Co-Creation through Technology: Dimensions of Social Connectedness
Download as PPTX, PDF1 like501 views
The document summarizes a research presentation on how tourists co-create experiences through technology. It identifies three dimensions of technology-facilitated co-creation: 1) Social connectedness vs. disconnectedness, 2) Social intercommunication vs. interaction, and 3) Social co-participation vs. co-living. A model is proposed that maps these dimensions on a continuum based on the level of involvement and connection in the tourist experience. The research contributes to understanding how co-creation occurs through different intensities with social networks and implications for facilitating richer socially co-created experiences are discussed.
Co-Creation through Technology: Dimensions of Social Connectedness
- 1. Co-Creation through Technology: Dimensions of Social Connectedness Barbara Neuhofer, Dimitrios Buhalis and Adele Ladkin BU eTourismLab Bournemouth University, UK Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 1
- 2. Agenda • Introduction • Theoretical Background • Methodology & Data Collection • Findings • Discussion • Conclusions & Implications Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 2
- 3. Agenda • Introduction • Theoretical Background • Methodology & Data Collection • Findings • Discussion • Conclusions & Implications Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 3
- 4. Introduction • Co-Creation key notion in tourism research and practice • Supported by ICTs levels of engagement, interaction and co-creation reach new extent • Yet, there is a lack of understanding how tourists cocreation through ICTs This study has therefore the purpose to explore how: “to explore how tourists co-create through technology” Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 4
- 5. Agenda • Introduction • Theoretical Background • Methodology & Data Collection • Findings • Discussion • Conclusion & Implications Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 5
- 6. CO-CREATION Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 6
- 7. Consumer Centricism & Co-creation Experiences have undergone a significant change: • Distribution of power relationships companies-consumers • Consumers no longer want designed, staged and delivered experiences but play active part (Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004) • Emergence of service-dominant logic (Vargo & Lusch, 2004), coproduction and co-creation (Ramaswamy, 2009) • Multitude of social dimensions in a range of social contexts (Helkkula et al., 2012) • Recognition of C2C as source of value creation Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 7
- 8. TECHNOLOGY Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 8
- 9. Social and mobile ICTs • Advances in Web 2.0 and social media has opened new levels of engagement and interaction (Fotis et al., 2011; Sigala, 2009; Xiang & Gretzel, 2010) • Consumers changed from passive recipients to connected prosumers in a technology enabled experience environment (Andersson, 2007, Gretzel et al., 2006) • Mobile devices allow tourists to connect on the move anywhere and anytime (Green, 2002; Wang, Park, & Fesenmaier, 2012) Neuhofer et al. 2014 MOBILE ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 9
- 10. Socially Connected Tourist • ICTs support experience co-creation in a number of different ways: – – – – Platform of interaction companies/consumers (Hultkrantz, 2002) Establish a dialogue (Buhalis and Licata, 2000) Create more meaningful interrelations (Binkhorst and Den Dekker, 2009) ICTs lead co-creation to a new level and create a multi-phase co-creation space in the – physical and virtual world (Neuhofer et al., 2012) Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 10
- 11. Agenda • Introduction • Theoretical Background • Methodology & Data Collection • Findings • Discussion • Conclusions & Implications Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 11
- 12. Problem Definition & Research Question • Notion of ICTs supporting experience co-creation is widely discussed • Dominant focus on B2C perspectives on how companies facilitate co-creation, while customer-to-customer cocreation (C2C) is still under researched in tourism and ICT Research Question: 1. 2. How does the connected tourist consumer use social and mobile technologies to co-create the tourist experience? What are the dimensions of technology-facilitated co-creation? Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 12
- 13. Methodological Approach Research Approach Qualitative In-Depth Interviews 15 Exploratory In-Depth Interviews with Tourist Consumers: a) technology-savvy (smartphone and sm use) b) Have used ICTs for travel in 12 months TO GATHER: insights into the company-centric perspective of experience creation Analysis: qualitative thematic analysis - multi-stage coding process QSR NVivo 10 Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 13
- 14. Agenda • Introduction • Theoretical Background • Methodology & Data Collection • Findings • Discussion • Conclusions & Implications Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 14
- 15. Consumer Profile Nr. Pseudonym Gender Age Smartphone 1 Laura Female 20 Samsung Galaxy 2 Jane Female 29 iPhone 3 Martha Female 24 iPod 4 Veronica Female 40 iPhone 5 Sam Male 23 Samsung Galaxy 6 Paul Male 62 iPhone 7 John Male 34 Blackberry 8 Sandra Female 27 HTC 9 Teresa Female 23 HTC 10 Andrew Male 30 Samsung 11 Dan Male 45 Blackberry 12 Aaron Male 32 iPhone 13 Steve Male 32 Samsung Galaxy 14 Rachel Female 24 Blackberry 15 Hanna Female 30 iPhone Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 15
- 16. Findings • 1) Social Connectedness vs. Social Disconnectedness • 2) Social Intercommunication vs. Social Interaction • 3) Social Co-Participation vs. Social Co-Living Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 16
- 17. 1) Social Connectedness vs. Social Disconnectedness Social connectedness is a crucial part of tourist experiences when being physically distant from home. Principal values: • Being updated • Avoid feeling spatially and temporarily isolated from everyday life • Stay in touch with family, friends and also the work community • Provides tourists a sense of attachment to home ‘While being physically away, mentally you have the feeling that they are still present.’ “If you don’t and can’t Interact with the people around you, because you might not know them, then it is nice to have a conversation or have this kind of sense that other people are still around you, even though it is kind of virtual, it gives you kind of a security, and then you are more willing to share the experience.” Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 17
- 18. 1) Social Connectedness vs. Social Disconnectedness Contrasting position suggests: Social disconnectedness – State of being connected to and co-creating with the social network often represents an inhibitor of switching off, preventing escapism from home and enjoying the ‘real experience’. – Importance of living the ‘real experience’ and maintaining co-creation with individuals, such as tourists or tourism providers, in the physical surroundings. “Because if I connect so much it is not kind of travelling anymore, you are, I don’t know, I just really like I want to get off the daily life, so I seek the reality, because if you stick so much with technology you don’t really enjoy the place you live.” Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 18
- 19. 2) Social Intercommunication vs. Social Interaction Social connectedness and co-creation through ICTs important part of the travel experience Intensity of the social encounter varies – distinction between social intercommunication and social interaction Social media facilitated interactions frequently lack a deeper dialogue and meaning Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 19
- 20. 2) Social Intercommunication vs. Social Interaction Social intercommunication Two way interaction including different tasks: uploading and sharing, commenting in the social network while travelling While participants co-create, it frequently appears to be a form of superficial interaction through social networking lacking depth. “When I post pictures of things when I share things about my travel experience the best comment I have “very nice” but we are not creating a meaning.” Participants state that this does not account for a full interaction or replace meaningful exchanges and dialogues as they occur in the real environment. Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 20
- 21. 2) Social Intercommunication vs. Social Interaction Social interaction Deeper form of dialogue in which a meaning between individuals is created “I think interaction should create a meaning, I have a position, you have a position and we discuss about it and then there is a third position coming up which is blended.” “I can share it a little bit and then we just talk about it to say, my friend “oh I can’t believe you had that” “yes” and “I have been to your house and it was nothing like that” or something like that”. When sharing travel experiences and co-creating with network leads to meaningful discussions on a mutual subject which added socially constructed value to the actual physical tourist experience. Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 21
- 22. 3) Social Co-Participation vs. Social Co-Living Increasing intensity of co-creation: technology allows tourists to not only connect and interact but allows for immersive form of co-creation in which the network can become part of the experience itself Intense form of co-creation in which: individuals in the connected social network become virtual coparticipants of the tourist’s lived tourist experience A sensation expresses as ‘others being there with you during travels’ Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 22
- 23. 3) Social Co-Participation vs. Social Co-Living Social co-participation: People co-create by becoming virtual travel companions of the experience in real time “Just the feeling to have the other people participating in your journey even though they are not there but to share your experience with them because you can’t share it with no one else because no one else is there.” “I mean you can make friends on your journey but then you share it with your virtual friends instead of sharing it with a person who is not there”. In this form of co-creation, the social network socially co-constructs the experience online. “I don’t even consider to try that food during my planning, and because my friend told me that I have to try this food or this drink, it inspires you ‘ok maybe I can try things that they recommend me’ so it gives me information, so it is two ways.” Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 23
- 24. 3) Social Co-Participation vs. Social Co-Living Social co-living: The online shared experience can become real to an extent that people are not only participating but essentially co-living the travel moment. “Some others just travel through my eyes, so they have never had the chance to go to. “ When sharing experiences, the connected tourist can allow people to communicate, interact, participate, re-construct experiences as well as lend people virtual eyes to co-live tourist moments from the distance in the home environment. Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 24
- 25. Agenda • Introduction • Theoretical Background • Methodology & Data Collection • Findings • Discussion • Conclusions & Implications Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 25
- 26. Co-Creation Continuum Model Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 26
- 27. Agenda • Introduction • Theoretical Background • Methodology & Data Collection • Findings • Discussion • Conclusions & Implications Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 27
- 28. Conclusions & Implications – ICTs can constitute a key instrument to facilitate richer and more socially intense co-created experiences – Need to go beyond B2C co-creation to understand how tourists co-create within their own social circles through ICTs. – Importance to recognise nuances and understand the different ways in which tourist co-create through ICTs – Understanding that co-creation is not a single process but can occur on multiple levels and intensities Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 28
- 29. Conclusions & Implications • Theoretical contribution – Uncovered a distinctiveness of co-creation practices when ICTs come into place – Six overall dimensions of social connectedness divided by an involvement and connection/disconnection continuum. – Contradiction of tourist experience theories: Dissolving of a clear boundaries between travel and everyday life as tourists connect and co-create with their network and home environment online. • Practical implications – Use ICTs as a tool to facilitate opportunities for social co-creation experiences, not only in the B2C but also consumer domain C2C – Provide the technological prerequesites (e.g. wireless, devices) that allow tourists to co-create their own experiences and value Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 29
- 30. List of References Chathoth, Altinay, Harrington, Okumus, & Chan. (2013). Co-production versus co-creation: A process based continuum in the hotel service context. International Journal of Hospitality Management 32(0): 11-20. Fotis, Buhalis, & Rossides. (2011). Social Media Impact on Holiday Travel Planning: The Case of the Russian and the FSU Markets. International Journal of Online Marketing 1(4): 1-19. Grönroos. (2008). Service logic revised: who creates value? And who co-creates? European Business Review 20(4): 298-314. Kim, & Tussyadiah. (2013). Social Networking and Social Support in Tourism Experience: The Moderating Role of Online Self-Presentation Strategies. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 30(1): 78-92. Neuhofer, Buhalis, & Ladkin. (2012). Conceptualising technology enhanced destination experiences. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 1(1–2): 36-46. Neuhofer, Buhalis, & Ladkin. (2013). High Tech for High Touch Experiences: A Case Study from the Hospitality Industry. In L. Cantoni & Z. Xiang (Eds.), Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2012 (pp. 290-301). Austria: Springer Verlag. Prahalad, & Ramaswamy. (2004). Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value creation. Journal of Interactive Marketing 18(3): 5-14. Ramaswamy. (2009). Co-Creation of Value – Towards an Expanded Paradigm of Value Creation. Marketing Review St. Gallen 6(11-17). Sigala. (2009). E-service quality and Web 2.0: expanding quality models to include customer participation and inter-customer support. The Service Industries Journal 29(10): 1341-1358. Vargo, & Lusch. (2004). Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing. Journal of Marketing 68: 1-17. Wang, Park, & Fesenmaier. (2012). The Role of Smartphones in Mediating the Touristic Experience. Journal of Travel Research 51(4): 371-387. Wang, Park, & Fesenmaier. (2013). Transforming the Travel Experience: The Use of Smartphones for Travel. In L. Cantoni & Z. Xiang (Eds.), Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2012 (pp. 58-69). Austria: Springer Verlag. Xiang, & Gretzel. (2010). Role of social media in online travel information search. Tourism Management 31(2): 179-188. Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 30
- 31. Thank you! Barbara Neuhofer, Dimitrios Buhalis and Adele Ladkin eTourismLab Bournemouth University Bournemouth, UK Neuhofer et al. 2014 ENTER 2014 Research Track Slide Number 31