JTRXXX10.1177/0047287519871105Journal of Travel ResearchThao et al. research-article8711052019

Empirical Research Article

Journal of Travel Research 17–­1 Swiss Cooperation in the Travel and © The Author(s) 2019 Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions Tourism Sector: Long-term Relationships DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287519871105 10.1177/0047287519871105 and Superior Performance journals.sagepub.com/home/jtr

Vu Thi Thao1 , Widar von Arx1, and Jonas Frölicher2

Abstract Despite a growing body of research on the interface and relationship between transport and tourism, this research area remains undeveloped. Using Switzerland as a case study, the present study aims to investigate the level of integration between public transport and tourism companies, the enablers of their long-term cooperative relationship and outstanding performance, seen from the perspective of the public transport companies. A mixed methods approach is used to provide greater insights into how these companies cooperate with each other. Our findings suggest that public transport companies adopt different cooperative strategies with different types of partners. They are able to maintain long-term cooperative relationships due to strong cooperation in sales, a long tradition of cooperation, a high degree of involvement in national public organizations, and their central focus on the customer. Type of partner, sales, product design and pricing, and service provision have statistically significant effects on cooperative performance.

Keywords leisure travel, tourism, public transport, interfirm cooperation, Switzerland

Introduction review of literature, there is no research specifically on coop- eration between transport and tourism service companies as Transport and tourism are closely linked. Transport is one seen from the transport companies’ perspective. The present of the four fundamental elements of tourism, including study aims to fill in this gap in the literature. accommodation, attractions, and support services, and is an Similarly, leisure travel has received little attention in enabling condition for the existence and development of transport research (Ettema and Schwanen 2012; Schiefelbusch tourism. For example, the opening of the Vitznau–Rigi et al. 2007; Schlich et al. 2002). For some time, leisure travel Bahn, the first mountain railway in Europe, contributed sig- has been treated as a “residual” part of mobility (Heinze and nificantly to the boom in Swiss tourism and marked the Kill 1997). However, it has grown considerably in recent beginning of mass tourism (Gyr 2010). However, despite decades. For example, in Switzerland, leisure travel increased the important role of transport in tourism and a growing by 15% from 1984 to 2005 in terms of total person-kilome- body of research on the interface and relationship between ters traveled (Ohnmacht, Götz, and Schad 2009). In 2015, the two sectors, this interdisciplinary research area remains around 44% of daily distance (domestic) traveled were due undeveloped (Lohmann and Duval 2014; Page 2009; to leisure activities (BfS and ARE 2017). A similar phenom- Seetaram 2016). Furthermore, tourism research has tended enon is found elsewhere; for instance, in England during to focus on two particular themes: the role of transport in 2002–2017, leisure activities induced the longest average tourism and destination development, especially aviation distance traveled per person per year (Department for transport (Chung and Whang 2011; Khadaroo and Seetanah Transport 2018a) and became the most common travel pur- 2007; Rey, Myro, and Galera 2011), and mode of travel as pose in 2017 (accounting for 26%) (Department for Transport a tourism experience (Bae and Chick 2016; Halsall 2001; 2018b). This implies that leisure passengers are especially Su and Wall 2009). In tourism research, though there are a few studies on 1Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts, Institute of Tourism cooperation between transport and tourism companies, the ITW, Lucerne, Switzerland focus of these studies is on the tourism companies. In other 2KCW, Berlin, Germany words, they examine how tourism companies cooperate with Corresponding Author: partners in a supply chain in which transport companies are Vu Thi Thao, Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts, Institute of one of the partners (for examples, see Johann 2014; Seetaram Tourism ITW, P.O. Box 2940, Rösslimatte 48, Lucerne, 6002, Switzerland. 2016; Topolšek, Mrnjavac, and Kovačić 2014). Based on a Email: [email protected] 2 Journal of Travel Research 00(0) important to public transport (PT) companies, who have cooperation and competitive advantage. The resource-based faced increasingly strong competition from individual motor- view focuses on the impact of resources on organizational ized transport (Gross 2009). action and performance. Its central concern is that firms that Similarly, railway companies have to cope with fierce are able to accumulate rare, valuable, and nonsubstitutable competition from low-cost carriers (Dobruszkes 2011; resources and capabilities will gain a competitive advantage Behrens and Pels 2012; Yang and Zhang 2012). They also (Barney 1991; Dierickx and Cool 1989). Interfirm coopera- face increasing competition from long-distance bus compa- tion allows firms to acquire access to resources, thus helping nies (von Arx et al. 2018). In such a competitive business them to overcome resource constraints and to achieve their environment, building long-term relationships with service own objectives more fully (Combs and Ketchen 1999; Das partners in the travel and tourism sector is vital for PT compa- and Teng 2000). nies, as shown later in the empirical part of the present study. Conversely, the relational exchange theory is grounded in This article contributes to the current literature on the theories of transaction costs and agency. It argues that firms travel and tourism sector by investigating cooperation only gain competitive advantages if they both invest in a between PT and tourism companies in Switzerland. Our relation-specific asset that generates a relational rent above starting point in this research is inspired by James R. normal returns that neither partner individually can create Breiding’s work on the success of Swiss industries: “The (Duschek and Sydow 2002; Dyer and Singh 1998). Firms in icon products that Switzerland traditionally offers form a a long-term cooperative agreement that invest in relation- package. Hotels and tourism depend on transport systems; specific assets are less likely to pursue opportunistic behav- banking and insurance accompany trade. In this sense it is ior because of the mutual benefits they expect from the possible to talk about a particular quality of ‘Swissness’” agreement. They also establish governance mechanisms, for (Breiding 2013, x). It can be inferred from these findings that example, self-enforcing agreements such as trust, that reduce cooperation between transport and tourism companies con- transaction costs (Dyer 1997). tributes to the excellence of service quality. Our initial Another central difference between the resource-based inquiry also shows that transport and tourism companies view and the relational exchange theory is the unit of analy- have maintained long-term relationships and have superior sis. As the resource-based view focuses on resources and performance. Yet it is little known about how Swiss compa- rents created within the organization, its analytical level is nies are able to achieve this outcome. Hence, this study aims that of the firm. The relational exchange theory, conversely, to answer the following research questions: (1) How high is takes dyads or networks of firms as the unit of analysis the level of integration between transport and tourism com- because its argument is based on the relational rent generated panies? (2) What enablers are necessary for their long-term within the interfirm network. Therefore, the relational cooperative relationships and outstanding performance? (3) exchange theory is criticized for its neglect of the rents that Do long-term cooperative relationships bring about out- are created within the organization and is considered com- standing performances? To better understand the complexity plementary to the resource-based view (Dyer and Singh of interfirm cooperation, this study will apply a mixed meth- 1998; Lavie 2006). ods approach, namely, a survey of 30 PT companies and a Firms form alliances for a variety of motives, ranging range of qualitative methods. from cost savings to business expansion (Kale, Dyer, and The remainder of this article is organized as follows. In Singh 2002; Rosenfeld 1996). Evans (2001) lists the motives the second section, we provide a literature review on inter- for the formation of interfirm alliances as internal drivers firm cooperation and on the interconnectedness of transport (risk-sharing, economies of scale and scope, learning, access and tourism. The third section describes the context of the to resources and competencies, and shaping competition) study. The fourth section documents the methodological and external drivers (information and technology changes, approach adopted for gathering and analyzing data before economic restructuring, and global competition). turning to the analysis in the fifth section. The article ends To form a successful alliance, a firm should possess capa- with discussions of the enablers needed for long-term coop- bilities that help it effectively manage the entire life-cycle of eration and superior performance and of the implications for the alliance, from selecting partners (Saxton 1997; Hitt et al. the management of PT companies and tourism service pro- 2000), the choice of governance mechanism and monitoring, viders in the final section. and the design of contractual terms (Gulati and Singh 1998), to modes of coordination and cooperation during the life of the agreement (Schreiner, Kale, and Corsten 2009). Literature Review Interfirm cooperation offers firms many benefits such as Interfirm Cooperation: Motives, Governance greater levels of learning, capacity and skills acquisition, Mechanisms, and Outcomes profitability gain, improved market position, and induced innovation (Hagedoorn and Schakenraad 1994; Rosenfeld The resource-based view and relational exchange theory have 1996). Interfirm collaborative networks with high informa- been widely adopted in organizational studies of interfirm tion exchange capacities and high intensities and a diversity Thao et al. 3 of information sharing can enhance greater innovation by the travel chains. Zhang, Song, and Huang (2009) further firm members in the way they facilitate the development of argue that transport and tourism partners in the tourism sup- new products, shorten the time to market for new products, ply chain need to intensively coordinate and integrate their and enhance knowledge creation (Thorgren, Wincent, and product development and distribution. Boter 2012). Although there are a few studies of cooperation between transport and tourism companies, they mainly focus on the The Interconnectedness of Transport and perspectives of the tourism companies. For example, draw- Tourism ing on a case study of Germany, Gronau and Kagermeier (2007) suggest that one way in which PT companies can suc- Transport forms an integral part of the tourism system cessfully compete with private cars is by cooperating in mar- (Leiper 1990). It links source markets with tourist destina- keting activities with persons and companies involved in the tions, provides access and mobility within a destination area leisure and tourism market. One example of such coopera- and within a tourist attraction, and promotes travel along a tion is a combined ticket that covers different modes of PT recreational route (D. H. Hall 1999). In addition, transport and entrance fees to various tourism attractions. This coop- plays an important role in tourists’ decisions regarding desti- eration can increase the numbers of both PT users and visi- nation choices. Tourists take into consideration not only tran- tors to tourism attractions. Moreover, information about PT sit routes between a tourist-generating region and a tourist services to tourists can be multiplied through the marketing destination, but also the use and supply of transport services channels of tourism partners. A survey of visitor users and at the destination (Hyde and Laesser 2009). Similarly, Lamb nonusers of PT in Munich, conducted by Le-Klähn, Gerike, and Davidson (1997) claim that the quality of intermodal and Hall (2014), confirms that a lack of information is one of transport networks is a key factor influencing destination the reasons discouraging tourists from using PT. choice. These authors suggest that different modes of trans- Several studies have pointed out that tourism is in fact a port need to be integrated in order to provide a seamless relatively high intensive use of energy and tourist transport travel experience for tourists. This implies that transport is one of the main causes of CO emissions (Perch-Nielsen, 2 operators such as bus, rail, and boat should work together to Sesartic, and Stucki 2010; Gössling 2013), in particularly, create a seamless journey for tourists. A survey of overseas car and air transport (UNWTO & UNEP 2008). One way to visitors in Greater Manchester conducted by Thompson and reduce this negative environmental impact is to promote Schofield (2007) confirms Lamb and Davidson’s (1997) rec- the modal shift from private car to PT through cooperation ommendation. Overseas visitors consider ease of use to be between transport and tourism stakeholders (Gronau 2017; the most important criterion in the quality of PT. Furthermore, Schiefelbusch et al. 2007; Gronau and Kagermeier 2007). the overall performance of PT has a small but significant The cooperation among these stakeholders also shows the influence on satisfaction with the destination itself. Studying industry’s response to tourist demands for environmental- a tourist destination in northeast India, Sarma (2003) con- friendly products. The cooperation, however, must increase cludes that transport within a destination is one of the crucial convenience and comfort of PT as well as easy access to factors affecting the destination’s attractiveness. PT. Otherwise, it may be difficult to encourage tourists to As transport forms an important part of the tourist’s over- choose sustainable mode of transport (Le-Klähn, Gerike, all experience of travel (Rhonden and Lumsdon 2006), trans- and Michael Hall 2014). Even though a majority of tourists port and tourism have mutual interest in meeting tourist express concern about the environmental impacts caused demands (Lumsdon and Page 2004). Furthermore, in the lei- by their activities, only a small proportion of them behave sure travel sector, passengers tend to take more aspects into responsibly because the tourists often act upon their habit- consideration when selecting alternative modes of transport ual lifestyles rather than environmental attitudes (Budeanu than when planning everyday travel (Gronau and Kagermeier 2007). 2007). They are likely to face fewer obstacles than other pas- The above discussion indicates that transport and tourism senger segments (Jansen, Perian, and Beckmann 2002). are strongly interrelated. Cooperation between transport and Similarly, Gilbert and Wong (2003) find that the expectations tourism companies plays a critical role in satisfying leisure of leisure passengers seem to be higher than those of passen- passengers’ expectations and in maintaining a competitive gers who are visiting friends and relatives. To provide a edge. This is particularly crucial for PT operators, as govern- seamless experience throughout the customer journey, ments throughout the world are increasingly pushing for Schiefelbusch et al. (2007) propose the concept of “travel greater efficiency and effectiveness in the organization of PT chains” to describe the integration of travel, tourism activi- (Nash 2008). Tourists’ use of PT can increase occupancy ties, and services. A travel chain is a product that integrates rates, thus making the maintenance of frequencies and of ser- transport and tourism into a single package. This sort of inte- vice quality less costly for operators (Albalate and Bel 2010). grated tourism-related mobility service chain offers the In the following sections, we demonstrate how PT compa- greatest possible comfort and convenience for leisure pas- nies cooperate with tourism companies to enhance their sengers, and different service providers may be involved in competitive advantage. 4 Journal of Travel Research 00(0)

The Swiss Context recourse. In relation to complex organizational tasks like the development of a sales platform, leadership is assigned to a In recent years, leisure travel has grown significantly in competent network partner. Today, about 250 PT companies Switzerland. The Swiss Microcensus for Mobility and are members of this network, which provides them with the Transport conducted in 2015 shows that leisure is the most benefits of a countrywide distribution and marketing net- important reason for journeys, even during weekdays. A con- work (VöV 2013). siderable proportion (21%) of Swiss leisure passengers are The Swiss PT companies form a nationwide coordination carried by modes of PT, mainly rail (18%) (BfS and ARE of schedules, routes, and modes of transport. They synchro- 2017). In 2016, leisure passenger transport contributed one- nize timetables between long-distance, regional, and local fourth of total tourism revenue (Schweizer Tourismus- PT services, thus guaranteeing shorter connection times and Verband 2017). providing one of the best integrated PT networks in the The Swiss context of tourism and transport provides a world. The integration of modes of transport, fares, and tick- special kind of cooperation among its stakeholders. Some eting among PT companies gives PT in Switzerland high- cooperation between transport providers and tourism compa- service quality and high occupancy rates (VöV 2017; nies has existed since the early, developmental stage of Swiss Petersen 2016). Significantly, granting public subsidies to tourism. In particular, Swiss railway companies played a his- regional PT is conditional on the regional PT agreeing to par- torical role in promoting tourism. For example, founded in ticipate in the national transport association. Tourist railways 1901, the Montreux-Oberland-Bahn railway company was also benefit from public subsidies as long as they connect the first organization to invest in building comprehensive villages with at least a hundred inhabitants (Schweizer tourist infrastructure, with viewpoints, hotels, and sport Bundesrat 2009). Meanwhile, PT companies in tourist-ori- facilities across its railway networks (Tissot 2004, 2006). ented rural regions have realized that a high-quality PT sys- Another example is the alliance behind the construction of a tem can encourage tourists to use PT. This, in turn, facilitates funicular railway from St Moritz Dorf to the Chantarella pla- cost recovery and provides a higher quality service to local teau and the foundation of several medical tourism organiza- residents (Petersen 2016). These conditions also encourage tions in Chantarella in the early 1900s (Barton 2009). At that companies providing transport means for tourists to join the time, this kind of cooperation was often initiated by private PTs’ information, ticketing, and sales system. In addition, as stakeholders. Later on, in order to promote local tourism, the market share of PT in leisure traffic is around 25%, tour- some coordinating and cooperative functions were taken ist service providers have strong incentives to cooperate with over by community-based tourist organizations (so-called 1 PT companies to attract this customer segment. destination management organizations or [DMOs ]) (Laesser A further component of the Swiss culture of cooperation 1999). Besides DMOs, there are some national tourism mar- is the number of national institutions and programs. Key keting organizations that focus on promoting sales and mar- aspects of such national institutions are the marketing of keting for leisure travel. They often work closely with both Switzerland as a holiday destination (myswitzerland.com), PT and tourism companies in marketing activities. For sustainable regional development (regiosuisse.ch), and the instance, the Swiss Travel System is a marketing organiza- promotion of cooperation in tourism (innotour.ch). In order tion for the Swiss Federal Railways (SBB), Switzerland to benefit from these subsidized activities, companies are Tourism, and various PT companies. obliged to cooperate for the good of the country (SECO Extensive cooperation between PT companies is pro- 2016). The expectation of cooperation between tourism moted by a unique characteristic of Swiss PT systems. One stakeholders is also part of the national tourism strategy. In hundred fifty years ago, the largest Swiss railway companies many cases, the Swiss confederation or the cantons are rep- began to harmonize passenger transport fares. This coopera- resented in the shareholder structure of transport and tourism tion between railway companies led to the creation of a companies and DMOs, resulting in an obligation to cooper- national tariff association, the “Direct Service Network,” ate. In the analytical section, we will document how PT com- which attracted over time the participation of PT companies panies cooperate with tourism organizations in order to plying other means of transport such as bus, boat, and cable maintain a high level of service quality. car. The association ensures seamless travel chains by pursu- ing the principle of “one trip, one ticket,” even if a journey involves several transport companies. The significant mile- Methods stone for the “Direct Service Network” is the Passenger Unit of Analysis, Data Collection, and Sample Transportation Act, which came into force in 2010. This requires all PT companies to work together to guarantee the As discussed above, the central theory of the relational “one trip, one ticket” principle. To achieve this goal, the PT view is that a network of firms can develop relationships companies need to establish a framework of cooperation that that give them a competitive advantage. In the present involves the sharing of common administrative costs, distri- study, as we are only concerned with interorganizational butions of transport income, joint liability, and mutual competitive advantages, we adopt a relational view in Thao et al. 5

Table 1. Definition of Firms.

Firm Description Cooperation PT companies A company that provides a public transport service for passengers, whether a PT with PT: 13 public railway, bus, tram, or boat company. Tourism A company or organization that specializes in marketing and designing packages PT with tourism brokers of leisure and tourism products, whether a marketing agency, a destination broker: 15 management organization (DMO), or a tour operator. Tourism service A company that specializes in offering leisure and tourism products, whether a PT with tourism providers hotel, a restaurant, a natural park, a cable car company, a skiing rental shop, etc. service provider: 15 exploring cooperative relationships between PT operators cooperation. Except for firm characteristics, duration of and tourism companies. The analytical level is therefore cooperation (measured in years), and frequency of interac- that of cooperative behavior between a PT operator and a tion (measured in numbers of face-to-face meetings), tourism company, meaning that the unit of analysis is a pair responses were assessed by using five-point Likert-type of firms. We also include cooperation between PT operators scales. For instance, the level of integration in each area of in the analysis because the integration of different modes of cooperation was ranked from 1 to 5, with 1 meaning “very transport makes a significant contribution to the seamless limited or no cooperation” and 5 meaning “very close travel experience of tourists. cooperation.” In recent years, a mixed methods approach has found Table 2 summarizes how the methods used to collect data increasing acceptance and use within organizational studies and their corresponding analytical techniques contribute to (Azorín and Cameron 2010; Molina-Azorin et al. 2017). A answering research questions. As data from the survey only mixed methods approach uses a combination of quantitative shows different degrees of integration between PT and tour- and qualitative methods to provide a better understanding of ism companies; therefore, we used the Zentralbahn as an the complexities of the research inquiry than either approach illustrative case study to document more insights into the can do alone (Creswell and Plano Clark 2011). This approach level of integration. The data used for this illustrative case offers a range of advantages, including enhanced potential study was drawn on eight in-depth semistructured interviews for elaboration, generalization, triangulation, and interpreta- with managers of the Zentralbahn and its cooperative part- tion (Gibson 2017). For these reasons, we adopted a mixed ners (Titlis Mountain Railway company, DMO Lucerne, methods approach (namely a survey, eight semistructured Lake Lucerne Boat Company, Montreux-Oberland-Bahn, interviews, two workshops and eight steering meetings) for the Rhaetian Railway, Kuoni, Swiss Travel System). These data collection and analysis. interviews were conducted during the period 2012–2016 and Based on consulting work by our Competence Centre for lasted between one and two hours. They were taped and tran- Mobility over the years, we identified 69 PT operators (mak- scribed. For this portion of the study, we used guiding ques- ing up around 30% of the total number of PT companies in tions to understand partner selection, motivations for joining Switzerland) and their corresponding addresses in our sam- cooperative activities, cooperative practices, deployment of pling frame. The survey was e-mailed to contact persons joint resources, and success factors for cooperation. For (usually managers) in November 2013. These companies example, how does the alliance implement cooperation in were located in different language-speaking regions of the marketing activities, joint production of services, product country. Of the 69 PT companies targeted, we received a development, and market expansion? What are typical exam- total of 30 responses, representing a 43.5% response rate, ples of cooperative initiatives? Thematic analysis was used which is rather high for a survey in an industrial context. All to identify and analyze the common cooperative themes. the returned responses proved usable. These PT companies In addition to the semistructured interviews, we carried have cooperative relationships with 13 PT companies and 30 out two workshops and eight steering meetings with key tourism companies (see Table 1). tourism and transport stakeholders (the Zentralbahn, the In the present study, cooperation is defined as a process Swiss Travel System, the Association of Public Transport of two companies working together to achieve mutual goals, Companies [VöV], Lötschbergbahn railway company, the for example, product differentiation. The PT companies sur- Swiss Federal Railways [SBB], RailAway,2 PostAuto,3 and veyed were asked to select two partners in the travel and Zurich Transport Network [ZVV]) on the value creation tourism sector with whom they have had cooperative rela- potentials in regard to cooperation in the leisure travel. For tionships in the last twelve months. The questionnaire was data collected from these methods, we also adopted the- divided into four topics, including the main characteristics matic analytical techniques to pinpoint and analyze of the firms surveyed and their cooperative partners (type enablers for long-term cooperative relationships and out- and size), as well as areas, practices, and performances of standing performance. 6 Journal of Travel Research 00(0)

Table 2. Methods, Data Collection and Analytical Techniques.

Research Questions Methods and Data Collection Analytical Techniques (i) How high is the level of integration - Survey: level of cooperative activities - Descriptive analysis between transport and tourism - 8 semistructured interviews: partner selection, motivations - Illustrative case study companies? for joining cooperative activities, cooperative practices (Zentralbahn) with (including resources and instruments used) thematic analysis (ii) What enablers are necessary for their - Survey: level and practices of cooperation - Multiple regression long-term cooperative relationships - 8 semistructured interviews: success factors for analysis and outstanding performance? cooperation - Thematic analysis - Two workshops and eight steering meetings: the value creation potentials through cooperation in the leisure travel (iii) Do long-term cooperative relationships - Survey: performances of cooperation - Multiple regression bring about outstanding performances? analysis

Based on information collected from the qualitative meth- using five-point Likert-type scales. ods above, we selected the Zentralbahn, a state-owned pas- To check whether the construct of seven areas of coopera- senger railway company, as an illustrative case study of how tion has a good level of consistency, reliability was tested PT companies cooperate with tourism companies, for the fol- using Cronbach’s alpha test. These tests were carried out for lowing reasons. First, in Switzerland, railway is the most all the groups (seven items, α = 0.77) and for each type of important mode of PT in terms of passenger kilometers (VöV cooperation (PT–PT: seven items, α = 0.80; PT–broker: 2017). The Swiss railway system is well-known for its high seven items, α = 0.74; PT–service provider: seven items, α service quality and its integration of a very dense network = 0.76). The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients are all higher (Desmaris 2014). Secondly, the Zentralbahn is a typical pub- than 0.7, showing the items exhibit the internal consistency lic railway company that operates as a fully integrated rail- of a construct. way company. This means it has control of its infrastructure and rolling stock, unlike some other public railway opera- Long-term cooperative relationships. Long-term cooperative tors, which are separate from the infrastructure provider. relationships were measured in terms of the duration of Thirdly, the Zentralbahn provides rail services for both com- cooperation (how many years the two firms have been coop- muters and tourists. In particular, it operates along routes erating with each other). All the cooperation was still work- connecting the three popular tourist destinations of Lucerne, ing at the time of the survey. We ran multiple regression Engelberg, and Interlaken. Leisure passengers are one of the models to determine the factors that influence the stability of most important customer segments for the Zentralbahn, con- cooperation. tributing more than two-thirds of total passenger kilometers traveled. Hence, we consider that the Zentralbahn provides a Cooperative performance. Following Parkhe (1993), we used good case study enabling us to deepen the quantitative analy- the fulfilment of long-term strategic goals in the following sis of cooperation between PT and tourism companies. areas: “product differentiation,” “cost savings,” “increased The Zentralbahn was founded in 2005 as a result of a sales in current markets,” “access to new markets,” “reputa- merger between the Brünig Railway and the Lucerne–Stans– tion,” “access to new competences and knowledge,” and Engelberg Railway. Thanks to its focus on quality, the num- “marketing impacts.” to measure the performance of a coop- ber of passengers using the Zentralbahn have increased erative arrangement. Respondents were asked to assess the significantly in recent years. In 2016, the Zentralbahn carried long-term gains through cooperation using five-point Likert- 37.2 million passengers (equal to 278 trains a day) and had type scales from “very limited” to “very high.” The Cron- around 350 full-time staff (Zentralbahn 2017). bach’s alpha test for this parameter shows a high consistency of items for performance (seven items, α = 0.85). An index Measures of performance was created based on the mean of these seven items and was used as dependent variable. Level of integration. Drawing on previous studies (Topolšek, Mrnjavac, and Kovačić 2014; March and Wilkinson 2009) Control variables. We used firm diversity as a control variable. and our consulting work, seven areas of cooperation were Various studies have revealed the impact of firm size (Stuart identified: “marketing and communication,” “sales,” “prod- 2000; Sarkar, Echambadi, and Harrisor 2001; Hagedoorn and uct design and pricing,” “service provision,” “maintenance Schakenraad 1994) and firm type on alliance relationships. of joint infrastructure,” “political lobbying,” and “joint pur- For instance, Hagedoorn and Schakenraad (1994) claim that chasing.” Respondents were asked to assess how closely the effect of firm size on alliance relationships is positive. To their company cooperates with their partner in these areas extract possible confounding effects, we identified three Thao et al. 7

Table 3. Levels of Integration by Public Transport (PT).

With PT With Broker With Service Provider

Activity Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Marketing and communication 3.69 1.23 3.67 1.12 3.50 1.28 Sales 4.00 1.00 3.73 1.26 3.21 1.42 Product design and pricing 3.65 1.08 2.70 1.08 3.28 1.54 Service provision 3.46 1.37 3.07 1.64 3.15 1.57 Maintenance of joint infrastructure 2.38 1.34 1.75 1.12 1.50 0.75 Political lobbying 3.13 1.40 2.60 1.07 1.85 1.29 Joint purchase 2.57 1.34 1.80 1.27 1.69 1.11 Arithmetic mean of total activities 3.26 2.73 2.60

Note: SD = standard deviation. important control variables: firm size, partner type, and part- that firms within an industry are more likely to have politi- ner size. Firm size and partner size4 were both measured by cal interests in common. In Switzerland, PT is usually number of employees. placed high on the national agenda, thus receiving greater attention from politicians. The Swiss Federal Railways (SBB), and interest groups such as the Association of Public Analyses Transport Companies (VöV), the Swiss Association of Appendix 1 gives the means, standard deviations, and cor- Transport and Environment (ATE), and Information Services relations for all variables. No multicollinearity of indepen- for Public Transport (LITRA) are relatively active in lobby- dent variables in the four regression models (presented in ing for PT. Tourist firms join in political lobbying with PT the fifth section) was found as all pairwise correlations because they share the aim of providing good connections were below a threshold 0.7. To determine the level of inte- and affordable prices for the benefit of tourists as well. gration between transport and tourism companies, simple Moreover, tourist areas are often located in rural cantons, descriptive statistics were carried out. Multiple regression which therefore usually mobilize nationally to press for rec- analyses were performed to identify the factors influencing ognition of the economic significance of local tourism and long-term cooperative relationships and outstanding per- subsidies to support it. formance (dependent variable). We use levels of the inte- In general, PT companies cooperate more closely with gration of cooperative activities and cooperative practices other PT companies (3.26) than with brokers (2.73) or ser- as independent variables. Previous studies in organizational vice providers (2.60). This is because PT companies often studies show that the use of ordinal variables in regression have joint products for a common customer base that is usu- analyses is acceptable (see, e.g., Michel and Hambrick ally larger than their customer bases with brokers and service 1992; Parkhe 1993). The models were estimated by using providers. They also use the same infrastructure. The need the statistical program R and its linreglm command in the for cooperation between PT companies may also be stronger MASS package. because they are under pressure to create multimodal trans- port networks. In short, there are more similarities and com- mon interests between PT companies, which, by cooperating Findings with each other, may gain higher synergy effects. The case Level of Integration study of the Zentralbahn below describes in detail who its partners are and how the company cooperates with them to As seen in Table 3, overall PT companies have strong levels expand its market share and provide a seamless customer of integration with all types of partners in marketing and experience. communication, sales, product design and pricing, and ser- vice provision. They work more intensely with their partners Illustrative Case Study of the Zentralbahn for the in these activities than in the maintenance of joint infrastruc- Level of Integration ture, political lobbying, or joint purchasing. PT companies have the strongest cooperation with PT and brokers in sales. Typical partners of the Zentralbahn. Service provider part- With service providers, they work more closely in product ners of the Zentralbahn are usually located along the rail design and pricing, and marketing and communication. tracks and at destinations where the railway company has Political lobbying is an important area of cooperation its connections. This is because those tourists who travel between PT companies, yet they also cooperate in minor with the Zentralbahn are often customers or potential cus- ways with brokers and service providers. The reason may be tomers of the tourist service providers and vice versa. Given 8 Journal of Travel Research 00(0) this shared customer catchment base, it is in the interests is Zentralbahn’s key partner in sales, reservations, and infor- of the Zentralbahn and its service provider partners to mation (timetables and ticket-app). The company can rely optimize customer experience and increase customer on this partner’s infrastructure, especially its online ticketing satisfaction. services. Broker partners are mainly DMOs and tour operators. The Zentralbahn works closely with brokers like the Since the Zentralbahn connects a triangle of destinations Swiss Travel System and the Switzerland Travel Centre5. (Lucerne, Interlaken, and Engelberg), these three DMOs are The main role of the Swiss Travel System is to convince their key partners. It is the DMOs’ role to bring local stake- international tourists to use PT, especially the railways. The holders (among which transport companies are key actors) Switzerland Travel Centre has marketing managers based together to cooperate in marketing the destination. in emerging markets, for example, in the USA, Europe, PT partners of the Zentralbahn are PT companies in the Russia, India, China, and South Korea. These brokers pro- neighboring cantons and the national incumbent, the Swiss mote the Lucerne–Interlaken Express Train in their adver- Federal Railways (SBB). These PT partners transport pas- tising and sales channels. Given such cooperation, the sengers from big cities and main airports to Lucerne, Zentralbahn can access tour operators’ knowledge of inter- Interlaken, and Engelberg. The Zentralbahn has a close rela- national tourist behavior and their marketing and sales net- tionship with these partners thanks to countrywide ticketing works in emerging markets. and a sales system with coordinated timetables. As men- Cooperation in sales not only reduces operating costs, it tioned previously, this area of cooperation occurs not just on also improves the customer experience. For instance, on a voluntary basis but also due to political forces. the Lucerne-Interlaken route, the Zentralbahn sells Jungfraubahn’s tickets to Jungfrau-Joch (departing from Cooperative activities between the Zentralbahn and its part- Interlaken) so that customers do not have to queue at the ners. Table 4 presents typical examples of Zentralbahn’s ticket counter in Interlaken. cooperative activities with its partners and its motivations for joining in these activities. Product design and pricing. The focus of cooperation in this area is to design attractive day trips and round Marketing and communication. To gain new customers trips and to improve the customer’s travel experience. from outside its own catchment area and to trigger customers’ The Zentralbahn and its partners usually create “bundle decisions to purchase leisure trips, the Zentralbahn, service offers” (travel tickets, meals, and hotels) with discounts providers, and brokers cooperate by communicating each or trips using various means of transport. For example, the other’s promotional materials through their own channels. “golden round trip” includes a boat trip, the funicular to They organize joint flash-sale activities, create tourist cards, Pilatus, a hike, and a return rail trip with the Zentralbahn. and run regional online information platforms jointly. The Although PT companies, service providers, and brokers partners usually undertake these activities through exchange are involved in developing such offers, the role of the bro- agreements without cash being involved (in kind, i.e., ser- kers is limited to communication and sales. Hence, their vices) and consolidate their marketing resources with those involvement in product design and pricing is less than that of one regional partner. Motivations for cooperation in mar- of the other partners. keting and communication also include sharing marketing costs and taking advantage of the reputation of a partner’s Service provision. Cooperation between the Zentralbahn strong brand name. and its partners in this activity is largely operational in In recent years, the Zentralbahn has focused on attracting nature, for instance, in respect of coordinating timetables, tourists from emerging markets, usually from Asia. However, organizing transfer points, signaling, luggage storage, and it has little knowledge of emerging markets, and internation- customer information. Such activities that are essential for ally its brand is not well-known. Therefore, it cooperates service quality and a seamless customer experience. with the famous brands of Titlis, Pilatus, and Lucerne to take advantage of these partners’ reputations. In addition, it works Maintenance of joint infrastructure. The Zentralbahn has with Asian tour operators to promote its products directly to little cooperation in this area with any of its partners because potential customers in Asia. The company also cooperates of the nature of its infrastructure and its distinctive services. with the Federal Tourism Association to market the Lucerne- To a certain extent, the Zentralbahn cooperates in this field Interlaken Express worldwide and its use of premium pan- with touristic railway companies that also use narrow-gauge oramic trains. In the domestic market, the Zentralbahn works railways, like the Rhaetian Railway and Montreux-Ober- with the RailAway. land-Bahn. They are investing together in IT infrastructure for group reservations (via Railplus). Sales. PT offers a dense multi-channel sales network through which customers can purchase tickets from almost Political lobbying. Cooperation in lobbying between PT all transport operators. The Swiss Federal Railways (SBB) companies is quite strong in Switzerland. Intense cooperation Thao et al. 9

Table 4. Examples of Cooperative Activities between ZB and Its Partners.

Cooperative Activities Typical Example Motivation Marketing and - Mutual marketing of partner offers through own channels - Mutual access to different communication - Marketing of attractive service bundles (e.g. Snow’n Rail) customer bases - Establishment of regional umbrella brands along the route - Cost savings (e.g., Goldenpass Line) - Benefiting from the tourist leader’s - Specific online platforms for leisure traffic and activities strong brand name (schweizmobil.ch) - Joint advertising presence in the incoming market Sales - Joint booking centers and points of sale - Cost savings - Joint sales organizations for emerging markets - Sharing management attention - Incoming sales initiatives with jointly financed sales - Gain access to source markets representatives outside own catchment area - Joint use of the Direct Service Network IT-Platform and - Access to specialized knowledge Travel-Card (Swisspass) for national tickets and arrangements - Partner’s reputation - Convenience for customers Product design and - Development of round trips by ship, train, and mountain - Market penetration pricing railway - Market expansion - Regional flat-rate fares that include PT and mountain railways - Product differentiation (e.g., Tellpass) - Development of discounted packages with train, excursion, and overnight stay - Development of segment-specific service offers (Asian customers, families) Service provision - Coordination of operations and service offer - Cost savings - Close collaboration in case of traffic disruptions, events, or - Increased service quality increased customer volume - Customer satisfaction - Signaling, customer information - Railway station as service point for e-bike rental or car-sharing Maintenance of joint - IT infrastructure for seat reservations - Cost savings infrastructure - Sharing expertise for narrow-gauge tracks system - Project complexity - Knowledge gaps Political lobbying - Joint lobbying for the expansion of the Lucerne central station - Influencing contextual business (Tiefbahnhof) environment for business decisions Joint purchasing - Tourist railways have jointly developed and purchased a - Sharing of costs customer infotainment system - Economies of scale - Knowledge gaps takes place “ad hoc,” whenever an important referendum takes variable in the model increases the explanatory power to place. For example, the Lucerne DMO and PT service pro- 0.30 (model 2). viders joined the Zentralbahn to lobby for the Lucerne transit The results of Model 2 show that PT companies of central station. medium size (β = 0.96, p < 0.01) have significantly positive effects on the duration of cooperation. This suggests that PT Joint purchasing. Joint purchasing is quite rare, but it does companies of medium size have longer durations of coopera- exist between PT companies: for example, the Zentralbahn tion with their partners than large PT companies. One possi- and the Rhaetian Railway have jointly purchased an onboard ble explanation is that, compared with the large PT infotainment system. companies, medium-sized PT counterparts are more likely to face resource constraints and to have a smaller customer Long-term Cooperative Relationships base. Therefore, the need for cooperation for medium-sized PT companies may be greater than their counterparts. Table 5 presents the results of regression analyses of the Sales cooperation (β = 0.45, p<0.05) has a significantly duration of cooperation. Model 1 uses variables of firm positive impact on durations of cooperation. A possible rea- diversity and cooperative activity. Model 2 uses variables son for this is that it often involves developing a joint sales of firm diversity, cooperative activity, and practice. Firm channel (implementation of specific software) with a com- diversity and levels of the integration of cooperative activ- mon customer base. This is a long and expensive process ities can explain 0.25 of the variance in the duration of requiring a high level of both commitment and dependence cooperation (model 1). Including cooperative practice as a among partners. If one party ends the relationship, they are 10 Journal of Travel Research 00(0)

Table 5. Results of Regression Analyses for Duration of Cooperation.

Model 1 Model 2

Explanatory variable Coeff. SE t Values Coeff. SE t Values Constant 2.36*** 0.58 0.402*** 2.62** 0.78.38 3.36**

Firm diversity Firm size (ref.: large) Small 0.34 0.42 0.82 0.23 0.48 0.47 Medium 1.04* 0.42 2.47* 0.96* 0.42 2.26* Partner type (ref.: service providers) PT −0.15 0.44 −0.35 −0.28 0.45 −0.62 Broker −0.32 0.41 −0.78 −0.27 0.42 −0.65 Partner size (ref.: large) Small −0.37 0.46 −0.80 −0.31 0.48 −0.63 Medium −0.37 0.54 −0.69 −0.33 0.54 −0.62

Cooperative activities Marketing and communication −0.27 0.19 −1.47 −0.27 0.20 −1.35 Sales 0.46* 0.19 2.37* 0.45* 0.21 2.21* Product design and pricing −0.14 0.15 −1.00 −0.19 0.17 −1.14 Service provision 0.11 0.12 −0.86 −0.08 0.17 −0.49

Cooperative practices High engagement - - - −0.16 0.23 −0.70 Transparent behavior - - - 0.02 0.23 0.08 Frequency of interaction - - - 0.05† 0.02 1.90† Adjusted R2 0.25 0.30

Note: N = 43. Coeff. = coefficient ; SE = standard error ; Sig. = significance; PT = public transport. ***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05, †p < 0.10.

more likely to be punished by “tit-for-tat” behavior from its The results of model 4 indicate that PT companies of partner, potentially leading to considerable losses. Hence, medium size (β = −0.23, p < 0.05) benefit less from coop- there is no interest in dissolving sales cooperation. eration than the large PT companies. However, this is not Cooperative practices were found to have no significant confirmed for small PT companies (β = 0.09, p = 0.25), as effects on duration of cooperation, except for frequency of it has no effects on cooperative performance. This can be interaction (β = 0.05, p<0.1). This indicates that having because the large PT companies have their own infrastruc- more face-to-face meetings between partners increases the ture (rolling stock and IT systems), marketing, sales, distri- likelihood that the cooperation will be maintained. bution, financial, and other resources, and are able to In models 1 and 2, the insignificant coefficients are out- market a product or apply a new technology arising from numbered by the significant ones. This might be due to the the cooperation in a relative shorter time. In other words, small sample size. Yet, this should not be a problem because the ability to realize potentials from cooperation for large these models aim to test which factors have a statistically PT companies is greater than in the medium-sized firms, significant influence on duration of cooperation. who have fewer resources than the large firms. Brokers benefit more from cooperation (β = 0.31, Cooperative Performance p<0.01) than do service providers. The reason lies in the brokers’ business models, because they do not produce ser- Table 6 gives the results of the regression analyses for coop- vices themselves but rather act as intermediaries between erative performance. Model 3 uses the variables of firm customers and service providers. Thus, they deliver (and diversity and cooperative activity. Model 4 uses the variables buy) the services of the service providers, who provide PT of firm diversity, cooperative activity, and practice. Firm services and tourism products to customers, bundle these ser- diversity and levels of integration of cooperative activities vices, and sell them as packages. The brokers can only per- can explain 0.69 of the variance in cooperative performance form these activities when PT and service providers agree (model 3). Including cooperative practice variables in the that they should undertake an intermediate role. Therefore, it model increases the explanatory power to 0.72 (model 4). is vital that the brokers cooperate with PT and service Thao et al. 11

Table 6. Results of Regression Analyses for Performance.

Model 3 Model 4

Explanatory variable Coeff. SE t Values Coeff. SE t Values Constant 0.57*** 0.11 5.25*** 0.47* 0.16 2.73*

Firm diversity Firm size (ref.: large) Small −0.13 0.08 −1.56 −0.12 0.09 −1.19 Medium −0.21* 0.08 −2.47* −0.23* 0.09 −2.47* Partner type (ref.: service providers) PT 0.05 0.09 0.53 0.02 0.09 0.19 Broker 0.25** 0.07 3.39** 0.31** 0.08 3.73** Partner size (ref.: large) Small −0.11 0.09 −1.24 −0.16 0.10 −1.62 Medium 0.07 0.09 0.81 0.12 0.11 1.08

Cooperative activities Marketing and communication −0.01 0.04 −0.31 −0.01 0.04 −0.17 Sales −0.07* 0.04 −2.11* −0.11* 0.04 −2.45* Product design and pricing 0.12*** 0.03 4.75*** 0.16*** 0.03 4.86*** Service provision 0.13*** 0.02 5.59*** 0.13** 0.03 3.97**

Cooperative practices High engagement − − − 0.04 0.05 0.87 Transparent behavior − − − −0.01 0.05 −0.17 Frequency of interaction − − − −0.01 0.01 −1.32 Duration of cooperation − − − 0.003 0.004 0.73 Adjusted R2 0.69 0.72

Note: N = 43. Coeff. = coefficient ; SE = standard error ; Sig. = significance; PT = public transport. ***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05, †p < 0.10. providers, whereas the PT and service providers can still run tive product effectively to emerging markets. The coopera- their businesses without cooperating with brokers. tion ended once the tour had been established. Cooperation in sales has significant negative impacts (β Cooperation in service provision across customer jour- = −0.11, p<0.05) on cooperative performance. As men- neys is especially critical in the travel and tourism sector tioned above, cooperation in sales has significant positive because the service is usually provided by different compa- impacts on the duration of cooperation. Yet long-term coop- nies. Nonetheless, customers usually perceive the service as eration may occur at a lower intensity. Therefore, it often a single product. Any bad experience at one stage of their reduces the level of performance. Furthermore, cooperation journey will create a bad experience overall. Therefore, PT in sales is often driven either by the public policy, that is, the and the tourism companies must guarantee the service qual- Passenger Transportation Act or social obligations, but not ity throughout the entire customer journey. Closer coopera- by economic reasons. tion in service provision smooths service provision and Product design and pricing (β = 0.16, p<0.001) and improves service quality, which in turn increases customer service provision (β = 0.13, p<0.01) were found to have satisfaction. Consequently, this enhances firm performance. significant positive effects on cooperative performance. Duration of cooperation and other cooperative practices Cooperation in product design and pricing is usually proj- were found to have no significant effects on cooperative ect based and has concrete goals such as product differen- performance. tiation and accessing new markets. Hence, companies involved in cooperation over product design and pricing Discussion and Conclusion must generally work intensively to achieve their goals within a defined time frame. The cooperation normally Despite the increasing importance of interfirm cooperation ends after the launch of the new product. For example, the in the travel and tourism sector, academic research on this Zentralbahn jointly developed a “Grand Train Tour of topic is still fragmented and rare. Drawing on the example of Switzerland” with other railway companies to sell an attrac- Switzerland, this article contributes to the existing literature 12 Journal of Travel Research 00(0) by investigating how PT companies cooperate with tourism crucial in cases where cooperation would be highly benefi- companies to maintain competitive advantages in the travel cial but requires significant investments. Such national and tourism sector. organizations typically have sufficient financial resources, Our findings suggest that PT companies adopt different partly thanks to the state’s funding instruments. Their cooperative strategies with different types of partners. PT involvement in transport–tourism cooperation usually companies generally cooperate more closely with their PT prompts other organizations and companies in this sector to counterparts than with brokers or service providers because enter cooperation. Conducting a meta-analysis of interfirm they have a larger common customer base, integrated multi- networks, Grandori and Soda (1995) also argue that the modal networks, and strong political representation. With involvement of public organizations plays an important brokers, they cooperate strongly in sales. With service pro- role in creating and retaining interfirm networks and in viders, they work more closely in product design and pricing. helping them obtain their goals. Similar findings are also With all types of partners, they cooperate strongly in market- found in the Finnish tourism sector (Seppälä-Esser, Airey, ing and communication. and Szivas 2009). The lower level of cooperation between PT companies The travel and tourism industry is one of Switzerland’s and either brokers or tourist service providers may lie in most important economic sectors. In 2016, the total (direct, structural differences. As tourism companies operate under indirect, and induced) contribution of this sector to GDP and market forces, they can flexibly adapt their businesses. to employment accounted for 9.1% and 12%, respectively However, the PT sector operates in a regulated environ- (WTTC 2018). The Swiss government, therefore, prioritizes ment. Investigating the cooperation between tourism and this sector politically. It has established several funding PT companies in Scottish island destinations, Currie and instruments to support tourism and tourism-related products Falconer (2014) also report that structural disparities is one and services. Yet to benefit from these public funds, stake- of the key obstacles that hinders close cooperation between holders in the travel and tourism sector are usually required these companies. to cooperate with each other (Swiss Federal Council 2017). The findings emphasize that PT and tourism companies Thirdly, a focus on customers is central to cooperation have maintained long-term relationships, with on average between PT and tourism companies. The travel and tourism more than 10 years of cooperation. This is a much longer sector is faced by a demand for an “all-in-one experience,” as cooperation in comparison with a case study in Poland expressed by customers (Mahrous and Hassan 2017; where cooperative relationships between tourism and trans- d’Angella and Go 2009). At the same time, the Swiss tourism port companies lasted only four to five years (Johann 2014). sector has to cope with increasing competition from the other Swiss companies are able to maintain and nurture such Alpine countries due to rising saturation and stagnation long-term cooperative relationships mainly due to strong (Siegrist et al. 2016; Swiss Federal Council 2017). These cooperation in sales and to certain extent the frequency of underlying reasons are inducing Swiss alliance partners to face-to-face meetings. Cooperation in sales is especially work more closely together to strengthen their competitive useful in keeping partners together as it entails complex position in the tourism market. They cooperate not only in partnership agreements and a long-term investment. The day-to-day operations but also in strategic partnerships. By partners are engaged in a sort of “locked-in” relationship. doing so, alliance partners can synergize their resources to Those who attempt to exit this relationship often face pun- better meet the customer need. These benefits would be dif- ishment reactions from the alliance. ficult to achieve without cooperation with partners. We have identified the following enablers to explain the Maintaining a long-term relationship not necessarily gen- long-term cooperation between transport and tourism com- erates better cooperative performances. This can be seen panies. First, as a traditional tourist country, Switzerland has especially in the case of medium-sized PT companies and a long tradition of cooperation between private and public cooperation in sales, which have statistically significant and stakeholders in the transport and tourism sector. In this type positive effects on the duration of cooperation, but negative of cooperative relationship, DMOs are one of the key public effects on cooperative performance. An explanation can be stakeholders. Thanks to organizational forms as associations that longer periods of cooperation tend to lead to a lack of (Vereine) or cooperatives (Genossenschaften), which are dif- efficiency and management attention. Yet, many long-term ferent from those of many other European DMOs (Beritelli, cooperative relationships are still maintained because of Bieger, and Laesser 2014), the Swiss DMOs have acquired institutional requirements, the political context, and “locked- good skills in creating, coordinating, and facilitating the in” circumstances, even though they may be inefficient from local cooperative networks of tourism enterprises and tour- the economic point of view. Meanwhile, partners in short- ism infrastructure providers. term cooperation are more likely to work intensively to real- Secondly, a high degree of involvement by national pub- ize common goals within a limited time frame. In the case of lic organizations such as the RailAway, the Swiss Federal the medium-sized PT companies, another reason may be lim- Railways (SBB), and the Federal Tourism Association can ited resources, in comparison with the large firms, to realize help maintain the cooperation and achieve its goals. This is products from the cooperation. This finding contributes to Thao et al. 13 the existing literature, which often focuses on small and dioxide emissions from tourism activities and transportation. large firms in investigating the relationship between firm Also, the present article extends previous studies (Dev, Klein, size and cooperative performance. Contrary to our findings, and Fisher 1996; Hill and Shaw 1995) on how to select the studying the relationship between firm size and market per- right partner for an alliance to consider how to build a coop- formance, Sarkar, Echambadi, and Harrisor (2001) report erative relationship among alliance partners for market that small firms benefit more from an alliance. The incon- success. sistent findings may arise from industry-specific conditions In contrast to Parkhe’s study (1993), our findings show no and different ways of measuring firm size (Hagedoorn and significant relationship between transparent behavior and Schakenraad 1994). cooperative performance. However, our findings support We found that product design and pricing and service pro- other studies (Rosenfeld 1996; Hagedoorn and Schakenraad vision have significant and positive effects on cooperative 1994; Dussauge, Garrette, and Mitchell 2000; Zach 2012) performance. Cooperation in these areas among a group of showing that interfirm cooperation provides firms with vari- firms with different competences—for instance, tour opera- ous benefits such as market expansion, access to new (spe- tor, railway company, and hotel—can generate economic cialized) knowledge, improved customer experience, and rents by creating an integrated, coherent, and effective end greater service quality. product for tourists. In this vertical cooperation, alliance The limitation of this study is the small sample size that partners not only share their marketing know-how in specific might be a cause of several insignificant coefficients in the customer segments, they can also harmonize their products regression models, especially in Model 1 and Model 2. Also, and services by establishing a joint mechanism to optimize as cooperation was still in force at the time of the survey, we and control service quality. As a result, a highly consistent cannot tell whether the duration of cooperation might be service quality is guaranteed in all stages of a customer’s influenced by other factors rather than sales and the fre- journey. And high quality of service usually has positive quency of face-to-face meetings. Our study was conducted effects on customer satisfaction and customer loyalty on the specific characteristics of a service-oriented industry, (Ahrholdt, Gudergan, and Ringle 2017). as well as in the special context of the Swiss travel and tour- Cooperation between PT and tourism companies promotes ism sector. Any generalizations from our findings should sustainable mobility for leisure travel. This is particularly therefore take these factors into consideration. At the same important because of the predominance of using cars for time, they may encourage future investigations of how dif- travel and leisure purposes in developed countries (ARE and ferent types of cooperation, whether project-based, institu- BFS 2017; Hall 2010). Thus, insights from our study can help tion-based (membership), or in everyday operations, affect policy makers in designing instruments to reduce carbon cooperative performance.

Appendix 1. Descriptive Statistics and Correlations.

Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1. Duration of cooperation 10.91 9.51 2. Cooperative performance 3.19 1.00 −.17 3. Firm size 2.49 0.80 −.04 .50* 4. Partner size 2.27 0.87 .18 .04 −.04 5. Marketing and communication 3.62 1.19 −.11 .39* .12 .19 6. Sales 3.65 1.26 .20 .36* .29 .17 .68** 7. Product design & pricing 3.19 1.29 .10 .35* .14 .13 .48** .58** 8. Service provision 3.22 1.51 .05 .68* .22 −.10 .44** .32* .34 9. Maintenance of joint 1.87 1.13 .13 .35* .44** .10 .16 .30 .18 .34* infrastructure 10. Political lobbying 2.50 1.32 −.18 .36* .38* −.11 .18 .26 .12 .25 .38* 11. Joint purchasing 2.01 1.28 .05 .30 .22 .11 .39* .44** 37* .28 .33* .37* 12. Frequency of interaction 5.56 5.53 .51** .20 .03 .09 .12 .16 .27 .34* .38* .11 .43** 13. Transparency 3.71 1.02 −.11 .49** .31 .01 .35* .31 .35* .43* .21 .41* −.004 .004 14. High engagement 3.79 1.03 −.09 .42* .08 −.32 .04 .09 .01 .52** .14 .42* −.09 .02 .59** 15. Trust 4.25 0.86 −.15 .39* .24 −.16 −.09 −.04 −.05 .53** −.001 .41* −.12 −.07 .56** .79*

Note: N = 43. SD = standard deviation. *p<0.05, **p<0.01. 14 Journal of Travel Research 00(0)

Authors’ Note Behrens, C., and E. Pels. 2012. “Intermodal Competition in the London-Paris Passenger Market: High-Speed Rail and Air Jonas Frölicher is also affiliated with KCW, Berlin, Germany. Transport.” Journal of Urban Economics 71 (3): 278–88. Beritelli, P., T. Bieger, and C. Laesser. 2014. “The New Frontiers Acknowledgments of Destination Management: Applying Variable Geometry as We thank Philipp Wegelin and participants of the 68th AIEST con- a Function-Based Approach.” Journal of Travel Research 53 ference for their valuable comments and suggestions. We also thank (4): 403–17. the reviewers and the Editor Prof. Geoffrey Crouch for their careful Breiding, J. R. 2013. Swiss Made: The Untold Story Behind reading of the manuscript and their constructive remarks. All errors Switzerland’s Success. London: Profile Books Ltd. and omissions remain the sole responsibility of the authors. Budeanu, A. 2007. “Sustainable Tourist Behaviour—A Discussion of Opportunities for Change.” International Journal of Declaration of Conflicting Interests Consumer Studies 31 (5): 499–508. Chung, J. Y., and T. Whang. 2011. “The Impact of Low Cost The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect Carriers on Korean Island Tourism.” Journal of Transport to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Geography 19 (6): 1335–40. Combs, J. G., and D. J. Ketchen. 1999. “Explaning Interfirm Funding Cooperation and Performance: Toward a Reconciliation of The author(s) received no financial support for the research, author- Predictions from the Resource-Based View and Organizational ship, and/or publication of this article. Economics.” Strategic Management Journal 20:867–88. Creswell, J. W., and W. L. P. Clark. 2011. Designing and ORCID iD Conducting Mixed Methods Research, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Vu Thi Thao https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9319-9028 Currie, C., and P. Falconer. 2014. “Journal of Destination Marketing & Management Maintaining Sustainable Island Notes Destinations in Scotland: The Role of the Transport– 1. The first DMO in Switzerland dates back to 1864. Its original Tourism Relationship.” Journal of Destination Marketing & function was to implement tasks that could be financed neither Management 3:162–72. by private enterprises alone nor by the municipalities alone. d’Angella, F., and F. M. Go. 2009. “Tale of Two Cities’ 2. A subsidiary company of the Swiss Federal Railways (SBB). It Collaborative Tourism Marketing: Towards a Theory of functions as a national tourism marketing organization that pro- Destination Stakeholder Assessment.” Tourism Management motes the use of public transport services in leisure products. 30 (3): 429–40. 3. A subsidiary company of the Swiss Post. It provides bus services Das, T. K., and B.-S. Teng. 2000. “A Resource-Based Theory.” in regional and rural areas of Switzerland. Journal of Management 26 (1): 31–61. 4. Small-sized firms: 1–20 employees; medium-sized firms: 21–50 Department for Transport. 2018a. “Average Distance Travelled by employees; large-sized firms: above 50 employees. Purpose and Main Mode: England.” https://assets.publlishing. 5. An inbound tour operator. service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attach- ment_data/file/729506/nts0410.ods (accessed February 12, 2019). References Department for Transport. 2018b. “National Travel Survey Ahrholdt, D. C., S. P. Gudergan, and C. M. Ringle. 2017. “Enhancing England 2017: Main Results.” https://assets.publishing.ser- Service Loyalty: The Roles of Delight, Satisfaction, and vice.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_ Service Quality.” Journal of Travel Research 56 (4): 436–50. data/file/729521/national-travel-survey-2017.pdf (accessed Albalate, D., and G. Bel. 2010. “Tourism and Urban Public Transport: February 12, 2019). Holding Demand Pressure under Supply Constraints.” Tourism Desmaris, C. 2014. “The Reform of Passenger Rail in Switzerland: Management 31 (3): 425–33. More Performance without Competition.” Research in ARE and BfS. 2017. “Swiss Microcensus for Mobility and Transport Transportation Economics 48:290–97. 2015: Final Report.” Swiss Federal Office of Statistics, Swiss Dev, C. S., S. Klein, and R. A. Fisher. 1996. “A Market-Based Federal Office of Spatial Development, Neuenburg and Berne. Approach for Partner Selection in Marketing Alliances.” Azorín, J. M., and R. Cameron. 2010. “The Application of Mixed Journal of Travel Research 35 (1): 11–17. Methods in Organisational Research: A Literature Review.” Dierickx, I., and K. Cool. 1989. “Asset Stock Accumulation and Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods 8 (2): 95–105. Sustainability of Competitive Advantage.” Management Bae, S. Y., and G. Chick. 2016. “An Emerging Korean Youth Science 35 (12): 1504–13. Culture, Rail-Ro: The Application of Cultural Consensus Dobruszkes, F. 2011. “High-Speed Rail and Air Transport Analysis to Domestic Rail Travel Experiences.” Current Issues Competition in Western Europe: A Supply-Oriented in Tourism 20 (4): 330–68. Perspective.” Transport Policy 18 (6): 870–79. Barney, J. 1991. “Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Duschek, S., and J. Sydow. 2002. “Resource-oriented approaches to Advantage.” Journal of Management 15:175–90. strategic management: Two perspectives on corporate coopera- Barton, S. 2009. “Technology Transfer in Swiss Tourism.” Paper tion.” Wirtschaftswissenschaftliches Studium 31:426–31. presented at the Transfer of Technology Forum, University of Dussauge, P., B. Garrette, and W. Mitchell. 2000. “Learning from Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland; November. Competing Partners: Outcomes and Durations of Scale and Thao et al. 15

Link Alliances in Europe, North America and Asia.” Strategic Hill, T., and R. N. Shaw. 1995. “Co-Marketing Tourism Management Journal 21 (2): 99–126. Internationally: Bases for Strategic Alliances.” Journal of Dyer, J. 1997. “Effective Interfirm Collaboration: How Firms Travel Research 34 (1): 25–32. Minimize Transaction Costs and Maximize Transaction Hitt, M. A., M. T. Dacin, E. Levitas, J.-L. Arregle, and A. Borza. Value.” Strategic Management Journal 18 (7): 535–56. 2000. “Partner Selection in Emerging and Developed Market Dyer, J., and H. Singh. 1998. “The Relational View: Cooperative Contexts: Resource-Based and Organizational Learning Strategy and Sources of Interorganzational Competitive Perspectives.” Academy of Management Journal 43 (3): Advantage.” Academy of Management Journal 23 (4): 660–79. 449–67. Ettema, D., and T. Schwanen. 2012. “A Relational Approach to Hyde, K. F., and C. Laesser. 2009. “A Structural Theory of the Analysing Leisure Travel.” Journal of Transport Geography Vacation.” Tourism Management 30 (2): 240–48. 24:173–81. Jansen, K., T. Perian, and K. J. Beckmann. 2002. “Aktivitätenmuster Evans, N. 2001. “Collaborative Strategy: An Analysis of the und Raum-Zeit-Verhalten in der Freizeit.” Aachen: Institut für Changing World of International Airline Alliances.” Tourism Stadtbauwesen und Stadtverkehr RWTH Aachen, Stadt Region Management 22 (3): 229–43. Land, Heft 73. Gibson, C. B. 2017. “Elaboration, Generalization, Triangulation, Johann, M. 2014. “The Relationship Building Strategy with Partners and Interpretation.” Organizational Research Methods 20 (2): in Tourism Market.” European Journal of Tourism, Hospitality 193–223. and Recreation 95–105. Gilbert, D., and R. K. C. Wong. 2003. “Passenger Expectations Kale, P., J. H. Dyer, and H. Singh. 2002. “Alliance Capability, and Airline Services: A Hong Kong Based Study.” Tourism Stock Market Response, and Long-Term Alliance Success: Management 24 (5): 519–32. The Role of the Alliance Function.” Strategic Management Gössling, S. 2013. “National Emissions from Tourism: An Journal 23 (8): 747–67. Overlooked Policy Challenge?” Energy Policy 59:433–42. Khadaroo, J., and B. Seetanah. 2007. “Transport Infrastructure and Grandori, A., and G. Soda. 1995. “Interfirm Networks: Antecedents, Tourism Development.” Annals of Tourism Research 34 (4): Mechanisms and Forms.” Organization Studies 16 (2): 183– 1021–32. 214. Laesser, C. 1999. “Implementing Destination Structures: Gronau, W., and A. Kagermeier. 2007. “Key Factors for Successful Experiences with Swiss Cases.” Turizam 47 (3): 185–280. Leisure and Tourism Public Transport Provision.” Journal of Lamb, B., and S. Davidson. 1997. “Tourism and Transportation Transport Geography 15 (2): 127–35. in Ontario, Canada.” In Practising Responsible Tourism: Gronau, W. 2017. “Encouraging Behavioural Change towards International Case Studies in Tourism Planning, Policy Sustainable Tourism: A German Approach to Free Public and Development, edited by Lynn C. Harrison and Winston Transport for Tourists.” Journal of Sustainable Tourism 25 Husbands, 261–76. Chichester, UK: Wiley. (2): 265–75. Lavie, D. 2006. “The Competitive Advantage of Interconnected Gross, M. 2009. “Competition and Cooperation in Local Firms: An Extension of the Resource-Based View.” Academy Public Transport: Realistic Scenario or Just a Fantasy?” of Management 31 (3): 638–58. Transformations in Business and Economics 8 (1): 86–100. Le-Klähn, D. T., R. Gerike, and C. M. Hall. 2014. “Visitor Users Gulati, R., and H. Singh. 1998. “The Architecture of Cooperation: vs. Non-users of Public Transport: The Case of Munich, Managing Coordination Costs and Appropriation Concerns in Germany.” Journal of Destination Marketing and Management Strategic Alliances.” Administrative Science Quarterly 43 (4): 3 (3): 152–61. 781–814. Leiper, N. 1990. Tourism Systems: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. Gyr, U. 2010. “The History of Tourism: Structures on the Path to Palmerston North, NZ: Department of Management Systems, Modernity.” European History Online (EGO). http://ieg-ego. Business Studies Faculty, Massey University. eu/en/threads/europe-on-the-road/the-history-of-tourism/ueli- Lohmann, G., and D. T. Duval. 2014. “Destination Morphology: gyr-the-history-of-tourism (assessed October 20, 2018). A New Framework to Understand Tourism–Transport Issues?” Hagedoorn, J., and J. O. S. Schakenraad. 1994. “The Effect of Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 3:133–36. Strategic Technology Alliances on Company Performance.” Lumsdon, L., and S. Page. 2004. “Progress in Transport and Tourism Strategic Management Journal 15 (4): 291–309. Research: Reformulating the Transport-Tourism Interface and Hall, D. H. 1999. “Conceptualising Tourism Transport: Inequality Future Research Agendas.” In Tourism and Transport: Issues and Externality Issues.” Journal of Transport Geography 7 (3): and Agenda for the New Millennium, edited by Les Lumsdon 181–88. and Stephen Page, 1–27. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Hall, M. 2010. “Equal Access for All? Regulative Mechanisms, Mahrous, A. A., and S. S. Hassan. 2017. “Achieving Superior Inequality and Tourism Mobility.” In Tourism and Inequality: Customer Experience: An Investigation of Multichannel Problems and Prospects, edited by Stroma Cole and Nigel Choices in the Travel and Tourism Industry of an Emerging Morgan, 34–48. Wallingford, UK: CABI. Market.” Journal of Travel Research 56 (8): 1049–64. Halsall, D. A. 2001. “Railway Heritage and the Tourist Gaze: March, R., and Ian Wilkinson. 2009. “Conceptual Tools for Stoomtram Hoorn-Medemblik.” Journal of Transport Evaluating Tourism Partnerships.” Tourism Management 30 Geography 9 (2): 151–60. (3): 455–62. Heinze, G. W., and H. H. Kill. 1997. Leisure and Mobility: Michel, J. G., and D. C. Hambrick. 1992. “Diversification Posture New Solutions for Leisure Travel. Hannover: Akad. für and Top Management Team Characteristics.” Academy of Raumforschung und Landesplanung. Management Journal 35:9–37. 16 Journal of Travel Research 00(0)

Molina-Azorin, J. F., D. D. Bergh, K. G. Corley, and D. J. Ketchen. Seetaram, N. 2016. “Special Focus. Economics of Tourism and 2017. “Mixed Methods in the Organizational Sciences.” Transport: Introduction.” Tourism Economics 22 (2): 203–6. Organizational Research Methods 20 (2): 179–92. Seppälä-Esser, R., D. Airey, and E. Szivas. 2009. “The Dependence Nash, C. 2008. “Passenger Railway Reform in the Last 20 of Tourism SMEs on NTOs.” Journal of Travel Research 48 Years: European Experience Reconsidered.” Research in (2): 177–90. Transportation Economics 22:61–70. Siegrist, D., M. Aufdereggen, F. Lintzmeyer, and H. Spiess. Ohnmacht, T., K. Götz, and H. Schad. 2009. “Leisure Mobility 2016. “Chapter 13: The Economic Potential of Regional Styles in Swiss Conurbations: Construction and Empirical Nature Pakrs in Switzerland: A Case Study of the Planned Analysis.” Transportation 36 (2): 243–65. Regional Nature Parks in the Canton of Bern.” In Protected Page, S. 2009. Transport and Tourism: Global Perspectives, 3rd ed. Areas and Regional Development in Europe: Towards a New Harlow, UK: Pearson Prentice Hall. Model for the 21st Century, edited by Ingo Mose, 213–30. Parkhe, A. 1993. “Strategic Alliance Structuring: A Game Theoretic London: Routledge. and Transaction Cost Examination of Interfirm Cooperation.” Stuart, T. E. 2000. “Interorganizational Alliances and the Academy of Management Journal 36 (4): 794–829. Performance of Firms: A Study of Growth and Innovation Perch-Nielsen, S., A. Sesartic, and M. Stucki. 2010. “The Rates in a High-Technology Industry.” Strategic Management Greenhouse Gas Intensity of the Tourism Sector: The Case of Journal 21:791–811. Switzerland.” Environmental Science & Policy 13:131–40. Su, M. M., and G. Wall. 2009. “The Qinghai-Tibet Railway Petersen, T. 2016. “Watching the Swiss: A Network Approach and Tibetan Tourism: Travelers’ Perspectives.” Tourism to Rural and Exurban Public Transport.” Transport Policy Management 30 (5): 650–57. 52:175–85. Swiss Federal Council. 2017. Tourism Strategy of the Swiss Rey, B., R. L. Myro, and A. Galera. 2011. “Effect of Low-Cost Confederation. Bern: Swiss Federal Council. Airlines on Tourism in Spain: A Dynamic Panel Data Model.” Thompson, K., and P. Schofield. 2007. “An Investigation of the Journal of Air Transport Management 17 (3): 163–67. Relationship between Public Transport Performance and Rhonden, S., and L. Lumsdon. 2006. “A Conceptual Classification Destination Satisfaction.” Journal of Transport Geography 15 of the Transport-Tourist Experience.” Paper presented at: The (2): 136–44. European Transport Conference (ETC), Strasbourg. Thorgren, S., J. Wincent, and H. Boter. 2012. “Small Firms Rosenfeld, S. A. 1996. “Does Cooperation Enhance in Multipartner R&D Alliances: Gaining Benefits by Competitiveness? Assessing the Impacts of Inter-firm Acquiescing.” Journal of Engineering and Technology Collaboration.” Research Policy 25:247–63. Management 29 (4): 453–67. Sarkar, M. B., R. Echambadi, and J. S. Harrisor. 2001. “Alliance Tissot, L. 2004. “A Travers Les Alpes. Le Montreux-Oberland Entrepreneurship and Firm Market Performance.” Strategic Bernois ou la Construction d’un Système Touristique, 1900- Management Journal 22 (6/7): 701–11. 1970.” Geschichte der Alpen 9:227–44. Sarma, M. 2003. “Towards Positioning a Tourist Destination: A Tissot, L. 2006. “Développement des Transports et Tourisme: Study of Northeast India.” Asean Journal on Hospitality and Quelles Relations?” Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Geschichte Tourism 2 (2): 104–19. 56 (1): 31–37. Saxton, T. 1997. “The Effects of Partner and Relationship Topolšek, D., E. Mrnjavac, and N. Kovačić. 2014. “Integration Characteristics on Alliance Outcomes.” Academy of of Travel Agencies with Transport Providers.” Tourism Management Journal 40 (2): 443–61. Management Perspectives 9:14–23. Schiefelbusch, M., A. Jain, T. Schäfer, and D. Müller. 2007. UNWTO and UNEP (United Nations World Tourism “Transport and Tourism: Roadmap to Integrated Planning Organization and United Nations Environment Programme). Developing and Assessing Integrated Travel Chains.” Journal 2008. “Climate Change and Tourism—Responding to of Transport Geography 15 (2): 94–103. Global Challenges.” Madrid. https://sdt.unwto.org/sites/all/ Schlich, R., S. Schönfelder, S. Hanson, and K. W. Axhausen. files/docpdf/climate2008.pdf (accessed March 4, 2019). 2002. “Leisure Travel in a Historical Perspective: Changes von Arx, W., V. T. Thao, P. Wegelin, S. Maarfield, and J. in the Structures of Time and Space Use.” Arbeitsbericht Frölicher. 2018. “Research in Transportation Economics Verkehrsund Raumplanung 107. The Development of International Passenger Rail Services Schreiner, M., P. Kale, and D. Corsten. 2009. “What Really Is from 2007 to 2016 : The Case of Switzerland.” Research in Alliance Management Capability and How Does It Impact Transportation Economics 69:326–36. Alliance Outcomes and Success?” Strategic Management VöV (Verband öffentlicher Verkehr). 2013. Direct Service Manual Journal 30 (13): 1395–419. on Public Transport Practices. Berne: Swiss Association of Schweizer Bundesrat. 2009. Verordnung über die Abgeltung des Public Transport (SAPT). Regionalen Personenverkehrs—ARPV [Ordinance on the VöV (Verband öffentlicher Verkehr). 2017. Facts and Figures: Charging of Regional Passenger Traffic]. https://www.admin. Swiss Public Transport 2016/2017. ch/opc/de/official-compilation/2009/6061.pdf (accessed WTTC. 2018. “Economic Impact of Travel & Tourism 2018: November 15, 2018). Switzerland.” London. https://www.wttc.org/-/media/files/ Schweizer Tourismus-Verband. 2017. “Schweizer Tourismus in reports/economic-impact-research/countries-2018/switzer- Zahlen 2016: Struktur- Und Branchendaten.” land2018.pdf%22%5Ct%22_blank%22%5Ct%22_blank SECO. 2016. “Umsetzungsprogramm der Tourismuspolitik (accessed November 14, 2018). 2016-2019 (Implementation Program of Tourism Policy).” Yang, H., and A. Zhang. 2012. “Effects of High-Speed Rail and Staatssekretariat für Wirtschaft. Air Transport Competition on Prices, Profits and Welfare.” Thao et al. 17

Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 46 (10): focus on leisure travel, travel behaviour, carpooling and public 1322–33. transport. Zach, F. 2012. “Partners and Innovation in American Destination Marketing Organizations.” Journal of Travel Research 51 (4): Widar von Arx received his PhD from the University of St. Gallen, 412–25. Switzerland. His research interests include strategic management, Zentralbahn. 2017. “Geschäftsbericht 2016 (Annual Report).” organization theory, leadership and regulation. His current work https://www.zentralbahn.ch/sites/default/files/180323_ focuses on the mobility and tourism sectors. He isthe head of the Zentralbahn_GB_2017_Endversion%20%28klein%29.pdf Competence Center for Mobility at the Lucerne Universty of (accessed October 24, 2018). Applied Sciences and Arts. Zhang, X., H. Song, and G. Q. Huang. 2009. “Tourism Supply Jonas Frölicher (MSc in Business Administration and graduate Chain Management: A New Research Agenda.” Tourism Tourism Specialist) has extensive experience in tourism and mobil- Management 30 (3): 345–58. ity. Before joining the Berlin consulting company KCW as a con- sultant, he worked for several years as a project manager and lec- Author Biographies turer at the Institute of Tourism at the Lucerne University of Applied Vu Thi Thao received her PhD degree in Human Geography, a Sciences and Arts, where he is still employed on a part-time basis. Master degree in Geography and Geoinformatics, both from the Before that, he worked for the Swiss Federal Railways and the University of Copenhagen, Denmark. Her current research interests Kuoni Travel.