This is the html version of the file https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3938820.
Google automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web.
Shaping digitalization among German tourism service providers: Processes and implications
Page 1
Journal of Tourism, Heritage & Services Marketing, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2021, pp. 3-15
3
C Copyrigh
t © 200
© 2021 Authors. Published by International Hellenic University
ISSN: 2529-1947. UDC: 658.8+338.48+339.1+640(05)
http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5548393
Published online: 18 October 2021
www.jthsm.grpyright © 200
Some rights reserved.
Except otherwise noted, this work is licensed under
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Shaping digitalization among German
tourism service providers: Processes
and implications
Hannes Thees
Catholic University of Eichstätt-Ingolstadt, Germany
Elina Störmann
Catholic University of Eichstätt-Ingolstadt, Germany
Franziska Thiele
Ostfalia University of Applied Sciences, Germany
Natalie Olbrich
Catholic University of Eichstätt-Ingolstadt, Germany
Abstract:
Purpose: This study addresses the digital transformation in tourism, accelerated due to the COVID-19
pandemic. By linking the front- and backstage activities, a model of the tourism value system is sketched with
the aim to assist the shift toward digital value creation in the case of the German tourism sector by asking,
What are the challenges for the digital transformation of tourism service providers, and how can it be promoted
along with the tourism value system?
Methods: Recognizing the processual challenges of digitalization, this contribution builds upon a mixed-
methods approach. First, a quantitative online survey (n = 372) was conducted by the German Competence
Center for Tourism at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. The results were discussed in a workshop
with 40 experts from the tourism industry in September 2020, where the COVID-19 pandemic was referred to.
Results: The focus of tourism service providers is predominantly the digitalization of guest communication,
whereas corporate strategies on digitalization are widely not available. Key findings of the survey indicate
that competitiveness in digitalization will depend on the appropriate infrastructure, clear strategies, and
organizational integration.
Implications: The study affirms the increased speed of digital transformation against the backdrop of the
COVID-19 pandemic and reveals the need for greater focus on internal processes. In addition, an orchestrated
linking of the service providers in a digital ecosystem that is supported by national efforts is proposed.
Keywords: Digital transformation, German tourism service providers, digital tools and value creation,
digitalization of the tourism value system, knowledge gap
JEL Classification: L83, N7, Z30
Biographical note: Hannes Thees (hannes.thees@ku.de) is a PhD researcher at the Catholic University of
Eichstätt-Ingolstadt, Chair of Tourism and Center for Entrepreneurship. He obtained a double master’s degree
in tourism and regional planning from the Catholic University of Eichstätt-Ingolstadt and the University of
Oulu. Elina Störmann (elina.stoermann@ku.de) is a research associate and PhD researcher at the Catholic
University of Eichstätt-Ingolstadt, Chair of Tourism and Center for Entrepreneurship. She completed her
master’s degree in tourism and regional planning at the Catholic University of Eichstätt-Ingolstadt. Franziska
Thiele (f.thiele@ostfalia.de) is a lecturer and research assistant at the Institute for Tourism and Regional
Research of Ostfalia University of Applied Sciences. She holds a PhD in tourism geography from the
University of Trier. Her research interests are hiking tourism, service quality, and digitalization in tourism.
Natalie Olbrich (natalie.olbrich@ku.de) is a research associate and PhD researcher at the Catholic University
of Eichstätt-Ingolstadt, Chair of Tourism and Center for Entrepreneurship. She completed her master’s degree
in tourism and regional development at the Ernst Moritz Arndt University of Greifswald. Her research focuses
on the areas of destination management, experience, and culinary tourism.
1 INTRODUCTION
The tourism sector is one of the industries worst affected by
the COVID-19 pandemic. Destination shutdowns,
restrictions, and mobility reduction have forced destinations
to find creative solutions (Hall & Seyfi, 2021). The pandemic
has accelerated the digital adaptation of the whole tourism
industry (Pencarelli, 2020). The need for new digital and
interactive incentives in tourism is growing not only due to
younger and more technological-savvy and trend-conscious
target groups but also due to consumers' increasing
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3938820
Page 2
4
Hannes Thees, Elina Störmann, Franziska Thiele & Natalie Olbrich
requirements for quality and service (Komodromos, 2019).
Service providers already well-digitized before have had an
advantage during the pandemic that has helped them to adapt
to and overcome the situation (Almeida et al., 2020).
Digitalization is a paradigm shift in tourism, with the rapid
emergence of digital tools and techniques (Buhalis &
Amaranggana, 2015). Digital transformation has changed
interaction with the consumer in the travel sector and has had
an immense effect on the customer journey (Cuomo et al.,
2021). On the one hand, this has enabled a change in
consumer behavior and led to the need to implement new
solutions at every step of the customer journey. On the other
hand, technological adaptations can help service providers
take advantage of digitalization to strengthen their
competitiveness. Therefore, developing long-term digital
strategies is crucial for realizing the most effective use of
technology to foster digital value creation. Obstacles often
occur in the form of lack of IT expertise, time constraints,
financial risks, and the strategy itself (Styvén & Wallström,
2017). Practitioners recognize the value of digitalization in
terms of efficiency and communication, and it is becoming
urgent to use technological advancement for digital value
creation (Pohjola et al., 2020). From an entrepreneurial
perspective, digital transformation is a human-driven
process, which brings a change first in corporate culture to
create new experiences and later in processes and business
models. Thus, digital value creation is a central objective of
the digital transformation (Santarsiero et al., 2021).
The literature reveals a gap in the use of proactive strategies
by service providers to meet and respond to consumers'
digital requirements. This raises the need to analyze how
technological adaptation can facilitate digital transformation
in tourism to design the customer journey and strengthen the
value impact (Opute et al., 2020). Therefore, digital
transformation needs a multi-stakeholder approach,
supported by service providers with a long-term digital
strategy (Brunetti et al., 2020). Research is already available
on the digitalization of the customer journey, in particular in
the context of experiences and added value for the consumer
(Bec et al., 2019). However, there are gaps in the internal
processes of tourism service providers, which can be bridged
by leveraging digital technologies to drive the benefits of
consumer engagement (Opute et al., 2020).
This paper approaches the research gaps mentioned above
and contributes to understanding the digital transformation
toward digital value creation in the tourism sector by asking:
What are the challenges for the digital transformation of
tourism service providers, and how can it be promoted along
with the tourism value system?
In this respect, a case study on the German tourism industry
was conducted, focusing on inbound service providers.
Service providers, in this study, comprised hospitality
providers, tourism associations, and destination marketing
organizations (DMOs). Building upon the generally high
awareness for digital value creation, this study aimed to
address various digitalization challenges observed in the
recovery as well. In this regard, this study corresponds to the
demand for empirically testing the digitalization impact in
practice (Tanti & Buhalis, 2017) or multi-stakeholder
involvement (Brunetti et al., 2020). To meet the complex
requirements of digital transformation, a mixed-methods
approach (Pelletier & Cloutier, 2019) was implemented in
2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic. The strength of the
study lies in the analysis and discussion of quantitative
survey results in a negotiated process with a subsequent
workshop (Ørngreen & Levinsen, 2017).
2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
To explore the implications of digital technology for tourism
destinations, the tourism value system is used as a conceptual
framework consisting of the concept of the customer journey
and the model of value chains. Modeling the value system is
a basis for linking the empirical results from the German case
study with theoretical insights.
2.1 Digital transformation in the tourism value system
The tourism value system is considered a combination of the
value chain and the customer journey. In addition, the model
differentiates between front- and backstage (Thees et al.
2020). Value co-creation must be taken into account at both
stages. Thus, the service providers should have the ability to
align the digital offers with consumer needs (Fragniere et al.,
2020). However, the tourism value system is rather complex
in function and scale. It comprises individual service
providers, management organizations, cities and regions, and
even national and international authorities when travel
abroad is involved (Thees et al., 2020).
The frontstage includes all customer touchpoints and,
specifically, the customer journey, with several steps of
experience from the customer's point of view (Stickdorn &
Zehrer, 2009). The journey is a result of numerous attractions
and involves facilities and services. Thus, the customer
journey is linked to different accommodations, mobility, and
service providers. To address consumer needs as effectively
as possible, digital value creation could occur at any stage:
the planning stage, the journey itself, or the post-stage of
travel (Lane, 2007; Wang et al., 2014). Consistent
digitalization at each step illustrates how the level of
immersion within tourism experiences can be increased for
travelers along the journey (Bec et al., 2019). Technology
adaption enables service providers to create and use new and
diversified communications channels, making it easier for
consumers to engage (Komodromos, 2019).
Supplementary to the customer journey, the model of value
chains (secondary activities) helps analyze the company’s
value creation on the backstage (Thees, Erschbamer, &
Pechlaner, 2020). Consequently, the classical model of Porter
(2000) is adopted as a framework, where the value chain
serves as an analytical tool to structure the activities and
diversification of a company. Digitalization in tourism has
changed the entire value chain in tourism creation, marketing,
and distribution (Minghetti & Buhalis, 2010).
Figure 1 represents a complex chain, where bilateral
communication and touchpoints between consumers
(frontstage) and tourism service providers (backstage) can be
guaranteed. The use of digital technologies may increase
competitiveness when embedded early in a knowledge-
creating strategy. Thus, a digitalization strategy should be
more consumer oriented on the frontstage in the short term
and less risky on the backstage in the long term (Brunetti et
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3938820
Page 3
SHAPING DIGITALIZATION AMONG GERMAN TOURISM SERVICE PROVIDERS: PROCESSES AND IMPLICATIONS
5
al., 2020). According to this, digital transformation is not just
about fulfilling consumers' requirements. E-Customer
Relationship Management (CRM) becomes a strategy to
increase consumer satisfaction (Sigala & Christou, 2006).
Figure 1: Value System in Tourism. Source: Own
elaboration, according to Thees, Erschbamer, and
Pechlaner (2020)
Digital technologies in tourism should not be merely a means
to an end or even lead to over-digitalization (Nanchen et al.,
2021). It is no longer sufficient to simply determine consumer
requirements. The customer journey is exposed to
significantly more influencing factors than in the past, and
consumer touchpoints have changed (Prahalad &
Ramaswamy, 2004). Consumer touchpoints refer to all points
of contact between the traveler, the tourism products, the
service providers, and tourism stakeholders (Stickdorn &
Zehrer, 2009). Digitalization helps to better understand
changing consumer requirements and provide more effective
customer solutions (Rusu et al., 2020). Therefore, technology
can fundamentally change the way to manage tourist flows
and experiences (Hughes & Moscardo, 2019). Smart
technologies and personal mobile devices provide new
touchpoints. Consequently, touchpoints have a
multidirectional influence on purchasing decisions and also
enable direct interaction (Stare & Križaj, 2018). For
interlinking digital and physical distribution channels
efficiently, systematic and holistic customer touchpoint
management is necessary (Straker et al., 2015).
The challenge in digital transformation is to create a digital
ecosystem in which tourism service providers develop a
holistic and valuable or smart tourism experience by
strengthening personalization, context awareness, and real-
time information (Shafiee et al., 2021). A successful digital
transformation in companies will depend on the adaptability
of tourism service providers, their collaboration partners, and
the consumers (Almeida et al., 2020). Therefore, a targeted
analysis of the frontstage is critical. This helps to plan
budgets and financing on the backstage and to control them
on specific distribution channels (Reichstein & Härting,
2018). The more complex the journey, the more potential an
analysis offers for identifying interdependencies and
optimizing budgets. The findings lead to an increase in
effectiveness and efficiency as well as the optimization of
budgets (Buhalis & Amaranggana, 2015). Ultimately, this
leads to the fact that information and communication
technology continuously reconfigure and reorient
competitive structures (Pencarelli, 2020). Against the
backdrop of the experience society and digitalization, those
tourism providers that can be competitive and innovative also
co-create authentic, personalized, and technology-supported
experiences in conjunction with consumers (Neuburger et al.,
2019; Krakover & Corsale, 2021).
2.2 Technological readiness in the tourism value system
Current research shows great diversity in technological
readiness, maturity, and technical tools (Ivanov et al., 2021).
A multitude of new technological possibilities and
applications, but also changes in consumer expectations and
behavior, open up new opportunities and challenges
(Pencarelli, 2020). On the one hand, digitalization enables the
optimization of processes and, thus, more efficient and cost-
effective service performance on the frontstage (Reichstein
& Härting, 2018). On the other hand, technological
adaptation in the company also requires investments, creates
new costs, and changes processes and structures on the
backstage (Hughes & Moscardo, 2019).
The widespread use of ICT enhances value co-creation within
multi-stakeholder ecosystems, increases value for visitors,
and facilitates decision making for service providers
(Matarazzo et al., 2021). To accelerate digital transformation,
several studies have explored value creation in tourism in a
digital context (Neuhofer et al., 2014; Opute et al., 2020;
Schmidt-Rauch & Schwabe, 2014). To sum up those studies,
there is a need to strengthen companies' internal processes,
reduce the complexity in managing digital solutions (Opute
et al., 2020), and provide communication between consumer
and tourism service providers (Reichstein & Härting, 2018).
Several constraints and obstacles can occur on digitizing the
frontstage. There is a lack of within-budget digitalized
products for which a particular technology level is sufficient
(Dredge et al., 2019). In addition, computer-based solutions
to management issues need to consider the importance of
functional benefits and also address privacy and security
issues (Hughes & Moscardo, 2019). Digital hubs, community
platforms, interactive maps, and further smart solutions in
accommodation and transportation could be useful tools in
the digitalization of the customer journey (Fragniere et al.,
2020). Visitor management and guidance have gained new
significance due to the COVID-19 pandemic and call for
renewal. Thus, visitor management has become a proactive,
sustainable, and holistic instrument, where digitalization can
have a supporting function (Høegh-Guldberg et al., 2021).
On the backstage, there are complementary obstacles and
constraints. Entrenched in everyday work routines, especially
small and medium-sized tourism companies (SME) tend to
lack time, digitally trained employees, and the necessary
financial resources to dedicate themselves to technological
adaption (Dredge et al., 2019). Networks of regional,
national, and international open data initiatives will be a
critical success factor in maximizing the synergies,
relevance, and innovation of an open digital data
infrastructure. To realize this vision, coordinated cooperation
and trust are essential. Technological adaption requires
digital expertise and know-how, relevant information, and a
culture of innovation (Fragniere et al., 2020). However, there
is often a lack of finance and insufficient technological
knowledge (Dredge et al., 2019).
For destinations and their service providers, it is, therefore,
necessary to examine the benefits of company-specific
digitalization measures and related implications.
Destinations need to create a trustworthy, authentic, and
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3938820
Page 4
6
Hannes Thees, Elina Störmann, Franziska Thiele & Natalie Olbrich
insightful environment to answer any questions digital
consumer audiences might have (Buhalis & Amaranggana,
2015). One of the greatest challenges in establishing a shared
vision for an open digital data infrastructure relates to
leadership issues. With the understanding that a coordinated
path for building an open digital data infrastructure will
create a common baseline for innovation, service providers
can leverage digital opportunities in the future (Pesonen,
2020). This study provides an outlook on where service
providers in Germany stand in mastering the digital
transformation, which front- and backstage activities in the
tourism value system must be considered, and which
prerequisites must be implemented.
3 DIGITALIZATION OF GERMAN TOURISM
The tourism industry in Germany is characterized by diverse
and extensive offerings: cities and culture, nature and
activities, castles and palaces, and experiences and pleasure
(German National Tourist Board, 2021). The organization of
the tourism industry in Germany is quite complex, with
various political actors, policy instruments, and objectives at
the federal, state, and municipal levels (Figure 2) (German
Tourism Association, 2021b). Thiele and Dembowski (2019)
show that tourism in Germany is a cross-sectional task, and
discussions include departments such as economy, transport,
and environment.
In addition to the funding program "enhancing performance
& promoting innovation in the tourism sector" (LIFT) and the
so-called Advisory Board on Tourism Issues, a federal
competence center for tourism was established in 2018, with
the primary goal to support tourism policy of the federal
government by generating knowledge and data (Competence
Center for Tourism of the German Federal Ministry for
Economic Affairs and Energy, 2021a). The federal cabinet
initiated a dialogue process for the development of a national
tourism strategy in 2019, which includes strengthening
digital infrastructure as an operational goal.
Figure 2: Tourism Policy Framework in Germany. Source:
Own illustration
Germany is a popular destination, and both foreign and
domestic travelers enjoy its offerings. For example, the
number of overnight stays has increased in a 10-year
comparison from 370 million in 2009 to just under 500
million overnight stays in 2019 (Federal Statistical Office of
Germany, 2021). However, in 2020, the COVID-19
pandemic caused a decline, with about 40% fewer overnight
stays than in 2019. Commercial sales also fell by around
40%, and there were around 75% fewer passengers at
German airports (Federal Association of the German
Tourism Industry (BTW) 2021). It is especially due to the
COVID-19 pandemic that digitalization has been accelerated,
e.g., in technological adaptation, the digitalization of
business areas, tourist information as well as leisure
activities, visitor guidance, artificial intelligence, open data,
online distribution, and mobile payment (German Tourism
Association, 2021a). However, only the first steps toward a
smart destination have been taken so far (German Tourism
Association, 2021a), and the German National Tourist Board,
which markets Germany as a tourist destination on an
international level, calls for the expansion of a high-
performance data infrastructure, increasing the data
competence of German tourism since "Germany's online
travel market has grown more slowly than some other
European countries due to the popularity of offline
distribution and the leading role of tour operators”
(Phocuswright 2018, p. 7).
The previous challenges illustrate that the SME-dominated
tourism industry in Germany is struggling with the digital
transformation so far and digital transformation has become
more urgent during the COVID-19 pandemic, which will be
highlighted next.
4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY: MIXED-METHODS
APPROACH
Combining the theoretical background and the case-specific
challenges, five main hypotheses were developed (Table 1),
on the following issues: digital maturity (H1), functional
integration of digitalization (H2), digitalization of business
divisions (H3), digitalization strategy (H4), and employees’
acceptance (H5). This study is based on two data sources as
part of the market and trend radar of the Competence Center
for Tourism. The center works on behalf of the German
Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy and was
established by Project M GmbH. Its primary objective is to
facilitate the process of knowledge transfer between
politicians, scientists, and travel companies.
The quantitative analyses are based on an online panel of
nearly 400 stakeholders from the tourism industry in
Germany who have been regularly surveyed on various
industry topics since 2018. The stakeholders belong to
tourism companies and organizations, the goal being to
gather a differentiated view of the German tourism industry.
Subjects were acquired from various industry segments with
the aim of quota sampling. Since participation was voluntary
and thus inconsistent, no quota procedure could be applied.
Nevertheless, the nonprobability sample aimed to get the first
impression of different perspectives on relevant topics.
Results of the online surveys were presented to and discussed
with different industry experts in workshops in order to
jointly develop options and solutions for designing political
framework conditions. This triangulation design was also
used for this study to complement and supplement the results
of quantitative and qualitative data so that it can be assigned
to mixed-methods approaches (Kelle, 2005). This paper
illustrates the results of the combination of a quantitative
Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy and other Federal Ministries
Federal-State Committee
Tourism Committee
Tourism
Commissioner
Industry Associations
Regional DMOs
State Associations
Advisory Board
on Tourism Issues
Parties
State Governments and Parliaments
Local DMOs
Municipalities
Chambers of
Commerce
Tourist Offices
State Marketing Organizations
German National
Tourist Board
Tourism Industry in Germany
Laws and Regulations
Tax and Subsidies
Investments
Funding
Marketing
Laws and Regulations
Strategies
Investments
Qualification
Funding
Marketing
Statues
Investments
Cooperation
Information
Federal Competence Center for Tourism
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3938820
Page 5
SHAPING DIGITALIZATION AMONG GERMAN TOURISM SERVICE PROVIDERS: PROCESSES AND IMPLICATIONS
7
online survey and its discussion in a qualitative and
structured workshop (Figure 3).
Figure 3: Mixed-Methods procedure. Source: Own
illustration
4.1 Online survey and recruitment of a nonprobability
sample
The online survey covered the areas of digital maturity in
order to record the current state of digitalization in German
service providers and their value creation; the aim was to
shed light on the added value of digital technologies and their
application in value creation processes. The digital and
analog value creation components were compared and areas
in need of support identified. The questionnaire contained 27
predominantly closed questions and was sent to nearly 400
registered panel participants, and an open survey link was
also distributed via the Competence Center for Tourism and
different multipliers from the tourism industry (e.g., industry
associations). This study was based on convenience sampling
to reach as many representatives of the industry sector as
possible and to get the first insight into the status quo of
digitalization from different perspectives. Online surveys
have proven their worth for this objective (Evans & Mathur,
2005). In this study, 372 completed and valid questionnaires
were collected. The majority of the participants belonged to
the segments of hospitality (accommodation and
gastronomy) (60%) as well as local, regional, and state
destination management organizations (40%). In addition,
service providers of leisure and cultural facilities, tour guides,
tour operators and travel agencies, mobility services, and
consultants were surveyed. The statistical measurement
followed a descriptive analysis at first as the frequencies were
discussed in the workshops (Section 4.2). Furthermore,
hypotheses were developed to uncover differences and
peculiarities within the data (Table 1). Inferential analyses
were carried out to test selected hypotheses, such as Pearson
correlation coefficient. Additional cross-tab statistics were
used to interpret the results. The statistical analyses were all
performed with the help of IBM SPSS Statistics.
4.2 Structured workshops with Industry Experts
At the online workshop "Digital design: Digital operations
and digital paths to the customer" in September 2020, the
results of the online survey were presented and discussed in
detail to verify key aspects from the experts' perspective.
Invitations were sent to association representatives, selected
industry experts, and the tourism department of the federal
government (purposive sampling, 43 participants).
Accordingly, a workshop is understood as a dialogical
method that aims to structure a discussion and to share
knowledge from different stakeholders (McDonald et al.,
2009). Ørngreen and Levinsen (2017) found out that use of
workshops as a research method in combination with other
empirical approaches is less represented in literature. It is
mainly used as a participation tool in local governance and
policymaking processes (Bramwell & Sharman, 1999; Thees
et al., 2020). In addition to the research function, the
Competence Center enables stakeholders in the tourism
industry to get indirectly involved in the tourism policy of the
federal government by creating a collaborative environment
in which interests and needs for action are negotiated. A pre-
structured customer journey map was used to facilitate a
discussion about digital problem solutions, instruments, and
the operational requirements concerning the different stages
of the customer journey. The results were presented to all
workshop participants in a plenary session. The summarized
discussion results of the online workshops were documented
and presented to all participants.
5 FINDINGS: DIGITAL MATURITY AND PATHS FOR
DIGITALIZATION
Subsequent findings illustrate the digitalization of service
providers in German tourism, with particular reference to
five selected hypotheses on digital maturity (Section 5.1)
and the tourism value system (Section 5.2). The results were
vital to discussing future development in an open workshop
(Section 5.3).
5.1 Quantitative survey: Hypotheses on digital maturity
First, the survey participants were asked to assess the degree
of digitalization (digital maturity) of their company or
organization (Figure 4). The given answers show a Gaussian
distribution around an average of 2,99. Only 31% perceived
their own degree of digitalization as "high" or "very high"
(H1, Table 1), and the rather indecisive answer of "medium"
of 41% of the respondents reflects a possible uncertainty
regarding coping with digitalization.
Figure 4: Degree of digitalization, How high do you rate
the degree of digitalization in your company? n = 372.
Source: Own illustration
Second, looking at how the service providers organize
digitalization, there is a comparatively low integration into
the organizational structure. Only a quarter of the companies
surveyed had a separate task/functional area for
digitalization. It is conspicuous that one in two DMOs had
some kind of digital officer, compared to 13% of hospitality
providers (accommodation and gastronomy), which confirms
significant differences (H2, Table 1).
Third, respondents evaluated the importance of digitalization
in relation to particular functional divisions (Figure 5). In this
regard, the most important divisions for digitalization were
outward-directed (backstage), such as marketing and
communication (57% "very important"). Above this, there
was a significant difference between DMOs and hospitality
providers (H3, Table 1). On the one hand, hospitality
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3938820
Page 6
8
Hannes Thees, Elina Störmann, Franziska Thiele & Natalie Olbrich
providers rated outward-directed functions even stronger
than DMOs, and on the other hand, they did not focus much
on internal processes.
Fourth, the quantitative study asked for different measures
and directions in the digitalization of the business models.
The availability of a digitalization strategy provides a starting
point for this discussion, as the respondents were undecided
in defining appropriate strategies. However, there are
significant positive correlations between a digitalization
strategy and the degree of digitalization or integrating
technology into the company (H4, Table 1). Beyond the
business model perspective, a digitalization strategy
correlates with available digital competencies (.507
significance, p < 0.01) or receiving and analyzing customer
feedback (.462 significance).
Figure 5: Importance of digitalization, What is the
importance of digitalization in the following areas of your
business? n = 372. Source: Own illustration
Fifth, a positive correlation between the employees'
acceptance of digitalization and the integration of technology
in the company was confirmed (H5, Table 1). Moving
beyond this hypothesis, digital know-how and competencies
have a wide-ranging influence, e.g., sufficient digital
competence correlates with high acceptance for digital
processes (.600 significance) and digital decision and
approval processes correlate with the qualification of
employees (.548 significance).
There are additional significant correlations above the
described hypotheses, for example, between:
- The use of collaboration software for the
digitalization of customer contact (.510
significance)
- The use of collaboration software for the use of data
management systems (.538 significance)
- The usage of collaboration software for digital
decision and approval processes (.522 significance)
- B2B information portals for the digitalization of
products and services (.519 significance)
- The renewal of IT structure/software for the
optimization of data protection/security (.710
significance)
- The development of a digitalization strategy for
online coaching (.513 significance)
- The development of know-how for the optimization
of data protection (.713 significance)
5.2 Quantitative survey: Descriptive analysis of the
tourism value system
While tourism services follow a detailed customer journey
(Section 2), Figure 6 displays key variables from the
questionnaire and assigns items to the customer journey and
the secondary activities. The majority of the service providers
in our study (63% of the respondents) were concerned with
the digitalization of customer contact and the introduction of
new digital marketing and sales concepts (51%), which
reveal activities on the frontstage. Objectives of digitalization
projects, similar to the integration of digitalization in
businesses, predominantly focus on customers. In our study,
78% pursued the goal of increasing customer satisfaction and
customer loyalty, while 76% aimed to ensure
competitiveness. Internal objectives, such as renewal of IT
structures and software (59%) or making jobs more flexible
(29%), were pursued less frequently. Concrete projects were
mainly data related but also related to the digitalization of
processes, broadband expansion, or introduction of new
digital products. Overall, it can be stated that the integration
of digitalization follows a predominantly customer- and
product-oriented picture, while internal processes provide
further potential for digitalization and value creation.
Analyzing details of every step of the value system uncovers
further findings, e.g., the need to introduce new digital
marketing and sales concepts (information). It is important to
structure and provide open data or data protection (data
management) and accumulate expertise to achieve digital
objectives and implement projects (know-how) or develop
digitalization strategies (strategy).
Table 1: Main hypotheses and variables
Source: Own illustration, significance level – p<0.01
To sum up the survey results, service providers in German
tourism are well aware of the future importance of digital
value creation. Nevertheless, there is insufficient
understanding and know-how of the potential applications
and added value of digital technologies, which are
predominantly understood as customer- and sales-oriented
instruments, while internal applications and requirements are
considered to be low in importance (H3). The level of
digitalization within companies (H1) is often unclear due to
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3938820
Page 7
SHAPING DIGITALIZATION AMONG GERMAN TOURISM SERVICE PROVIDERS: PROCESSES AND IMPLICATIONS
9
a lack of expertise in many areas. Concerning future plans of
the companies surveyed for 2030 in a post-COVID era, there
is a clear trend: the current ratio of digital-to-analog sales of
30% to 70% is to be turned around by 2030, with digital sales
then accounting for 70%. This would correspond to an almost
Figure 6: Customer Journey with selected findings from the quantitative survey. Source: Own illustration
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3938820
Page 8
10
Hannes Thees, Elina Störmann, Franziska Thiele & Natalie Olbrich
133% increase in the digital share of sales. However, it is
often uncertain which technologies and applications can be
used to achieve this, as the focus is almost exclusively on
online bookability.
5.3 Workshops: Problems and solutions for digitalization
These quantitative results built the basis for a workshop with
service providers with the aim to discuss problems and
solutions in digitalization (Section 3.2). According to various
inputs from the workshop sessions, major problems occur in
terms of (1) adequate selection of tools and channels, (2)
transition and integration of analog and digital data, and (3)
further optimization of bookability across the customer
journey. During this workshop, these challenges were
discussed against the background of the COVID-19
pandemic, as well as existing and future instruments. The
COVID-19 pandemic may have emphasized the development
of these internal processes. A central instrument that bridges
all customer journey stages is the platform in its various
settings, especially by linking service providers and
communicating with customers efficiently and transparently.
In addition, a couple of impulses relate to background
processes according to the provided framework in Table 2.
The most critical challenges are the provision of know-how,
data management, and the need for strategic impulses.
Table 2: Workshop: Design of Digitalization, problems and
solutions
Source: Own illustration
One important finding of the quantitative survey and the
conducted workshop is that digitalization in the tourism
industry is accompanied by hopes regarding increased
efficiency, better networking, etc. At the same time, a large
number of participants are unsettled. The reasons for this
include the complexity of legal provisions and regulations
(e.g., on data protection) and a lack of know-how. There is a
consensus that more collaboration is needed within the
industry as a whole. The availability and networking of up-
to-date data and reliable information are crucial for the
industry’s recovery. Comparing the survey and the workshop
results, increased awareness of internal processes on the
backstage can be observed.
6 DISCUSSION: DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION ON
MULTIPLE LEVELS
This discussion builds upon the research question on the
digital transformation of service providers in German tourism
during the COVID-19 pandemic. The related problem
statement (Section 1) can be structured at multiple levels.
This discussion approaches research gaps at the service
provider level (Section 6.1), in the development of a digital
ecosystem at the destination level (Section 6.2), and in the
design of context conditions at the national level (Section
6.3). The combination of these three levels corresponds to
research recommendations made by Santarsiero et al. (2021).
6.1 Service providers: System integration
Reflecting on the theoretical background (Section 2), digital
value creation in tourism is embedded in a complex value
system that requires digital transformation at multiple levels
across destinations along the customer journey.
Digitalization at company levels means digitizing customer
interactions or touchpoints on the frontstage and the
supporting activities on the backstage (Thees, Erschbamer, &
Pechlaner, 2020). However, theory reveals that systemic
integration of front- and backstage activities provides further
potential for developing digital business models and
increasing customer value (Opute et al., 2020).
Against this background, the conducted case study with
German tourism service providers (Section 5) uncovers
several challenges that prevent digital transformation at the
company level. Challenges exist in terms of vague digital
maturity or inconsequent organizational integration by a
digitalization officer, but more importantly, service providers
acknowledge a lack of know-how on implementing digital
offers and tools across company divisions. Finally, a strong
focus on the digitalization of outward functions can be
identified, e.g., customer service, which visualizes positive
progress among a significant share of service providers, but
the appropriate digitalization of background processes is a
challenge for the consequent linking of front- and backstage,
e.g., by a system integration through a digital platform.
Commonalities can be identified on linking the theoretical
background with case study results. For example, there is
strong customer focus in digitalization (Reichstein and
Härting 2018) and knowledge gaps (especially for SMEs)
(Dredge et al., 2019; Minghetti & Buhalis, 2010). Proceeding
with these visible differences, scholars frequently indicate
opportunities for digitalization, especially digitalization of
business models (Brunetti et al., 2020), while German service
providers still seem to struggle with rather general context
conditions. These operational challenges are confirmed by
the workshop, which stressed not only data availability,
connectivity, and quality but also the qualification of DMOs
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3938820
Page 9
SHAPING DIGITALIZATION AMONG GERMAN TOURISM SERVICE PROVIDERS: PROCESSES AND IMPLICATIONS
11
and service providers as well as the availability of technical
infrastructure. However, the awareness that digitalization
increases the companies’ success requires a new mentality to
shape the business model (Brunetti et al., 2020). Further
potential lies in a business model development that increases
the tourist experience by value co-creation along the
customer journey (Cuomo et al., 2021).
This study shows that the courage, speed, and freedom of
choice of service providers to deal with the issue of
digitalization has reached a new level. Decisions are made
significantly faster and have helped to boost technological
transformation (Cuomo et al., 2021). However, the digital
gaps have become even more visible due to the COVID-19
pandemic and should be minimized. A significant amount of
work has been done in the direction of digital communication
and product development so far, but internal processes have
been neglected. As a result, the link between front- and
backstage is often insufficiently developed or, in some cases,
completely absent. The frontstage has not been fully digitized
either, so digital bookability is often unavailable along the
entire service chain, and many processes are still at the
beginning of their development. Visitor management and
guidance will assume a significant role in the context of
digitization and will remain a strategic tool after the COVID-
19 pandemic (Høegh-Guldberg et al., 2021). With regard to
the possibilities and measures related to visitor management,
an increased acceptance on the guests' side can be observed.
Guests are looking for digitalization, and service providers
are required to address this desire satisfactorily, especially on
the frontstage. It is also an opportunity for destinations to
make more conscious decisions and to act in a target-group-
oriented manner.
Summarizing the discussion at the level of service providers,
the case study of Germany contributes to understanding the
current pain points from an operational level (including
technical infrastructure or access to knowledge) and
identifying appropriate solutions that assist in digitalization,
including training, information about target groups' digital
needs, multi-channel occupancy management, and digital
aftercare engagement. A digital mindset is required (Shafiee
et al., 2021), which should be balanced with a particular
provider’s objectives or strengths (e.g., personal contact).
Looking ahead, the digitalization of daily processes and
provision of data might soon become a basis for the next steps
in digitalization, which include tools such as chatbots,
assistance robots, and real-time visitor flow management, to
name just a few (Gretzel et al., 2021; Ivanov et al., 2021).
6.2 Destination: Digital ecosystem development
The cooperative nature of tourism requires the management
of relevant stakeholders across the customer journey (Section
2). This means that the digital maturity of each involved
service provider determines and affects the digitalization of
the customer journey (Cuomo et al., 2021). A couple of
scholars indicate the need for information systems and
destination management in digital transformation (Pencarelli,
2020). Here, destinations, especially DMOs, play a strategic
leadership role in supporting digital transformation. DMOs
are often responsible for disseminating technologies, but
collaborative strategies to compete in new value ecosystems
are inevitable (Jaziri 2019). Therefore, concepts such as
smart destination (Gretzel et al. 2015) and digital ecosystems
(Buhalis & Amaranggana, 2015) underline the
embeddedness of service providers. These concepts comprise
various driving factors, such as the intention to promote
cooperation in the sector, to comprise tourism and non-
tourism companies, to shape context conditions for
digitalization and entrepreneurship, and to provide a joint
platform for exchange. Such platforms could visualize inter-
systemic or cross-sectoral relationships and assist in
knowledge diffusion or innovation development. Digital
information systems are still under development in tourism
(Baggio & Chiappa, 2013), even if authors from other fields
(Brunetti et al., 2020) claim to be tackling digital
transformation from a systemic perspective. This systemic
perspective includes a corporate culture (Section 6.1) and
developing digital culture and skills at the network level
(Chatzigeorgiou & Christou, 2020; Brunetti et al., 2020).
This study on the German tourism sector shows first
approaches to engage in digital ecosystems. For example,
digital networking with partners and internal marketing are
assigned moderate importance. The use of collaborative
platforms proves significant correlations with the
digitalization of customer contact or use of data management
systems. In line with theoretical gaps, there is only limited
active participation in exchange platforms (Neuburger et al.,
2019).
Contributing to the theoretical discussion, this case study
uncovers that the preconditions and the digital maturity at the
service provider level are often too weak to allow
engagement in an exchange on digital issues actively.
Improvements are also perceived in collaboration with start-
ups (Baggio & Chiappa, 2013) or the provision of uniform
data standards. The workshop highlights the need for
collaborative platforms at the destination level and consistent
data usage. As digitalization is still challenged by knowledge
gaps and organization (Neuhofer et al., 2014), the workshop
participants declared a consistent distribution of tasks
between the different levels of DMOs (local, federal). In sum,
progress is highly valued through smaller projects that
develop in a bottom-up process. It is a central task of the
digital ecosystem to accompany digitalization by the
implementation of tools specifically on the backstage.
Upcoming applications, e.g., with the use of artificial
intelligence, could further simplify deep learning and
knowledge diffusion in the ecosystem (Tussyadiah, 2020).
Besides the speed of the digital transformation, discussions
around the creation of a "level playing field" (Bramwell &
Lane, 2010) are increasing. Aligned with the needs of
technological progress, fair cooperation and appropriate
distribution of value creation will be more than ever essential
in the course of the recovery (Fotiadis & Sigala, 2015;
Mombeuil & Fotiadis, 2017; Vassiliadis et al., 2013).
Even if the technological capabilities are promising, there is
often a lack of human resources and know-how on dealing
with digital technologies, e.g., specialized skills in data
management and machine-learning-based analytics. Further
research needs to address digital (leadership) skills in tourism
and the way these skills can affect the digital maturity of
service providers (Pesonen 2020). In this regard, a digital
ecosystem needs to be built upon the cooperative handling of
such challenges. DMOs can provide leadership, but
associations and independent consultancies are important
entities in this process, which then diversifies the governance
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3938820
Page 10
12
Hannes Thees, Elina Störmann, Franziska Thiele & Natalie Olbrich
of digitalization in German tourism. A digital ecosystem may
change the governance of tourism, as it empowers service
providers in self-organization and multi-lateral cooperation
besides the focal DMO. Further challenges of a digital
ecosystem in practice concern the activity of service
providers in this environment and the definition of scope and
content. A digital ecosystem is not only dominated by a
central platform but also includes various public-available
platforms and platforms across different spatial levels and
company types, which then require digital culture plus
technological knowledge.
6.3 National: Governance of digital context conditions
At the macro level, nationwide associations and
governmental agencies have the power to support digital
transformation. Brunetti et al. (2020) analyzed the role of
public administration at the macroregional level and claimed
that public administration should focus on providing digital
education, innovative partnerships, and financial resources.
In this regard, public administration should serve citizens,
businesses, and relevant stakeholders as a partner in
digitalization. Especially a detailed national digitalization
policy is required to assist in digitalization across spatial and
functional levels (Hasenzahl et al., 2019). If successful, this
would fill the gap between human-driven digitalization at the
level of service providers and the provision of digital
ecosystems that require public support policies on
infrastructure, data standards, and supply systems
(Pencarelli, 2020; Mugobi & Mlozi, 2021).
Although this case study of Germany focused on service
providers, implications can be derived from respondents of
the national associates and related studies carried out by the
National Competence Center. Digitalization in German
tourism is certainly affected by the complex organizational
structure across spatial scales with partially diverging
interests and distribution of tasks. Key development areas in
digitalization are innovative and responsible data usage and
expansion of a high-performance data infrastructure, which
will increase data competence of German tourism (Section
3). The quantitative results illustrate that there is still a lack
of context conditions, e.g., in digital infrastructure,
education, and financial support. In this regard, this case
study highlights the need for governance across multiple
levels and thus gives guidance in a coordinated way.
Referring to similar cases, governance requires (Pesonen,
2020; Nechoud et al., 2021):
- Structure (digitalization strategy, digital officers)
- Framework conditions (broadband availability, data
standards, joint platforms)
- Flexible financing (project oriented)
- Knowledge (information and knowledge platforms,
digital competence)
- Inspiration and leadership (providing a role model,
underlining chances of digitalization, providing
innovation).
7 CONCLUSIONS
In light of the research question "What are the challenges for
the digital transformation of tourism service providers, and
how can it be promoted along with the tourism value
system?" this study investigated the digital maturity of
German tourism service providers, as well as processes of
digital transformation, using a participative mixed-methods
approach. Against this background, four major contributions
of this paper can be stated:
1. Underscoring the importance of the holistic
digitalization of services by digitizing internal
processes in the value system.
2. Identifying the potential of joint digital ecosystems
to overcome service providers’ obstacles (such as
data management and know-how).
3. Identifying the prerequisites for the national
governance of digitalization, with special
consideration of a digitalization strategy, linking
several spatial levels.
4. Defining the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on
digitalization at the service provider level.
It can be concluded that the expansion of time, financial, and
human resources for the development of an internal digital
environment is particularly important. In addition, workflows
and work processes must be reorganized; digital marketing
and sales concepts, as well as operational measures, must be
developed and expanded; and data analysis (big data, smart
data, etc.) must be improved. The expansion of infrastructure
(e.g., broadband), the adaptation of data protection, or the
further development of funding lines can be further practical
implications. The development of a digitalization strategy
that follows the corporate strategy and spans various levels
(internal and external) is necessary. Overall, a high degree of
innovation and cooperation on different levels is required to
increase digital value creation in tourism.
Nevertheless, three main limitations need to be addressed for
the case study. First, survey results, as well as workshop
results, are difficult to generalize for digitalizing all German
tourism service providers, as the participants were volunteers
probably interested and engaged in digitalization. Second, the
survey sample overrepresented the hospitality sector and
DMOs, while tourist attractions, tour operators, and travel
agencies were hardly represented. In future research, a quota
process to capture the status of the entire industry is required,
as well as representative comparisons between different
segments. Third, this study was subjected to rapid changes
during the COVID-19 pandemic. While the online survey
was conducted in the early days of the pandemic, the online
workshop took place during the pandemic and under an acute
need for digital transformation. These dynamics are also
illustrated by the result of a recent survey that revives the
level of digitalization in a similar setting with a mean value
of 3.47. So the current level increased from medium to
relatively high during the pandemic (Competence Center for
Tourism of the German Federal Ministry for Economic
Affairs and Energy, 2021b). Nevertheless, the results offer a
first impression of how the tourism industry in Germany
deals with challenges of digitalization and where
policymakers can take action to provide greater support and
to overcome the backlog, especially that revealed during the
pandemic. Overall, a high degree of innovation and
cooperation on different levels is required to increase digital
value creation in tourism. Building upon these limitations,
future research may focus on linking service providers in a
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3938820
Page 11
SHAPING DIGITALIZATION AMONG GERMAN TOURISM SERVICE PROVIDERS: PROCESSES AND IMPLICATIONS
13
digital ecosystem in a systemic approach, defining measures
to promote competencies and infrastructure in specific stages
of the customer journey, and analyzing the role of national
initiatives to shape the important context conditions for
digitalization across the tourism industry.
REFERENCES
Almeida, F., Duarte Santos, J., & Augusto Monteiro, J. (2020). The
Challenges and Opportunities in the Digitalization of
Companies in a Post-COVID-19 World. IEEE Engineering
Management Review, 48(3), 97–103.
Baggio, R., & Chiappa, G. D. (2013). Tourism Destinations as
Digital Business Ecosystems. In L. Cantoni & Z. Xiang (Eds.),
Information and communication technologies in tourism 2013:
Proceedings of the International Conference in Innsbruck,
Austria, January 22-25, 2013 (pp. 183–194). Springer Berlin
Heidelberg; Imprint; Springer.
Bec, A., Moyle, B., Timms, K., Schaffer, V., Skavronskaya, L., &
Little, C. (2019). Management of immersive heritage tourism
experiences: A conceptual model. Tourism Management, 72,
117–120.
Bramwell, B., & Lane, B. (2010). Sustainable tourism and the
evolving roles of government planning. Journal of Sustainable
Tourism, 18(1), 1–5.
Bramwell, B., & Sharman, A. (1999). Collaboration in local tourism
policymaking. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(2), 392–415.
Brunetti, F., Matt, D. T., Bonfanti, A., Longhi, A. de, Pedrini, G., &
Orzes, G. (2020). Digital transformation challenges: strategies
emerging from a multi-stakeholder approach. The TQM
Journal, 32(4), 697–724.
Buhalis, D., & Amaranggana, A. (2015). Smart Tourism
Destinations Enhancing Tourism Experience Through
Personalisation of Services. In I. Tussyadiah & A. Inversini
(Eds.), Information and Communication Technologies in
Tourism 2015 (pp. 377–389). Springer International
Publishing.
Chatzigeorgiou, C., & Christou, E. (2020). Promoting agrotourism
resorts online: an assessment of alternative advertising
approaches. International Journal of Technology Marketing,
14(3), 249-266.
Christou, E., & Nella, A. (2016). Web 2.0 and networks in wine
tourism: The case studies of greatwinecapitals.com and
wineandhospitalitynetwork.com. In Social Media in Travel,
Tourism and Hospitality: Theory, Practice and Cases. M.
Sigala, E. Christou and Gretzel, U. (Eds). Surrey, UK: Ashgate
Publishing, pp.11-24.
Competence Center for Tourism of the German Federal Ministry for
Economic Affairs and Energy [Kompetenzzentrum Tourismus
des
Bundes].
(2021a).
Unsere
Arbeit.
https://www.kompetenzzentrum-tourismus.de/ueber-
uns/unsere-arbeit [Accessed the 29th of May 2021]
Competence Center for Tourism of the German Federal Ministry for
Economic Affairs and Energy [Kompetenzzentrum Tourismus
des Bundes]. (2021b). Welche Voraussetzungen braucht die
Revitalisierung
des
Tourismus?,
https://www.kompetenzzentrum-tourismus.de/wissen/online-
panel/463-welche-voraussetzungen-braucht-die-
revitalisierung-des-tourismus [Accessed the 29th of May 2021]
Cuomo, M. T., Tortora, D., Foroudi, P., Giordano, A., Festa, G., &
Metallo, G. (2021). Digital transformation and tourist
experience co-design: Big social data for planning cultural
tourism. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 162,
120345.
Dredge, D., Phi, G. T. L., Mahadevan, R., Meehan, E., & Popescu,
E. (2019). Digitalisation in Tourism: In-depth analysis of
challenges
and
opportunities.
https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/33163/attachments/
1/translations/en/renditions/native [Accessed the 29th of May
2021]
Evans, J. R., & Mathur, A. (2005). The value of online surveys.
Internet Research, 15(2), 195–219.
Federal Association of the German Tourism Industry
[Bundesverband der Deutschen Tourismuswirtschaft (BTW)
e.V.]. (2021). Das Tourismusjahr 2020 - ein Überblick.
http://www.btw.de/tourismus-in-zahlen/das-tourismusjahr-
2020-ein-ueberblick.html [Accessed the 29th of May 2021]
Federal Statistical Office of Germany [Statistisches Bundesamt].
(2021). Number of overnight stays at travel accommodation in
Germany from 1992 to 2020. Statistisches Bundesamt.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/560792/overnight-stays-
german-accommodation/ [Accessed the 29th of May 2021]
Fragniere, E., Fumeaux, D., Fux, M., Grezes, S., & Imboden, A.
(2020). How Smart is your Tourism? Designing a Maturity
Model for Lesser-Known Mountain Resorts. Proceedings of
the 27th FRUCT Conference, 27, 307–313.
Fotiadis, A. K., & Sigala, M. (2015). Developing a framework for
designing an Events Management Training Simulation
(EMTS). Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism
Education, 16, 59-71.
German National Tourist Board [Deutsche Zentrale für Tourismus
e.
V.].
(2021).
Jahresbericht
2020.
https://www.germany.travel/media/redaktion/pdf/ueber_uns/2
021/DZT_Jahresbericht2020_DE_RZ_WEB.pdf [Accessed
the 29th of May 2021]
German Tourism Association [Deutscher Tourismusverband e.V.].
(2021a).
Digitalisierung.
https://www.deutschertourismusverband.de/impulse/digitalisi
erung-im-tourismus.html [Accessed the 29th of May 2021]
German Tourism Association [Deutscher Tourismusverband e.V.].
(2021b). Struktur im Deutschlandtourismus. Deutscher
Tourismusverband
e.V.
https://www.deutschertourismusverband.de/verband/aufgaben
strukturen/struktur-im-deutschlandtourismus.html [Accessed
the 29th of May 2021]
Gretzel, U., Sigala, M., Xiang, Z., & Koo, C. (2015). Smart tourism:
foundations and developments. Electronic Markets, 25(3),
179–188.
Hall, C. M., & Seyfi, S. (2021). COVID-19 pandemic, tourism and
degrowth. In C. M. Hall, L. Lundmark, & J. J. Zhang (Eds.),
Contemporary geographies of leisure, tourism and mobility.
Degrowth and tourism: New perspectives on tourism
entrepreneurship, destinations and policy (pp. 220–238).
Routledge.
Hasenzahl, L., Kalbaska, N., & Cantoni, L. (2019). Digital
transformation in the national tourism policies. In Y.-C. Chen
(Ed.), ACM Digital Library, Proceedings of the 20th Annual
International Conference on Digital Government Research (pp.
417–424). Association for Computing Machinery.
Høegh-Guldberg, O., Seeler, S., & Eide, D. (2021). Sustainable
Visitor Management to Mitigate Overtourism: What, Who and
How. In A. Sharma & A. Hassan (Eds.), Overtourism as
Destination Risk (pp. 167–186). Emerald Publishing Limited.
Hughes, K., & Moscardo, G. (2019). ICT and the future of tourist
management. Journal of Tourism Futures, 5(3), 228–240.
Ivanov, D., Tang, C. S., Dolgui, A., Battini, D., & Das, A. (2021).
Researchers’ perspectives on Industry 4.0: multi-disciplinary
analysis and opportunities for operations management.
International Journal of Production Research, 59(7), 2055–
2078.
Jaziri, D. (2019). The advent of customer experiential knowledge
management approach (CEKM): The integration of offline &
online experiential knowledge. Journal of Business Research,
94, 241–256.
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3938820
Page 12
14
Hannes Thees, Elina Störmann, Franziska Thiele & Natalie Olbrich
Kelle, U. (2005). Sociological Explanations between Micro and
Macro and the Integration of Qualitative and Quantitative
Methods.
Historical
Social
Research/Historische
Sozialforschung, 95–117.
Komodromos, I. (2019). New generation of consumers in the
tourism industry: Secondary Research. International Journal of
Entrepreneurship and Innovative Competitiveness – IJEIC,
1(1).
Krakover, S., & Corsale, A. (2021). Sieving tourism destinations:
Decision-making processes and destination choice
implications. Journal of Tourism, Heritage & Services
Marketing, 7(1), 33–43.
Lane, M. (2007). The Visitor Journey: the new road to success.
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, 19(3), 248–254.
Matarazzo, M., Penco, L., Profumo, G., & Quaglia, R. (2021).
Digital transformation and customer value creation in Made in
Italy SMEs: A dynamic capabilities perspective. Journal of
Business Research, 123, 642–656.
McDonald, D., Bammer, G., & Deane, P. (2009). Research
Integration Using Dialogue Methods. ANU Press.
Minghetti, V., & Buhalis, D. (2010). Digital Divide in Tourism.
Journal of Travel Research, 49(3), 267–281.
Mombeuil, C., & Fotiadis, A. K. (2017). Assessing the effect of
customer perceptions of corporate social responsibility on
customer trust within a low cultural trust context. Social
Responsibility Journal, 13(4), 698-713.
Nanchen, B., Bovier, A., Golay, B., Salamin, J., & Fragnière, E.
(2021). Improving the Orchestration Resilience of a Smart
Integrated Tourism Destination – A Case Study in the Swiss
Alps. Die Unternehmung, 75(1), 24–42.
Nechoud, L., Ghidouche, F., & Seraphin, H. (2021). The influence
of eWOM credibility on visit intention: An integrative
moderated mediation model. Journal of Tourism, Heritage &
Services Marketing, 7(1), 54–63.
Neuburger, L., Beck, J., & Egger, R. (2019). The ‘Phygital’tourist
experience: The use of augmented and virtual reality in
destination marketing. In M. A. Camilleri (Ed.), Tourism
planning and destination marketing (pp. 183–202). Emerald
Publishing.
Neuhofer, B., Buhalis, D., & Ladkin, A. (2014). A Typology of
Technology-Enhanced Tourism Experiences. International
Journal of Tourism Research, 16(4), 340–350.
Opute, A. P., Irene, B. O., & Iwu, C. G. (2020). Tourism Service
and Digital Technologies: A Value Creation Perspective.
African Journal of Hospitality, Tourism and Leisure, 9(2), 1–
18.
Ørngreen, R., & Levinsen, K. (2017). Workshops as a Research
Methodology. The Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 15(1),
70–81.
Pelletier, C., & Cloutier, L. M. (2019). Conceptualising digital
transformation in SMEs: an ecosystemic perspective. Journal
of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 26(6/7), 855–
876.
Pencarelli, T. (2020). The digital revolution in the travel and tourism
industry. Information Technology & Tourism, 22(3), 455–476.
Pesonen, J. (2020). Management and Leadership for Digital
Transformation in Tourism. In Z. Xiang, M. Fuchs, U. Gretzel,
& W. Höpken (Eds.), Handbook of e-Tourism (pp. 1–34).
Springer International Publishing.
Phocuswright (2018). Tourism in Germany 2030 - Executive
Summary.
Pohjola, T., Lemmetyinen, A., & Dimitrovski, D. (2020). Value Co-
creation in Dynamic Networks and E-Tourism. In Z. Xiang, M.
Fuchs, U. Gretzel, & W. Höpken (Eds.), Handbook of e-
Tourism (pp. 1–23). Springer International Publishing.
Porter, M. E. (2000). Location, Competition, and Economic
Development: Local Clusters in a Global Economy. Economic
Development Quarterly, 14(1), 15–34.
Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004). Co-creation
experiences: The next practice in value creation. Journal of
Interactive Marketing, 18(3), 5–14.
Reichstein, C., & Härting, R.‑C. (2018). Potentials of changing
customer needs in a digital world – a conceptual model and
recommendations for action in tourism. Procedia Computer
Science, 126, 1484–1494.
Rusu, V., Rusu, C., Botella, F., Quiñones, D., Bascur, C., & Rusu,
V. Z. (2020). Customer eXperience: A Bridge Between Service
Science and Human-Computer Interaction. In T. Ahram, W.
Karwowski, S. Pickl, & R. Taiar (Eds.), Advances in Intelligent
Systems and Computing. Human Systems Engineering and
Design II (Vol. 1026, pp. 385–390). Springer International
Publishing.
Santarsiero, F., Lerro, A., Carlucci, D., & Schiuma, G. (2021).
Modelling and managing innovation lab as catalyst of digital
transformation: theoretical and empirical evidence. Measuring
Business Excellence, Article ahead-of-print. Advance online
publication.
Schmidt-Rauch, S., & Schwabe, G. (2014). Designing for mobile
value co-creation—the case of travel counselling. Electronic
Markets, 24(1), 5–17.
Shafiee, S., Rajabzadeh Ghatari, A., Hasanzadeh, A., & Jahanyan,
S. (2021). Smart tourism destinations: A systematic review.
Tourism Review, 76(3), 505–528.
Sigala, M., Christou, E., & Baum, T. (2002). The impact of low cost
airlines on business travel. Proceedings of AIEST Conference
(Vol. 44, pp. 313-334), Salvador-Bahia, Brazil.
Sinclair-Maragh, G., & Simpson, S. B. (2021). Heritage tourism and
ethnic identity: A deductive thematic analysis of Jamaican
Maroons. Journal of Tourism, Heritage & Services Marketing,
7(1), 64–75.
Stamboulis, Y., & Skayannis, P. (2003). Innovation strategies and
technology for experience-based tourism. Tourism
Management, 24(1), 35–43.
Stare, M., & Križaj, D. (2018). Crossing the frontiers between touch
points, innovation and experience design in tourism. In A.
Scupola & L. Fuglsang (Eds.), Services, economy and
innovation: 2018: 1. Services, experiences and innovation:
Integrating and extending research (pp. 81–106). Edward Elgar
Publishing.
Stickdorn, M., & Zehrer, A. (2009). Service Design in Tourism :
Customer Experience Driven Destination Management.
Proceedings of the First Nordic Conference on Service Design
and Service Innovation.
Straker, K., Wrigley, C., & Rosemann, M. (2015). Typologies and
touchpoints: designing multi-channel digital strategies. Journal
of Research in Interactive Marketing, 9(2), 110–128.
Styvén, M. E., & Wallström, Å. (2017). Benefits and barriers for the
use of digital channels among small tourism companies.
Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 19(1), 27–
46.
Tanti, A., & Buhalis, D. (2017). The influences and consequences
of being digitally connected and/or disconnected to travellers.
Information Technology & Tourism, 17(1), 121–141.
Thees, H., Erschbamer, G., & Pechlaner, H. (2020). The application
of blockchain in tourism: use cases in the tourism value system.
European Journal of Tourism Research, 26, 2602.
Thees, H., Pechlaner, H., Olbrich, N., & Schuhbert, A. (2020). The
Living Lab as a Tool to Promote Residents’ Participation in
Destination Governance. Sustainability, 12(3), 1120.
Thiele, F., & Dembowski, N. M. (2019). Der tourismuspolitische
Handlungsrahmen urbaner Transformationsprozesse. In T.
Freytag & A. Kagermeier (Eds.), Studien zur Freizeit- und
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3938820
Page 13
SHAPING DIGITALIZATION AMONG GERMAN TOURISM SERVICE PROVIDERS: PROCESSES AND IMPLICATIONS
15
Tourismusforschung: Band 15. Touristifizierung urbaner
Räume (pp. 87–104). Verlag MetaGIS-Systems.
Tussyadiah, I. (2020). A review of research into automation in
tourism: Launching the Annals of Tourism Research Curated
Collection on Artificial Intelligence and Robotics in Tourism.
Annals of Tourism Research, 81, 102883.
Vassiliadis, C., Fotiadis, A., & Piper, L. (2013). Analysis of rural
tourism websites: the case of Central Macedonia.
TOURISMOS: An International Multidisciplinary Refereed
Journal of Tourism, 8(1).
Wang, D., Xiang, Z., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (2014). Adapting to the
mobile world: A model of smartphone use. Annals of Tourism
Research, 48, 11–26.
SUBMITTED: MAR 2021
REVISION SUBMITTED: JUL 2021
ACCEPTED: AUG 2021
REFEREED ANONYMOUSLY
PUBLISHED ONLINE: 18 OCT 2021
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3938820
-