The International Journal Of Business & Management (ISSN 2321–8916) www.theijbm.com

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BUSINESS & MANAGEMENT

Using a Market Share Approach towards Tourism Planning for Millennial Travellers: Implications for Evidence Based Practice

Dr. Walter Mzembi Aldersgate University College, Minister, Tourism and Hospitality Industry, Chairperson, United Nations World Tourism Organization Regional Commission for Africa, Zimbabwe

Abstract: This article present data about an evidence based framework for planning basing on the unique characteristics of the millennial generation (also known as generation ‘Y’) in the tourism industry. “Generation Y refers to the specific generation born between the 1990’s to the early 2000. The research which synthesised existing and empirical exploratory study in Zimbabwe, established that it is also widely acknowledged that the lifestyle differences which are determined by generations has a more defined consistency than demographic attributes like education, gender and income. In the USA, millennials have begun to shape market dynamics mainly because they are three times the size of the older generation X and are the largest market since baby boomers. Since “market share is positively correlated to profits, tourism operators can gain a huge market share by harnessing the preferences of the millennial generation through meeting their unique requirements. The sheer potential of the millennial spending power makes it imperative to understand their patterns and attitudes regarding expenditure. A knowledge of their unique behavioural attributes has the potential to transform how tourism has to be planned going into the future. Such knowledge can produce economic value through diffusion of knowledge into the [service delivery] process.

1. Background and Introduction The research takes place against a background whereby industries are beginning to understand and deploy knowledge to enhance their performance. A vast majority of organisations have adopted the tools and methods of the 21st century knowledge economy whereby organisations collect empirical data to inform their strategic and operational decisions. (Hogan, 2011; Noordin and Mohtar, 2013; Chavula, 2010). Beginning in the early 1990s, strategists from global economic powers in the OECD had anticipated the increasing role of knowledge in business and economics. “The term “knowledge-based economy” results from a fuller recognition of the role of knowledge and technology in economic growth.” (OECD, 1996:9).  … analytical approaches are being developed so that knowledge can be included more directly in production functions. Investments in knowledge can increase the productive capacity of the other factors of production as well as transform them into new products and processes. (OECD, 1996:11). All the countries which belong to Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) have made tremendous moves to become knowledge based economies. However, Africa continues to trail behind. (World Bank, 2012) UNESCO which is associated with the global tourism industry has endorsed the adoption of and encourages policies that promote knowledge based practice to increase service efficiency. (Al-Rahbi et al., 2008). In this particular case, this paper focuses on the collection of data and knowledge on the profile of generation Y or millennial group for use in tourism strategic and operational planning and implementation. It is expected that increasingly, over the next ten years, “Millennial travellers … will enter their peak earning and spending years. Their maturation is expected to drive the next wave of consumer and tourism growth.” (McKinsey and Company, 2013:7) This allows for long term sector-wide strategic planning within the tourism industry. This approach is quintessential in a scenario whereby “advocates of market-share objectives have provided no evidence to support their contention” (Armstrong and Green, 2007:128) Thus tourism departs from a sentimental appreciation on the value of knowledge in business to an empirical one.

2. Literature Review Many scholars acknowledge that in recent years academia and policy practitioners have increased their interest in ‘generational analysis’ within the various tourism literature. (Xi, et al, 2013; Chang and Sung Hee, 2010 Beldona, Nusair, and Demicco, 2009). The practice of generational cohort marketing has begun to influence market segmentation and become a useful tool for differentiating and measuring markets.

199 Vol 5 Issue 2 February, 2017

The International Journal Of Business & Management (ISSN 2321–8916) www.theijbm.com

This is largely due to the similarity in values, experiences and preferences (Parment, 2013). The beliefs, values, expectations and behaviours of a cohort remain more or less constant throughout the lifetime of a generation (Jackson et al., 2011). Below is a demarcation of millennial generations in the populations of selected countries.

Table 1 Source: Hole (2010:100)

As seen in the classification above, one of the most outstanding aspects of using a generation cohort based analysis is that there are no fixed metrics to demarcate who are millennial generations and which ones are not. The country by country differences in the starting point accounting for the different generations depends on country level factors in terms of technology introduction, development and diffusion. In literature, there are a few areas of overlap depending from scholar to scholar. (Reisenwitz & Iyer, 2009) For example Garikapati et al (2016) considers the millennial generation to be those “born between 1979 and 2000”. Case and Schipinski (2015:3) sets the millennial range at 1982 through 2000. For the sake of this study, the researcher utilised the framework by Ordun (2015:7) and based on the American population. This is elaborated in the section on methodology below. Yet another important framework, slightly different from the one by Hole (2010) seeks to enhance an understanding of the progression of the generations. It is shown in the table below.

Table 2 Source: Case and Schipinski, (2015:3)

This classification shows not just the demarcation of the various generations, but also shows how they progress in the market over time. This affects the timing of planners and implementers.

200 Vol 5 Issue 2 February, 2017

The International Journal Of Business & Management (ISSN 2321–8916) www.theijbm.com

In the broader scheme, the key attributes of the generation should be the focus of planners and managers in evidence based practice. As a case in point, generation Y millennials were raised in an environment saturated with advanced technology like desktop and laptop computers, smartphones, and the internet “… constantly plugged into technology.” This has transformed the way people in their generation engage with the outside world. Yusop ‘Generation Y prefer to communicate more quickly and effectively. This generation is also attracted to organizations where technology is’ (Yusop 2015:3). Millennials are also often known to be a “frugal generation” (O’Connell, 2015). That is why they spend a lot of time searching cheap flights and accommodation arrangements online. Other traits include “lower rates of car ownership” and travel fewer miles and minutes on a daily basis (Polzin et al, 2014; McDonald, 2015). ICT gives millenials the requisite capabilities to search for the budget facilities and also for fast communication as noted above.

“Lacking such knowledge, one might be tempted to oversimplify the cause-and-effect relationships between market shares and marketing variables.” Cooper and Nakanishi (2010:1). This the reason why it is vital to adopt an approach in evidence based practice to maximise the development and performance of the tourism sector in Zimbabwe ad across the whole world.

2.1. Objectives (1) To compare the sizes of the Zimbabwean generations based on census 2012 results (2) To determine the size of the millennial generation against the other generations (3) To determine level of education for the different generations (4) To map out the levels of economically active populations among the generations (5) To model tourism market share based on size of millennial generation (6) To make planning recommendations for operators in the tourism industry based on the market share of the millennials

3. Methodology The researcher has used content analysis to profile the various generations from the results of census 2012. The criteria for benchmarking and measuring the size of the various generation is based on a classification. Four major cohorts exist in the United States. Builders were born between 1920 and 1945; Baby Boomers between 1946 and 1964; Generation X members were born between 1965 and 1980 and Generation Y between 1981 and 2000. (Ordun, 2015:7). The researcher has used this framework to demarcate the generations in the context of Zimbabwe. This is a default approach which allows modelling. The researcher has adopted the framework because the researcher could not find a similar framework which classifies Zimbabwean generations based on ‘X’ and ‘Y” and also coupled with an analysis of technological diffusion and integration. The American model was preferred because the USA together with England, , and have a similar British benchmark in terms of literacy, language, technology and formal institutional and historical networks. Zimbabwe was built on a British post-colonial foundation and is thus largely integrated into this global network.

4. Results The following results are based on the Zimbabwean census 2012. They reflect the relative sizes of the various generations based on a classification of the American population. The first set of data relates to the first two objectives whereby the researcher sought to determine the relative sizes of the various generations and then also make a comparison among the different generational cohorts to determine which one is the biggest.

Years of Birth Generation Magnitude (%) 1920 and 1945 70+ (Builders) 3 1946 and 1964 51 – 70 (Baby Boomers) 7.9 1965 and 1980 50 – 36 (Generation X) 12.3 1981 and 2000 35 and below (Generation Y) 76.8 Table 3

The figures in the table are illustrated in the diagram below.

201 Vol 5 Issue 2 February, 2017

The International Journal Of Business & Management (ISSN 2321–8916) www.theijbm.com

Generation Corhorts

76.8

12.3 7.9 3 35 Minus (Millenial) 51 to 35 (Gen X) 52 to 70 (Baby 70+ (Builders) Boomers)

Figure 1

The results show that by far, the millennial generation is the biggest of all the cohorts in the country. This means that in line with the aspects identified in the literature review and background sections, the tourism industry is likely going to be affected by their preferences. It is therefore a matter of strategic introspection to think ahead in terms of any infrastructure and policy changes which are suited to the psychological profile of this particular generation.

The next category seeks to determine the education statuses of the different generations. The populations are represented in absolute numbers, not percentages.

Generations Secondary Education Tertiary Education Millenial 1735597 252834 Generation X 697317 202387 Boomers 119570 60766 Table 4 Source: Census 2012

202 Vol 5 Issue 2 February, 2017

The International Journal Of Business & Management (ISSN 2321–8916) www.theijbm.com

Educational Attainment

Secondary Tertiary 2000000 1800000 1735597 1600000 1400000 1200000 1000000 800000 697317 600000

400000 252834 202387 119570 200000 60766 0 Millenial Gex X Boomers

Figure 2

Millennials have a very low level of tertiary education. Millennials are quite dominant in all categories but across all generations, there is a considerably small number of people in the tertiary education sector. They are more entrepreneurial and less disposed to pursue tertiary education, yet they have greater opportunities to advance intellectually. That is why they tend to be bargain spenders. The following data relates to employment status of the people who were economically active. This is based on the categories of paid employee and employer while excluding inactive elements.

Paid employee Employer Millennial 54.7 27.3 Generation X 32.3 43 Boomers 12.9 29.7 Table 5

The data in the table is illustrated diagrammatically in the bar graph below.

Employment Patterns

54.7

43

32.3 29.7 27.3

12.9

Millenial Gex X Boomers

Paid employee Employer

Figure 3

203 Vol 5 Issue 2 February, 2017

The International Journal Of Business & Management (ISSN 2321–8916) www.theijbm.com

The greatest size of the workforce was the millennial generation at 54.7%, followed by generation X at32.3% and finally the baby boomers at 12.9%. Among the employees, the generation X had the highest population (43%) followed by the millennial (27.3%) and finally the baby boomers (29.7%). Thus, the combination of boomers and generation X currently outweigh the millennials economically. However, it is a market in transit and this is the time to start preparing for the millennials. As noted above, their spending power shall peak over the next ten years, which gives enough time to recover and plan.

5. Summary In summary, three measures have been used to weigh the size of the market that is made up of the millennials. Firstly, there was sheer size per generational cohort. The millennial cohort was by far the biggest. Secondly, there was a comparison of educational attainment. It emerged that the biggest populations with secondary and tertiary education are the millennials as well. Notwithstanding, this does not translate into any meaningful immediate advantage because proportionally they are outweighed by the other two generations combined. Lastly, when considering the level of economic activity, the biggest numbers are currently generally biased towards the generation Xs and boomers followed by the millennials. This means that the spending power shall increasingly over the next few decade shift towards the millennial generation.

6. Recommendations If the spending power is gravitating towards millennials, then it makes sense to adjust long term strategic plans to suit their generational tastes and preferences without necessarily excluding the earlier generations, especially generation X which still holds the bulk of the share of business ownership. Tourism operators should invest in widespread installations of ICT infrastructure like WIFI hotspots, LAN connections, power reserves, automatic check in, remote assistance, remote technological solutions, e-visas, and biometric access system and data integration. They should also equip their infrastructure with Electronic Funds Transfer (ETF) capabilities so that millennials can make transactions online. Their websites should be interactive enough to prevent unnecessary face to face interaction with customer care staff which is a value millennials care very little about. Hotels should also make an opportunity to rationalise on customer care personnel and invest in an efficient ICT infrastructure.

As an overall comment, in order for the tourism industry to benefit and successfully participate in a typical knowledge economy they need to meet the requirements of:

(1) An institutional framework (policies and structures) that incentivises entrepreneurship and the collection, storage, deployment/utilisation and dissemination of knowledge (2) Ensure the availability of adequate and skilled labour (3) Adequate ICT infrastructure and flexible options for access (4) A vibrant culture and environment which promotes innovation including stakeholders in the academic, public and private sectors. (World Bank, 2012)

Thus if stakeholders in tourism meet these prerequisites, they stand to benefit a lot over the next few years.

7. References i. Armstrong J. S. and Green K. C., (2007), Competitor-oriented Objectives: The Myth of Market Share, International Journal of Business, 12(1) ii. Al-Rahbi, I., Grewal, B. and Sharma, S. (2008), ‘Three Common Misconceptions about the Knowledge Economy and their Relevance to the MENA Countries’, paper presented at The International Conference on Globalisation, Economic Reforms, Aid and Democracy in the Arab World Proceedings, Arab Thought Forum, Amman, , February. iii. Belleau, B. D. Summers, T. A., Xu, Y., & Pinel, R. (2007). Theory of reasoned action purchase intention of young consumers. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 25(3), 244-257. iv. Beldona, S., Nusair, K., & Demicco, F. (2009). Online travel purchase behavior of generational cohorts: a longitudinal study. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 18(4), 406-420. v. Chang, H. U. H., & Sung Hee, P. (2010). Changes in patterns of trip planning horizon: a cohort analytical approach. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 19(3), 260 - 279. vi. Chavula, H. K. (2010). Knowledge and Economic Growth in Africa, ICT Science and Technology Division, UNECA. vii. Cavusoglu B., (2016), Knowledge Economy and North , 3rd Global Conference on Business, Economics, Management and Tourism, 26-28 November 2015, Rome, viii. Cooper L. G., and Nakanishi M., (2010), Market-Share Analysis Evaluating Competitive Marketing Effectiveness, International Series in Quantitative Marketing, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Kluwer Academic Publishers ix. Hogan T., (2011). An Overview of the Knowledge Economy with a Focus on Arizona, Arizona State University, School of Business, Productivity and Prosperity Project

204 Vol 5 Issue 2 February, 2017

The International Journal Of Business & Management (ISSN 2321–8916) www.theijbm.com

x. Hole D., Zhong L. and Schwartz J., (2010), “Talking About Whose Generation, Why Western Generational Models Can’t Account for a Global Workforce”, On Talent, The Talent Paradox: A 21st Century talent and leadership agenda, Deloitte University Press xi. Espinoza, C., Ukleja, M., & Rusch, C. (2010). Managing the Millennials: Discover the core competencies for managing today’s workforce, John Wiley and Sons xii. Garikapati V. M., Pendyala R. M., Morris E. A., Mokhtarian P. L., and McDonald N., (2016), Activity Patterns, Time Use, And Travel Of Millennials: A Generation In Transition?, Transport Reviews · September xiii. Hume, M. (2010). Compassion without action: Examining the young consumers consumption and attitude to sustainable consumption. Journal of World Business, 45(4), 385- 394 xiv. Jackson, V., et al. (2011). Mall attributes and shopping value: Differences by gender and generational cohort. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 18(1), 1-9. xv. Jorgensen, B. (2003). Baby boomers, generation X and generation Y? Foresight, 5(4), 41-49. xvi. Martin, C. A., & Bush, A. J. (2000). Do role models influence teenagers’ purchase intentions and behavior? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 17(5), 441-453. xvii. McDonald, N.C. (2015). Are Millennials Really the “Go-Nowhere” Generation? Journal of the American Planning Association, xviii. Noordin, M.A. and Mohtar, S. (2013). An Exploratory of the Intangible Assets: Methods of Measuring Intellectual Capital, 3rd International Conference on Business, Economics, Management and Behavioural Sciences, . xix. Ordun G., (2015), Millennial (Gen Y) Consumer Behavior, Their Shopping Preferences and Perceptual Maps Associated With Brand Loyalty, Canadian Social Science Vol. 11, No. 4, 2015, pp. 40-55 xx. Pan, B., and D. R. Fesenmaier (2006). Online Information Search: Vacation Planning Process. Annals of Tourism Research, 33(3), 809-32. xxi. Parment, A. (2013). Generation Y vs. baby boomers: Shopping behavior, buyer involvement and implications for retailing. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 20(2), 189- 199. xxii. Polzin, S.E., Chu, X., & Godfrey, J. (2014). The Impact of Millennials' Travel Behavior on Future Personal Vehicle Travel. Energy Strategy Reviews, 5, 59-65. xxiii. Reisenwitz, T. H., & Iyer, R. (2009). Differences in generation X and generation Y: implications for the organization and marketers. Marketing Management Journal, 19(2), 91e103. xxiv. TIA (2008). Travelers' Use of the Internet. Washington, DC: Travel Industry Association of America. xxv. TIA (2009). Travelers' Use of the Internet. Washington D.C.: Travel Industry Association of America. xxvi. World Bank, (2012), World Bank’s Knowledge economic index, World Bank, USA xxvii. Xiang, Z., U. Gretzel, and D. R. Fesenmaier (2008). Semantic Representatin of the Online Tourism Domain. Journal of Travel Research, 47(4), 440-53. xxviii. Yusop N. D. B M., Maizatul Anis Asyikin Binti Mohd Zin, Ikhsan Kurniawan, Girinsah (2015), Tourism and Hospitality Essentials (THE) Journal, Vol.V No.2.

205 Vol 5 Issue 2 February, 2017