Measuring the Return on Investment of Destination Welcome Centres: The Case of Florida

Abstract

US state destination boards have traditionally operated welcome centres – viewed as cost centres – at key vehicular entrance points to their states. In fact, if travel parties modify trips in the state as a result of their welcome centre experience so as to make an incremental economic contribution to the state, then what has been perceived as a cost centre may actually be a profit centre for the state. Using return on investment (ROI) analysis or accountability research, this study outlines the methodology of VISIT FLORIDA, the private–public partnership serving as the official tourism board for the State of Florida. The partnership was developed to analyse the impact of Florida's welcome centres and to identify whether or not they resulted in a positive cash flow for the state. The study includes strategic marketing questions which allow VISIT FLORIDA to make management decisions to improve further the impact of its welcome centres.

Keywords

management decisions ROI return on investment welcome centres Florida

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Cadez

, and Hunt

J.D.

(1978), A Comparison Between Port-of-Entry Visitor Center Users and Nonusers, Institute for the Study of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism, Utah State University, Logan, UT.

Fesenmaier

D.R.

, and Johnson

(1989), ‘Involvement based segmentation: implications for travel marketing in Texas’, Tourism Management, Vol 10, No 4, pp 293–300.

Fesenmaier

D.R.

, and Vogt

C. A.

(1993), ‘Evaluating the economic impact of travel information provided at Indiana welcome centers’, Journal of Travel Research, Vol 31, No 3, pp 33–39.

Fesenmaier

D. R.

, Vogt

C. A.

, and Williams

S. P.

(1993), ‘Investigating the influence of welcome center information on travel behavior’, Journal of Travel Research, Vol 31, No 3, pp 47–51.

Gitelson

R. J.

, and Crompton

(1983), ‘The planning horizons and sources of information used by pleasure vacationers’, Journal of Travel Research, Vol 32, pp 2–6.

Gitelson

R. J.

, and Perdue

R. R.

(1987), ‘Evaluating the role of state welcome centers in disseminating travel related information in North Carolina’, Journal of Travel Research, Vol 25, No 4, pp 15–19.

Globe & Mail (2001), 28 November, p T5, in Tourism Highlights, Canadian Tourism Commission, 3 December 2001.

Gunn

C.A.

(1988), Tourism Planning, 2nd edition, Taylor and Francis, New York.

Howard

D. R.

, and Gitelson

R. J.

(1989), ‘An analysis of the differences between state welcome center users and nonusers: a profile of Oregon vacationers’, Journal of Travel Research, Vol 27, No 4, pp 38–40.

10.

Mason

J. B.

(1975), ‘The motorist travelers and the interstate highway system: an exploratory analysis,’, Journal of Travel Research, Vol 13, pp 11–14.

11.

McCann

(1999), ‘Public-access interactive computers at state welcome centers in the United States: 1991 and 1995 studies’, Journal of Travel Research, Vol 37, No 3, pp 249–255.

12.

Muha

(1977), ‘Who uses highway welcome center’, Journal of Travel Research, Vol 15, pp 1–4.

13.

PR Newswire (2001), 27 November, in Tourism Highlights, Canadian Tourism Commission, 3 December 2001.

14.

Perdue

R. R.

, and Botkin

M. R.

(1988), ‘Visitor survey versus conversion study’, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol 15, No 1, pp 76–87.

15.

Stewart

W. P.

, Chi-Chaun

, Fessenmaier

D. R.

, and Anderson

S. B.

(1993), ‘A comparison between welcome center visitors and general highway auto travelers’, Journal of Travel Research, Vol 31, pp 31–39.

16.

Tierney

, and Haas

(1988), Colorado Welcome Centers: Their Users and Influence on Length of Stay and Expenditures, Department of Recreation Resources and Landscape Architecture, Colorado State University, Ft Collins, CO.

17.

Travel Industry Association of America, Inc (2001), Press Release, 13 November.