Читать книгу Tourism Enterprise - David Leslie - Страница 22

The study encompassed a focus on the owners/managers and their background on the basis that the information so gained might illuminate the management of the enterprises as regards EP. Yet, such information can be invaluable in the context of seeking to explain/account for some of the key elements of the study; for example potentially influential factors on why an owner/manager may act in a particular way.

The policies and thus operational practices of any organization are a direct function of the governance, thus of the owners’ values and attitudes whether a public limited company, partnership or sole trader. As such, if the chairman of the company, chief executive officer or the senior partner decides that the enterprise will in future ensure that all employees, irrespective of location will be treated equally as regards terms and conditions, and further that they will all be equitably paid at a higher rate than the average for the region, then every operation within that company follows suit. Equally so if a company decides that supplies of X will always be sourced locally whenever it is possible so to do. This is just as applicable to SMEs. In so far as national and multi-national companies (MNC) are influenced in their practices by the attitudes of their owners so too individual enterprises by their owners. Therefore the study sought to gain a profile of the owners (managers in comparatively few cases) of those enterprises that participated in the extended interviews of 2001 and 2011; an aspect that has hardly gained attention in the published research.

The areas covered not only contribute to the overall picture of the enterprises but also, and more usefully, serve to provide helpful criteria to subsequent analysis and interpretation, especially in the context of their awareness of, and attitudes towards, sustainability issues and EM practices (see Chapter 9). Insights into the background of the owners in the 2001 stage are presented in Table 2.5. Not surprisingly, given the motivational factors previously noted, one in four of these owners moved into the LDNP within the last 10 years. More surprisingly perhaps is the finding that close to one in three owners are comparatively recent entrants into the tourism sector. This factor rather affirms the view that there are few barriers to entry into the business of tourism. Also and potentially evidencing that many persons are new to the tourism sector is the limited membership of professional associations (see Table 2.6). The significance of such memberships lies in the attention to environmental matters by such associations. For example, the Hotel, Catering and Institutional Management Association (HCIMA) (now the Institute of Hospitality, IH) produced a technical brief for their members on environmental issues in 1993 within which it was argued that all hospitality businesses should produce an Environmental Policy Statement as well as promoting EM practices, particularly energy conservation. In 2000, they launched a campaign to reduce energy consumption in hotels by a minimum of 15% over 3 years, which they argued would lead to reduced carbon dioxide emissions of some 40% based on consumption in 2000 (Forte, 2000, p. 18).

Whilst approximately one in four of the 2001 interviewees were members of the IH, this falls to one in ten across the whole sample for 2001 (8% for 2005; 4% in 2011). Conversely, in 2001 few interviewees were members of the Tourism Society compared with 5% overall (3% for 2005; 6% for 2011). Such low membership is understandable in that the owners perhaps do not see themselves as part of the oft cited ‘tourism industry’. This speculation is not so readily argued in the case of managers with career aspirations who might be expected to demonstrate recognition of their commitment through membership of these associations. However, the findings for 2011 certainly indicate that this is not the case (see Table 2.6).

As the WTTC et al. (2002) argued, there is a need for multisector partnerships and effective involvement of all stakeholders in order to achieve sustainable, and economically successful tourism. This is well illustrated by the Lake District’s Tourism & Conservation Partnership (TCP), which well exemplifies how environmental partnerships can be very successful in their aims (see Long and Arnold, 1995) and the benefits attributable to-collaboration and partnerships in the tourism sector (see Bramwell and Lane, 2000). Membership and participation in professional and community groups are all potential steps in initiating the development of partnerships of one form or another. Involvement in such groups and also membership of green organizations are also potential indicators of environmental behaviours as well as influences on the management practices of the enterprise. Thus membership of such organizations was investigated (see Table 2.6). All the categories of supply in the LDNP stage are included here, as well as the overall figures for 2006 and 2011. The reason for this is to provide for comparative analysis across the spectrum of enterprises. Though this is just the 2001 stage the data for the different categories of 2006 are similar. Reference to Table 2.6 draws attention to the fact that many of these owners, for whatever reason, recognize a benefit to being a member of their respective Tourist Board (TB). Largely, if not solely, this is accounted for by the fact that if they wish both to gain accredited grading status of their operation and be promoted by the TB they must take up membership.

Table 2.5. Profile of the LDNP interviewees (audits).

Category	Response (%)
Where is proprietor originally from: i.e. home
Local	6
Not local but within Cumbria	8
NW England	36
NE England	6
Mid-England	12
SW England	12
SE England	10
If not originally from LDNP when did they move into LDNP?
1970s	22
1980s	22
1990s	26
Period of time involved in the hospitality sector [years]
5 or less	32
6–10	8
11–15	12
16–20	6
21 +	36
Period of time in current position [years]
1–3	40
4–7	20
8–10	4
11–14	6
15–20	14
21+	10
Membership of professional bodies
HCIMA (now Institute of Hospitality (IH))	28
British Hospitality Association	6
Licensed Victuallers Association	4
Tourism Society	2

Further analysis of the data across the categories opens up wide scope for discussion; too much for here given the constraints of space. Even so, a number of such differences are highlighted as follows:

Table 2.6. Membership of a cross section of organizations.

^aSA= Serviced accommodation; R= Restaurants; I= Inns; A= Attractions; C= Caravan and camping sites; S= Self-catering.

^bFringe study – 46% of serviced accommodation enterprises were members of the CTB.

• Membership of green organizations is most apparent among the owners of self-catering operations.

• The urban enterprises are comparatively the least likely (except for restaurants) to be members of a TB and most likely (except for Caravan/Camping operations) to be involved in a local community group.

• Attractions are the most likely to be members of a Tourism Forum.

• Given the rural locality of 2001 and 2005 one might anticipate higher memberships of green organizations. However this clearly is not so and similar to Carlsen et al.’s (2001) study. This is perhaps especially notable given that within their sample there were a number of wildlife/nature-based enterprises and one might readily speculate that they would be members of green groups.

Overall, in general the owners/managers of these tourism enterprises are not members of professional associations (with the exception of a TB), and perhaps one in three is involved in a business forum. One might speculate with some confidence that the owners do not see themselves for the most part as being part of the ‘tourism industry’, and in many cases perhaps not really a part of the business community.

Further of note is the low membership of green organizations which might be considered surprising given that for many owners in rural areas the attractiveness of the location was identified as a primary reason for their enterprise. Thus one might expect higher involvement in such organizations. However, the low level of memberships was also identified by Gaunt (2004) in her study into Scottish based TOs, which found that 17% were members of a green organization (similarly Erdogan and Baris, 2006) though their study was wholly based on larger hotels i.e. 40 bedroom plus). Again perhaps such a low figure is surprising given that many of the operations of these TOs involve tours around Scotland and walking or cycling tours. In contrast Carlsen et al.’s (2001) study into family run tourism enterprises in Australia found that 39% were members of a conservation organization and did identify a correlation between such membership and the introduction of EM practices.