An Exploratory Study of Differences among Meeting and Exhibition Planners in their Destination Selection Criteria

Abstract

Destination selection criteria for meetings, conventions, trade shows, and other events have been explored by a variety of researchers. Most research in this area, however, has not evaluated how planners of different events rate the destination selection variables. The current study identified three international associations for different types of event professionals and compared members' ratings of 13 destination selection criteria. Findings show that there are differences in the most important criteria used by each of the associations, with the International Association of Exhibitions and Events (IAEE) rating exhibit space, Meeting Professionals International (MPI) rating perceived value for the money, and Professional Convention Management Association (PCMA) rating support services for events as the Robin B.highest criteria. Choice of restaurant and variety of nightlife are the lowest rated criteria by all groups. This information will help destination marketing organizations and event venues in specific destinations market themselves more effectively by positioning themselves appropriately in the marketplace.

The impact of the servicescape on the desire to stay in convention and exhibition centers: The case of Macao

“…Hultsman's later study (2001) confirmed that layout was considered the second most important exhibit hall attribute after the rental fee. Indeed, the members of the International Association of Exhibitions and Events rate exhibit space as the most important criterion for an attractive event or exhibition venue (DiPietro et al, 2008). This makes spatial layout a good indicator of service providers' efforts towards their customers.…”

“…Hospitality servicescape research has mainly been conducted in the context of hotels (Heide et al, 2007), restaurants (Kim and Moon, 2009;Liu and Jang, 2009), bars (Lin, 2010), theaters (Stuart and Tax, 2004), festivals (Taylor and Shanka, 2002), casinos (Lam et al, 2011), or general leisure settings (Wakefield and Blodgett, 1994). The existing research on the servicescape related to the convention setting is more focused on areas such as the exhibition attributes which encourage repeat visits (Whitfield and Webber, 2010), safety and security concerns (Hilliard and Baloglu, 2008), the relationship between the design elements used and creating an emotional connection for event attendees (Nelson, 2009), site and venue selection criteria (DiPietro et al, 2008;Robinson and Callan, 2005), the perceived quality and competitiveness of convention center facilities by both event organizers and attendees in terms of their attributes and services (Breiter and Milman, 2006;Wu and Weber, 2005) or the successful factors of a convention (Hultsman, 2001). There is a paucity of studies investigating the role and impact of the servicescape on customers' cognitive, affective and behavioral responses in event settings.…”

Business Tourism Destination Competitiveness: A Case of Vojvodina Province (Serbia)

“…A number of authors have provided some inputs into the understanding and practical research of competitiveness in tourism destinations (De Keyser and Vanhove, 1994;Evans, Fox and Johnson, 1995;Faulkner et al, 1999;Hassan, 2000;Ritchie and Crouch, 1993;Crouch and Ritchie, 1999;Crouch and Ritchie, 2000;Ritchie and Crouch, 2003;Dwyer et al, 2000Dwyer et al, , 2002Newton, 2004, 2005;Bonn et al, 2005;Cracolici and Nijkamp, 2008;Crouch, 2010;Miller et al, 2008;Dragićević et al, 2009). But, there seems to be no generally accepted definition of competitiveness and the means to measure it (Croes 2005;Papatheodorou andSong 2005, Gomezelj andMihalič, 2008).…”

“…Numerous studies have investigated specific destination variables that influence the selection of a destination for holding business events and its competitiveness (Ching-Fu, 2006;Crouch and Ritchie, 1998;DiPietro et al, 2008;Oppermann, 1996;Baloglu and Love, 2001;Crouch and Louviere, 2004;Chacko and Fenich, 2000;Oppermann and Chon, 1997;Yoo and Chon;2008, Zhang et al, 2007Qu et al, 2000).…”

Las Vegas Versus Macao as Diversified Travel Destinations

“…Developing travel destinations, on the other hand, are less competitive and therefore have been trying to entice event tourists through other offerings, such as leisure and nightlife entertainment, lower cost of travel and lower event admission fees, and other destination-specific tourism products (Crouch and Ritchie, 1998;Getz, 2007). Although these destination attributes have been widely acknowledged as travel incentives and play a central role in destination selection (Chacko and Fenich, 2000;Comas and Moscardo, 2005;DiPietro et al, 2008;Fenich, 2001;Oppermann and Chon, 1997), it is still unclear how these attributes are related to tourism destination development. This literature void is addressed in the current research in the context of the developing travel destination of Macao, China.…”