Factors affecting chinese tourist’s loyalty towards Ho Chi Minh city - A mediation analysis of tourists’ perceived value
Journal of Science Ho Chi Minh City Open University – VOL. 19 (3) 2016 – October/2016 23
FACTORS AFFECTING CHINESE TOURIST’S LOYALTY
TOWARDS HO CHI MINH CITY - A MEDIATION ANALYSIS OF
TOURISTS’ PERCEIVED VALUE
MAI NGOC KHUONG
International University, Vietnam National University HCMC – Email: mnkhuong@hcmiu.edu.vn
NGUYEN TRAN NGUYEN KHAI
International University, Vietnam National University HCMC – Email: khainguyenminh@gmail.com
DO AI DAO
International University, Vietnam National University HCMC – Email: doaidao0604@gmail.com
(Received: September 1, 2016; Revised: September 23, 2016; Accepted: October 10, 2016)
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this research was to examine empirically the causal relationships among push factors, pull
factors, risk perception, tourists’ perceived value and loyalty of Chinese tourists travelling to Ho Chi Minh City. A
survey was conducted investigating 470 Chinese tourists to collect the primary data. As a result, Chinese tourists’
loyalty towards Ho Chi Minh City could be predicted by some of their push motivation, pull motivation and their
perceived value about the trip or tourists’ services received. Consequently, business organizations and tourism
companies should consider the crucial roles of push and pull factors to attract more potential repeated visitors and
increase their perceived value and loyal to Vietnam, especially to Ho Chi Minh City in the near future.
Keywords: Pull factors; Push factors; Risk perception; Tourists’ loyalty; Tourists’ perceived value.
international visitors. According to VNAT
(2016), Ho Chi Minh City attracted more than
4.6 million international arrivals, a year-on-
year rise of 13%, and created tourism
revenues of VND 94.6 trillion, a rise of 10%
compared to last year. The aforementioned
data showed a significant contribution of
tourism industry to the country’s economy
and promised a great potential in the
development of Vietnam’s tourism in general
and Ho Chi Minh City’s tourism in particular.
Of all international visitors travelling to
Vietnam, Chinese tourists took up the highest
rate in terms of visitors with total arrivals in
the whole year of 2015 of 1,780,918 people, a
decrease of 9.5% compared to the same period
last year (VNAT, 2015). Not only did Chinese
tourists reach record high in terms of total
arrival, they also reach the highest rate in
terms of consumption value. According to
1. Introduction
Recognizing the important role of tourism
industry, Vietnam has attempted to invest and
develop the industry in recent years and
gained some achievements. In 2015,
Vietnam’s
tourism
made
remarkable
achievements and maintained its stability
regardless of challenges in international
political and economic situation and
difficulties in domestic situation. International
tourist arrivals to Viet Nam in November
2015 were estimated at 760,798 visitors, an
increase of 2.6% over the previous month and
15% over the same period last year. Total
international tourist arrivals for 12 months
reached 7,943,651 people, increasing by 0.9%
over the same period last year (VNAT, 2015).
Remarkably, Ho Chi Minh City, one of
the largest cities and most popular
destinations in Vietnam, has attracted many
24
Factors affecting Chinese tourist’s loyalty towards Ho Chi Minh City...
World Tourism Cities Federation (2014),
Chinese tourists spent 128.7 billion dollars
abroad in 2013 including 23% and 10% on
luxury goods in Europe and the US
respectively, an increase of 26.8% over 2012.
With such travelling and spending habits,
Chinese tourists could be regarded as a
potential target market for Vietnam’s tourism.
The number of Chinese tourists travelling
to Ho Chi Minh City had the potential of
increasing year after year. Additionally, Ho
Chi Minh City had many tourism potentials
such as many beautiful sightseeing places,
famous historic relics, natural and cultural
heritages together with diversified cuisines
and recreational activities. However, Vietnam
tourism has faced some tough challenges such
as keen competition from other ASEAN
countries, lack of awareness among people,
poor infrastructure system, as well as some
unfruitful governmental policies to make Viet
Nam a more competitive destination. Many
tourists just came to Viet Nam or Ho Chi
Minh City once and do not return as they
prefer other destinations.
to others and repurchase intentions, and
compound loyalty combined both
components, predicting the construct better
(Dimitriades, 2006; Pritchard & Howard,
1997). In addition, this research also
investigated loyalty in the tourism context
which was defined as the tourists’ intention to
re-visit or return to any destinations.
Visitors’ loyalty had become a key
element for destination marketers and
management researchers (Lee, Graefe, and
Burns, 2007). Retention of loyal customers
brought several benefits for a destination.
Firstly, the marketing costs needed to attract
repeat visits were normally lower than those
to recruit new tourists (Lindgreen, Davis,
Brodie,
and
Buchanan-Oliver,
2000;
Oppermann, 1998). Secondly, tourists
returning to a destination were a positive sign
of their satisfaction (Oppermann, 1998).
Thirdly, repeat visitors form a stable tourist
market. Lastly, they also provided free
advertising in the form of word-of-mouth
recommendations to other potential tourists
(Reid & Reid, 1993; Anderson & Mittal,
2000; Oppermann, 2000; Bowen & Chen,
2001; Lau & McKercher, 2004). Due to the
importance of the visitors’ loyalty for a
destination, both academics and practitioners
had attempted to explore the most prominent
previous research and factors, which most
affected tourist loyalty to increase the
probability of repeat visitors.
This research focused on studying
Chinese tourists from China (Beijing,
Shanghai, Tianjin, Hong Kong, Guangdong,
etc.), and from Chinese-speaking countries
like Taiwan travelling to Ho Chi Minh City.
The participants consisted of both females and
males; and both first time and repeat visitors.
2. Literature Review
Tourists’ Loyalty
Tourists’ Perceived Value
According to Oliver (1997), loyalty
referred to the repeat purchase commitment of
products or services regardless of the
influences of situation or marketing efforts
directed at causing changes in consumers’
behavior. The destination loyalty was
regularly reflected in tourists’ intention to re-
visit the destination (Oppermann, 2000).
Moreover, loyalty was conceptualized from
these three main perspectives: behavioral,
attitudinal and compound (Bowen & Chen,
2001; Zins, 2001). Behavioral loyalty was
reflected in repeat purchase, attitudinal loyalty
includes recommending the service provider
Tourist perceived value was defined as
the overall evaluation of consumers about the
usefulness of any products that was based on
the awareness of the thing they was received
and the thing they was given (Zeithaml,
1988). Zeithaml (ibid) further claimed that
tourist’ perceived value was a comprehensive
construct involving both price variations and
psychological factors. Tourist perceived value
might vary extensively depending on the
types of products and services that were
offered as well as on various consumers’
characteristic (Zeithaml, ibid).
In recent years, several studies in the area
Journal of Science Ho Chi Minh City Open University – VOL. 19 (3) 2016 – October/2016 25
of tourism and hospitality had been done to
examine how the tourist’s perceived value
might impact on different aspects of consumer
behavior. Schiffman and Kanuk (2004)
claimed that the main objective of providing
value to clients and making an organization
more effective than their competitors was to
have and to retain highly satisfied client. The
empirical study of tourist perceived value
showed that it was more relatively significant
and comprehensive when putting in the
tourism context than in other settings
(Gallarza & Saura, 2006).
as a specific motivation that caused him to
take a vacation (Goossens, 2000). This
research also highlighted the four factors of
the push motivation: self-exploratory,
relaxation, prestige, and social interaction.
According to Crompton (1979), pull
factors were tangible resources and traveler’s
perception and expectation for the included
features, attractions, or attributes of a specific
destination of choice. Pull factors were
external forces that correlated to the natural
and historic attractions, food, people,
recreation services, and marketed image of the
destination (Uysal & Jurowski, 1994). Pull
factors influenced the choice of a destination
and the reference made by using those factors
would lead to the selection of a destination
once the decision of travel had been made
(Klenosky, 2002). This research deeply
examined pull factors including the following
6 main factors: destination image; natural
environment; infrastructure and accessibility;
cultural, history and art; entertainment,
recreation and other activities; local cuisine.
According to the literature of consumer
behaviors, perceived risk was a multi-
dimensional construct including several
primary risk facets: equipment, financial,
physical, satisfaction, social, psychological,
and moment in time (Kaplan, Szybillo, and
Jacoby, 1974). Previous research had
confirmed that perceptions of risk and safety
could directly influence tourists’ destination
choice as well as their probability to visit or
avoid certain destinations, particularly areas
which safety was uncertain (Sonmez &
Graefe, 1998a). This factor was divided into
three small factors: destination related risk,
physical risk, and travel related risk. This
aimed to have an in-depth understanding
about the risks that really affected tourists’
perceived value or loyalty. Destination related
risk comprised of items such as the reactions
of family and friends toward the trip, the
compatibility of the trip with the individual’s
self-image and personality, difficulties in
communicating and adapting with the culture
of the destination, and the locals’ attitudes
The Factors Affect to Tourists’ Loyalty
This study emphasized three main factors
which might affect tourists’ expectation: push
factor, pull factor and risk perception. The
concept of push and pull travel motivation
factors had become one of the most popular
and helpful frameworks to study and examine
tourists’ behaviors. These two factors
explained that people decided to travel
because they were pushed by their own
internal motivation and pulled by the external
motivation from characteristic of the
destination. Push factors referred to the
motivation that pushed a person from home or
one destination to travel to another
destination, pull factors were the motivation
that pull individuals towards a specific
destination. Moreover, this research also
conducted an in-depth exploration about the
negative attribute – risk perception – which
might or might not affect tourists’ loyalty.
The features of each motivation factor created
an in-depth discussion as below.
According to Crompton (1979), the push
factors consisted of seven socio-psychological
motivation
(including ‘escape’,
‘self-
exploratory’,
‘relaxation’, ‘prestige’,
‘regression’, ‘kinship enhancement’, and
‘social interaction’) and two other cultural
motivations (novelty and education). These
push factors were regarded as extremely
important factors to help us understand the
reason for tourists to take a holiday and their
behaviors. Push factors helped a person build
the desire to make a holiday and was regarded
26
Factors affecting Chinese tourist’s loyalty towards Ho Chi Minh City...
toward international tourists that leads to an
unpleasant experience (Dolnicar 2005; Fuchs
& Reichel 2006b). Physical risk consisted of
many factors such as food safety, infectious
diseases, natural disasters, car accidents,
crime, terrorism, and political turmoil
of the research, all questions were raised as
suitable as possible. Most of questions were
designed and formulated based on a five-point
Likert-scale ranging from 1 to 5, equivalent to
1= Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 =
Neutral, 4 = Agree and 5 = Strongly agree.
The original questionnaire was firstly written
in English, and then was translated to
Chinese; written in the simple Mandarin form
to make it easier and more understandable for
Chinese respondents.
Primary data was the main data source for
analysis, which was obtained directly from
Chinese tourists travelling to Ho Chi Minh.
The data was collected by two ways: (1) gave
questionnaire directly to the target
respondents and (2) did online survey by
sending questionnaire link to respondents
through email and Facebook. Some
respondents were approached by tour guides,
restaurant and hotel servants at various tourist
attractions in the center of Ho Chi Minh City,
such as Ben Thanh Market, the Unification
Palace, Museum of War Remnant, etc.; and in
District 5. The respondents were also given
incentives (a pen with a yellow ribbon bow) to
reduce the rejection rate.
(Mitchell
&
Vassos, 1997; Maser
&
Weiermair, 1998; Fuchs & Reichel 2006b).
Travel related risk included the factors that
related to equipment and conditional problems
or troubles like bad weather, transport
breakdown, inappropriate company, and
misuse of time and money (Fuchs & Reichel,
2006b; Reisinger & Mavondo, 2006).
3. Methodology
Research proposed framework
With the importance of push, pull factors
and risk perception to the tourism, this
research proposed a model of 13 independent
factors, of which there are 4 pull factors, 6
pull factors and 3 risk perception factors that
might affect Chinese tourists’ loyalty and
perceived value.
To confirm the direct and indirect effects
of push, pull, perceived risk factors, and
perceived value on tourists’ loyalty, this study
hypothesized that:
H1: Push factors, pull factors, and risk
perceived factors directly affect tourists’
perceived value
H2: Push factors, pull factors, risk
perceived factors, and tourists’ perceived
value directly affect tourists’ loyalty
H3: The effects of push factors, pull
factors, and risk perceived factors on tourists’
loyalty is mediated by tourists’ perceived
value
Sample Background
Through the data collection process, 470
responses were collected from Chinese
tourists with 61.3% female and 38.7% male.
Most of the respondents were from age of 41
to 60 (31.1%), followed by 31 – 40 age group
(28.5%), 26-30 age group (19.8%), above 60
(7.2%), 18-25 age group (7%) and below 18
(6.4%). The data implied what potential
customers of Vietnam tourism like.
Generation Y or millennial could be lucrative
market in the long run but at the present
Generation X is the main segment that
tourism industry should focus on. Besides, the
sample recognized that 36.4% of the
respondents have college degree, 45.3% is
studying or completed university degree and
5.7% has master degree or higher.
Accordingly, tourist businesses should have a
very special and systematic business plan to
be able to meet these well-educated tourists’
Questionnaire
Collection
Design
and
Data
Because the study aimed to identify
factors affecting Chinese tourists’ loyalty
when travelling to Ho Chi Minh City,
questionnaire was considered as the most
appropriate
research
instrument.
The
questionnaire was built based on major
concepts and variables, which were mentioned
in the literature review section. In order to
ensure the reliability and validity of all scales
Journal of Science Ho Chi Minh City Open University – VOL. 19 (3) 2016 – October/2016 27
needs. Moreover, nearly half of the
respondents (49.1%) have visited Ho Chi
Minh City twice and 30.9% of them came to
the city for the first time. Surprisingly, 77
Chinese tourists came three times (16.4%) and
17 more than three times (3.6%). These
figures show that Ho Chi Minh City has
become more and more popular among
Chinese tourists.
In this study, Exploratory Factor analysis
(EFA) was applied twice for the groups of
independent and dependent variables. For
independent variables, the KMO measure of
sampling adequacy (KMO = .793) and
Bartlett’s test of Sphericity was significant
(Sig = .000). Therefore, this factor analysis
was considered appropriate. In the table of
Total Variance Explained, these factors
accounted for 72% of the total variance,
which was higher than 50%.
4. Research Findings
Factor Analysis and Reliability
Table 1
Summary of Independent Variables with Reliability Coefficients
Type of factor No. of
Items
Given Names
Alpha
Self-exploratory (SELEXPLO)
Relaxation (RELAX)
PUSH
PUSH
PUSH
PUSH
PULL
PULL
PULL
PULL
PULL
5
5
4
5
6
4
5
5
.911
.863
.910
.962
.927
.771
.827
.903
Factor 1
Factor 2
Factor 3
Factor 4
Factor 5
Factor 6
Factor 7
Factor 8
Prestige (PRESTI)
Social Interaction (SOCINT)
Destination Image (DESIMA)
Natural Environment (NATENVI)
Infrastructure and Accessibility (INFRACES)
Cultural, History and Art (CULHISA)
Entertainment, Recreation and Other activities
(ENRENOT)
5
5
5
.761
.882
.907
Factor 9
Factor 10
Factor 11
Local Cuisine (LOCUIS)
PULL
RISK
PERCEPTION
Destination Related Risk (DERERIS)
RISK
PERCEPTION
Physical Risk (PHYRIS)
5
5
.891
.920
Factor 12
Factor 13
RISK
PERCEPTION
Travel Related Risk (TRARERIS)
The second Exploratory Factor Analysis
finding, the KMO = .820 and Bartlett’s test of
sphericity Sig = .000 satisfied the initial
conditions of EFA. Components were retained
only when they had the initial eigenvalues of 1
or higher. These factors accounted for 59% of
the total variance, which was higher than 50%.
was conducted for the group of two dependent
variables. The KMO and Bartlett’s test of
sphericity and Varimax Rotation were applied
for 6 tourists’ perceived value attributes and 4
tourists’ loyalty attributes. Based on the
28
Factors affecting Chinese tourist’s loyalty towards Ho Chi Minh City...
Table 2
Summary of Dependent Variables with Reliability Coefficients
Given Names
No. of Items
Alpha
.725
Tourists’ Loyalty (TOLOY)
4
6
Factor 14
Factor 15
Tourists’ Perceived Value (PERVA)
.859
the intervening variable, SELEXPLO,
RELAX, ENRENOT, and NATENVI had
indirect effects on tourists’ loyalty at (=-
.012), (=-.014), (=-.047), and (=-.029).
Significance of the Indirect Effects
Factors Affecting Tourists’ Perceived
Value and Tourists’ Loyalty
In the Pearson’s Correlation Analysis, the
strength and direction of association between
Independent Variables and Tourists’ Loyalty
were examined. The finding indicated the
Table 3 shows the results of the
bootstrapping method recommended by
Preacher and Hayes (2008) to test the
significance of indirect effects or mediations.
The output provided the bootstrapped
confidence intervals (at the 95%). If there is a
ZERO (0) lies within the interval range
between the lower boundary (LL) and the
upper boundary (UL), then we can conclude
that, with 95% confidence, there is no
mediation or indirect effect. On the other
hand, if zero does not occur between the LL
and the UL, then we can conclude that, with
95% confidence, the mediation or indirect
effect is significant (Preacher and Hayes,
2004). As can be seen in the output of Table
4, the indirect effects of SELEXPLO,
RELAX, ENRENOT, and NATENVI on
TOLOY through the mediation of PERVA
were estimated to lie between -.0236 (LL) and
-.0027 (UL), -.0275 (LL) and -.0040, -.0785
(LL) and -.0184 (UL), and -.0502 (LL) and -
positive
independent
SELEXPLO, and RELAX) and TOLOY, with
r = .147, p<.01; r = .164, p<.01; and r = .139,
p<.01 respectively; and negative correlation
correlation
between
three
variables
(SOCINT,
between
two
independent
variables
(INFRACES; NATENVI and PERVA) and
TOLOY with r = -.151, p<.01; r = -.195,
p<.01; and r = -.102, p<.05 respectively. This
means the stronger SOCINT, SELEXPLO,
and RELAX the travelers had, the higher
Loyalty degree they felt; and the stronger
INFRACES, NATENVI and PERVA Ho Chi
Minh City had, the lower Loyalty degree
travelers felt. Moreover, in the Linear
Regression Analysis, the R squared value of
the model was .139. It meant the model could
explain 13.9% the variation of Tourists’
Loyalty.
Indirect Effects of Tourists’ Loyalty
The results of multiple regression
analysis indicated that tourists’ perceived
value was significantly affected by four out of
thirteen independent variables: SELEXPLO
(=.090, p <.05), RELAX (=.110, p <.05),
ENRENOT (=.367, p <.05), and NATENVI
(=.222, p <.05). In addition, tourists’
perceived value had a direct effect on tourists’
loyalty ((=-.129, p <.05). Therefore, through
.0109
(UL)
with
95%
confidence,
respectively. Because zero is not in the 95%
confidence interval, we can conclude that the
indirect effects of SELEXPLO, RELAX,
ENRENOT and NATENVI on TOLOY were
indeed significantly different from zero at p
<.05 (two tailed) and the mediation of
PERVA in this study was true.
Journal of Science Ho Chi Minh City Open University – VOL. 19 (3) 2016 – October/2016 29
Table 3
Direct, Indirect and Total casual effects
Variables
Casual Effects
Direct
.083
Indirect
Total
.071
LL
UL
SELEXPLO
RELAX
-.012
-.014
-.047
-.029
-
-.0236
-.0275
-.0785
-.0502
-.0027
-.0040
-.0184
-.0109
.111
.097
ENRENOT
NATENVI
SOCINT
.175
.128
-.139
.083
-.168
.083
INFRACES
PERVA
-.090
-.129
-
-.090
-.129
-
The Causal Effects of Tourists’ Loyalty
According to the result, the NATENVI
factor had the strongest effect on Tourists’
Loyalty of Chinese tourists surveyed, with = -
.168, followed by Tourists’ Perceived Value
with = -.129; ENRENOT factor with
= .128; RELAX factor with = .097;
INFRACES factor with = -.090; SOCINT
factor with = .083. The SELEXPLO factor
had the weakest effect on their Loyalty towards
Ho Chi Minh City with = .071 only. Finally,
the total effect of these factors on Tourists’
Loyalty was -.008.
SOCINT
.083
SELEXPLO
RELAX
.090
.110
.083
.111
-.129
.175
PERVA
TOLOY
.367
ENRENOT
.222
-.139
NATENVI
-.090
INFRACES
Figure 1. Path Coefficients of the Structural Equation for Hypothesis Testing
30
Factors affecting Chinese tourist’s loyalty towards Ho Chi Minh City...
5. Discussion and Recommendations
Discussion
According to figure 1, the dependent
illustrated, with Self-exploratory ( = -.012);
Relaxation ( -.014); Entertainment,
=
Recreation and Other Activities ( = -.047);
and Natural Environment (=-.029), which
answer Hypothesis 3. For total effects, Natural
Environment had the strongest effect on
Chinese Tourists’ Loyalty with = -.168.
Therefore, push motivation combined
with pull motivation and the perceived value
to the trip of the Chinese tourist could help
predict their loyalty towards Ho Chi Minh
City. The findings of this research were
partially similar to the results of research
made by Allan (2011); Cam (2011); Chang,
(2013); and Khuong and Ha (2014).
However, the results of this study also provide
some negative correlations between Tourists’
Loyalty and Tourists’ Perceived Value and
two pull motivation (Natural Environment;
and Infrastructure and Accessibility), which
create a slight difference from other previous
studies.
variable – Tourists’ Loyalty was directly
affected by seven factors: Social Interaction
( = .083); Self-exploratory ( = .083);
Relaxation (
Recreation and Other Activities ( = .175);
Natural Environment ( -.139);
=
.111); Entertainment,
=
Infrastructure and Accessibility ( = -.090)
and Tourists’ Perceived Value ( = -.129) at
the 95% confidence level, which answered
Hypothesis 2, and 13.9% the variation of
Tourists’ Loyalty could explained by these
factors (R2 = .139).
The two main factors that directly affect
Chinese Tourist Loyalty are Relaxation factor
and Entertainment, Recreation and Other
activities factor showing the importance of
both pull and push factors in tourism industry.
Tourists look for destinations that can make
them feel relaxed and of course such
destinations need to have special and unique
selling points in terms of entertainment,
nightlife, recreation, etc. It suggests policy-
makers to encourage business, and change
image of Vietnam to an active, interesting and
fun destination with various activities for
tourists.
In comparison with Cam’s research
(2011), some significant differences were
found. In her findings, local food,
environment and socio cultural factors were
attractive to tourists travelling to Nha Trang
while factors such as leisure, entertainment,
infrastructure
and
accessibility
were
unattractive to them. On the contrary, this
research found that such factors have some
effect on Chinese tourists’ perceived value
and loyalty.
Only 13.9 percent of the variance in the
TOLOY could be explained by six out of
thirteen independent variables. This research
covered many factors; however, the R square
value was not high. It means there might be
some other factors relating to Vietnamese
demographic or Vietnamese family/relative
characteristics that could affect Chinese
tourists’ loyalty. Many Chinese tourists
travelling to Ho Chi Minh City because their
relatives are living here; therefore, further
research studying Chinese tourists’ loyalty
should focus more on other different factors to
increase the percent that could be explained.
Moreover, by conducting Path
Moreover, Khuong and Ha (2014) found
some slight different results by examining
larger and more diversified target respondents
including international leisure tourists
(England, American, Chinese, French,
Japanese, and Korean) traveling to the same
destination, Ho Chi Minh City. Their findings
showed that pull factors had significant and
positive influence on tourists’ destination and
return intention to Vietnam. This was contrast
to this research’s findings due to different
target respondents between the two studies.
The negative effect between Tourists’
Analysis, the indirect impacts of Independent
Variables on Tourists’ Loyalty through
Tourists’ Perceived Value were also
Loyalty and Tourists’ Perceived Value or
Journal of Science Ho Chi Minh City Open University – VOL. 19 (3) 2016 – October/2016 31
Tourists’ Loyalty and two pull motivations
(Natural Environment, Infrastructure and
Accessibility) might result from the fact that
the research target respondents were mostly
Chinese visitors travelling not only for
tourism purposes but also for doing business
or visiting relatives. Noticeably, some of the
respondents were businessman or investors
who want to invest in Ho Chi Minh City. The
less quality of Ho Chi Minh City natural
prepared for alternative activities or plans to
meet the different customers’ needs and to
offer interesting and unforgettable tourism
experiences. Tourist companies should
cooperate with some recreational areas to
offer tourists more exciting activities (cooking
classes, sports, sailing, golf, etc.) and combine
with special events or traditional holidays
with special deal or discounts. Furthermore,
more special events and festivals (about
culture, sport or shopping, etc.) should be
hold to attract more inbound tourists and
impress them during a trip to the city.
Finally, factors such as natural
environment, infrastructure & accessibility
system had negative effect on Tourists’
Loyalty. The reason was probably that some
research respondents are Chinese travellers
who wanted to invest in Ho Chi Minh City.
Ho Chi Minh City’s natural environment,
infrastructure and accessibility system were
generally good but not good enough for
Chinese visitors to build up their loyalty
toward the city so that they can return, start up
their business and invest in the city. If these
assumptions were true, Ho Chi Minh City’s
government should have some encouraging
moves to build trust in foreign investors. Also,
the city’s administrative system should spend
more time and money improving their service.
The tourism managers need regularly check
and update the state of all restaurants, hotels
and entertaining places (such as bars, movie
theaters, karaoke or shopping stores, etc.) in
the city to make sure that they are in good
condition. If any problems or damaged things
are detected, they will need to be repaired
immediately.
environment
and
infrastructure
&
accessibility, the less Chinese visitors
perceived value to Ho Chi Minh City; the
more loyalty Chinese visitors had towards Ho
Chi Minh City to improve or invest, which
depend very much on their aims of travelling
to Ho Chi Minh City.
Recommendations for Ho Chi Minh’s
Tourism
Based on these results, the research
provides local tourism policymakers with
some constructive recommendations for
raising Chinese tourists’ loyalty as they travel
to the city.
Firstly, Vietnam destination marketers
should invest more in impressive tourism
advertisements and attractive promotional
programs to boost potential customers’ travel
motivation. Investing in tourism websites and
video clips with diversified tourist
information and images may also be effective
ways to introduce Vietnam’s destinations to
foreigners. Tourism organizations must create
a positive atmosphere and build up good
relationships with customers before, during
and after a visit. The term “after” means that
the organization should recreate an experience
of satisfaction for tourists and make them
desire to return and, at the same time, recall
the memorable moments they have had about
the destination.
6. Conclusion
In summary, this study sought to provide
overall understanding about the tourism
industry of Ho Chi Minh City and to
recommend some methods to measure tourists’
loyalty by identifying all independent and
significant factors that directly or indirectly
affected their loyalty. By analyzing the
information collected from 470 respondents
Secondly, tourist agents should diversify
vacation packages and develop destination
programs and activities to provide tourist with
more choices. They should be more flexible in
designing and providing tourist products and
services. Besides, they need to get well
32
Factors affecting Chinese tourist’s loyalty towards Ho Chi Minh City...
who travelled to Ho Chi Minh City, the
research discovered some valuable results.
Seven factors significantly affecting
Chinese tourists’ loyalty include: (1) Social
There were 4 factors held positive beta
value, which meant the better Entertainment;
Recreations and Other Activities; Relaxation;
Social Interaction; Self-exploratory; the more
loyalty Chinese tourist would have towards
Ho Chi Minh City. In contrary, there were 3
factors that held negative beta value, which
meant the lower Natural Environment;
Tourists’ Perceived Value; Infrastructure and
Accessibility; the more loyalty Chinese tourist
would have towards Ho Chi Minh City.
Based on these results, the research
provided some constructive recommendations
for local tourism policy-makers to raise the
loyalty of Chinese tourists coming to this
destination, which might contribute to the
success of tourism industry of Ho Chi Minh
City
Interaction,
(2)
Self-exploratory,
(3)
Relaxation; (4) Entertainment, Recreations
and
Environment;
Other
Activities;
(6) Infrastructure
(5)
Natural
and
Accessibility and (7) Tourists’ Perceived
Value. Especially, of which Entertainment,
Recreations and Other Activities was the most
important factor greatly affecting tourists’
loyalty with the largest beta value (.175),
followed by Natural Environment; Tourists’
Perceived Value; Relaxation; Infrastructure
and Accessibility; Social Interaction; and
Self-exploratory with = -.139; -.129; .111; -
.09; .083 and .083 respectively.
References
Allan, M. (2011). Toward a better understanding of motivations for a geotourism experience: A self-determination
Anderson, E. W. & Mittal, V. (2000). Strengthening the satisfaction - profit chain. Journal of Service Research,
3(2), 107–120. doi: 10.1177/109467050032001
Bowen, J. & Chen, S. (2001).The relationship between customer loyalty and customer satisfaction. International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 13(5), 213–217. doi:
Cam, T. T. A. (2011). Explaining tourists satisfaction and intention to revisit Nha Trang, Viet Nam. (Master thesis).
Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10037/3782/.
Chang, L. (2013). Influencing Factors on Creative Tourists’ Revisiting Intentions: The Roles of Motivation,
Experience and Perceived Value. Dissertations. Paper 1084.
Crompton, J. (1979). Motivations for pleasure vacations. Annals of Tourism Research, 6(4), 408-424.
Dimitriades, Z. S. (2006). Customer satisfaction, loyalty and commitment in service organizations. Management
Research News, 29(12), 782–800. doi:
Dolnicar, S. (2005). Understanding Barriers to Leisure Travel: Tourist Fears as a Marketing Basis. Journal of
Vacation Marketing, 11(3), 197-208. doi: 10.1177/1356766705055706
Fuchs, G. & Reichel, A. (2006b). Tourist Destination Risk Perception: The Case of Israel. Journal of Hospitality
and Leisure Marketing, 14 (2), 83-108. doi: 10.1300/J150v14n02_06
Gallarza, M. G. & Saura, I. G. (2006). Value dimensions, perceived value, satisfaction and loyalty: an investigation
of
university
students’
travel
behavior.
Tourism
Management,
27(3),
437–452.
doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2004.12.002
Ghazizadeh, M., Besheli, A. L. & Talebi, V. (2010). Assessing of bank customers retention and loyalty: a case study
of state-owned banks in Tehran. European Journal of Social Sciences, 17(2), 274-287.
Journal of Science Ho Chi Minh City Open University – VOL. 19 (3) 2016 – October/2016 33
Goossens, C. (2000). Tourism information and pleasure motivation. Annals of tourism research, 27(2), 301- 321.
doi: 10.1016/S0160-7383(99)00067-5
Hair, J. F. Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E. & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis, 6th
edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Harwood, M. (2002). Branding on a budget: building the community bank’s image. Community Banker, 11(4), 24-
28.
Preacher, J. K. and Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and re sampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect
effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879-891. doi:
10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
Preacher, J. K. and Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple
mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(4), 717-731. doi:
10.3758/BF03206553
Kaplan, L. B., Geogre, J. S., and Jacoby, J. (1974). Components of Perceived Risk in Product Purchase: A Cross
Khuong, M. N., and Ha, H. T. T. (2014). The Influences of Push and Pull Factors on the International Leisure
Tourists’ Return Intention to Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam — A Mediation Analysis of Destination
Satisfaction. International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance, 5(6), 490-496. doi:
10.7763/IJTEF.2014.V5.421
Klenosky, D. B. (2002). The pull of tourism destinations: a means-end investigation. Journal of travel research,
40(4), 396-403. doi: 10.1177/004728750204000405
Lau, A. L. S. & McKercher, B. (2004). Exploration versus acquisition: A comparison of first time and repeat
visitors. Journal of Travel Research, 42(3), 279–285. doi: 10.1177/0047287503257502
Lee, J., Graefe, A. R., & Burns, R. C. (2007). Examining the antecedents of destination loyalty in a forest setting.
Leisure Sciences: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 29(5), 463– 481. doi: 10.1080/01490400701544634
Lindgreen, A., Davis, R., Brodie, R. J., & Buchanan-Oliver, M. (2000). Pluralism in contemporary marketing
practices. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 18 (6), 294–308. doi:
Maser, B., & Weiermair, K. (1998). Travel Decision- Making: From the Vantage Point of Perceived Risk and
Information Preferences. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 7(4), 107-21. doi:
10.1300/J073v07n04_06
Mitchell, V. W. & Vassos, V. (1997). Perceived Risk and Risk Reduction in Holiday Purchases: A Cross- Cultural
and Gender Analysis. Journal of Euromarketing, 6(3), 47-79. doi: 10.1300/J037v06n03_03
Oliver. (1997). Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perspective on the Consumer. New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies,
Inc.
Oppermann, M. (1998). Destination threshold potential and the law of repeat visitation. Journal of Travel Research,
37(2), 131–137. doi: 10.1177/004728759803700204
Oppermann, M. (2000). Tourism destination loyalty. Journal of Travel Research, 39(1), 78– 84. doi:
10.1177/004728750003900110
Pritchard, M. & Howard, D. R. (1997). The loyal traveler: examining a typology of service patronage. Journal of
Travel Research, 35(4), 2–10. doi: 10.1177/004728759703500417.
Reid, L. & Reid, S. (1993). Communicating tourism supplier services: Building repeat tourist relationships. Journal
of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 2(2/3), 3–19. doi: 10.1300/J073v02n02_02
Reisinger, Y. & Mavondo, F. (2006). Cultural Differences in Travel Risk Perception. Journal of Travel and Tourism
Marketing, 20(1): 13-31. doi: 10.1300/J073v20n01_02
Schiffman, G. L. & Kanuk, L. L. (2004). Consumer Behavior. Pearson Education, Inc.
34
Factors affecting Chinese tourist’s loyalty towards Ho Chi Minh City...
Sonmez, S. F., and Graefe, A. R. (1998a). Determining Future Travel Behavior from Past Travel Experience and
Perceptions of Risk and Safety. Journal of Travel Research, 37(2), 171-177. doi:
10.1177/004728759803700209
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics, 4th edition. New York: HarperCollins.
Uysal, M. & Jurowski, C. (1994). Testing of the push and pull factors. Annals of Tourism Research, 21(4), 844-846.
doi:10.1016/0160-7383(94)90091-4
VNAT – Vietnam National Administration of Tourism. (December 28, 2015). International visitors to Vietnam in
December and 12 months of 2015. Retrieved from
VNAT – Vietnam National Administration of Tourism. (January 15, 2016). HCM City targets 5.1 million
World Tourism Cities Federation. (December 09, 2014). Market Research Report on Chinese Outbound Tourist
World Travel & Tourism Council. (March 2016). 2016 Economic Impact Annual Update Summary. Retrieved from
Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-end model and synthesis of
evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 2–22. doi: 10.2307/1251446
Zins, A. H. (2001). Relative attitudes and commitment in customer loyalty models. International Journal of Service
Industry Management, 12(3), 269–294. doi:
12 trang
08/01/2024
880
Bạn đang xem tài liệu "Factors affecting chinese tourist’s loyalty towards Ho Chi Minh city - A mediation analysis of tourists’ perceived value", để tải tài liệu gốc về máy hãy click vào nút Download ở trên
File đính kèm:
- factors_affecting_chinese_tourists_loyalty_towards_ho_chi_mi.pdf
