS that can be categorised at this level and has several implications for tourism management at a macro level is the example of the web map-based website of WWW in Greece (http://www.oikoskopio.gr/map_fixed.phtml#). The website combines geographical related information from many sources (http://www.oikoskopio.gr/resources.html) in order to mash it up on a map that can then, customise and filter geo-information based on the users’ preferences. This WMS has further expanded the role of the WWF staff that is responsible to gather and provide geo-information for managing resources at destinations. Nowadays, WWF staff needs to identify and digitise information that is available not only internally within its own department, but also in other WWF departments as well as in external partners, volunteers and organisations. To that end, the WWF has the additional role and responsibility to network and collaborate with many other stakeholders and partners who can gather and provide the necessary information to complete the mash-up map. In other words, the successful completion of the task of the WWF’s staff depends not only on his/her own resources, but also on his/her abilities to cooperate and coordinate with others. Overall, it becomes evident from these examples that the implementation of such WMS leads to the participation and inclusion of other stakeholders (e.g., social networks and travellers’ on the booking process) in a business operation. This organisational change, that stresses the interdependence of various actors across different functions and borders, challenges the role of the existing staff that is responsible for the corresponding map enhanced business operation. So, WMS like the one provided by Yahoo!Travel forces tourism firms to rethink the job descriptions and responsibilities of their staff (e.g., travel consultants and marketers) as well as of whole departments. For example, e-marketers may need to be viewed not only as salespersons responsible to sense the market for developing and promoting on websites and customer e-mail lists special prices and offers. Instead, e-marketers responsible for the operations and design of a travel website should also be regarded as responsible: to create, maintain and support customers’ virtual communities; and to find ways to integrate, motivate and support customers’ participation into service processes (i.e., making customers co-designers, co-marketers and co-creators of travel itineraries and experiences). However, although there is numerous research investigating how user-generated content impacts tourism demand (e.g., Xiang and Gretzel, 2009) and what motivates travellers to contribute user-generated content (Wang and Fesenmaier, 2004; Yoo and Gretzel, 2008), there is still a lack of research exploring the implications of the former on the role and the
Web map services in tourism
13
responsibilities of marketers. Moreover, future research should also inform managers of the organisational factors inhibiting and/or enabling such organisational changes, e.g., leadership, professional development, culture, motivational theories etc. Implementing WMS at this level would also require tourism firms to also consider the technical changes required and referring to the technical interconnectivity of WMS with other IS applications such as, booking tools, search engines, customer databases, inventory management systems, and yield – pricing systems. However, the tourism industry has been known for the use of many different and obsolescence standards which inhibit technical integration. Thus, future research and managers should critically examine the issue of using and adopting SOA and open standards, which can facilitate such technical integration issues.
3.2.3 Level 3: types of WMS’ exploitation reflecting ‘business process redesign’ According to Venkatraman (1994) this level of IT exploitation refers to the exploitation of IT aiming to achieve operational efficiencies through the whole redesign of business processes. Similarly, Vidgen et al. (2004) identified a stage of web service exploitation namely ‘application brokerage’ and referring to the use of web services for the acquisition of a suite of applications. In this vein, this third level of exploitation represents the use of WMS with the purpose to enable the seamless integration of different business processes. Benefits from IT induced business process redesign are limited in scope if the processes are not extended outside the focal organisational boundary for identifying options to also redesign relationships with the other organisations. But there is absolutely no evidence that deploying proprietary inter-organisational systems per se provides any competitive advantage (Venkatraman, 1994). For example, the WMS offered at Sheraton’s website do not only allow customers to search, contribute and read user-generated content about Sheraton properties on an interactive map, but Sheraton also uses this user-generated content for: new service development (staff uses this feedback for market research and identifying opportunities for providing new services); business process improvement (user- generated content is used for addressing operational problems identified by guests); customer relationship management (e.g., user – generated content and social networking amongst guests is an effective way for: creating a community of loyal guests of Sheraton properties; staying in touch and communicating with them; identifying valuable customers for future personalised targeting; and many other CRM practices). By expanding the exploitation of these WMS in order to ‘informate’ many other business operations, substantial intra-organisational changes are required. Thus, as this map-based online application of Sheraton has become a shared and cross-functional business application, its successful implementation and the materialisation of its benefits demand the engagement, coordination and cooperation of hotel staff from different departments and functions. Another WMS application that can be categorised in this level and it can be used at both a micro and macro tourism level is the example of http://www.authormapper.com/. This is a knowledge management system enhanced with Web 2.0 tools (e.g., tags, social networks) and based on free map (API from GoogleMaps) that people can use for locating and plotting on a map knowledge resources and experts as well as for uploading and sharing their own knowledge on the shared map. This WMS can easily be adapted and applied in different contexts in order to facilitate and support cross-functional tasks
14
M. Sigala and D. Marinidis
and groups such as New Service Development teams, market research groups and/or the management or tourism resources by DMOs. Overall, organisational concepts that may get affected and would need to be examined in order to better understand and manage the successful implementation of such WMS include (Venkatraman, 1994): centralisation versus decentralisation; span of control and power; functional specialisation; authority-responsibility balance; administrative mechanisms for coordination and control; multi-functional versus functional-based performance evaluation criteria; staff motivation and knowledge management issues.
3.2.4 Level 4: Types of WMS’ exploitation reflecting ‘business network redesign’ According to Venkatraman (1994) the level ‘business network redesign’ represents the exploitation of IT for expanding the business network of a firm and whereby IT is used for cooperating with other firms. Similarly, Vidgen et al. (2004) identified the stage of web service exploitation named as ‘collaborative commerce’ and involving the use of web services for connecting and collaborating with business partners. In this vein, this level of exploitation represents the use of WMS for enabling the collaboration of different and geographically dispersed firms. In other words, this level of WMS represents the use of maps for building interorganisational IS. Business partners associated with mapping services can integrate transactions based on web services’ standards and offer their core competencies as services to other companies. In other words, this exploitation level represents the affordability of WMS to instil and foster the expansion of the business network of a firm by connecting and collaborating with other business partners. For example, Happymappy.com cooperates with many mapping services (such as GoogleMaps) and with Expedia.com (for obtaining a booking engine) in order to create a one-stop platform whereby users can search (based on a map) and then, book the tourism firms and services of their choice. Indeed, the development of mash – up applications can boom the creation of as such collaborative practices within the tourism industry. For example, a hotel can create a mash-up application by combining the API provided freely by eventful.com (http://api.eventful.com/community/success) and the API of an interactive map (e.g., by GoogleMaps) in order to enrich its website with a search engine that can provide its users the capability to search and locate on a map information about cultural events taking place nearby the location of the hotel. It should be highlighted that although the development of these inter-firm collaborations are not equivalent to the development of a proprietary inter-organisational IS such as an electronic data interchange (EDI) project, such partnerships can still enhance interdependencies across independent organisations as well as they can be accompanied by a high level of business processes transformation. An example of such types of application and its business implications are described below. Tele Atlas (http://www.teleatlas.com) is one of the world’s leading provider of digital maps and dynamic content that powers some of the world’s most essential navigation and location-based services. To develop such services, Tele Atlas has formed the most extensive network by partnering with many government partners and industry pioneers in the portable navigation, the internet and the automotive sector (e.g., Google, Yahoo, deCarta, Map24, Multimap, Mapsolute, ESRI, National Geographic, CompassCom etc.).
Web map services in tourism
15
Tele Atlas delivers a richer consumer experience as a result of innovations ranging from dynamic content to voice recognition that help users arrive at their destinations more quickly, easily, safely, and efficiently, and help them locate the people and places they seek while they are in route. Tele Atlas continuously studies changes in the mapping industry to ensure that their partners have access to the best digital map content possible, so that collaborative products are built with unprecedented rich and accurate content. To meet those ‘find-centric’ demands of a new ‘mapping era’, Tele Atlas collaborates, communicates and interacts with their partners, through three major web-based applications; PartnerLinkSM, DeveloperLinkSM and ContentLinkSM. PartnerLinkSM (http://partnerlink.teleatlas.com/index.htm) provides a comprehensive and ever-expanding suite of sales and marketing tools, networking opportunities, information and technical support. DeveloperLinkSM (https://developerlink.teleatlas .com/index.cfm?ses=1) is a free online resource for developers of internet, mobile, and other next-generation digital map applications. Its services include the provision of sample data, technical tools, and business resources to help developers reduce time to market and increase their potential for success. Members gain access to Tele Atlas’ paperless database of geographic content, and to the world’s largest community of geographic application developers. Tele Atlas ContentLinkSM (http://contentlink.teleatlas. com/login.htm) is a unique web-based programme that links qualified application developers with providers of specialised content and that provides both parties with the technologies they need ion order to improve the quality and marketability of their products. Through Tele Atlas ContentLinkSM, both content providers and application developers are able to capture more customers, minimise costs, streamline their processes, simplify data management and improve their data quality. Based on this example, the following critical issues would need to be examined and managed for the successful implementation of this level of map-based services: identification and management of relationships with potential collaborators; management of the network of partners; knowledge management leverage of the resources and competencies of the network actors; process and technical integration issues amongst network actors; performance criteria for assessing and managing the success of the IT project; management, share and balance of the benefits and costs of the IT projects across all network actors. Similar issues have also been identified in Venkantraman’s (1994) studies regarding inter-organisational IS.
3.2.5 Level 5: types of WMS’ exploitation reflecting ‘business scope redefinition’ According to Venkatraman (1994) the highest level of IT exploitation refers to the use of IT for transforming the business model and strategy of the firm (i.e., business scope redefinition). Similarly, Vidgen et al. (2004) referred to the stage of web service exploitation named as business reconfiguration and which represents the use of web services aiming to transform the enterprise. Similarly, firms can use WMS for transforming their business model by developing and selling online tools and applications that combine mapping services. Such possibilities are enormous given the rise of mash-up technologies nowadays. Such examples may refer to the development and sale of mapping services to others, unbundling and rebundling mapping services. Similarly to the previous level, a high degree of business re-configuration is required.
16
M. Sigala and D. Marinidis
MapBuilder (http://www.mapbuilder.net) is one example of a WMS that is powered by mash-up technologies LLC, (http://mashuptecnologies.net) and that reflects the bundling and sale of WMS. The company offers a mash-up development tool based on Web 2.0, AJAX, PHP and mySQL technologies, which can be used for building customised Google and Yahoo maps without any knowledge of the Google/Yahoo Maps API and JavaScript. MapBuilder is a graphical user interface (GUI) – driven map maker that provides a decent visual interface for the map building process with geocoding and import features based on freely-available internet mapping technologies such as Google™ Maps, Yahoo!™ Maps etc. MapBuilder also allows users to export and publish their customised maps on their own websites. OpenStreetMap (OSM, http://www.openstreetmap.org) is also another collaborative project inspired by Wiki-based websites that aims to collaboratively create a free editable map of the world. The maps are created by using data captured by portable GPS devices and uploaded by internet users. Any user can export and/or embed on other websites (by using XML, Javascript and other similar technologies) aerial photography and other free OSM resources. Mobilizy is an interesting example showing how firms can exploit WMS for transforming their business model by creating bundles of mapping services and then rebundling them for reselling them. Mobilizy’s major product is the Wikitude AR Travel Guide (http://www.mobilizy.com/wikitude.php), which is a mobile travel guide with augmented reality (AR) functionality based on (multimedia) user-generated-content provided by Wikipedia and Panoramio. In this vein, Wikitude AR Travel Guide is a platform enabling users of mobile phones to search, identify and read location-based content of Wikipedia and Panoramio. In other words, Mobizity has created an open mobile software stack by combining web services from different firms (including the web mapping services of GoogleMaps) that allows users: to search landmarks in their surroundings and view them on a map, on a list, and on an AR camera view; and to see an annotated landscape, mountain names, landmark descriptions and read interesting stories. Thus, the Wikitude AR travel guide is an ideal (collaboratively built open software) travel itinerary planning tool or a mobile tourist guide that any DMO, heritage sites operator and/or firm may be interested to integrate it into its services and business models as well as enhance it by contributing and providing its own knowledge and resources. However, the engagement and implementation of this level of WMS by tourism firms and organisations can again be affected by several factors. Enablers such as tourism firms’ innovation capacity and propensity, technological capabilities and understanding as well as financial resources can play a major role, but they are usually lacking from the industry. Moreover, the public and non-profit organisational status of DMO and other tourism organisations (e.g., museums) may not permit them to develop and WMS for a fee or for making a profit. Finally, the implementation of such WMS always undermines the risk of losing business focus and priorities. Tourism firms and organisations should never forget that their main purpose of existence is to serve travellers’ needs in the most hospitable way.
Web map services in tourism
4
17
Conclusions
The aim of this paper was to analyse the functionality of WMS and then identify their different levels and types of exploitation that in turn transform tourism firms’ operations and business models. The paper also contributed to field by also debating the major organisational changes required in order to successfully implement each type of exploitation. The paper has also contributed to the literature by showing how the two features of Web 2.0 (namely, social networking and the social intelligence) have further enhanced the functionality of WMS. To achieve these, WMS were regarded and analysed as web services and in this vein, Venkatraman’s (1994) framework on IT – induced business transformation was adapted for identifying and analysing the impact of five major types-levels of WMS exploitations on the business operations and models of tourism firms. In short, WMS were demonstrated to crucially impact the internal and external design of business operations by fostering and instilling the collaboration of tourism firms with other external partners. Apart from the business implications of these WMS, the paper has also discussed the inhibiting and enabling factors for implementing each type of WMS. The discussion of each type of WMS has also shown that the successful implementation and exploitation of these applications raises three immediate concerns: organisational changes, performance level and security. Business transformation (internally and externally driven by WMS) creates challenges regarding the role, the responsibility and the management practices of staff and function-based departments, while it also empowers customers and other external stakeholders to get engaged within business processes (and become service co-providers, co-marketers, co-designers and co-creators). Future studies are required in order to further investigate how firms can manage these organisational changes fostered by web service enabling. Literature related to the role of customers and other stakeholders in business processes (e.g., service science) as well as literature on business networks, and inter-organisational collaboration and IS can be a useful theoretical background to study the business transformations enabled by WMS. Moreover, a web service-based application could slow down to an unacceptable level if there is insufficient bandwidth or insufficient server capacity at any of the nodes and connections in the network of components that comprise the application. A failure of one component node could result in the application becoming unavailable. Security is a further issue, raising concerns about access control, authentication, privacy, integrity and non-repudiation, as well as defences against malicious attack (e.g., denial of service).
5
Implications for further research
As performance and security issues can significantly inhibit the future adoption and development of WMS, it is suggested that future research should look into how inter-firm relationships based on the mash-up of WMS should be designed, developed and managed in order to ensure performance reliability and security. Moreover, future research should also investigate the ways in which soft issues (such as trust and commitment) can be built, maintained and managed amongst partners of WMS-based applications in order to ensure the long-term viability of these inter-organisational application. Finally, given the
18
M. Sigala and D. Marinidis
low take-up of such technologies specifically within the tourism sector, future research is required in order to investigate the factors inhibiting and/or facilitating the adoption of WMS by tourism firms and organisations.
References Aditya, T. (2008) ‘A usable local geospatial data infrastructure for improved public participation and collaborative efforts in enhancing community preparedness and mitigation’, paper presented at the International Conference on Tsunami Warning (ICTW), Bali, Indonesia, 12–14 November. Connell, J. and Page, S. (2008) ‘Exploring the spatial patterns of car-based tourist travel in Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park, Scotland’, Tourism Management, Vol. 29, No. 3, pp.561–580. Currie, L.W. and Parikh, A.M. (2005) ‘Value creation in web services: an integrative model’, Journal of Strategic Information Systems, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp.153–174. Dangermond, J. (2002) ‘Web services and GIS’, Geospatial Solutions, Vol. 12, No. 7, pp.56–9. Daniel, E.M., White, A. and Ward, J.M. (2004) ‘Exploring the role of third parties in inter-organizational web service adoption’, Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 17, No. 5, pp.351–360. Dickinger, A., Scharl, A., Stern, H., Weichselbraun, A. and Wöber, K. (2008) ‘Acquisition and Relevance of GeoTagged Information in Tourism’, in O’Connor, P, Höpken, W. and Gretzel, U. (Eds.): Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism, pp.545–555, Springer, New York. Duran, E., Seker, D.Z. and Shrestha, M. (2004) ‘Web based information system for tourism resort: a case study for side/manavgat’, in Proceedings for XXth International Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, Istanbul, Turkey, 12–23 July. Erle, S., Gibson, R. and Walsh, J. (2005) Mapping Hacks: Tips and Tools for Electronic Cartography,O’Reilly Media, Sebastopol, CA. Fensel, D. and Bussler, C. (2002) ‘The web service modelling framework’, Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp.113–37. Goodchild, M. F. (2007) ‘Citizens as voluntary sensors: spatial data infrastructure in the world of Web 2.0’, International Journal of Spatial Data Infrastructures Research, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp.24–32. Gottschalk, K., Graham, S., Kreger, H. and Snell, J. (2002) ‘Introduction to web services architecture’, IBM Systems Journal, Vol. 41, No. 2, pp.170–177. Guidi, C., Lucchi, R. and Mazzara, M. (2007) ‘A formal framework for web services coordination’, Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. 180, No. 2, pp.55–70. Hagel, J. (2002) Out of the Box: Strategies for Achieving Profits Today and Growth Tomorrow Through Web Services, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. Hannon, N. (2001) ‘Web services and XBRL’, Strategic Finance, January, pp.59–60. IDC (2002) ‘Global universal description, discovery and integration repository is unlikely part of Web services in short term’, e-Marketect; The Journal for Builders, Owners and Operators of Trading Networks, available at www.emarketect.com (12 July 2010). Ilies, G. and Ilies, M. (2006) ‘Trends in 3D tourist mapping’, Geographia Technica, Vol. 58, No. 2, pp.55–59. Ismail, A., Patil, S. and Saigal, S. (2002) ‘When computers learn to talk: a web services primer’, McKinsey Quarterly Special Edition: Risk and Resilience, pp.71–7. LaMonica, M. (2003) ‘Web services finds new life as corporate bridge’, CNET News.com, available at http://news.com (23 August 2010).
Web map services in tourism
19
Lau, C. and Ryman, A. (2002) ‘Developing XML web services with web sphere studio application developer’, IBM Systems Journal, Vol. 41, No. 2, pp.178–97. Longley, P.A. and Batty, M. (2003) Advanced Spatial Analysis: The CASA Book of GIS, ESRI Press, Redlands, California. MetaGroup (2003) ‘The five most important things for CIOs’, Metagroup Quarterly, available at http://silicon.com (23 August 2010). Moitra, D. and Ganesh, J. (2005) ‘Web services and flexible business processes: towards the adaptive enterprise’, Information & Management, Vol. 42, No. 7, pp.921–933. National Research Council (NRC) (1999) Distributed Geolibraries: Spatial Information Resources, National Academy Press, Washington, DC. Pan, B. and Fesenmaier, D.R. (2006) ‘Online information search and vacation planning process’, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 33, No. 3, pp.809–832. Pan, B., Crotts, J.C. and Muller, B. (2007) ‘Developing web-based tourist information tools using google map’, in M. Sigala, L. Mich and J. Murphy (Eds.): Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2007, pp.503–512, Springer, New York. Raggam, K. and Almer, A. (2005) ‘Acceptance of geo-multimedia applications in Austrian tourism organizations’, in A. Frew (Ed.): Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2005, pp.46–56, Springer, New York. Rasinger, J., Fuchs, M. and Höpken, W. (2007) ‘Information search with mobile tourist guides: a survey of usage intention’, Information Technology & Tourism, Vol. 9, Nos. 3–4, pp.177–194. Rinner, C. (2006) ‘Argumentation mapping in collaborative spatial decision making’, in R. Balram and S. Dragicevic (Eds.): Collaborative Geographic Information Systems, pp.85–102, Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA. Sayah, Y.J. and Zhang, L.J. (2005) ‘On-demand business collaboration enablement with web services’, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 40, pp.107–12. Sayar, A., Pierce, M. and Fox, G. (2005) ‘Developing GIS visualization web services for geophysical applications’, ISPRS 2005 Spatial Data Mining Workshop, Ankara, Turkey. Scharl, A. and Tochtermann, K. (2007) The Geospatial Web: How Geobrowsers, Social Software and the Web 2.0 are Shaping the Network Society, Springer, London. Sigala, M. (2009) ‘Measuring customer value in online collaborative trip planning processes’, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, in press. Sigala, M., Lockwood, A. and Jones, P. (2001) ‘Strategic implementation and IT: gaining competitive advantage from the hotel reservation process’, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp.364–371. Silicon.com. (2003) Meta Group Quarterly: The Five Most Important Trends for CIOs, available at http://www.silicon.com (23 August 2010). Smith, D.M. (2001) Criteria for the Web Services Platform Magic Quadrant, Gartner Group, available at http://www.Gartner.com/IT. Tait, M. (2005) ‘Implementing geoportals: applications of distributed GIS’, Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp.33–47. Turner, A. (2006) Introduction to Neogeography, O’Reilly Media, Sebastopol, CA. Venkatraman, N. (1994) ‘IT-induced business transformation: from automation to business scope redefinition’, Sloan Management Review, Winter, pp.73–87. Vidgen, R., Francis, D., Powell, P. and Woerndl, M. (2004) ‘Web service business transformation: collaborative commerce opportunities in SMEs’, Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 17, No. 5, pp.372–381. Wang, J., Sui, D.Z. and Lai, F.Y. (2004) ‘Mapping the internet using GIS: the death of distance’, Journal of Geographical System, Vol. 5, No. 4, pp.381–405.
20
M. Sigala and D. Marinidis
Wang, Y. and Fesenmaier, D.R. (2004) ‘Towards understanding member’s general participation in and active contribution to an online travel community’, Tourism Management, Vol. 25, No. 6, pp.709–722. Wusteman, J. (2006) ‘Realising the potential of web services’, OCLC Systems & Services: International Digital Library Perspectives, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp.5–9. Xiang, Z. and Gretzel, U. (2009) ‘Role of social media in online travel information search’, Tourism Management, in press. Yoo, K.H. and Gretzel, U. (2008) ‘What motivates consumers to write online travel reviews?’, Information Technology & Tourism, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp.283–295. Zanker, M., Fuchs, M., Seebacher, A., Jessenitschnig, M. and Stromberger, M. (2009) ‘An automated approach for deriving semantic annotations of tourism products based on geo-spatial information’, in Höpken, W., Gretzel, U, Law, R. (Eds.): Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2009, pp.211–221, Springer, New York.
