Using multi criteria decision making techniques in tourism, travel and hospitality

Öz

Especially during the Covid-19 pandemic, the importance of the tourism, travel and hospitality industry has become even more evident. For this reason, there is a great need for a scientific knowledge unit to overcome the problems in these fields. At this point, an awareness of the necessity and advantages of multi-criteria decision making techniques is needed. The main purpose of this study is to take a step towards creating this awareness. In this context, first of all, the question of why it is difficult to make a decision in the tourism, travel and hospitality sector is emphasized. Then, answers were sought to the questions of why these methods might be necessary and how they were superior. Then, examples of studies using multi-criteria decision making techniques in the field of tourism, travel and hospitality are given and some research articles are suggested for further reading. By examining these studies, which adopt different approaches using different methods, it is aimed to create an awareness of the capabilities of multi-criteria decision-making techniques. Finally, some suggestions are presented for educational institutions to adopt new (different) approaches to scientific knowledge production.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Tourism
• Hospitality
• Travel
• Multi-Criteria Decision Making

Turizm, seyahat ve ağırlama alanlarında çok kriterli karar verme teknikleri kullanımı

Öz

Özellikle Covid-19 pandemisi döneminde Turizm, seyahat ve ağırlama endüstrisinin önemi herzamankinden daha fazla ortaya çıkmıştır. Bu nedenle bu alanlardaki problemlerin üstesinden gelinmesine yönelik bilimsel bilgi birikimine oldukça ihtiyaç duyulmaktadır. Bu noktada, çok kriterli karar verme tekniklerinin gerekliliğine ve üstünlüklerine yönelik bir farkındalığa ihtiyaç vardır. Bu çalışmanın temel amacı bu farkındalığın oluşturulmasına yönelik bir adım atmaktır. Bu kapsamda öncelikle Turizm, seyahat ve ağırlama sektöründe karar vermek neden zor olduğu sorusu üzerine durulmuştur. Ardından bu yöntemlerin neden gerek olabileceği ve nasıl üstünlükleri olduğu sorularına yanıt aranmıştır. Ardından turizm, seyahat ve ağırlama alanında çok kriterli karar verme tekniklerini kullanan çalışmalardan örnekler verilerek sonraki okumalar için araştırma makaleleri önerilmiştir. Birbirinden farklı yöntemler kullanarak farklı yaklaşımlar benimseyen bu çalışmaların incelenmesiyle çok kriterli karar verme tekniklerinin kabiliyetlerine yönelik bir farkındalığın oluşması amaçlanmaktadır. Son olarak da bilimsel bilgi üretimine yönelik yeni (farklı) yaklaşımların benimsenebilmesine yönelik eğitim kurumları için bazı öneriler sunulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Turizm
• Seyahat
• Ağırlama
• Çok Kriterli Karar Verme

Kaynakça

1. Abdul, B., Abdul, A. K. & Tehmina, F. Q. (2021). Who performed more on worth going to see? Country-wide Ranking and Categorization based on Performance in Travel and Tourism. Sjesr, 4(2), 119–130. doi:10.36902/sjesr-vol4-iss2-2021(119-130)
2. Aktaş, R., Doğanay, M. M., Gökmen, Y., Gazibey, Y. & Türen, U. (2015). Sayısal karar verme yöntemleri. Beta Yayım Dağıtım.
3. Algan, N., Balcılar, M., Bal, H. & Manga, M. (2017). Impact of Terrorism on Financial Markets of Turkey: An Empirical Study. Ege Academic Review, 17 (1) , 147-160.
4. Alptekin, G. I. & Büyüközkan, G. (2011). An integrated case-based reasoning and MCDM system for Web based tourism destination planning. Expert Systems with Applications, 38 (3), 2125–2132. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2010.07.153
5. Altuntas, F. & Gok, M. S. (2021). The effect of COVID-19 pandemic on domestic tourism: A DEMATEL method analysis on quarantine decisions. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 92, 102719. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102719
6. Ariza-Montes, A., Hernández-Perlines, F., Han, H. & Law, R. (2019). Human dimension of the hospitality industry: Working conditions and psychological well-being among European servers: Working conditions and psychological well-being. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 41, 138–147. doi:10.1016/j.jhtm.2019.10.013
7. Büyüközkan, G., Havle, C. A. & Feyzioğlu, O. (2021). Digital competency evaluation of low-cost airlines using an integrated IVIF AHP and IVIF VIKOR methodology. Journal of Air Transport Management, 91, 101998. doi:10.1016/j.jairtraman.2020.101998
8. Canavan, B. (2017). Tourism stakeholder exclusion and conflict in a small island. Leisure Studies, 36(3), 409–422. doi:10.1080/02614367.2016.1141975

9. Carayannis, E. G., Ferreira, F. A. F., Bento, P., Ferreira, J. J. M., Jalali, M. S. & Fernandes, B. M. Q. (2018). Developing a socio-technical evaluation index for tourist destination competitiveness using cognitive mapping and MCDA. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 131, 147–158. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2018.01.015
10. Chang, T. H. (2014). Fuzzy VIKOR method: A case study of the hospital service evaluation in Taiwan. Information Sciences, 271, 196–212. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2014.02.118
11. Dwyer, L., Forsyth, P. & Dwyer, W. (2010). Tourism economics and policy. Bristol: Channel View Publications.
12. Ekel, P., Peycz, W. & Parreiras, R. (2013). Fuzzy multicriteria decision-making : models, methods and applications. Wiley.
13. Eren, D. & Onat, G. (2018). İçsel Pazarlama Faaliyetlerinin İşgören Yetkinliği Üzerine Etkisi: Nevşehir’deki Otel İşletmelerinde Bir Uygulama. Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi, 8(1), 58–76. doi:10.30783/nevsosbilen.409552
14. Furmolly, A. W. & Kırkulak Uludağ, B. (2018). The Impact of Tourism on Turkish Economy (1963-2015). Journal of Multidisciplinary Academic Tourism, 3(1), 11–22. doi:10.31822/jomat.364321
15. Gürbüz, F. & Erdinç, G. (2018). Selecting the best hotel using the Fuzzy-Moora method with a new combined weight approach. 2018 2nd International Symposium on Multidisciplinary Studies and Innovative Technologies (ISMSIT) içinde (ss. 1–8). IEEE.
16. Jusoh, A., Mardani, A., Omar, R., Štreimikienė, D., Khalifah, Z. & Sharifara, A. (2018). Application of mcdm approach to evaluate the critical success factors of total quality management in the hospitality industry. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 19(2), 399–416. doi:10.3846/jbem.2018.5538
17. Kahraman, C. (Ed.). (2008). Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Making: Theory and Applications with Recent Developments. New York: Springer.
18. Karakuş, Y. (2019). Identifying the Best Alternative Tourism Product for a Destination: the case of Cappadocia. Revista Anais Brasileiros de Estudos Turísticos - ABET, 9(1, 2 e 3). doi:10.34019/2238-2925.2019.V9.16929
19. Karakuş, Y. (2020). Introduction to Multi Criteria Decision Making Modelling (MCDM). R. P. S. Kaurav, D. Gursoy ve N. Chowdhary (Ed.), An SPSS Guide for Tourism, Hospitality and Events Researchers içinde (1st bs.). London: Routledge.
20. Karakuş, Y. & Çoban, S. (2018). Evaluation Of Stakeholders’ Expectations Towards Congress Tourism By Kano Model: Case Of Nevşehir. Anais Brasileiros de Estudos Turísticos - ABET, 8(2), 8–20. https://abet.ufjf.emnuvens.com.br/abet/article/view/3027 adresinden erişildi.
21. Karakuş, Y. & Kalay, N. (2017). A Study on The Concept and Causes of Destination Rejection. International Journal of Management Economics and Business, 13(3), 1–16. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.17130/ijmeb.2017331320
22. Krstic, B., Jovanovic, S., Jankovic-Milic, V. & Stanisic, T. (2016). Examination of travel and tourism competitiveness contribution to national economy competitiveness of sub-Saharan Africa countries. Development Southern Africa, 33(4), 470–485. doi:10.1080/0376835X.2016.1179103
23. Kuo, M. S. & Liang, G. S. (2011). Combining VIKOR with GRA techniques to evaluate service quality of airports under fuzzy environment. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(3), 1304–1312. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2010.07.003
24. Lee-Ross, D. & Pryce, J. (2010). Human resources and tourism: Skills, culture and industry (C. 2). Bristol: Channel View Publications.
25. Lee, K. C., Tsai, W. H., Yang, C. H. & Lin, Y. Z. (2018). An MCDM approach for selecting green aviation fleet program management strategies under multi-resource limitations. Journal of Air Transport Management, 68, 76–85. doi:10.1016/j.jairtraman.2017.06.011
26. Liao, S. K., Hsu, H. Y. & Chang, K. L. (2019). OTAs Selection for Hot Spring Hotels by a Hybrid MCDM Model. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2019. doi:10.1155/2019/4251362
27. Lin, C. L. (2020). Establishing environment sustentation strategies for urban and rural/town tourism based on a hybrid MCDM approach. Current Issues in Tourism, 23(19), 2360–2395. doi:10.1080/13683500.2019.1642308
28. Liou, J. J. H., Hsu, C. C., Yeh, W. C. & Lin, R. H. (2011). Using a modified grey relation method for improving airline service quality. Tourism Management, 32(6), 1381–1388. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2011.01.013
29. Liou, J. J. H. & Tzeng, G. H. (2007). A non-additive model for evaluating airline service quality. Journal of Air Transport Management, 13(3), 131–138. doi:10.1016/j.jairtraman.2006.12.002
30. Liu, C.-H., Tzeng, G.-H., Lee, M.-H. & Lee, P.-Y. (2013). Improving metro–airport connection service for tourism development: Using hybrid MCDM models. Tourism Management Perspectives, 6, 95–107. doi:10.1016/J.TMP.2012.09.004
31. Liu, C. H., Tzeng, G. H. & Lee, M. H. (2012). Improving tourism policy implementation - The use of hybrid MCDM models. Tourism Management, 33(2), 413–426. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2011.05.002
32. Lopes, A. P. F., Muñoz, M. M. & Alarcón-Urbistondo, P. (2018). Regional tourism competitiveness using the PROMETHEE approach. Annals of Tourism Research, 73, 1–13. doi:10.1016/J.ANNALS.2018.07.003
33. Madanoglu, M., Olsen, M. D. & Kwansa, F. A. (2007). The impact of terrorist bombings on the market values of hospitality and tourism enterprises: Global evidence from Turkey, Spain, and Indonesia. Journal of Hospitality Financial Management, 15(2), 49–60. doi:10.1080/10913211.2007.10653842
34. Majumdar, A. & Adhikari, A. (2020). An integrated TOPSIS-MOORA-based performance evaluation methodology for the key service providers in sharing economy: case of Airbnb superhosts. Benchmarking, 28(2), 600–620. doi:10.1108/BIJ-03-2020-0085
35. Martín, J. C., Rudchenko, V. & Sánchez-Rebull, M.-V. (2020). The Role of Nationality and Hotel Class on Guests’ Satisfaction. A Fuzzy-TOPSIS Approach Applied in Saint Petersburg. Administrative Sciences, 10(3), 68. doi:10.3390/admsci10030068
36. Mhlanga, O. (2018). Factors impacting restaurant efficiency: a data envelopment analysis. Tourism Review, 73(1), 82–93. doi:10.1108/TR-07-2017-0109
37. Morakabati, Y., Fletcher, J. & Prideaux, B. (2012). Tourism development in a difficult environment: A study of consumer attitudes, travel risk perceptions and the termination of demand. Tourism Economics, 18(5), 953–969. doi:10.5367/te.2012.0162
38. Nilashi, M., Samad, S., Manaf, A. A., Ahmadi, H., Rashid, T. A., Munshi, A., … Hassan Ahmed, O. (2019). Factors influencing medical tourism adoption in Malaysia: A DEMATEL-Fuzzy TOPSIS approach. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 137, 106005. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2019.106005
39. Özbek, A. (2019). Multi criteria decision making methods and solutions with excel. Ankara: Seçkin Academic and Vocational Publishing.
40. Papageorgiou, G. C. (2008). The human dimension of tourism supply-side perspectives. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(1), 211–232. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2007.07.007
41. Peng, K. H. & Tzeng, G. H. (2012). Strategies for Promoting Tourism Competitiveness Using a Hybrid MCDM Model. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, 16, 107–115. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-29920-9_12
42. Sin, K. Y. & Sin, M. C. (2019). Applying Multi-Criteria Decision Making Technique in Hospitality Quality Management System. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 9(11). doi:10.6007/ijarbss/v9-i11/6511
43. Soleymaninejad, M., Shadifar, M. & Karimi, A. (2016). Evaluation of Two Major Online Travel Agencies of US Using TOPSIS Method. Digital Technologies, 2(1), 1–8. doi:10.12691/dt-2-1-1
44. Stević, I., Stević, S. R. & de Jesus Breda, Z. M. (2019). Application of MCDM methods to tourism evaluation of cultural sites. Urban Book Series içinde (ss. 357–381). Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-10612-6_24
45. Tasci, M. & Gorner, A. (2016). Evaluating the strategies of medical tourism sector through AHP and MOORA in a SWOT framework. Journal of Global Strategic Management, 10(2), 15–30.
46. Tekin, Ö. A. & Ehtiyar, R. (2010). Yönetimde Karar Verme: Batı Antalya Bölgesindeki Beş Yıldızlı Otellerde Çalışan Farklı Departman Yöneticilerinin Karar Verme Stilleri Üzerine Bir Araştırma. Journal of Yasar University, 20(5), 3394–3414. http://journal.yasar.edu.tr/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/5_OTekin_REhtiyar.pdf?cv=1 adresinden erişildi.
47. Tsai, W. H., Chou, W. C. & Leu, J. Der. (2011). An effectiveness evaluation model for the web-based marketing of the airline industry. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(12), 15499–15516. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2011.06.009
48. Tsaur, S.-H., Chang, T.-Y. & Yen, C.-H. (2002). The evaluation of airline service quality by fuzzy MCDM. Tourism Management, 23, 107–115. https://ac.els-cdn.com/S0261517701000504/1-s2.0-S0261517701000504-main.pdf?_tid=0fa196ea-bd5e-11e7-b2b4-00000aab0f27&acdnat=1509359914_d93e2923c443d667f36763dee46871e2 adresinden erişildi.
49. Tseng, M. L. (2009). Using the extension of DEMATEL to integrate hotel service quality perceptions into a cause-effect model in uncertainty. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(5), 9015–9023. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2008.12.052
50. Turan, G. (2015). Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemleri. (F. Yıldırım ve E. Öner, Ed.) Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemleri. Bursa: Dora.
51. Wang, W. C., Cho, W. C. & Chen, Y. J. (2014). Analysis of the influence of quantile regression model on mainland tourists’ service satisfaction performance. The Scientific World Journal, 2014. doi:10.1155/2014/763573
52. Wang, X., Li, X. R., Zhen, F. & Zhang, J. H. (2016). How smart is your tourist attraction?: Measuring tourist preferences of smart tourism attractions via a FCEM-AHP and IPA approach. Tourism Management, 54, 309–320. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2015.12.003
53. Williams, A. M. & Baláž, V. (2015). Tourism Risk and Uncertainty: Theoretical Reflections. Journal of Travel Research, 54(3), 271–287. doi:10.1177/0047287514523334