Date post: | 22-Jan-2018 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | radu-zoica |
View: | 111 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Successful marketing strategies in Transylvanian Rural Tourism
By
Zoicaș Radu
Student Number: IHTBM 15.15
Email address: [email protected]
Cell number: +40724493685
Supervisor: Bucoi Alexandru
Date: 16.09.2016
Study Programme: MSc. International Hospitality and Tourism Business
Management
American Hotel Academy Programme
i
Dissertation Declaration:
Student
No part of this work has been submitted in support of an application for any other
qualification of this, or any other institution of learning. I declare that this is an
original piece of work and that all data has been collected and results analysed as
stated within.
This research has been conducted in an ethical manner in accordance with the
School’s Ethical Framework.
I have shown my supervisor evidence of data collection and analysis.
Signed..............................................................
Date.................................
Supervisor (please sign after the appropriate statement)
The student has presented sufficient evidence during supervision to verify that
this dissertation is their own work and that the data collection and analysis is
genuine.
Signed ……………………………………………………Date……………………..
The student has not presented sufficient evidence during supervision to verify
that this dissertation is their own work and that the data collection and analysis
is genuine. Therefore I cannot verify data collection and analysis at this stage
of the assessment procedure.
Signed ……………………………………………………Date……………………..
Copyright@ American Hotel Academy 2013
ii
ABSTRACT
The aim of this research is to effectively determine successful marketing
strategies used in Transylvanian Rural Tourism. The objectives set are to
understand the concept of rural tourism, to define general successful marketing
strategies, to identify marketing strategies used in Transylvanian rural tourism,
to establish successful marketing strategies used in Transylvania and to draw
conclusions and make recommendations.
The paper is structured in five chapters, beginning with the introductory chapter.
The second chapter which presents the literature review is devised on three
levels, analysing academic works on rural tourism from international, European
and Romanian points of view. The third chapter details the research
methodology, explaining the method, tools and the way it was conducted. The
fourth chapter introduces the findings obtained through data analysis while the
fifth chapter presents personal conclusions and recommendations.
iii
Table of contents
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................1
1.1 Background to the study ..........................................................................1
1.2 Aims and Objectives..................................................................................2
1.3 Structure of the dissertation ...................................................................3
1.4 Definitions ....................................................................................................3
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................5
2.1 Introduction..................................................................................................5
2.2 Body ...............................................................................................................6
2.2.1 International context..............................................................................6
2.2.2 European context ............................................................................... 10
2.2.3 Romanian context .............................................................................. 15
2.3 Summary of the literature ..................................................................... 20
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .................................................... 22
3.1 Introduction............................................................................................... 22
3.2 Secondary data research ...................................................................... 22
3.2.1 Literature search................................................................................. 22
3.2.2 Literature review ................................................................................. 23
3.3 Primary Data research ........................................................................... 23
3.3.1 Research design................................................................................. 23
3.3.2 Research method ............................................................................... 24
3.3.3 Research tools .................................................................................... 24
3.3.4 Pilot study ............................................................................................ 24
3.3.5 Sampling Strategy .............................................................................. 25
3.3.6 Conducting the research ................................................................... 26
3.3.7 Limitations ........................................................................................... 26
iv
CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS ........................................................................... 27
4.1 Introduction............................................................................................... 27
4.2 Questionnaire structure......................................................................... 28
4.3 Questionnaire analysis .......................................................................... 30
4.4 Summary.................................................................................................... 50
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS / RECOMMENDATIONS ................................. 53
5.1 Introduction............................................................................................... 53
5.2 Conclusions .............................................................................................. 53
5.3 Recommendations .................................................................................. 55
5.4 Reflections and evaluation of the methodology ............................. 56
5.5 Suggestions for further research. ...................................................... 56
REFERENCES: ........................................................................................................ 57
APPENDIX A: DETAILED QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS ............................... 60
APPENDIX B: GUESTHOUSE MAILING LIST .................................................. 78
1
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the study
Rural tourism is a relatively new, increasingly popular type of tourism that is
being practiced in non-urban areas in order to develop these specific regions.
The emergence of rural tourism can be attributed to the polarizing nature of
mainstream tourism which tends to limit the income from touristic activities to
large cities and resorts. Meanwhile, rural areas are being underdeveloped,
depopulated due to migration/ageing and are often witnessing a low level of
involvement from local authorities. Sharpley (2002) states that “throughout
Europe, in particular, tourism has been widely promoted and relied upon as a
means of addressing the social and economic challenges facing peripheral rural
areas” (Sharpley, 2002, p. 233). Therefore, rural tourism is seen as a chance
of reaching a state of sustainability that would prevent the further deterioration
of the region and the locals’ life standard. Moreover, the economic impact would
substantially benefit the infrastructure development, leading to new business
opportunities in which the local residents can and should be directly involved.
This research aims to determine successful marketing strategies used in
Transylvanian rural tourism, to assess their level of effectiveness and to
propose relevant solutions based on a comparison to other geographic areas.
While rural tourism is not a viable option for every area as will be detailed in the
literature chapter, the areas that do have this opportunity should heavily rely on
marketing, especially in the incipient stages of the development. The literature
chapter will also refer to variations of rural tourism, ecotourism and agri-tourism
- which encourages tourists to stay in farmhouses alongside locals and get
involved in daily activities. Examining these variations will be helpful in grasping
the level of rural tourism development and eventually fully understanding the
concept of rural tourism, which is the first proposed objective for this research,
further detailed below.
2
1.2 Aims and Objectives
The aim of this study is to effectively determine successful marketing strategies
used in Transylvanian rural guesthouses.
Objectives:
To understand the concept of rural tourism
This objective will be accomplished by examining a varied selection of academic
materials in the literature review chapter.
To define successful marketing strategies
After finishing the literature review chapter we will be able to draw the first
conclusions and examine the international, European and Romanian
approaches regarding marketing/promotion as well as the perceived effects.
To identify marketing strategies used in Transylvanian rural tourism
The Romanian segment of the literature review, along with the responses from
the distributed questionnaire, will create a relevant image of how marketing is
currently being addressed in rural Transylvania.
To establish successful marketing strategies used in Transylvania
The data analysis chapter will establish what are the respondents’ preferences
regarding advertising and promotion, what is their attitude towards marketing
and what are the results that they have reached through these strategies.
To draw conclusions and make recommendations
The final thoughts and suggestions will be presented in the final chapter of this
research paper. This chapter will also include the findings related to the five
objectives.
3
1.3 Structure of the dissertation
This dissertation paper contains an abstract, a table of contents, five chapters
that will now briefly be detailed, a reference page and two appendices. The first
chapter is introductory, familiarizing the reader with the overall theme, aim and
objectives while also providing a few representative definitions of specialized
terms. The second chapter presents a systematic review of 12 academic
publications that present various stages and challenges of worldwide rural
tourism. The third chapter outlines the research methodology, introducing the
tools and method that were used in primary data collection and also mentions
some of the limitations that were met. The fourth chapter provides a
comprehensive data analysis of the results that were revealed by the
questionnaire. The final chapter summarizes the dissertation while pointing out
findings and expresses personal conclusions. There are two appendixes, the
first one further details the analysed data from chapter four while the second
appendix lists the email addresses that were used in the distribution of the
survey. The abstract, table of contents and the reference page are self-
explanatory.
1.4 Definitions
Destination image – “an individual’s overall perceptions of a particular
destination.”(Gunn, 1972; Spencer and Dixon, 1983; Fakeye and Crompton,
1991, cited in Phillips, Wolfe, Hodur and Leistritz, 2011, p. 94)
Ecotourism – “responsible travel to natural areas that conserves the
environment, sustains the well-being of the local people, and involves
interpretation and education" (TIES, 2015)
4
Innovation of a process – “to introduce a new or a significantly improved
process, distribution method or support activity for the tourism products. The
innovation must be new to the company but it does not need to be new to the
tourism sector.”(Cosma, Paun, Bota and Fleseriu, 2014, p. 508)
Innovation of a tourism product – “to bring on the market a new or a significantly
improved product. The tourism product must be new to the company but it does
not need to be new to the tourism sector.”(Cosma, Paun, Bota and Fleseriu,
2014, p. 508)
Marketing innovation – “the implementation of new or significantly improved
product design, placement, or promoting … to increase the appeal of the
products or to enter new markets.”(Cosma, Paun, Bota and Fleseriu, 2014, p.
508)
Organizational innovation – “the implementation of new or significant changes
into the company structure or the management methods, which should be used
to improve … efficiency.”(Cosma, Paun, Bota and Fleseriu, 2014, p. 508)
Perceived value – “a consumer’s overall evaluation of what they paid for the
product (service) acquired.”(Zeithaml, 1988, cited in Phillips, Wolfe, Hodur and
Leistritz, 2011, p. 95)
Satisfaction – “the degree to which an individual believes that a consumption
experience brings positive feelings.”(Rust and Oliver, 1994, cited in Phillips,
Wolfe, Hodur and Leistritz, 2011, p. 95)
5
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
The literature review chapter aims to generally present the international context
of rural tourism in order to establish a basis to which we will then compare the
present study of Transylvanian rural tourism. When referring to tourism, most
people immediately think about traditional activities like travelling to seaside
resorts or engaging in city breaks that usually take place in large cities/capitals
across the globe. However, these types of tourism economically benefit only
the aforementioned areas, creating a significant gap between visitor hotspots
and other less explored areas with touristic potential. Therefore, rural areas
often tend to be overlooked and left behind when it comes to investments in
infrastructure and overall regional development. Rural tourism seeks to fill that
gap by generating interest in the particularities of those areas, promoting the
geographical assets, the ethnographic elements and allowing visitors to
immerse themselves into the rural life.
This chapter also touches adjacent topics like agri-tourism, which not only gives
visitors the possibility of being accommodated in the rural environment, but also
encourages them to participate in day-to-day activities and closely witness local
customs and traditions. Another topic that is quickly gaining popularity is
ecotourism, defined by The International Ecotourism Society as “responsible
travel to natural areas that conserves the environment, sustains the well-being
of the local people, and involves interpretation and education” (TIES, 2015).
Ecotourism is all about sustainability, aiming to offer a unique experience to
visitors while also being productive and protecting the surrounding
environment. Popular ecotourism destinations include remote, undeveloped
locations, some of which will be discussed in depth within this chapter.
The literature selection has been devised to be as varied as possible, both
geographically and culturally, with the purpose of extracting advantages,
disadvantages and the marketing solutions implemented in order to reduce the
latter.
6
2.2 Body
2.2.1 International context
Before examining the current state of rural tourism in Europe, this section will
present the recent levels of development in different parts of the world. The
articles chosen for this purpose explore both the situation in North Dakota,
which faces challenges in attracting tourists, as well as the Amazonian Forest
in Peru which faces extinction due to the area’s increasing development. Also,
we analyse the situation in Malaysia where the increased touristic activities
prove to be problematic for the locals, while the small African state of Gambia
faces the opposite problem, not being able to diversify its touristic offer.
North Dakota, from overlooking to revisiting
The first article refers to the situation in one of the more rural states of the USA,
North Dakota. Rural tourism is considered a niche category and it is not
particularly popular in the United States, being aimed mostly locally and with
very few international guests interested in the rural American experience. The
reason for this may be that international travellers have a limited time at their
disposal and choose to focus on visiting cities or taking trips to well-known
American landmarks. The article addresses the tourists’ intent of revisiting and
recommending the accommodations, stating that “Destination marketing
campaigns and promotions should play a major role in convincing travellers to
visit a destination. Other marketing strategies like positive word of mouth
(WOM) from past visitors should be taken into consideration for marketing
purposes” (Phillips et. al, 2011, p. 94). The authors (of which 3 are actually
coming from North Dakota) express their concern that the area tends to be
overlooked seeing as the surrounding states have consistently larger allocated
budgets for tourism. The market in North Dakota also has significant restraints
due to the difficult access and overall poor quality services, leading the authors
to analyse the main concepts of destination image, perceived value and
satisfaction. The research tools used were questionnaires given to tourists at
7
three separate locations, out of which 317 samples were then selected. As
authors note, “respondents were asked to rate their level of agreement (1 =
strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree) with eight image attributes: beautiful
scenery, historic attraction, interesting cultural activities, friendly people, good
reputation, outdoor activities, family oriented and recreation activities available
for children” (Phillips et. al, 2011, p. 96). The article then presents the study’s
figures and draws the main conclusions, stating that respondents largely
expressed that they had a positive destination image and would opt for revisiting
although they are reluctant in recommending if further on. On the other hand,
the respondents that said that they would recommend the destination to others
have not expressed their wish to revisit the place, making them economically
less valuable than the first category.
Attitude towards tourism in Malaysia
Moving on and taking a look at the situation in Asia, Malaysia faces a different
issue: while tourism has flourished, the personal interest of the local
communities has mostly been ignored. According to www.travel-to-
malaysia.com (2014), in 2010 Malaysia was the 9th most visited country in the
world, yet locals have been disregarded as stakeholders, leading to the dire
need of a repositioning strategy for rural tourism. The article is about a future
study that will take place in Malaysia with the authors of the article arguing that
the community should be more actively involved in creating a destination image,
especially due to the high regional touristic competition. They also believe that
“for successful tourism development, community leaders and tourism planners
need to view tourism as a local community industry” (Falak S., May Chiun L.
and Wee A.Y., 2014, p. 413). The main problem of Malaysia’s rural tourism is
that local establishments have not been integrated into the touristic circuit,
leaving the cultural gap between tourists and locals unattended. Therefore,
workers in hospitality fail to properly understand the guests’ needs, leading to
poor customer service while at the same time, visitors do not get to properly
immerse themselves into the region’s culture. The solutions found were to
monitor both the local residents’ reaction towards tourism as well as keeping
8
track of the customer satisfaction level in order to better understand the way
these two factors, internal and external, impact each other. The results were
then to be quantified and split into tangible and non-tangible elements, for
example a tangible impact for the locals would be an increase in income while
the intangible would be represented by the way they feel towards touristic
activities. Concluding the article, the three authors present their methodology
and research objectives, stating that they will use locally administered surveys
in order to determine “the current positioning of rural tourism destination from
the perspective of local community and to explore how these views contribute
to repositioning strategy in a rural destination” (Falak S., May Chiun L. and Wee
A.Y., 2014, p. 414). By doing so, they hope to substantially improve the touristic
experience for both hosts and guests, creating a pleasant and productive
intercultural environment.
Developing Inland Gambia
The third article is written by a team of three university professors from
Germany, Austria and South Africa and examines the state of rural tourism in
the small African state of Gambia. Seeing as rural areas in Africa are usually
benefiting less from touristic activities, compared to their urban counterparts,
the authors of this study administered 450 questionnaires to tourists in order to
divide them into relevant categories, thus identifying the best strategies towards
tourism development. The underdevelopment of tourism in Gambia can be
justified by the lack of diversity - seeing as the beach is basically the only
touristic attraction, it cannot compete with other (more) developed countries in
the area. This is why rural tourism needs to be taken into consideration, not
only will it fill in the gap left from traditional seaside tourism but it will also create
new jobs and bring new income for locals. This is extremely important since the
vast majority of foreign tourists are coming through package tours, meaning
that they are provided with everything they need from arrival to departure, rarely
spending any money in Gambia. The questionnaires were distributed in the
capital’s airport, having considered that this is the point through which most of
the tourists are travelling in and out of the country, and were devised to create
a comprehensive view on the expectations from arriving tourists as well as the
9
level of satisfaction from the ones departing. The results revealed that 93% of
tourists were coming from Europe, over 83% were satisfied with their stay and
around 72% would consider visiting Gambia again. The respondents were
divided into four categories, differenced on what they were primarily seeking:
“heritage and nature”, “authentic rural experience”, “learning” and “sun and
beach”. Concluding the study, the researchers found that “sun and beach”
represented a minor 5% general interest, meaning that Gambia should indeed
diversify its touristic offer. Their suggestion to the local stakeholders were to
develop a new product of event-based rural tourism, like a themed route for the
river Gambia, which would open up a new area of interest “as the river offers
rich natural resources and cultural heritage to cater to the motivations in the
“heritage & nature” segment and also, the river offers relatively easy access to
rural areas from the main hotels situated along the Gambian coast” (Rid W.,
Ezeuduji I. O. and Probstl-Haider U., 2014, p.110).
Sustainable ecotourism in Tambopata Province, Peru
Lastly, we turn our attention to South America and we examine a study
regarding sustainable ecotourism in Peru’s Amazonian rainforest. The author,
Dr. Tiffany M. Doan from Central Connecticut State University USA, considers
that this particular type of tourism should be examined with upmost
consideration in developing countries, since it can become one of the most
important ways of development. Dr. Doan focuses on a small region of Peru,
the Tambopata Province, which is currently very popular among visitors
seeking ecotourism. The appeal of this specific area is that it is one of the last
parts of the Amazonian area that has evaded deforestation so far, being home
to a large number of plant and animal species, many of which are already
extinct in neighbouring areas. The tourists are being encouraged to experience
the Peruvian rural life without harming the environment and are being
accommodated in picturesque river lodges which can only be reached by boats.
These lodges are the object of this study, they are being compared to each
other and to other lodges around the globe while taking into consideration their
proximity to urban areas and the history of the region, in order to determine their
sustainability. The author chose six lodges for the comparison because “of the
10
12 large lodges in the region, they have been existence longest. Other tourism
sites have opened within the last five years, but the six sites included in this
study have had a long record of establishment and are stable businesses in the
local area, as opposed to the newer sites, which often close a few years after
opening” (Doan T. M., 2013, p. 263). The establishments were compared and
graded according to the following six categories: “financial support for
conservation”, “employment for residents”, “local attitudes toward
conservation”, “local attitudes towards tourism”, “ecological status of area” and
“protection status of area”. The data collection was done personally by the
author, visiting each of these lodges from 1995 to 2009 and interviewing ten
staff members and ten local residents from each site. The conclusions were
that while being situated within the same geographic area, the sites offered very
different results from one to another. In terms of sustainability, the best scores
were achieved by the lodges situated the furthest from urban areas, seeming
more appealing to tourists while also being more concerned about practicing
tourism without affecting the pristine surrounding environment.
2.2.2 European context
Tourism in Europe is constantly changing and adapting and can be extremely
varied even within a single country, so in order to properly understand the
general context, we need to look at it from varied geographical, social and
economic points of view. While European tourism can be traditionally split into
two large categories: cultural tourism (learning and visiting) and resort tourism
(mountain or seaside holidays), there is a third, more recent but growing branch
represented by rural tourism. This type of tourism is becoming more popular as
urban settlers are constantly looking for peaceful destinations to rest and relax,
while also getting (back) in touch with old customs from those areas. The
following segment will present the situation of rural tourism in significantly
different areas, from Cyprus which faces a strong competition between rural
tourism and its own developed resort tourism to landlocked Serbia that lacks
the seaside opportunities that most of its neighbours benefit from. Also, we
examine the highly popular Italian region of Tuscany, just before we move on
to a secluded forest in northern Poland.
11
Inland Cyprus
British professor Richard Sharpley is analysing the case of Cyprus, a country
famous for its seaside tourism that has recently begun the development of local
rural tourism. Sharpley (2002) notes that “a number of popular sun–sea–sand
tourist destinations have, in recent years, attempted to diversify into rural
tourism … in order to achieve a more balanced, sustainable approach to
tourism development. More specifically, the development of rural tourism in
traditionally summer-sun destinations is seen as an effective means of
achieving not only the regeneration of rural areas but also a variety of tourism-
policy objectives” (Sharpley, 2002, p. 234). The author then continues to
enumerate several benefits of rural tourism like economic growth and socio-
cultural development and revitalisation. He also balances this view by adding
some regular challenges such as low returns on investments, inferior quality of
products and services and poorly applied marketing strategies. After a brief
history of tourism in Cyprus, Sharpley presents the main disadvantages,
mentioning seasonality and the fact that the inland areas have not benefited
from the business developed in coastal resorts. This was the trigger for the
development of rural tourism in an attempt of developing the rest of the country
while also attracting tourists outside summer season. The aim was to revitalize
existing rural communities while also preventing emigration and strengthening
small local economies. Towards the end of the article, the author interviews
several business owners, asking them about the benefits and challenges of
agrotourism. The main positive aspects included supplementing the income in
small villages, the renovation of old buildings and enforcing local traditions and
customs. On the other hand, respondents complained about a lack of support
from local authorities and declared themselves unsatisfied with the overall
revenue. Other important disadvantages were seen in poor staff training and
lack of amenities, as well as low occupancy rates and high prices in relation to
their coastal counterparts. Summing up the findings, rural tourism in Cyprus
proves the point according to which this particular type of tourism is not suitable
for every region and in this particular case, it cannot yet rival the popular,
coastal tourism.
12
Tuscany, Italy
Another Mediterranean destination that is associated with traditional tourism
and has recently also started shifting towards rural tourism is Italy. The article
presents the current situation in famous wine region Tuscany, Italy, where the
typical agricultural activities have begun to transform into agri-tourism with
visitors eager to witness the local customs and to be accommodated at small
independent farms. In order to properly quantify the actual level of rural tourism,
the authors first had to identify the rural establishments in Tuscany, doing so by
using three separate indicators: social, economic and ecological. The
identification was done by applying the indicators to all establishments as the
authors “classified as rural those municipalities respecting at least one of those
three following indicators: social dimension (density of population <150
inhabitants per km2, as indicated by the OCSE for rural areas), economic
dimension (number of employees in agriculture >4.09%, which is the regional
average), ecological dimension (measured by rural land use >95.92%, regional
average)” (Randelli F., Romei P. and Tortora M., 2013, p. 277). Tuscany is
considered to be the centre of Italian rural tourism, based on the number of
beds and existing establishments that are practicing agri-tourism. The reason
behind this is that in the 1950s there was a large depopulation of Tuscany due
to low farm incomes, leading workers to move to more industrialized areas with
better paid jobs. Houses and farms that were left behind were then bought by
foreigners and wealthy Italians from large cities, most of which started
accommodating tourists in their farms beginning with the 1970s. By 1985 the
benefits from rural tourism were evident and the emerging sub-genre of agri-
tourism had finally been acknowledged and properly legislated. What followed
was a period of prosperity in which the area was refinanced due to a touristic
boom, which in turn lead to revitalizing old agricultural activities. Also, the local
infrastructure has been consistently improved, as the authors point out
“entrepreneurs invested in farmhouse restoration and in doing so they were
supporting small firms and craftsmen working as masons, carpenters, joiners,
plumbers, electricians and so on. As the number of tourists increased, so the
price of houses and farm started to grow. Related services began to be offered
by local municipalities (tourist information, public transportation) and local
13
entrepreneurs (restaurants, car rental, taxi services)” (Randelli F., Romei P. and
Tortora M., 2013, p. 279). While agri-tourism emerged as an economic
necessity, today Tuscany embraces all types of tourism which reportedly gather
more income than the other industries in the area. Agricultural activities are now
intertwined with touristic ones and the new issue has become the need for
diversification as the touristic offer in Tuscany has expanded beyond the actual
demand.
Bory Tucholskie, Poland
The third article that addresses European rural tourism is a Polish study that
investigates a less documented touristic segment, which is the existence and
importance of second homes transformed into guesthouses. These
establishments are an alternative to conventional tourism and while they do not
contribute as heavily to the local touristic income, they are extremely important
to the overall development of the surrounding area. Professor Adamiak, Doctor
at the Department of Spatial Management and Tourism, Nicolaus Copernicus
University, briefly presents an overview of this type of rural tourism as
experienced internationally. Referencing Poland, he is stating that the number
of second homes began to increase exponentially in the late 1970s, following a
prosperous economic period the country has gone through. The area chosen
for this study is Bory Tucholskie, a forest situated in northern Poland, secluded
from urban centres. The study was devised to examine the impact second
homes have on the local economy and was conducted in two stages, “the first
is a survey among second home owners and permanent residents, and the
second is semi-structured interviews with second home owners, local residents,
entrepreneurs and local administration officials. The survey was conducted
during summer 2013, on a sample of 255 second home owners and 62
permanent residents living in the villages with a high proportion of second
homes” (Adamiak C., 2014, p. 364). As the results of the study revealed, the
main economic impact second houses have is represented by the property
taxes and in some cases, a separate tax applicable to establishments
registered as recreational houses. Second houses do not influence local
residential prices but a recent increase in numbers has led to a higher price for
14
land, if the purpose of the future building is declared as recreational. There are
also indirect economic impacts, like capital transfer from the urban environment
to the rural one: while the actual accommodation rate may be paid elsewhere,
tourists staying at these establishments will spend money in that area during
their stay. Another indirect effect is the development of the area’s infrastructure,
from which all residents benefit although second house owners may not be
thrilled about it, seeing as their business is mainly based on the seclusion factor.
As mentioned earlier in the article on Peru, this is a paradox encountered
around the world: as appealing as it may be, starting a business in a remote
area ultimately leads to populating and developing the area, making it less
remote and therefore less profitable.
Serbian villages
Serbia is a small landlocked European country so it does not have any access
to the seaside, which means that it needs to compensate what it lacks in
traditional resort tourism. While its capital, Belgrade, is a popular destination for
cultural tourism, the countryside has recently started to develop and embrace
the concept of rural tourism as many other European nations. The authors of
the article concerning Serbia believe that rural tourism is the key to developing
rural areas, opening up new jobs for the population, in order to prevent the
migration towards cities. While many visitors look forward to experiencing the
quiet, traditional way of life, stakeholders need to think about all other
categories: “The level of engagement in the activities of visitors in a rural setting
varies from very active to very passive. World trends show that fun and
educational activities are becoming increasingly important in the design of new
destinations and this is a key element for the differentiation of destinations”
(Maksimović, M., Mihajlović D. and Urošević S., 2012, p. 44). The article offers
a few solutions for Serbia’s decreasing and ageing rural population like
organizing fairs and festivals to attract tourists and introducing guests to various
traditional crafts, held as classes. Local customs should be upheld and
promoted as a reaction to globalization and the authors also allude that rural
tourism can be a more in-depth experience for cultural tourism, as foreigners
visit museums, monuments and art galleries in cities, rural tourism can be the
15
next step where tourists can actually experience that history first-hand. Organic
agriculture is singled out as a viable strategy to economically strengthen the
rural areas, seeing as while not that widespread in Serbia, organic products are
increasingly popular in the European Union. The conclusions that are being
drawn about the development of Serbia’s rural tourism include the need of
creating a national rural brand that can encompass smaller existing regional
brands and promote their products and symbols.
2.2.3 Romanian context
Excluding popular seaside and mountain resorts, Romanian tourism has been
largely unorganized in the past and like other Romanian industries, has begun
its proper development only after the communist regime ended in late 1989,
when private businesses stated to emerge. Romania is administratively divided
into 41 counties and the first area to benefit from an organized form of rural
tourism was the Bran area from Brașov County, a popular touristic destination
that due to its wide range of accommodation offers and picturesque landscapes
may still be the first choice for guests that are looking for quiet, traditional
accommodation in Romania. In order to better understand the current state of
rural tourism in Romania, we will examine four academic articles that address
this particular topic. The following segment will examine the way guesthouses
in the northern region of Maramureș dealt with the economic crisis and the way
Romanian tourists feel about visiting Transylvania. We will also take a look at
sustainable ecotourism and the way it is being understood in Romania and
lastly, we will examine the infrastructure development of one of Transylvania’s
hidden gem, the small Saxon village of Viscri.
Innovation in Maramureș
One of the main rural tourism destinations is represented by the historical region
of Maramureș, which is also the main focus of the first article chosen for this
part of the literature review, an article written by four professors from Babeș-
Bolyai University in Cluj-Napoca, Romania. It addresses the concept of
innovation and its usage in private guesthouses through a research that has
16
taken place between 2009 and 2011, with the respondents being
representatives from 40 selected accommodation establishments. While
hospitality is generally considered a less innovative industry, the authors’ goal
was to determine the actual level of innovation present in Romanian rural
tourism. The authors see innovation as a valuable tool for businesses to
differentiate themselves from the competition and argue that this should be
seen as a dynamic process. The 2009 – 2011 period was chosen in relation to
the economic crisis and the effect it had on the strategies adopted by the
guesthouses, with surveys being used as the primary data collection method.
When asked about innovation, two thirds of the respondents revealed that they
improved existing products and services while the others either introduced new
ones or did not change anything. Owners that did not introduce new products
and services argued that the economic crisis had a negative impact on
customer demand which made further investments in the business infeasible.
Most businesses used innovative practices based on personal experience and
concerns, with few owners doing so while considering guests’ opinions or
strategies approached by their competition. Reasons for marketing innovation
stem from the same areas as above, with no involvement from local authorities.
The article concludes that the overall rural tourism in Maramureș has improved
in spite of the economic crisis, due to a large increase in touristic pensions
starting with 2006, when numerous private residences were transformed into
guesthouses. While most establishments have successfully adopted innovative
strategies, the local consensus is that there were difficulties in doing so due to
a lack of financial resources and trouble with obtaining credits for investments.
Romanian tourists visiting Transylvania
The second article references the tourists’ expectations from their desired
destinations and emphasizes the importance of fulfilling these expectations by
appealing to all of their senses. The authors argue that the touristic destination
needs to establish ‘’a communication on all five of the consumer’s sensory
channels, thus creating specific visual, auditory, olfactory, gustatory and tactile
identity elements (that constitute the pillars of the sensory brand)” (Diţoiu et. al.,
17
p. 39). In order to correctly asses the specific sensory brand of Transylvania,
the authors conducted a 2012 study on 374 Romanian respondents that were
asked to share their personal sensory experiences that they associate with
Transylvania. The research concluded that 87% of the respondents have visited
Transylvania while the other 13% have mostly declared that they lacked time
or material resources, factors that prevented them from visiting the region. Also,
an impressive 97.8% of the respondents that have visited Transylvania
expressed their intent to do so again. Tourists used a balanced mix of
information sources with social networks representing an increasingly important
factor in choosing the desired destination. Regarding the sensory dimensions,
respondents answered that the visual identity element is predominant with the
gustatory dimension ranking last among overall preferences. This could mean
that tourists that are visiting Transylvania are mostly interested in sights and
scenery while finding culinary tourism less important. We also have to
remember that all the respondents are Romanians and may be already
acquainted to most of the available culinary options, perhaps a similar study
involving foreign tourists would yield different results regarding this type of
cultural tourism. Furthermore, the study breaks down the sensory dimensions
experienced in ten different Transylvanian counties, represented by elements
of attraction, producing relevant yet predictable results. For example, The
Retezat National Park and The Apuseni Mountains are popular natural
destinations that dominate the visual dimension, while The Medieval Festival in
Sighișoara (which focuses on music and food), yields consistent results within
the auditory and gustatory dimensions. The conclusions that are therefore
being reached are that Transylvania is more appealing in a visual way and less
so in a tactile manner, which translates into the facts that while the scenery is
mostly appreciated, the physical quality offered by guesthouses needs to be
further improved.
Sustainable ecotourism in Romania
The third article delves into the rural development issue, taking a look at the
traits and effects it has on the environment and the population. The authors
18
express their concern that there has to be a balance between the improvement
of living conditions (that come along with the development), and preserving the
identity and cultural aspects of the rural community. The article also claims that
the development of rural tourism will lead to an increase in economic activities
that might prevent the rural to urban migration, a common process that can
ultimately lead to the depopulation of certain areas. We are then introduced to
the concept of alternative tourism which is “made to be friendly to the
environment and to respect social and cultural values of the communities, and
which allow both hosts and guests to enjoy positive and worthwhile interaction
and shared experiences” (Wearing S., Neil J., Ecotourism: impacts, potentials
and possibilities, Butterworth-Heinemann, London, 1999, cited in Drăgulănescu
I. V. and Druţu Ivan M., p. 198). The alternative tourism is considered non-
conventional, opposed to the mass tourism and can be broken down into
several categories: cultural, educational, scientific, adventure and agri-tourism
(rural, farm, ranch). When we combine cultural and agri-tourism we get
ecotourism, which attracts visitors by combining the natural beauty of an area
with the cultural heritage of that area’s specific community. This particular type
of tourism is less disruptive as it targets small groups of tourists, it encourages
the preservation of the natural environment and provides a closer, more
intimate guest-host relation. Another point that the article makes is that in order
for rural development to be sustainable, the community needs to actively
preserve its cultural characteristic, which can be done by integrating all outside
factors like economic, political and social ones into their daily lives.
Drăgulănescu and Druţu then move on to the impact of rural tourism, stating
that economically speaking, rural development will prove to be more beneficial
for the area itself than for the small business owner, seeing as rural tourism is
volatile and it may prove challenging to find willing investors. While also taking
into account that a large number of visitors might impact the environment in a
negative way, the conclusion that is being drawn is that this type of tourism
cannot simply be applied anywhere a rural settlement exists. While some
communities may be reluctant to the idea, other areas might simply be too
remote to become profitable.
19
Recent development of Viscri, Brașov County
The final article also deals with remote locations, it is a piece written by Cheryl
Klimaszewski, concerning Transylvanian infrastructure. The object of this 2007
study is represented by Viscri, a small Transylvanian village that has recently
caught the public eye and is known for having far more tourists than its small
population. The study was done by a group of student researchers that tried to
establish the state of ICTs (Information and Communication Technologies) that
are present (or missing) in Viscri, as well as the impact it has on the community.
The author argues that the ICT implementation needed to modernise the area
needs to begin with several strategies oriented towards schools and children,
with data needed to support this argument being collected through a series of
35 interviews. The article then details the history and current social context of
Viscri, setting up the broader picture for the study findings reveal. While some
of the respondents complained that the area is underdeveloped and that they
are facing poverty and a lack of alternatives, there were also interviewees that
reported establishing guest houses and offering food services, basically
initiating the independent tourism industry in Viscri. The infrastructure in Viscri
is poorly developed with severe faults regarding indoor plumbing and medical
care while “the main source of cash income in Viscri in May of 2007 came from
tourism, with residents running guest houses, cooking for visitors, making
souvenirs or working on NGO projects that restored the village’s historical
Saxon homes. The two most active NGOs in Viscri focused on projects related
to tourism” (Klimaszewski C., 2009, p. 19). Unfortunately, tourism is still not an
option for the majority of Viscri inhabitants, due to a low level of resources
necessary to establish a private business. The author concludes that while the
area is steadily being modernised, the persisting lack of modern infrastructure
prevents the people of Viscri from getting up to speed with the surrounding
world and advocates that investments in proper education, especially through
digital means, is crucial for the overall development of the area.
20
2.3 Summary of the literature
The literature review chapter has successfully drawn a relevant picture of the
way rural tourism is experienced worldwide, looking at different geographical
regions with different cultural backgrounds. A series of advantages and
disadvantages has been outlined and will be summarized in this final section.
We can see a high degree of diversity at an international level, with the main
common characteristic being the challenges rural tourism faces when
competing with mainstream, resort tourism. Efficient marketing strategies are
essential in all areas, seeing as poor infrastructure can prove to be an important
deterrent in the organizing stage of a leisure trip. While the geographic
characteristics are the main reasons for choosing a destination, there has to be
a proper management of the social and economic impact that touristic activities
has on visitors and locals alike. Also, the surrounding environment needs to be
preserved for both ecologic and economic reasons, seeing as any deterioration
that occurs could translate into a future decrease of visitor flow.
The European examples chosen for this review present a polarizing situation
as some areas are thriving while others are still struggling to impose themselves
in the touristic circuit. The case of Tuscany shows us that in some instances
the competition can be intense even within a small rural area as the economic
development is advancing and personal diversification becomes crucial. A great
advantage is that European countries have a diversified landscape which
provides visitors with plenty of options within reasonable distances. The cultural
individuality of European villages is another asset that combats the general
underdevelopment with their unique characteristics. Agri-tourism seems to be
a viable option for these regions, producing jobs and preventing the main rural
problem of depopulation due to urban migration and ageing process. While
financial support from authorities is low, a unified promotion strategy needs to
be implemented at all administrative levels in close collaboration with owners.
21
The analysis of the state of Romanian rural tourism revealed serious issues
regarding infrastructure and a predominant lack of involvement from local
authorities. It has been established that although there is a high geographical
appeal, products and services lack the quality needed to properly satisfy
customers. Local customs are not being promoted as aggressively as they
should and the general underdevelopment is being attributed to a severe lack
of financial resources. Marketing strategies are widely absent as well, with
Dracula being the most internationally recognizable brand, which economically
only impacts the small region of Bran in Brașov County.
22
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
The research methodology chapter will outline all stages of the present
research study and will detail the logical course that was taken, from planning
to completion. There will be a justification for the chosen population sample, the
research design as well as for the geographic origin of the respondents. The
following sections also contain justification for choosing the sources for the
literature review and are detailing the manner in which the primary data was
collected.
3.2 Secondary data research
3.2.1 Literature search
The articles used in the literature review chapter were researched online in an
estimated period of time ranging from early June 2016 to mid-August 2016. The
literature was discovered using Google Scholar and their publishing date ranges
from 2008 to 2016, considering that this period of time is sufficiently recent and
therefore relevant to the present study. The only exception was the work of
Richard Sharpley, titled “Rural tourism and the challenge of tourism
diversification: the case of Cyprus”, which was considered seminal and
particularly valuable to this paper. As of September 1st, Sharpley’s work has
been cited by 494 academic sources. The literature was researched with the
use of specific key words including “rural tourism”, “rural tourism development”,
“rural tourism marketing strategies”, “sustainable rural tourism”, “agri-tourism”,
“ecotourism” “international rural tourism”, “European rural tourism”, “sustainable
rural tourism”, “cultural tourism” and so on. The literature was selected from
research journals and academic publications that related to the present topic
and underwent a thorough selection process based on relevance and
geographic diversity.
23
3.2.2 Literature review
The literature review was approached through a funnel method, starting with
non-European examples followed by case studies of rural tourism
representations in Europe and ending with articles concerning Romania in
general and Transylvania in particular. For the non-European section we are
looking at four articles focusing on The United States of America, Malaysia,
Gambia and Peru, each country representing a different continent and socio-
economic context. Europe is being viewed by rural tourism in Cyprus, Italy,
Poland and Serbia, destinations that vary both culturally and in terms of touristic
development. Romania was examined through four journal articles that address
the tourist perception of Transylvania, the understanding of ecotourism, the
level of innovation found in Maramureș and the current state of infrastructure in
Viscri, Brașov County. The findings of these reviews will be confronted with the
results from the questionnaire and a summary of this comparison will be
presented in the final chapter.
3.3 Primary Data research
3.3.1 Research design
The research design is analytical, examining data gathered from questionnaire
respondents originating from a total of four Transylvanian Counties, Alba,
Brașov, Cluj and Sibiu. The results are being briefly presented in Chapter 4:
Data Analysis and are being further detailed in the Appendices, with the help of
various tables, charts and graphic representations. The chosen approach is
strictly quantitative seeing as the large geographic area that is the focus of this
study could not have been properly represented by a smaller amount of
qualitative responses. The research had one qualitative aspect in the form of
an optional open question that unfortunately was not answered by any of the
respondents.
24
3.3.2 Research method
The questionnaire revealed a sample of 87 accommodation units located in the
four researched counties, out of a total of 623 accommodation units that met
the scope and the conditions of the study, while also being recorded
commercially. The guesthouses were spread throughout 284 villages. This
questionnaire was thus applied to 13.9% of the total housing units that met the
required criteria. The questionnaire was sent online, the research method being
quantitative. One of the conditions for participating in the study of the economic
agents was the existence of a public email address where the research tool
could be sent. The questionnaire was applied between July 5, 2016 - August 4,
2016 and it was sent to 456 accommodation units from which a total of 87
responses was obtained.
3.3.3 Research tools
The data collection instrument is represented by a questionnaire containing 19
closed questions along with an open question. The questionnaire was chosen
because it is the appropriate tool for gathering quantitative data and was
devised as to contain clear, explicit questions that all respondents can easily
understand. Also, the questionnaire avoided asking for written answers in order
to achieve a higher response rate and a faster time of completion.
3.3.4 Pilot study
The pilot study was conducted with 10 additional questionnaires, given to 10
respondents that do not work in tourism, in order to assess the quality and
relevance of the questions. These questionnaires have not been used as part
of the study, and simply served as an orientation instrument towards devising
the final variant of the questionnaire. Upon completion, it became evident that
question number nine, “Which of the following promotion environments are
used by you?” posed difficulties in understanding, which was expected since
the respondents were not familiarized with some of the options. The pilot study
also revealed an error on the last question, number 19, “What is the county in
25
which your accommodation unit is being located?” This question should have
had only four possible answers, yet the online questionnaire provided a fifth one
titled “other” which was redundant and if it were to be undetected, would have
negatively influenced the study. While the valid respondents had an average
completion time of 17 minutes, the respondents from the pilot study reported a
much lower completion time of around nine minutes. The reason for this
discrepancy is attributed to the fact that the pilot study respondents did not
experience any involvement with the questions and completed the
questionnaire in a hasty, improper manner.
3.3.5 Sampling Strategy
Selection of the respondents was directed towards owners and employees from
rural guesthouses situated in four Transylvanian counties that were assumed
to be representative for the entire area. The names of the guesthouses were
made public on the official site of the Romanian Ministry of Tourism while the
email addresses were gathered directly from the guesthouses’ own websites,
meaning that the questionnaire was administered in an ethic manner, without
intruding in any way. The selected sample group consisted of 456 guesthouses
with all of the email addresses being listed in Appendix B. Table 4.1 from
‘Chapter 4: Data analysis’ elaborates the requirements that accommodation
units need to meet in order to be included in the ‘guesthouse’ category. All other
touristic units that were not eligible for this study were dismissed, including
hotels, motels, studio apartments and rentable rooms in non-commercial
establishments. Also, the research was only conducted on units situated in ‘rural
areas’ as presented by the Romanian Ministry of Tourism:
http://turism.gov.ro/informatii-publice/ listed under “Lista structurilor de primire
turistice cu functiuni de cazare clasificate”. Accommodation units that were
listed as being located in cities or towns (in the Ministry of Tourism table, under
column “G”) were not taken into consideration.
26
3.3.6 Conducting the research
The questionnaires were sent along with a small description that informed the
respondents that the purpose of this study is educational and that the
information they provide is solely informative and strictly confidential. The
questionnaire itself did not include personal questions like names of the
respondents or the accommodation units. The informative text included my
name, my partial address, the university name and private telephone number,
as a gesture intended to acquire more confidence. After the initial distribution
and collection of first responses, the questionnaires were sent two more times
in order to increase the response rate.
3.3.7 Limitations
There were several limitations that prevented this study from getting a higher
number of respondents, which in turn would have made for a more
representative and relevant research. While the questionnaire was aimed at all
available employees, we can assume that most guesthouses do not own more
than one computer and that there is only one person/department that handles
online communication. This means that it is highly unlikely that more than two
answers came from the same establishment. This can also be noticed from
question number 16, “According to your attributions, the position you hold within
the company can be included in the following department:” where all of the
respondents claimed to work in administration or the reservation/reception
departments, which are typically the only ones that would have access to a
computer used for business. Another limitation is that online survey distribution
does not garner a high degree of credibility, as one of the respondents put it,
she “does not trust unsolicited emails” as to follow the link that was leading to
the online survey. The time factor was also an issue, while the literature review
chapter and the data analysis are in themselves time consuming as they
represent the bulk of the research, questionnaire distribution proved to be a
challenge as well because there was a relatively long waiting period to acquire
the needed amount of responses. Lastly, most guesthouses did not have their
own website/email address which prevented contacting them.
27
CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS
4.1 Introduction
To provide a view on the current situation regarding the quality and the purpose
of tourism in rural areas in Alba, Brașov, Cluj-Napoca and Sibiu counties, a
sociological survey was applied based on a questionnaire issued online via
email to accommodation units classified (according to the Romanian National
Institute of Statistics) in the categories found in table 4.1 in rural areas situated
in the investigated counties.
Unit type Description
Tourist guesthouse A structure of tourist accommodation
with a maximum capacity of 15 rooms
for a maximum of 40 people, in
citizens' homes or in independent
buildings, which provides, in
dedicated facilities, tourist
accommodation and conditions for
preparing and serving meals. The
location of the tourist guesthouse in
rural areas will cover a minimum plot
of 1000 square metres.
Agro-tourist guesthouse A structure of tourist accommodation
with a maximum capacity of 8 rooms,
in citizens' homes or in an
independent building, which provides,
in dedicated facilities, tourist
accommodation and conditions for
preparing and serving meals, as well
as the possibility of taking part in
household or craft activities.
Table 4.1: Guesthouse classification
28
The questionnaire revealed a sample of 87 accommodation units located in the
four researched counties, out of a total of 623 accommodation units that met
the scope and the conditions of the study, while also being recorded
commercially. The guesthouses were spread throughout 284 villages. This
questionnaire was thus applied to 13.9% of the total housing units that met the
required criteria. The questionnaire was sent online, the research method being
quantitative. One of the conditions for participating in the study of the economic
agents was the existence of a public email address where the research tool
could be sent. The questionnaire was applied between July 5, 2016 - August 4,
2016 and it was sent to 456 accommodation units from which a total of 87
responses was obtained.
4.2 Questionnaire structure
The research instrument chosen was a questionnaire composed of 20
questions of which 19 were closed questions and one question was open. A
number of 19 questions were mandatory for the respondents, one of the
questions, the open one, depending on the answer to a previous question. The
structure of the questionnaire was composed as in table 4.2. The
questionnaires were anonymous and there were no questions about the unit
name or personal data of the respondent.
Question number Question destination
Questions 1-3
Closed questions meant to outline the
type of customers in accommodation
units, occupancy according to the
number of accommodation days and
according to the months of the year.
Questions 4-5 and 7
Closed questions to find the main
attractions for tourists in various
villages and in specific units of
accommodation. Question 7 is trying
to find out the degree of customer
loyalty and rate of return of tourists in
29
those guesthouses. Further, there is
an attempt to create the profile of a
customer who chooses these units.
Question 6
A question that asks the respondents
to reveal the general method to attract
customers, to find work platforms with
customers and their reported
efficiency.
Questions 8-13
Closed questions about the facilities
available for accommodation units,
about marketing and promotion
methods used by the units, about the
willingness to evolve and the opinion
on marketing in this area. Also
present here are questions about
customer complaints and their
handling. Question 12 is an open
question related to the units’
experience with specialists in
marketing, addressed only to those
who have had this experience.
Questions 14-18
These are questions devised to
outline the questionnaire respondent
profile, his/her role in the unit, age,
experience and tasks by gender, in
this area. A brief profile of front-office
personnel who responded to the
questionnaire may be obtained.
Questions 19-20
Closed questions about the
accommodation capacity of the units
and about the respondent’s county.
Table 4.2: Structure of the questionnaire
30
The average time of completing a questionnaire was 17 minutes. The
questioned group has a general indicative value and it cannot show the value
of the error margin, it is just giving an overview of the characteristics and
problems of rural tourism in Transylvania. There is no possibility of providing a
comparative picture between different regions of the country, nor on the
development of tourism in this area. The data collected cannot be verified at
the source because of the anonymity of the questionnaire, a method that has
been chosen to increase the number of respondents.
4.3 Questionnaire analysis
The first question "What is the average time that a tourist or a tourist group
spend in your unit?" is a question answered by 100% of the respondents (87
respondents). The results can be seen in Figure 4.1.
Figure 4.1: The tourist medium stay period
31
We can see that the accommodation time is very reduced, with a practice of
transit or weekend tourism. With a score of 52% (45 respondents), most tourists
in these accommodation units have a maximum stay of 2 days. Adding this to
the fact that the second option has 27 votes, i.e. about 36% of the respondents
spend only one night in accommodation units, and the fact that no respondent
chose the option ‚over a week’, we can say that the guests are weekend guests
who do not want to spend much time in these units and in these accommodation
areas. This would be the first problem that was identified. Donald Hawkins,
tourism professor at George Washington University, identified this aspect of
limited stays in Petra, Jordan as a major problem with an economic impact on
the country: “One problem, says Hawkins, is that too many day trippers do not
stay long enough to help the local economy. International aid programs help
small businesses to address that. To spice up the gateway’s relatively dead
evenings, for instance, he cites a grant that helped the Petra Kitchen restaurant
set up an evening workshop in Bedouin cuisine, with tourists cooking and then
eating their newly created meals.” (Stange J. And Brown D., 2011, p. 16)
Thus, the problem has two important features, one that depends on the local
environment including the authorities, and one that depends on possible
relevant activities in the area. The involvement of local and national authorities
in the development of the tourist concept is imperative and it can provide
solutions for opening areas for tourists. Lack of events and capacity in rural
areas represent a huge disadvantage compared to urban areas, as well as
deficiencies of the transport system and the distances between major urban
areas and centres must be remedied. The local stakeholders also need to find
activities specific to these areas that may convince tourists to have longer stays.
If there is a high degree of customer satisfaction, then tourists will stay more
and will consequently spend more money in the area, benefitting the local
economy and in the long run even contributing to the development of the local
infrastructure.
32
The second question, "How would you characterize your tourists according to
the following table within a year?" is meant to underline a portrait of a tourist
from these locations. This question was answered by a total of 85 units, which
is 97.7% of the respondents. The question obtained the following answers, as
presented in Table 4.3.
Table 4.3: Tourist categories
At all Very
rarely
Average
rate
Very
often
Almost
always
One tourist
(26%)
(58%)
(9%)
(5%)
(2%)
Young
couples
without
children
(9%)
(13%)
(47%)
(27%)
(4%)
Couples
over 60
(5%)
(20%)
(50%)
(25%)
(0%)
Couples with
children
(2%)
(9%)
(47%)
(36%)
(7%)
Foreign
citizens
(4%)
(29%)
(31%)
(31%)
(4%)
Romanian
citizens living
abroad
(4%)
(27%)
(62%)
(7%)
(0%)
Romanian
citizens
(0%)
(2%)
(20%)
(51%)
(27%)
Groups
larger than 15
people
(40%)
(29%)
(24%)
(4%)
(2%)
33
To this question, the answers had a high variety and we can see that most
tourist categories proposed in the questionnaire were chosen predominantly on
the average line of the answers. Here we find that there is a predominant type
of visitor in the rural tourism of Transylvania. We can see that in general there
are no single travellers and the only issue that can be spotted here is related to
the low frequency of larger groups which can be attributed to a lack of
communication of these units with the organizers of touristic routes, such as
travel agencies. Also, this may signal an insufficient capacity of these
accommodations.
The third question - "How would you characterize your occupancy rate by month
of the year?" verifies whether there is a year-around constant or if there are any
seasonal features. We find the results to this question in table 4.4.
Very low
occupancy
rate
Low
occupancy
rate
Average
occupancy
rate
High
occupancy
rate
Very high
occupancy
rate
JAN
(25%)
(47%)
(22%)
(6%)
(0%)
FEB
(44%)
(31%)
(25%)
(0%)
(0%)
MAR
(17%)
(49%)
(14%)
(20%)
(0%)
APR
(6%)
(43%)
(26%)
(20%)
(6%)
MAY
(3%)
(11%)
(57%)
(20%)
(9%)
JUN
(0%)
(6%)
(28%)
(44%)
(22%)
JUL
(0%)
(3%)
(8%)
(51%)
(38%)
AUG
(0%)
(3%)
(5%)
(32%)
(59%)
34
Table 4.4: Occupancy rate by months
We can deduct from these answers that there is a tourism dependency on
various seasons in these areas. We can see that in cold months, excluding
December and Christmas holidays, there is a significant decrease in number of
tourists. Looking at this table, we can notice six months with an occupancy rate
of under 30-40% and summer months that bring an increased number of
tourists in these areas. This implies a major problem by offering insufficient
resources during summer and an excess of resources in the cold season. As
Dr. Christine Lee puts it, “for a destination in a remote location, seasonality can
cause an under-utilisation of resources when visitor numbers are low and an
over-increased demand for resources when too many visitors arrive in a short
space of time. To address under-utilisation, strategies can be used to attract
more visitors, such as events and festivals, promotion of destination through
advertising and incentives to travel by creating and developing new attractions
for that location” (Lee et. Al, 2008, p. 15).
Therefore, some solutions must be found for winter tourism, focused on either
indoor events or outdoor activities like winter sports. Also in this case,
intervention from both local authorities and managers of guesthouses is
necessary, financial resources need to be allocated evenly, so that the entire
area develops in a harmonious manner.
SEP
(3%)
(3%)
(42%)
(36%)
(15%)
OCT
(3%)
(42%)
(39%)
(9%)
(6%)
NOV
(24%)
(48%)
(18%)
(6%)
(3%)
DEC
(12%)
(18%)
(21%)
(36%)
(12%)
35
The fourth question is related to attractions in the geographical area where the
guesthouse is located. "What do you think is the specific attraction in the area
where your accommodation unit is located?" We start from the premise that the
natural environment and tranquillity are superior to urban areas and that they
are important features in attracting tourists in rural areas.
Figure 4.2: Geographic area attractions and importance
We can see that the area is particularly important for these accommodation
units. In addition to the handcrafted items specific to the area, which obtained
a peak on the average line, the others scored a majority in the higher grades of
the classification. Tourists apparently love to transition to another world, a world
beyond time and without agitation. Charles, Prince of Wales said about these
regions that he ”hadn't been aware just how extraordinary this part of the world
is with all its biodiversity, the wildflower meadows. It just seemed to me,
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%Unimportant
Less important
NeutralPretty important
Crucial
Natural environment Exploring possibilities
Handcrafted items Local traditions and customs
Proximity to historical locations
36
particularly this area of the Carpathian Mountains, to be literally the last unspoilt,
untouched area" (Daily Express, 4th August 2015). So this charm and local
traditions, culinary diversity, myths such as Count Dracula or the myth of the
haunted Hoia forest from Cluj County must attract visitors and develop the local
tourism. Also, professionalism and diversity of products offered to tourists must
develop as well, while the image of these places must be promoted in a more
enjoyable and active manner.
The fifth question, “What do you think is the specific attraction to your
accommodation unit?" is meant to point out what are the existing advantages
inside the units.
Not
important
Somehow
important
Neutral Important
enough
Crucial
Prices (2%) (9%) (17%) (59%) (13%)
Staff (7%) (16%) (18%) (40%) (20%)
Product
quality (4%) (4%) (7%) (58%) (27%)
Touristic
packages (2%) (5%) (18%) (43%) (32%)
Only unit
in area (31%) (18%) (18%) (29%) (4%)
Promotion (2%) (7%) (35%) (40%) (16%)
Traditions (16%) (18%) (20%) (30%) (16%)
Rooms (0%) (0%) (16%) (53%) (31%)
Placement
of unit (0%) (0%) (12%) (47%) (42%)
Table 4.5: Attractions present in accommodation units
From these answers we can see a general opinion of what makes a unit a
preferential destination for tourists. The prices are perhaps much lower than in
37
urban areas while the staff seemed to attract and had a pleasant and
professional character. The products offered, from food to linens and bath
products, are perceived to be of high quality and promote a pleasant
environment. Special touristic packages are offered to guests in order to extend
their stay and to ensure occupancy during the holidays. At the same time, there
is a healthy competitive environment without being subjected to monopoly. The
unit is promoted, or at least this is the impression at the level of the unit, and
the traditions encountered within the guesthouse provide a positive
recommendation. The rooms satisfy the customers in terms of cleanliness and
size. Again, we can notice that the area and the location are positive elements
for the tourists.
“How are bookings made predominantly in your unit?” is the 6th question and it
highlights how these rural units welcome customers.
Figure 4.3: Origin of bookings
38
We can see that the majority of bookings are made online and by phone. There
is however a large percentage of unpredictability, of “tourists at the guesthouse
door", about 34% of the questionnaires sticking to the last two options. The
percentage for online is 35% and there were no other reported methods of
booking. The online environment is divided between email and professional
online booking services. The existence of a high percentage of impersonal
bookings reveals a degree of development and promotion rather high for these
units.
The next question, number 7 is related to the degree of loyalty and return of
customers in accommodation units. We start from the idea that tourism that
persuades tourists to come back is healthy and strong, customer satisfaction
and gratitude is high, thus they come back. The question was formulated as
“What is the return rate of customers in your unit, which you consider or is
statistically determined from year to year?”
Figure 4.4: Tourist return rate
We can see that there is a low degree of predominance in the case of tourists’
return. Only 12% of the respondents said that half of the clients return year after
year, and for 38%, i.e. 33 of the respondents, said that less than 10% of the
Under 10%38%
10%-25%26%
25-50%24%
Over 50%12%
CUSTOMER RETURN RATE
39
customers are returning. This loyalty can have two directions - a direct one,
effective customer return, and a second, equally important if not more so,
related to the recommendation degree of the location. Again, this problem may
be related to a lack of activities and diversity in rural areas. This is a problem
that could be solved by public private partnerships.
The next question tries to determine the level of facilities in rural locations and
a level of willingness for development and future investment in to equip and
develop the unit: The question is "What facilities does your unit provide?" and
it was answered on average by 84 respondents, i.e. 96.55%.
No facility (nor
intention to
acquire in the
near future)
Yes
No facility (But
we are going to
equip the unit in
the near future)
Restaurant (29%) (67%) (4%)
Pub/Terrace (37%) (54%) (9%)
CableTV/WiFi (4%) (93%) (2%)
Bath tub (37%) (60%) (2%)
Coffee
makers in rooms
(82%) (7%) (11%)
Storage area (38%) (49%) (13%)
Safe for
customers
(61%) (27%) (11%)
Farm or
petting zoo
(55%) (27%) (18%)
Playground (36%) (47%) (18%)
Permanent
reception
(51%) (38%) (11%)
Table 4.6: Unit facilities
40
According to almost a third of respondents (29%), there are no facilities for
providing food in the unit. Only 3 of them plan to expand the facilities with a
restaurant to also provide food to the guests. Quite many facilities lose some
money by not providing food or drinks (46%) and also force tourists to seek
other places nearby.
TV cable and WiFi become absolutely necessary equipment and it can be seen
that the percentage approaches 100% mainly regarding future investments. On
the other hand, very few units provide a safe for the customers’ valuables or
storage areas for certain bulky luggage, like skiing equipment or bikes. Many
units do not provide agro-tourist services and do not provide facilities for
families with children, although in all these areas the investment percentage in
the near future exceeds 10%, which is encouraging for tourism and its
relevance for the local economy.
Under 40% of the units have receptions and 24 hours a day available personnel
for customers and this figure should become 50% considering future
investments. There is an increasing level of facilities within the units and there
seems to be a fair amount of willingness (and also financial resources) to invest
in this area.
After trying, through the previous question, to highlight a level of facilities in
housing units, question number nine "Which of the following promotion
environments are used by you?” tries to find the tools used by guesthouses in
daily activities especially for promotion and marketing. On average, 85 of 87
respondents answered this question, i.e. 97.7%, with terms like HRS or Google
+ probably ending up to be confusing (Table 4.7). Furthermore, question
number 10, "Note how relevant the environments in the question above are for
your business with grades from 1 to 5 (where 1 is not at all and 5 is very
important)" was intended to find the employees’ opinion about the importance
of these mediums, as shown in figure 4.5.
41
Yes No More or less
Flyers, brochures and other
printed materials
(27%) (59%) (14%)
Website (70%) (30%) (0%)
Facebook page (78%) (19%) (3%)
Google+ page (23%) (71%) (6%)
Twitter page (3%) (94%) (3%)
Other social networks (12%) (88%) (0%)
Booking.com account (65%) (32%) (3%)
HRS account (14%) (86%) (0%)
Other online booking
accounts
(51%) (49%) (0%)
Own booking platform (33%) (67%) (0%)
Online ads (26%) (74%) (0%)
Radio ads (6%) (94%) (0%)
TV ads (3%) (97%) (0%)
Publication ads (14%) (83%) (3%)
Table 4.7: Promotion environments
In the table, we can see that most respondents own a website for their business
promotion. Also, the vast majority have Facebook pages and accounts for
online reservations. Moreover, when it comes to specific means of promotion
and purchased advertising, the figures show an important lack of advertising
purchase. In addition, figure 4.4 listed below reveals a lack of confidence in
these environments, only the website and the booking.com account
represented an average of over 2.5, meaning a positive average of opinions.
42
Figure 4.4: Promotion environments grading (1 to 5) – the order of the elements
presented in figure 4.4 is the same as those in Table 4.7
Professors Crișan and Berariu from Dimitrie Cantemir University in Târgu
Mureș state that ”Advertising has become increasingly international. More than
ever before, tour operators are looking beyond their own country's borders for
new customers. The growth of multinational corporations, rising personal
income levels worldwide, and falling trade barriers have all encouraged
commerce, trade and tourism between countries. No one can predict what new
forms advertising may take in the future. But the rapidly increasing cost of
acquiring new customers makes one thing certain: advertisers will seek to keep
their current customers by forming closer relationships with them and by
promoting products, services, and advertising messages to meet their individual
needs. So advertising will always continue to encourage people to buy goods
and survives no matter if they are useful or not” (Crișan R. E. and Berariu C.,
2011, p. 33).
43
The lack of advertising is a major problem of trust. Firstly, there needs to be a
clear identification of what is the entity responsible with promotions - local
authorities, local people providing accommodation or entities conducting
tourism related businesses such as festivals or other events. Advertising should
occupy a leading position in the tourism economy. Any form of promotion should
be considered, any opportunity must be speculated, and any potential negative
attitude from citizens, external and internal, must disappear.
Business owners could use the surrounding environment, like elements of
geology (caves, ice structures, natural art, natural diversity), elements of
biodiversity (exploitation of specific regional flora and fauna, of the wilderness
in the area), ethnographic elements (traditions and customs specific to the area,
which can attract, or turning them into true attractions such as Sângeorz in Alba,
or Junii/The Youth from Brașov), historical elements (promoting myths, historic
rehearsals: LARP sessions combined with medieval festivals, creating
medieval and historic areas inside accommodations). With the help of local
authorities, transformation is necessary to offer a unique Romanian experience
for different types of tourists. It should be something similar to Spanish bull
fights, which became an accessible event for tourists while also satisfying
locals, or similar to the festival Ha in southern China, which annually attracts
millions of enthusiast tourists to "worship" a god of the sea that does not exist
in their culture. Efforts should be made to efficiently promote the geographic
region and to find solutions to present it to the world in a positive image.
Question number 10 is about customer complaints: "What is the degree of
complaints from your customers according to the following table?" This question
provides perhaps the most positive answers, overwhelmingly showing that
customers are mostly satisfied with conditions in guesthouses. None of the
issues suggested is representative for accommodation in guesthouses. This
means that either the overall quality of the guesthouses is constantly meeting
general expectations or that maybe some owners choose not to present their
property in a negative manner, despite the anonymous nature of the
questionnaire.
44
Almost never2%
More or less4%
Often56%
A lot38%
CONSIDERI NG CUSTOMER
WISHESCLIENȚILOR
Quite often Often Neutral Very rarely Never
Prices
(0%)
(0%)
(8%)
(33%)
(58%)
Staff
(0%)
(0%)
(3%)
(22%)
(75%)
Product
quality
(0%)
(0%)
(8%)
(22%)
(69%)
Cleanliness
(0%)
(0%)
(6%)
(11%)
(83%)
Noise
(0%)
(0%)
(3%)
(19%)
(78%)
Rooms
(0%)
(0%)
(3%)
(22%)
(75%)
Food and
drinks
(0%)
(0%)
(3%)
(14%)
(83%)
False
advertising
(0%)
(0%)
(0%)
(3%)
(97%)
Table 4.8: Reasons for complaints
Question number 11, "To what extent do you think that your unit takes into
account the views and wishes of the clients?” is meant to measure the
employees’ degree of interest towards guests’ suggestions and demands.
Figure 4.5: Taking customer suggestions/demands into consideration
45
Yes4%
No
60%
No, but I intend to
36%
REQUES TI NG PROFESSIONAL CONSULT ANCY
In this case, the vast majority seems to take into account the customers and
their views, which is a positive aspect for the units. Customer satisfaction should
be imperative as to trigger future loyalty/advocacy.
Question number 12 - "Did you turn to professional consulting and marketing
services to improve your business?" is testing the degree of interest in outside
professional marketing skills.
Figure 4.6: Degree of units that requested professional consultancy services
Question 12 was followed by an open question (addressed only to respondents
that offered an affirmative answer) which unfortunately remained unanswered
due to a low percentage of respondents that have used professional
consultancy/marketing services. Thus, almost half of the rural guesthouses in
Transylvania could benefit from professional marketing in the future, which
should lead to an increase in the number of tourists and also in revenue. Also,
local authorities should be actively involved in increasing the touristic potential
of these areas. The uniqueness and specificity of this area should be reinforced
with quality marketing in order to achieve regional development and keep
business markets active. Professors from The Chinese University of Hong Kong
46
Absent34%
It exists but does not yield significant
benefits5%
It exists and it is helpful
36%
Will significantly increase in the
future25%
EXISTENCE OF SELF-MARKETI NG
argue that “Hospitality marketing is unique because it deals with the tangible
product, like a bed in the hotel or food in the restaurant, but it also deals with
the intangible aspects of the hospitality and tourism industry. It is about the
experience in a trip and social status it brings eating in a fine-dining restaurant.
Hospitality marketing is very critical in the success of any hospitality and tourism
product, organization and tourist destination. Proper marketing effort promotes
a product or service that fills the needs and wants of the consumers and at the
same time, bring profits to the organization or country that features it” (Tan A.,
Ching-Yick T. and Ling Wong C, 2009, p. 1).
Self-marketing is being addressed through question 13: "Which option do you
think is appropriate to characterize marketing performed in your unit?"
Figure 4.7: Self-marketing
A third of the respondents, i.e. 34%, admit that they do not make any efforts
towards marketing while a similar percent (34%) admit the influence of
marketing on their business and are pleased with their efforts. Only 5% use
marketing without noticing any improvement and a quarter of the respondents
plan to begin marketing efforts in the near future.
47
The following four questions are directed towards the respondents themselves,
regarding age, gender, job description and work experience, they offer concise
responses that do not require in-depth analysis and will be briefly presented.
The last two questions reveal the capacity of the guesthouses and the County
from which the respondents originate.
Question number 14 deals with the age group of the respondents. It can be
seen that they belong to all proposed age groups, the majority being between
35 and 44 years, providing 41% of the total answers. This can be linked to the
following factual questions in order to draw a general profile of the respondents.
Figure 4.8: Age of respondents
Question number 15 is represented in figure 4.9 and is regarding the gender of
the respondents, revealing that there is no considerable difference between the
number of male and female employees, 53% of respondents being men and
47% women. These results are relevant as they indicate that this particular
industry is not gender-oriented and there are equal employment chances for
men and women alike.
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
What is your age group?
18-34 years old 35-44 years old
45-60 years old Over 60 years old
48
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
What is your gender?
Female Male
Figure 4.9: Respondents’ gender
When asked about the position they hold within the company, on question
number 16, 80% of the respondents answered that they were managers and/or
owners, while only 20% of them worked at the reception/reservations
department, according to figure 4.10. This is understandable due to the fact that
a large number of establishments does not have a functioning reception and
while the questionnaire was aimed at all categories of employees, it seems no
one working in other departments wanted to answer or perhaps did not receive
the survey at all.
Figure 4.10: Respondents’ position within the company
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
According to your attributions, the position you hold within the company can be included in the following department:
Other department Housekeeping/technical
Restaurant/kitchen Reception/reservations
Administration (owner/manager)
49
Less than 1 year
13%
1-3 years15%
3-5 years17%
Over 5 years55%
WORK EXPERIENCE
The 17th question reveals the work experience that the respondents have
acquired in the tourism/hospitality field. A significant 55% of these answers
indicated more than 5 years of experience while the smallest percent was 13%,
which were respondents working for less than 1 year. We can therefore assume
that rural tourism is a non-volatile field of work, in which employees keep their
jobs for large periods of time which in turn leads to a stable economic context.
Figure 4.11: Work experience in the field of tourism/hospitality
Question number 18 is about the capacity of the accommodation units,
quantified in usable beds. From figure 4.12 we can see that most units have a
capacity between five and 20 beds, hence the low percentage of groups over
15 persons in table 4.3.
Figure 4.12: Guesthouse capacity
50
Alba13%
Brașov45%
Cluj18%
Sibiu24%
RESPONDENTS ' LOCATION (BY COUNTY)
Lastly, question number 19 reveals the origin/location of the respondents,
divided between the four Transylvanian counties. Although the questionnaires
were distributed in a relatively even proportion, Brașov had the most responses
which is understandable since it is the most developed tourism-wise, judging
by number of guesthouses and touristic attractions including the fortified
churches in the old Saxon villages and Bran Castle which is widely known as
“Dracula’s Home”.
Figure 4.13: Origin of respondents
4.4 Summary
Following this sociological research, we found some benchmarks related to
tourism in the rural areas of these four counties of Alba, Brașov, Cluj and Sibiu.
Globalization and the rapid development of global tourism determines
sustained efforts to promote and develop the local tourism market and to
improve overall products and services. While the overall picture seems
optimistic with intent to invest in facilities, with positive attitudes towards guests
and reduced customer complaints, we can still notice a few gaps where there
is still room for improvement and rethinking strategies. In order to end this
section properly, there is a list that summarizes the findings discussed above,
split into identified problems as well as potential marketing solutions.
51
Problems
identified
Solutions proposed
Short stay of
tourists: 1-2
days
o Creating new events and (re)discovering potential
touristic attractions. Promoting them and
pinpointing their individualities in order to attract
targeted segments of visitors.
o Development of internal activities in and around
accommodation units, presenting tourists with
alternatives so that they are not tempted to move
on to other areas/establishments.
o Promoting sports, trips, developing unique
activities in the surrounding areas and creating a
centralized system of promotion for most
Transylvanian locations.
o Collaborating towards infrastructure development,
providing easy transit from rural to urban areas.
Few tourist
groups
o Improving/establishing communication between
accommodation units and external partners such
as international travel agencies.
o Creating partnerships between neighbouring
villages to handle the lack of accommodation
spaces in busy periods.
o Using “bio” tourism in terms of nutrition, developing
and promoting traditional eatable products,
created/harvested at a local level in a micro -
factories system.
o Providing guesthouses with low capacity coaches
and hiring drivers for tours/transfer, also introducing
the possibility of benefitting from urban medical
services while accommodated in a rural setting.
o Creating small annexes where possible, permanent
or temporary, thus being able to accommodate
occasional extra guests.
52
Seasonal
character of
tourism
o Creating new attractions through festivals and
exploiting the historical/ethnographic character of
the region.
o Developing a basis for all year round sports and
activities while providing guests with basic
equipment (free of charge where possible).
o Promoting products specific to each season
(mulled wine, tea, hot chocolate and even
handcrafted hats/mittens) to attract tourists.
Exploiting the
environment
and the
geographical
position
o Creating a centralized strategy to promote the
specific attractions of the area.
o Allowing guests to partake in daily specific
activities/traditions (agri-tourism).
o Exploiting fishing and sportive hunting.
o Heavily promoting regions in UNESCO patrimony.
o Imposing own themes for guesthouses to provide a
unique experience (ranch, mill, cabin, sheepfold).
Increasing
informatization
degree
o Providing tourists with special offers for online
reservations (discounts, small personalized gifts)
o Offering support at a county level for future
hospitality employees’ training and preparation.
o Creating online pages for unitary promotion of the
uniqueness of each accommodation unit in each
village.
Low level of
resources for
development
o Seeking to obtain EU touristic grants.
o Maximizing occupancy rate of units by promotion
(significant increase in marketing investments).
o Affiliating with new, external business partners
Lack of
promotion and
marketing
o Creating common promotion platforms at county
organizations level.
o Promoting businesses in all national tourism fairs.
o Attracting personalities to pro - bono promotion of
these accommodations by various incentives.
53
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS / RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Introduction
This final chapter briefly presents the most important findings in this research
paper and proves that the aim of the study, effectively determining successful
marketing strategies in Transylvanian rural guesthouses, was reached one
objective after another.
5.2 Conclusions
In order to properly assess the findings from this research we will now bring up
the objectives that were set up at the beginning of this paper and confront them
with our results. The fifth and final objective will be detailed in the following
subchapter.
The first objective was to understand the concept of rural tourism. Advancing
through the literature review chapter we learned that rural tourism is used for
bridging the gap between developed urban areas and their less exploited rural
counterparts. Moreover, it is constantly subjected to a strenuous competition
coming from the traditional tourism that is considerably more popular and
attracts the vast majority of touristic spending. While its designation is to help
regional development through job creation, urban-to-rural migration and
infrastructure enhancement, most areas have trouble with the initial stages of
creating an independent touristic destination. Even when the region has
established a constant touristic flow, there is still work to be done in the
customer service area, as well as regarding product quality. As rural tourism
constantly develops, the appearance of new destinations forces existing ones
54
to diversify their offer and reach out to various marketing strategies like
rebranding and switching to agri-tourism.
In order to define successful marketing strategies, which was our second
objective, we must look at the literature review chapter one more time, as to
examine the solutions that were used to combat the numerous challenges faced
worldwide by rural tourism. The best way to attract customers is to offer
diversity, something that is new to the customer, which is what some
accommodation units did when they offered their customers the opportunity to
be involved in local customs and daily activities like producing handcrafted
items. Branding is vital to the success of any business and since the natural
environment is the most appealing factor to visitors, guesthouses should
intertwine their identity so that it matches and blends in with the surrounding
area. Also, accommodation units should consider partial reorientation, trying out
other activities as well, like the case of Serbia where organic agriculture is
helping tourism as visitors arrive to buy the products and spend time and money
in the area.
The third objective was to identify marketing strategies used in Transylvania
and we can point out several of these. Perhaps the most easily recognizable is
the branding of the Bran area as “home of Dracula”, a local myth that constantly
attracts visitors from all over the world, benefitting the accommodation units as
well as the surrounding region. In the literature review we see that in 2006,
many locals from Maramureș reoriented themselves by turning their private
residences into guesthouses, while the article about Romanian tourists visiting
Transylvania shows us that depending on the destination specific, it is important
to appeal to the right sensory dimensions. Unfortunately the questionnaire
results reveal that Transylvanian hosts do not rely that much on the
ethnographic factor which could be used as a powerful marketing tool seeing
as the uniqueness of every area is bound to generate interest.
55
The fourth objective was to establish successful marketing strategies that are
being used in Transylvania and we can only answer this by examining the
results yielded by our questionnaire. Question number three reveals that the
occupancy rate in guesthouses is high or very high during summer and
December (probably due to the Christmas holidays) which is telling us that they
effectively promote their unit since many rural guesthouses are remotely
situated and tourists do not regularly just stumble across them. This assumption
is backed by results from questions numbers six and nine, from which we
understand that the units rely heavily on online advertising, using personal
websites, Facebook pages and various online booking accounts. A number of
52 respondents, making up a total of 60%, admitted that they have not used
professional consultancy nor marketing services, although an optimistic 36%
seems interested in doing so. Also, self-marketing is practiced by a third of the
respondents while another 25% thinks that it will increase in the future.
5.3 Recommendations
The final objective was to draw conclusions and make recommendations so we
can safely say that we have managed to reach this last objective as well,
through the detailed summary of the data analysis chapter. We highlighted a
few important issues like the reduced stay of tourists which could be solved by
creating new events and gain outside interest by promoting their individualities.
Attracting groups of tourists can be done by providing transport for multiple
persons as well as by constructing small annexes, if building a new unit is not
feasible. The seasonal character of tourism can be countered by organizing
festivals during low season or promoting all year round sports. Exploiting the
environment should be a top priority and perhaps introducing agri-touristic
elements and creating personalized themes can prove to be beneficial. Another
recommendation would be to either invest in professional marketing services or
to seriously consider allocating resources into self-marketing seeing as the
market is nearing saturation and individuality becomes a must.
56
5.4 Reflections and evaluation of the methodology
The methodology is considered appropriate and successful as its goal has
ultimately been reached. However, due to the relatively low number of
respondents, some results could have been more relevant. Also, an additional
method of distribution, perhaps handed personally, might have gotten the
questionnaire to employees in other departments. Regarding the structure of
the questionnaire, some of the provided questions might have had too many
options which may have led to an increase completion time and/or loss of
interest.
5.5 Suggestions for further research
Regarding future research on the subject, authors should consider a larger
sampling pool in order to obtain a higher response rate and an increased level
of relevancy. Also, the questions should be more synthesized and the questions
presented in this questionnaire should be asked again towards a comparison of
results.
57
REFERENCES:
ADAMIAK, C. (2014) Importance of second homes for local economy of a rural tourism region. [Online] Available from: http://www.academia.edu/12753324 [Accessed: 8th September 2016]
COSMA, S., PAUN, D., BOTA, M., FLESERIU, C. (2014) Innovation – a useful tool in the rural tourism in Romania [Online] Procedia - Social and Behavioral
Sciences 148 (2014) p. 507–515. Available from:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042814039779 [Accessed: 10th September 2016]
CRIŞAN, R. E., BERARIU, C., (2013) Advertising aspects of tourism. [Online]
Academica Science Journal Geographica Series No. (2) 1 – 2013.
Available from:
http://academica.udcantemir.ro/wp-content/uploads/article/geographica/g2/G2A4.pdf [Accessed: 10th September
2016]
DIŢOIU, M.-C., STĂNCIOIU, A.-F., BRĂTUCU, G., ONIŞOR, L.-F., BOTOȘ A. (2014) The sensory brand of the destination. Case study: Transylvania [Online]
Theoretical and Applied Economics Volume XXI (2014), No. 5 (594), pp. 37-50. Available from: http://store.ectap.ro/articole/981.pdf [Accessed: 8th September
2016] DOAN, T. M. (2013) Sustainable Ecotourism in Amazonia: Evaluation of Six
Sites in Southeastern Peru [Online] International Journal of Tourism Research 15, 261-271. Available from:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259842167 [Accessed: 7th September 2016]
DRĂGULĂNESCU, I.-V., DRUŢU (IVAN), M. (2012) Rural Tourism for Local Economic Development [Online] International Journal of Academic Research in
Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences Volume 2, Special Issue 1 (2012), pp. 196-203 ISSN: 2225-8329. Available from: http://www.hrmars.com/admin/pics/1028.pdf [Accessed: 8th September 2016]
FALAK, S., MAY CHIUN, L., WEE, A. Y. (2014) A repositioning strategy for rural
tourism in Malaysia – community’s perspective [Online] Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 11 (2014) p. 412-415. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042814042384
[Accessed: 1st September 2016]
58
KLIMASZEWSKI, C., NYCE, J. (2009). Does universal access mean equitable access? What an information infrastructure study of a rural Romanian
community can tell us. [Online] New Library World, 10(5), 219-236. Available from:
http://repository.brynmawr.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1006&context=lib_pubs [Accessed: 9th September 2016]
LEE, C., BERGIN-SEERS, S., GALLOWAY, G., O’MAHONY, B., McMURRAY, A. (2008) Seasonality in the tourism industry. [Online] Available from:
https://coastaltourismacademy.co.uk/uploads/CRC_Queensland_2008_Seasonality_in_the_tourism_industry_(2).pdf [Accessed: 9th September 2016]
MAKSIMOVIC M., MIHAJLOVIC D., UROSEVIC S. (2012) Economic effects of rural tourism in eastern Serbia based on the concept of sustainable
development [Online] Quaestus Multidisciplinary Research Journal (2012), 41-55. Available from: http://www.quaestus.ro/en/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/maksimovic.mladan1.pdf [Accessed: 11th September
2016]
PALMER, R. (2015) Charles and the Dracula connection: Prince reveals his love of Transylvanian countryside. Daily Express. [Online] 4th August 2015. Available from: http://www.express.co.uk/news/nature/595780/Prince-Charles-
Dracula-Transylvanian-countryside-love [Accessed: 9th September 2016]
PHILLIPS W., WOLFE K., HODUR N., LEISTRITZ F.L. (2011) Tourist Word of Mouth and Revisit Intentions to Rural Tourism Destinations: a Case of North Dakota, USA [Online] International Journal of Tourism Research – January
2013 p. 93-104. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kara_Wolfe/publication/235744124
[Accessed: 10th September 2016] RANDELLI F., ROMEI P., TORTORA M. (2013) An evolutionary approach to
the study of rural tourism: The case of Tuscany. [Online] Land Use Policy (2014) 276-281. Available from:
http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/39629247/An_evolutionary_approach_to_the_study_of20151102-16301-5t21uk.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJ56TQJRTWSMTNPEA&Expires=147333
6001&Signature=0%2Bf7PAYtBzcesGeEq1ztGyyGVMs%3D&response-content-
disposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DAn_evolutionary_approach_to_the_study_of.pdf [Accessed: 8th September 2016]
RID W., EZEUDUJI I. O., PROBSTL-HAIDER U. (2014) Segmentation by motivation for rural tourism activities in The Gambia [Online] Tourism
Management 40 (2014) p. 102-116. Available from: http://gtbreu.pnyhost.com/Teachers/SampleArticles/6.pdf [Accessed: 1st September 2016]
59
SHARPLEY, R. (2002) Rural tourism and the challenge of tourism diversification: the case of Cyprus. [Online] Tourism Management – June 2002
p. 233-244. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223459404 [Accessed: 10th
September 2016] STANGE J., BROWN D. (2011) Tourism destination management. [Online]
Available from: https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/fi les/documents/2151/DMOworkbook_130
318.pdf [Accessed: 9th September 2016] TAN, A., CHING-YICK TSE, E., LING WONG, C. (2009) Hospitality Marketing
[Online] Available from: http://www.edb.gov.hk/attachment/en/curriculum-development/kla/pshe/nss-
curriculum/tourism-and-hospitality-studies/marketing%20english.pdf [Accessed: 10th September 2016]
THE INTERNATIONAL ECOTOURISM SOCIETY (2015) What is ecotourism? [Online] https://www.ecotourism.org/what-is-ecotourism [Accessed 11th
September 2016] TRAVEL TO MALAYSIA (2014) Malaysia is ninth most visited country in the
world in UNWTO list. [Online] Available from: http://travel- to-malaysia.com/malaysia-is-ninth-most-visited-in-the-world-in-unwto-list/
[Accessed: 1st September 2016]
60
APPENDIX A: DETAILED QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS
1. What is the average time that a tourist or a tourist group spend in your
unit?
1 day 1 - 2 days
3 - 4 days
5 - 7 days
Over 7 days
Responses
All Data
27 (37%)
44 (52%)
13 (15%)
3 (2%)
0 (0%)
87
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
1 day 1-2 days 3-4 days 5-7 days Over 7 days
61
2. How would you characterize your tourists according to the following table within a year?
At all
Very rarely
Average rate
Very often
Almost always
St.
Dev. Resp.
W.
Avg.
One tourist
21
(26%)
48
(58%)
7
(9%)
4
(5%)
2
(2%) 19.16 83 2/5
Young couples
without children
6
(9%)
10
(13%)
41
(47%)
22
(27%)
3
(4%) 15.53 85 3.04/5
Couples over 60
4
(5%)
19
(20%)
42
(50%)
21
(25%)
0
(0%) 16.6 84 2.95/5
Couples with
children
2
(2%)
6
(9%)
41
(47%)
34
(36%)
5
(7%) 18.39 85 3.36/5
Foreign citizens
3
(4%)
27
(31%)
28
(31%)
24
(29%)
23
(4%) 10.27 85 2.98/5
Romanian citizens living
abroad
3
(4%)
24
(27%)
52
(62%)
6
(7%)
0
(0%)
21.67 85 2.71/5
Romanian citizens
0
(0%)
2
(2%)
18
(20%)
43
(51%)
24
(27%) 17.60 85 4.02/5
Groups
larger than 15 people
36
(40%)
25
(29%)
20
(24%)
4
(4%)
2
(2%)
14.38 85 2/5
2.89/5
62
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
At all
Veryrarely
Average
rate
Veryoften
Almost
always
One touristYoung couples without childrenCouples over 60Couples with childrenForeign citizensRomanian citizens living abroadRomanian citizensGroups larger than 15 people
63
3. How would you characterize your occupancy rate (OR) by month of the year, rating every month from 1 to 5 where 1 means “very low occupancy
rate” and 5 is “very high occupancy rate”?
Very low OR Low OR Avg. OR High OR Very high OR St.
Dev. Resp.
W. Avg
.
JAN 21
(25%) 42
(47%) 19
(22%) 5
(6%) 0
(0%) 16.41 87 2.08/5
FEB 41
(44%)
25
(31%)
21
(25%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%) 17.76 87 1.81/5
MAR
12 (17%)
43 (49%)
10 (14%)
19 (20%)
0 (0%) 16.14 87 2.37/5
APR 5 (6%)
39 (43%)
22 (26%)
19 (20%)
5 (6%)
14.10 87 2.77/5
MAY
2
(3%)
10
(11%)
46
(57%)
19
(20%)
8
(9%) 17.32 87 3.2/5
JUN 0
(0%) 5
(6%) 23
(28%) 40
(44%) 17
(22%) 14,12 87 3.83/5
JUL 0
(0%) 2
(3%) 4
(8%) 46
(51%) 34
(38%) 19,04 87 4.24/5
AUG
0
(0%)
2
(3%)
3
(5%)
28
(32%)
52
(59%) 20,27 87 4.49/5
SEP 2
(3%) 2
(3%) 38
(42%) 32
(36%) 11
(15%) 15,18 87 3.58/5
OCT
2 (3%)
38 (42%)
35 (39%)
7 (9%)
5 (6%) 15,70 87 2.73/5
NOV
20
(24%)
44
(48%)
14
(18%)
5
(6%)
2
(3%) 14,94 87 2.15/5
DEC
9 (12%)
14 (18%)
17 (21%)
32 (36%)
8 (12%) 8,65 87 3.18/5
3.05/5
64
4. What do you think is the specific attraction in the area where your accommodation unit is located?
Unimportant Less important Neutral
Pretty important Crucial
St. Dev. Resp.
W
Avg.
Natural environment
10
(13%)
5
(7%)
9
(11%)
42
(46%)
23
(24%)
13,53 87 3.61/5
Exploring possibilities
8
(11%)
12
(16%)
12
(16%)
41
(44%)
10
(13%) 12,29 87 3.33/5
Handcrafted items
15
(20%)
14
(18%)
25
(29%)
17
(20%)
10
(13%) 4,96 87 2.89/5
Local traditions
and customs
12
(16%)
23
(24%)
12
(16%)
24
(27%)
14
(18%)
5,37 87 3.07/5
Proximity to historical
locations
7
(9%)
7
(9%)
21
(24%)
36
(40%)
14
(18%) 10,83 87 3.49/5
3.28/5
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%Very low OR
Low OR
Average ORHigh OR
Very high OR
JAN FEB MAR APR
MAY JUN JUL AUG
SEP OCT NOV DEC
65
5. What do you think is the specific attraction to your accommodation unit?
Not important
Somehow important Neutral
Important enough Crucial
St. Dev. Resp.
W.
Avg.
Prices 1
(2%)
7
(9%)
14 (17%)
52
(59%)
9
(13%)
18,18 87 3.72/5
Staff 4
(7%)
12
(16%)
13 (18%)
36
(40%)
17
(20%)
10,67 87 3.51/5
Product quality
3
(4%)
3
(4%)
5
(7%)
51
(58%)
23
(27%)
18,59 87 3.98/5
0%5%
10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%Unimportant
Less important
NeutralPretty important
Crucial
Natural environment Exploring possibilitiesHandcrafted items Local traditions and customsProximity to historical locations
66
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%Not important
Somehow important
NeutralImportant enough
Crucial
Prices Staff Product quality
Touristic packages Only unit in area Promotion
Traditions Rooms Placement of unit
Touristic packages
1
(2%)
3
(5%)
15 (18%)
39
(43%)
29
(32%) 14,72 87 3.98/5
Only unit in area
27
(31%)
15
(18%)
15 (18%)
26
(29%)
3
(4%) 8,77 87 2.58/5
Promotion
1
(2%)
5
(7%)
31 (35%)
36
(40%)
12
(16%) 14,01 87 3.6/5
Traditions 12
(16%)
14
(18%)
17 (20%)
26
(30%)
12
(16%) 5,23 87 3.11/5
Rooms 0
(0%)
0
(0%)
13 (16%)
49
(53%)
27
(31%) 18,52 87 4.16/5
Placement of unit
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
9 (12%)
44
(47%)
38
(42%) 19,00 87 4.3/5
3.66/5
67
6. How are bookings made predominantly in your unit?
By telephone
Online Personally On arrival Other (please specify)
Responses
All
Data
29
(31%)
32
(35%)
13
(17%)
13
(17%)
0
(0%)
87
7. What is the return rate of customers in your unit, which you consider or
is statistically determined from year to year?”
Under 10% 10%-25% 25%-50% Over 50% St.
Dev.
Resp.
All
Data
33
(38%)
23
(26%)
21
(24%)
10
(12%) 8,17 87
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
By telephone Online Personally On arrival Other (please specify)
68
8. What facilities does your unit provide?
No facility (nor intention to
acquire in the near future)
Yes
No facility (but we are going to
equip the unit in the near future)
St.
Dev. Resp.
W.
Avg.
Restaurant 24 (29%) 57 (67%) 3 (4%) 22,23 84 1.76/3
Pub/Terrace
32 (37%) 48 (54%) 6 (9%) 17,31 86 1.72/3
Cable TV/WiFi
3 (4%) 81 (93%) 2 (2%) 37,01 86 1.98/3
Bath tub 32 (37%) 49 (60%) 2 (2%) 19,43 83 1.65/3
Coffee makers in
rooms
72 (82%) 6 (7%) 8 (11%) 30,65 84 1.3/3
Storage area
27 (38%) 42 (49%) 6 (13%) 14,76 85 1.7/3
Safe for customers
50 (61%) 25 (27%) 9 (11%) 16,87 84 1.5/3
Farm or petting zoo
47 (55%) 23 (27%) 15 (18%) 13,60 84 1.64/3
Playground 32 (36%) 42 (47%) 12 (18%) 12,47 86 1.82/3
Permanent reception
46 (51%) 32 (38%) 6 (11%) 16,57 84 1.6/3
1.67/3
Customer return rate
Under 10% 10%-25% 25-50% Over 50%
69
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
No facility (norintention)
Yes
No facility (butintention)
Restaurant Pub/Terrace
Cable TV/WiFi Bath tub
Coffee makers in rooms Storage area
Safe for customers2 Farm or petting zoo
Playground Permanent reception
9. Which of the following promotion environments are used by you?
Yes No More or less
St. Dev. Resp. W. Avg.
Flyers, brochures
and other printed
materials
22 (27%) 44 (59%)
11 (14%)
13,72 87 1.86/3
Website 56 (70%) 31
(30%)
0 (0%) 22,91 87 1.3/3
Facebook page
64 (78%)
21 (19%)
2 (3%) 25,94 87 1.24/3
Google+ page
20 (23%)
61 (71%)
4 (6%) 24,00 85
1.83/3
Tw itter page 2 (3%) 80 (94%)
2 (3%) 36,77 84 2/3
Other social netw orks
8 (12%) 75 (88%)
0 (0%) 33,63 83 1.88/3
Booking.com account
56 (65%) 29 (32%)
2 (3%)
22,05 87 1.38/3
HRS account
10 (14%) 77 (86%)
0 (0%) 33,50 87 1.86/3
70
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%Yes
No
More or less
Printed materials Website
Facebook page Google + page
Twitter page Other social networks
Booking.com account HRS account
Other online booking accounts Own booking platform
Online ads Radio ads
TV ads Publication ads
Other online booking
accounts
44 (51%) 43 (49%)
0 (0%) 20,51 87 1.49/3
Ow n booking platform
28 (33%) 58 (67%)
0 (0%) 15,00 86 1.67/3
Online ads
24 (26%) 63 (74%)
0 (0%)
25,96 87
1.74 /
3
Radio ads 4 (6%) 81
(94%)
0 (0%) 38,50 85 1.94/3
TV ads 2 (3%) 82
(97%)
0 (0%) 38,19 84 1.97/3
Publication ads
11 (14%) 72 (83%)
2 (3%) 31,09 85 1.89/3
1.71/3
71
Please note how relevant are the environments presented above in relation to your business, rating 1 to 5 where 1 means “not relevant” and 5 means “very
relevant”.
1 2 3 4 5 St. Dev. Responses W. Avg.
Flyers, brochures
and other printed materials
42
(51%)
12
(14%)
7
(9%)
12
(14%)
10
(12%)
12.74 83 2.21/5
Website 21
(25%) 7
(9%) 12
(14%) 9
(11%) 34
(41%) 13.19 84 3.34/5
Google+ page 53
(63%)
10
(12%)
4
(5%)
6
(7%)
11
(14%) 18.31 83 1.98/5
Tw itter page 66
(76%) 4
(5%) 10
(11%) 4
(5%) 2
(3%) 21.35 86 1.54/5
Other social netw orks
47
(57%)
0
(0%)
8
(10%)
15
(19%)
12
(14%) 16.24 82 2.33/5
Booking.com account
25 (30%)
4 (5%)
15 (16%)
20 (23%)
23 (27%) 7.97 84 3.14/5
HRS account 50
(71%) 12
(17%) 7
(10%) 1
(2%) 0
(0%) 20.68 71 1.44/5
Other online booking accounts
40 (49%)
2 (2%)
25 (30%)
9 (7%)
10 (12%) 15.42 83 2.3/5
Ow n booking platform
48 (58%)
0 (0%)
6 (7%)
10 (12%)
19 (23%) 16.82 83 2.42/5
Online ads 45
(55%)
11
(14%)
7
(9%)
7
(9%)
11
(14%) 17.65 84 2.14/5
Radio ads 62
(76%) 10
(12%) 6
(7%) 4
(5%) 0
(0%) 26.91 82 1.4/5
TV ads 72
(83%)
4
(5%)
2
(2%)
9
(10%)
0
(0%) 27.97 81 1.39/5
Publication ads 56
(70%) 8
(10%) 6
(8%) 8
(10%) 2
(3%) 20.06 80 1.65/5
2.12/5
72
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%One
Two
ThreeFour
Five
Printed materials WebsiteGoogle + page Twitter pageOther social networks Booking.com accountHRS account Other online booking accountsOwn booking platform Online adsRadio ads TV adsPublication ads
10. What is the degree of complaints from your customers according to the following table?
Quite often Often Neutral Very rarely Never St. Dev. Resp. W. Avg.
Prices 0
(0%) 0
(0%) 7
(8%) 29
(33%) 50
(58%) 18.18 87 4.5/5
Staff 0
(0%) 0
(0%) 2
(3%) 19
(22%) 65
(75%) 20.34 87 4.72/5
Product
quality
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
7
(8%)
19
(22%)
60
(69%) 19.37 87 4.61/5
Cleanliness
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
5 (6%)
9 (11%)
73 (83%) 23.5 87 4.78/5
Noise 0
(0%)
0
(0%)
2
(3%)
17
(19%)
68
(78%) 20.72 87 4.75/5
Rooms 0
(0%) 0
(0%) 2
(3%) 19
(22%) 65
(75%) 20.34 87 4.72/5
Food and
drinks
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
2
(3%)
12
(14%)
72
(83%) 21.15 87 4.8/5
False advertising
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
2 (3%)
85 (97%) 23.91 87 4.97/5
4.73/5
73
11. To what extent do you think that your unit takes into account the views and wishes of the clients?
Almost never More or less Often A lot St. Dev. Resp.
All
Data
2
(2%)
4
(4%)
47
(56%)
34
(38%)
19,32 87
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Quiteoften
Often
NeutralVery
rarely
Never
Prices Staff Product qualityCleanliness Noise RoomsFood and drinks False advertising
Almost never More or less Often A lot
74
12. Did you turn to professional consulting and marketing services to improve your business?
Yes No No, but I intend to St. Dev. Resp.
All Data 3
(4%)
52
(60%)
32
(36%) 20,12 87
13. Which option do you think is appropriate to characterize marketing
performed in your unit?
Absent It exists but does not yield significant
benefits
It exists and it is helpful
Will significantly increase in the
future
St. Dev. Resp.
All Data
30 (34%)
5
(5%)
33
(36%)
19
(25%) 10,99 87
Yes No No, but I intend to
Absent
It exists but does not yield significant benefits
It exists and it is helpful
Will significantly increase in the future
75
14. What is your age group?
18 - 34 years
35 - 44 years
45 - 60 years
Over 60 years
St. Dev. Resp.
All
Data
20
(24%)
35
(41%)
20
(24%)
8
(11%) 9,58 87
15. What is your gender?
Female Male St. Dev. Resp.
All Data 41
(47%)
45
(53%) 2,00 86
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Female Male
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
What is your age group?
18-34 years old 35-44 years old
45-60 years old Over 60 years old
76
16. According to your attributions, the position you hold within the company can be included in the following department:
Administration (owner / manager)
Reception / reservations
Restaurant / kitchen
Housekeeping / technical
Other department
St. Dev.
Resp.
All Data
69
(80%)
18
(20%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%) 26,73 87
17. How long have you been working in the tourism/hospitality field?
Less than 1 year 1 – 3 years 3-5 years Over 5 years
St. Dev.
Resp.
All Data
11 (13%)
13 (15%)
15 (17%)
46 (54%) 14,36 87
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Reception/reservations Administration (owner/manager)
Less than 1 year 1 – 3 years 3 - 5 years Over 5 years
77
18. What is the total capacity of your accommodation unit?
Under 5 beds
5 – 10 beds 11 – 20 beds Over 20 beds St. Dev.
Resp.
All Data
6 (7%)
29 (33%)
30 (35%)
22 (26%) 9,60 87
19. What is the county in which your accommodation unit is being located?
Alba Brașov Cluj Sibiu St. Dev. Resp.
All Data
11 (13%)
39 (45%)
16 (18%)
21 (24%) 10,57 87
Under 5 beds 5 - 10 beds 11 - 20 beds Over 20 beds
Alba Brasov Cluj Sibiu
78
APPENDIX B: GUESTHOUSE MAILING LIST Alba County – 100 questionnaires
[email protected] - Filonul de Aur (Abrud)
[email protected] - Casa Helvetica (Aiud)
[email protected] - Doua Salcii (Aiud)
[email protected] - Melinda (Aiud)
[email protected] - Mobis (Aiud)
office@pensiunea-t ransilvania.ro - Transilvania (Aiud)
[email protected] - Aurora (Albac)
[email protected] - Corina (Albac)
[email protected] - Lenuta (Albac)
[email protected] - Perla Ariesului (Albac)
[email protected] - Steaua Ariesului (Albac)
[email protected] - Vila Rustica (Albac)
[email protected] - Poiana Verde (Albac)
[email protected] - Ady (Albac)
[email protected] - La Topivan (Albac)
[email protected] - Casa David (Almasu Mare)
[email protected] - Bianca (Arieseni)
[email protected] - Casa Motului (Arieseni)
[email protected] - Diana (Arieseni)
[email protected] - Gianina (Arieseni)
pensiunea_ [email protected] - Juliana (Arieseni)
[email protected] - Sarra Vank (Arieseni)
[email protected] - Viorica (Arieseni)
[email protected] - Casa Dory & Dan (Arieseni)
[email protected] - La Vasile (Arieseni)
rezervari@moaratitului. ro - Moara Titului (Arieseni)
[email protected] - Ada (Bubesti)
[email protected] - Poarta Ariesului (Bubesti)
[email protected] - Vraja Muntelui (Bubesti)
[email protected] - Maria (Fata Lapusului)
[email protected] - Casa Dorina (Galbena)
79
[email protected] - Iara (Galbena)
[email protected] - Casa Noastra (Izlaz)
[email protected] - Giulia (Izlaz)
rezervari@moaratitului. ro - Moara Titului (Arieseni)
[email protected] - Shanti (Brazesti)
[email protected] - Roua Muntelui (Baia de Aries)
[email protected] - Ela & Cata (Bistra)
[email protected] - Casta Tirol (Blaj)
[email protected] - Cosmi (Blaj
[email protected] - La Popa (Blaj)
[email protected] - Man President (Blaj)
[email protected] - Montana Popa (Blaj)
[email protected] - Casa Motilor (Bucium)
[email protected] - Casa din Vii (Ciugud)
[email protected] - Poarta Raiului (Cugir)
[email protected] - Cosette (Galda de Jos)
[email protected] - La Poiana (Galda de Jos)
[email protected] - Bleumarin (Galda de Jos)
[email protected] - Floare de Colt (Galda de Jos)
[email protected] - Casa Buna (Garbova)
[email protected] - Danciu (Garda de Jos)
[email protected] - De sub Munte Dobra (Garda de Sus)
[email protected] - Mama Uta (Garda de Sus)
[email protected] - Marydor (Garda de Sus)
[email protected] - Onelia (Garda de Sus)
[email protected] - Ghetar Scarisoara (Garda de Sus)
[email protected] - Lia (Garda de Sus)
[email protected] - Nicola (Horea)
[email protected] - Fey (Ighiel)
[email protected] - Terra Mythica (Ighiu)
[email protected] - Conacul Teleki (Telna)
[email protected] - Templul Cavalerilor (Livezile)
[email protected] - Galaxy (Lupsa)
80
[email protected] - Casa Apuseana (Lupsa)
[email protected] - Casa cu Dor (Apoita)
[email protected] - Izvorul Muntelui (Ampoita)
[email protected] - Casa Cerbului (Pianu)
[email protected] - Sapte Cetati (Pianu)
[email protected] - Casa Dives (Pianu)
[email protected] - Iedera (Pianu)
[email protected] - Ioana (Pianu)
[email protected] - Agota (Rametea)
[email protected] - Aranyos Panzio (Rametea)
[email protected] - Bitai Magda (Rametea)
[email protected] - Dulo Ana Maria (Rametea)
[email protected] - Gyopar (Rametea)
[email protected] - Panorama (Rametea)
[email protected] - Perla Trascaului (Rametea)
[email protected] - Sub Piatra (Sub Piatra)
[email protected] - Lena (Sona)
[email protected] - Silva Dobra (Susag)
[email protected] - Codru (Salciua)
[email protected] - Totu' Bun (Salciua)
[email protected] - Rustiq (Santimbru)
[email protected] - Podul Cetatii (Santimbru)
[email protected] - Vraja Vacantei (Capalna)
[email protected] - Hanul Surianu (Sibot)
[email protected] - Axa (Cunta)
[email protected] - Casa Butnarului (Stremt)
[email protected] - Silva Dobra (Dobra)
[email protected] - Nuta (Sugag)
[email protected] - Valea Frumoasei (Jinar)
[email protected] - Ana-Simona (Sugag)
[email protected] - Bellamy (Sugag)
[email protected] - Sureanu (Sugag)
[email protected] - Cotul Ariesului (Vadu Motilor)
81
[email protected] - Casa Anda (Vadu Motilor)
[email protected] - Craiul (Vidra)
[email protected] - Vidra de Sus (Vidra)
Brașov County – 152 questionnaires
[email protected] Casa din Bran (Bran)
[email protected] Casa Enescu (Bran)
[email protected] Casuta Bunicii (Bran)
[email protected] Cheile Castelului (Bran)
[email protected] Ina (Bran)
[email protected] Ioana (Bran)
[email protected] La Maison (Bran)
[email protected] Micul Castel (Bran)
[email protected] Narcis (Bran)
[email protected] Nicoleta (Bran)
[email protected] Regalina (Bran)
[email protected] Trattoria al Gallo (Bran)
[email protected] Vila Ambasadorului (Bran)
[email protected] Casa Kiss (Bran)
[email protected] Casa Miracole (Bran)
[email protected] Conacul Bratescu (Bran)
[email protected] La Busu (Bran)
[email protected] Paradis (Bran)
[email protected] La Voicut (Bran)
[email protected] Mis (Bran)
[email protected] Convivium Transilvania (Bunesti)
[email protected] Elena (Bunesti)
[email protected] Casa Vanatorului (Comana)
[email protected] Valceaua Zanelor (Dragus)
[email protected] Pepino (Moieciu)
[email protected] Andrei (Moieciu)
[email protected] Dorali (Moieciu)
[email protected] Casa Maria (Moieciu)
[email protected] Hanul Dorului (Moieciu)
82
[email protected] Popas Sambata (Sambata de Sus)
[email protected] Valea Sambetei (Sambata de Sus)
[email protected] Vila 3 (Tarlungeni)
[email protected] Cabana Vamii (Tarlungeni)
[email protected] Mama Mia (Tarlungeni)
[email protected] Casa Visteana (Vistea de Jos)
[email protected] Transylvanian Inn (Bran)
[email protected] Alina (Predelut)
[email protected] Belvedere (Predelut)
[email protected] Vila Predelut (Predelut)
[email protected] Carpathia (Predelut)
[email protected] Casa de sub Padure (Predelut)
[email protected] Casa Iacob (Predelut)
[email protected] Casa Serena (Predelut)
[email protected] Marmot (Predelut)
[email protected] Milenium (Predelut)
[email protected] Muntele Rece (Predelut)
[email protected] Orizont (Predelut)
[email protected] Pasul Caprioarei (Poiana Marului)
[email protected] Brandeberg (Simon)
[email protected] Casa Alex (Simon)
[email protected] Casa Maria (Simon)
[email protected] Conacul Boieresc (Simon)
[email protected] Cretu (Simon)
[email protected] Dumbrava Minunata (Simon)
[email protected] Hanul Simon (Simon)
[email protected] Laura (Simon)
[email protected] Traian (Simon)
[email protected] Vilica (Simon)
[email protected] Casa Domneasca (Simon)
[email protected] Casa Nobila (Simon)
[email protected] Bradul Inalt (Sohodol)
[email protected] Cehov (Sohodol)
83
[email protected] Coroana Reginei (Sohodol)
[email protected] Contele Vladimir (Sohodol)
[email protected] Gentiana (Sohodol)
[email protected] Taverna Branului (Sohodol)
[email protected] Alisa (Sohodol)
[email protected] Lais (Bran)
[email protected] Le Provence (Bran)
[email protected] Popasul Reginei (Bran)
[email protected] Guest House (Bran)
[email protected] Lunca Popii (Bunesti)
[email protected] Casa cu Zorele (Bunesti)
[email protected] Rozalia (Crit)
[email protected] Tabaluga (Roades)
[email protected] Viscri 125 (Viscri)
[email protected] Viscri 38 (Viscri)
[email protected] Casa Georg Prister (Cristian)
[email protected] Conacul Ambient (Cristian)
[email protected] Vila Old Cars (Cristian)
[email protected] Alpin (Fundata)
[email protected] Casa Muntelui (Fundata)
[email protected] Edera (Fundata)
[email protected] Padina Ursului (Fundata)
[email protected] Euro Park (Fundata)
[email protected] Ursul Carcotas (Fundata)
[email protected] Pensiunea Soarelui (Sirnea)
[email protected] Valea cu Struti (Sirnea)
[email protected] Natalia (Fundata)
[email protected] Rasaritul Soarelui (Fundata)
[email protected] Dynasty Club (Harman)
[email protected] Roma Antica (Harman)
[email protected] Templars' Inn (Harseni)
[email protected] Casa Fermierului (Fantana)
[email protected] Ionut (Hoghiz)
84
[email protected] Trei Stejari (Jibert)
[email protected] AdÓro (Moieciu)
[email protected] Darius (Moieciu)
[email protected] Cetatea Carului (Moieciu)
[email protected] Garden Resort (Moieciu)
[email protected] Casa Tabacaru (Moieciu)
[email protected] Nea Marin (Moieciu)
[email protected] Acasa la Moieciu (Moieciu)
[email protected] Brancoveanu (Moieciu)
[email protected] Camelia (Moieciu)
[email protected] Casa Stan (Moieciu)
rezervari@casutacuponei. ro Casuta cu Ponei (Moieciu)
[email protected] Casuta din Povesti (Moieciu)
[email protected] Cote D'Amour (Moieciu)
[email protected] La Perla (Moieciu)
[email protected] Moeciu - Bucegi (Moieciu)
[email protected] Niculina (Moieciu)
[email protected] Piatra Craiului (Moieciu)
[email protected] Podul Turcului (Moieciu)
[email protected] Preto E Branco (Moieciu)
[email protected] Valea Lunga (Moieciu)
[email protected] Craiasa Muntilor (Moieciu)
[email protected] Orzan (Moieciu)
[email protected] La Turcu (Moieciu)
[email protected] Malina (Moieciu)
[email protected] Nicoleta (Moieciu)
[email protected] Perla Carpatilor (Moieciu)
[email protected] Pui de Urs (Moieciu)
[email protected] Raza Soarelui (Moieciu)
[email protected] Roua Diminetii (Moieciu)
rezervari@vilamoecel. ro Vila Moecel (Moieciu)
[email protected] Vlahia Inn (Moieciu)
[email protected] Wiarusti (Moieciu)
85
[email protected] Casa Boiereasca (Moieciu)
[email protected] Gentiana (Moieciu)
[email protected] Nobillis (Moieciu)
[email protected] Prestige (Moieciu)
[email protected] Georgiana & Gabriel (Poiana Marului)
[email protected] Flori de Mar (Poiana Marului)
[email protected] Piscu Ioanei (Poiana Marului)
office@pensiunepoianamarului. ro Poiana Marului (Poiana Marului)
[email protected] Poiana Viselor (Poiana Marului)
[email protected] Paradisul Naturii (Dejani)
[email protected] Belmonte (Sambata de Sus)
[email protected] Caprioara (Sambata de Sus)
[email protected] Lacramioara (Sambata de Sus)
[email protected] Emma (Sambata de Sus)
[email protected] Miruna (Sambata de Sus)
[email protected] Poiana Izvorului (Sambata de Sus)
[email protected] Transilvania (Sambata de Sus)
[email protected] Casa Moga (Sambata de Sus)
[email protected] Baile Persani (Persani)
[email protected] Equus Silvania (Sinca)
[email protected] Roua Muntelui (Sinca)
[email protected] Traian (Carpinis)
[email protected] Alina (Vama Buzaului)
[email protected] Cincsor (Voila)
Cluj County – 99 questionnaires
[email protected] Paduricea (Apahida)
[email protected] Casa de Vis (Baisoara)
[email protected] Apus de Soare (Belis)
[email protected] Casa Morar (Belis)
[email protected] Diana (Belis)
[email protected] Rustic Nicusor (Belis)
[email protected] Zori de Zi (Belis)
86
[email protected] Alexandra (Belis)
[email protected] Valeria (Belis)
[email protected] Oaza Apusenilor (Calarasi)
[email protected] Valea Viilor (Camarasu)
[email protected] Casa Florela (Capusu Mare)
[email protected] Casa Dinainte (Ciurila)
[email protected] Primera (Feleacu)
[email protected] Carol (Floresti)
[email protected] Roata Faget (Floresti)
[email protected] Aniko (Floresti)
[email protected] Casa Iulia (Floresti)
[email protected] Casa Katalin (Floresti)
[email protected] Casa Katika (Floresti)
[email protected] Casa Lacramioara (Floresti)
[email protected] Casa Rozmarin (Floresti)
[email protected] Casa Valentin (Floresti)
[email protected] Levi (Floresti)
[email protected] Larix (Margau)
[email protected] La Noru (Mica)
[email protected] Cheile Turzii (Cheia)
[email protected] Perla Transilvaniei (Moldovenesti)
[email protected] Poienita Apusenilor (Moldovenesti)
[email protected] Art 1000 (Poieni)
[email protected] Mara (Poieni)
[email protected] Casa Rasca Pastrav (Rasca)
[email protected] Harmonia Mundi (Vlaha)
[email protected] Adrenalin Park (Tureni)
[email protected] Farama de Rai (Tureni)
[email protected] Gold Fayen House (Tureni)
[email protected] Gemenii (Apahida)
[email protected] Victoria Apahida (Apahida)
[email protected] Bonanza (Baciu)
[email protected] Skiland (Baisoara)
87
[email protected] Moara de Padure (Baisoara)
[email protected] Andreea (Baisoara)
[email protected] Nicoleta (Baisoara)
[email protected] Doru (Belis)
[email protected] Rom Concord (Belis)
[email protected] Alpin (Belis)
[email protected] Ana & Irina (Belis)
[email protected] Maria (Belis)
[email protected] Meridian (Belis)
[email protected] Sandor (Belis)
[email protected] Podina (Belis)
[email protected] Anda Lux (Calatele)
[email protected] Elena (Capusu Mic)
[email protected] Capus (Capusu Mic)
[email protected] Giulia (Caseiu)
[email protected] Route 60 (Ciucea)
[email protected] Domeniul Regilor (Ciurila)
[email protected] Kereki (Cornesti)
[email protected] Lacul Stiucii (Sacalaia)
[email protected] Aimee (Floresti)
[email protected] Casa Zanelor (Floresti)
[email protected] Il Milanese (Floresti)
[email protected] Matis (Floresti)
[email protected] Iozefini (Floresti)
[email protected] Maria (Floresti)
[email protected] Armonia (Garbau)
[email protected] Cionca (Gilau)
[email protected] Vila Gong (Gilau)
[email protected] Comtessa (Jucu)
[email protected] La Ionel (Maguri - Racatau)
[email protected] IC Ponor - Padis (Margau)
[email protected] Colt de Rai (Belis)
[email protected] Stefanut (Margau)
88
[email protected] Casa Eden (Marisel)
[email protected] Motilor (Marisel)
[email protected] Alpin (Marisel)
[email protected] Casa Moteasca (Cornesti)
[email protected] Nova (Bunesti)
[email protected] Hanul Dacilor (Moldovenesti)
[email protected] Valea Paradisului (Racatau)
[email protected] Mirabilandia (Bucea)
[email protected] Casa Morar (Poieni)
[email protected] Vila Roca (Poieni)
[email protected] Valerica (Belis)
[email protected] Sequoia (Sacuieu)
[email protected] Ady Endre (Sancraiu)
[email protected] Erika (Sancraiu)
[email protected] Golyafeszek (Sancraiu)
[email protected] Hajnal (Sancraiu)
[email protected] Leda (Sancraiu)
[email protected] Tunde (Sancraiu)
[email protected] Palinkas (Sancraiu)
[email protected] Sarika (Sancraiu)
[email protected] Saroklak (Sancraiu)
[email protected] Puspok (Sancraiu)
[email protected] Hanul Moara Veche (Savadisla)
[email protected] Sovirag (Sic)
[email protected] Paula (Suatu)
[email protected] Lacul Micesti (Tureni)
Sibiu County – 108 questionnaires
[email protected] Any (Arpasu de Sus)
[email protected] Albota (Arpasu de Sus)
[email protected] Casa Arpasana (Arpasu de Sus)
[email protected] Balada (Avrig)
[email protected] Ghiocelul (Avrig)
[email protected] Poiana Neamtului (Avrig)
89
[email protected] Popasul Avrig (Avrig)
[email protected] Dobsi (Bazna)
[email protected] Bassen (Bazna)
[email protected] Bazna (Bazna)
[email protected] Cetate (Biertan)
[email protected] Oppidum (Biertan)
[email protected] Copsa Mare (Biertan)
[email protected] Casa Moga (Blajel)
[email protected] Voicu (Lotrioara)
[email protected] Moara de Piatra (Carta)
[email protected] Casa Mosului (Cartisoara)
[email protected] Rafael (Cristian)
[email protected] Hanzu Darius (Gura Raului)
[email protected] Popasul Junilor (Gura Raului)
[email protected] Verde-Poli (Poplaca)
[email protected] Enescu (Rasinari)
[email protected] Robert (Rasinari)
[email protected] Domeniul Orlandea (Saliste)
[email protected] Ecvestria (Selimbar)
[email protected] Europa Transfagarasan (Cartisoara)
[email protected] Muntean (Sibiel)
[email protected] Mioritica (Sibiel)
[email protected] Ciortea Ana (Sibiel)
[email protected] Luca (Sibiel)
[email protected] Casa Stanca (Sibiel)
[email protected] Sandra (Sibiel)
[email protected] Cabana Sibiel (Sibiel)
[email protected] Pensiunea Andrei (Sibiel)
[email protected] Scorobet (Cartisoara)
[email protected] Casa Duse (Cartisoara)
[email protected] Casa Belvedere (Cisnadioara)
[email protected] Casa cu Flori (Cisnadioara)
[email protected] Casa Soarelui (Cisnadioara)
90
[email protected] Sub Cetate (Cisnadioara)
[email protected] Ananas (Cisnadioara)
[email protected] Casa Pandora (Cristian)
[email protected] Insula Christiana (Cristian)
[email protected] Izabel (Cristian)
[email protected] Daniela (Cristian)
[email protected] Casa Lucas (Gura Raului)
[email protected] Maria Koeber (Gura Raului)
[email protected] Lacul de Argint (Gura Raului)
[email protected] Lapadat (Gura Raului)
[email protected] Calin (Gura Raului)
[email protected] Conacul dintre Rauri (Gura Raului)
[email protected] Norica (Gura Raului)
[email protected] Elisabeta - Centrul Tarii (Merghindeal)
[email protected] Casa Verman (Ocna Sibiului)
[email protected] Cryss (Ocna Sibiului)
[email protected] Mamaruta (Ocna Sibiului)
[email protected] Lacul Verde (Ocna Sibiului)
[email protected] Ileana (Orlat)
[email protected] Perla Marginimii (Orlat)
[email protected] Bujorul de Munte (Poplaca)
[email protected] Natura (Porumbacu de Jos)
[email protected] La Curtea Porumbaceana (Porumbacu de Jos)
[email protected] Briana (Rasinari)
[email protected] Marcu (Rasinari)
[email protected] Miorita (Rasinari)
[email protected] Phoenix (Rasinari)
[email protected] Badiu (Rasinari)
[email protected] Bendorfeanu (Rasinari)
[email protected] Cioran (Rasinari)
[email protected] Curmatura Stezii (Rasinari)
[email protected] Mai (Rasinari)
[email protected] Otilia (Rasinari)
91
[email protected] Nora (Rau Sadului)
[email protected] Bio-Haus (Rosia)
[email protected] Romantic (Sadu)
[email protected] Trandafirul (Sadu)
[email protected] Printul Vlad (Saliste)
[email protected] Rudi & Ella (Saliste)
pensiunea.adriana.sibiel@t -i.ro Adriana (Sibiel)
[email protected] Bunica Eugenia (Sibiel)
[email protected] Casa Elena (Sibiel)
[email protected] Casa Stanca (Sibiel)
www.pensiuneacristina.uv.ro Cristina (Sibiel)
[email protected] Gentiana (Sibiel)
[email protected] Luca (Sibiel)
[email protected] Morariu (Sibiel)
[email protected] Sibiel (Sibiel)
[email protected] Carmen (Sibiel)
[email protected] Casa cu Livada (Saliste)
[email protected] Pensiunea Domnescu (Saliste)
[email protected] Nicoleta (Saliste)
[email protected] Casina (Saliste)
[email protected] Crisalia (Saliste)
[email protected] Lazy (Selimbar)
[email protected] Maria (Selimbar)
[email protected] Dracula (Selimbar)
[email protected] Slimnic (Slimnic)
[email protected] Miriam (Sura Mica)
[email protected] Calborean (Talmaciu)
[email protected] Ela (Talmaciu)
[email protected] Poiana Soarelui (Talmaciu)
[email protected] Irina (Tilisca)
[email protected]. ro Tiliscuta (Tilisca)
[email protected] Ioana (Turnu Rosu)
[email protected] Diana (Turnu Rosu)