~ i ~ MERC Global’s International Journal of Management ISSN 2321 – 7278 (Print) and ISSN 2321 – 7286 (Online) Volume 1, Issue 1, July – 2013 Management Education & Research Consortium Global (MERC Global) Yadav Nagar, Kusmara, Tah.- Bhongon, Dist.- Mainpuri, Uttar Pradesh, Pin: 206303, India Contact: +919604136798 / +919561346798, Email: mercglobal@rediffmail.com and info@mercglobal.org Web: www.mercglobal.org MERC Global’s International Journal of Management ~ ii ~ AIM & SCOPE MERC Global’s International Journal of Management (MERC Global’s IJM) is an international peer-reviewed, open access quarterly journal of management science, being brought out with a view to facilitating effective dissemination of the latest thinking and research with respect to various management issues and problem solving methodology relevant for practicing executives as well as for academicians and researchers working in the field of management around the globe. MERC Global’s IJM publishes articles, research papers, abstracts of doctoral dissertations, book reviews, case studies, short communications and bibliography that are interdisciplinary in nature as well as those within the major disciplines, including: marketing, OB/HR, entrepreneurship, production, operations, accounting, finance, business economics, international business, information technology management, social sector management, public sector management, healthcare management, management strategy, research methods, and so forth. PERIODICITY MERC Global’s International Journal of Management is a quarterly journal published in the month of January, April, July and October each year. PUBLISHING AGREEMENT Publication will be based on the following terms of the publishing agreement- The author(s) will contribute ₹ 1000 (only Indian authors) / $ 20 (non Indian authors) per author to get the online publication of manuscripts. The author(s) may order printed copy of journals at just printing cost. Members of MERC Global will get the publication of work free of cost. Copyright will be attributed to the author(s). The author(s) assure the MERC Global (as a publisher) that the material contained in the paper is not defamatory, unlawful, obscene, invasive of another person's privacy, hateful, racially or ethnically objectionable, abusive, threatening, and harmful or in contempt of court. The author(s) assure the MERC Global that the paper presented is based entirely on original material, that it does not infringe anybody else's copyright. In the case of copyright material, such as the use of quotes or images beyond what is legally considered 'fair use', the author(s) will undertake to arrange, and if necessary to pay for, permissions, and retain documentation proving that, these permissions have been secured. The author(s) agree to indemnify the MERC Global against any claims because of breech of the copyright of others. PUBLICATION ETHICS The MERC Global is committed to support and maintain the highest standards of publication ethics for its journals. Author(s) submitting manuscript(s) / works to the MERC Global for publication will be abide by the terms of publication agreement. The MERC Global is also committed to maintaining rigorous and fair double-blind peer-review process. Any departures from the defined rules should be brought into the notice of the Editors-in-Chief, who is unequivocally committed to MERC Global’s International Journal of Management ~ iii ~ providing swift resolutions to any of such a type of issues. In order to support publication ethics, it is important to avoid:  Plagiarism: Authors should not take any idea and work of others without giving them credit, as it is unfair and dishonest. Authors should not copying even a single sentence from someone others' manuscript / work, or even one of their own that has previously been published, without proper citation, as it is considered plagiarism-use their own words instead.  Data fabrication and falsification: Authors should not use made up data. Authors should do the study actually. Authors should not change any of the data of experiment or study, as both of these practices make people distrust.  Redundant publications: Authors should not publish many very similar manuscripts based on the same experiment. It can make readers less likely to pay attention to their manuscripts.  Multiple submissions: Authors should not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time, as it is unethical. It will not only waste the time of editors and peer reviewers but also can damage the reputation of journals if published in more than one. REVIEW PROCESS The MERC Global aims at rapid publication of manuscripts while maintaining rigorous review process, each manuscript will be primarily examined by the executive editor, and then forwarded for two blind peer reviews by two individual reviewers. The research paper shall be published subject to recommendation of reviewers. The review process may take up to a week to one month (maximum). The final decision on acceptance of the paper is with the editors/editorial board. Selected papers will be put in queue for publication. The author's shall be informed about the selection/rejection of the manuscript by email only. However, the journal shall publish the manuscript of the authors completing the formalities in due time mentioned in the selection letter. The rejected papers shall not be returned. In case of acceptance of the article and completion of publication formalities by the author, the journal reserves the right of making amendments in the final draft of the research paper to fit the journal's requirement. DISCLAIMER The accountability of the matter articulated in MERC Global's IJM is entirely of the author(s) concerned. The opinion expressed in the research papers/articles in this journal does not essentially correspond to the views of the publisher/editors. The publisher/editors of this journal is not liable for errors or any consequences arising from the use of information contained in it. INDEXING & LISTING Research Bible, DRJI, JOUR Information, Scholory Open Access, sciencecentral.com, Academy of Management, Jayde, Academic Resources, Scribd, YUDU Library, Follow Science, pubzone, PhilPapers, Ebookbrowse, Academia.edu, Issuu, I-Science, viesearch, iseek, Docstoc, SlideShare, PDFCast.org, slide boom, H-Net, CFP (The University of Pennsylvania), The CFP List, CPF World, Eventbrite, WikiCFP, Proroch Call for Papers, etc. MERC Global’s International Journal of Management ~ iv ~ EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Atul Kumar President, MERC Global, India EDITOR Dr. Venkat Ram Raj Thumiki Assistant Professor (Department of Business), Modern College of Business & Science, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman EXECUTIVE EDITOR Dr. Vinaydeep Brar Assistant Professor, Indira School of Business Studies, India GUEST EDITOR Dr. Haitham Nobanee Assistant Professor, Faculty of Business Administration, Abu Dhabi University, UAE ASSOCIATE EDITORS Shekhar Verma Assistant Professor, Department of Management, SCOE, India Arun Kumar Deshmukh Research Scholar (Ph.D.), FMS, Banaras Hindu University, India ADVISORY BOARD CHAIRPERSON (2013-14) Dr. Tetsuji Yamada Chair and Professor (Health Economics), Department of Economics, Center for Children and Childhood Studies, Rutgers University, The State University of New Jersey, Camden, USA MEMBERS Dr. Winston Jacob MBE National President, Global University for Life Long Learning (USA) Sam Choon Yin Head, School of Business and Communications, PSB Academy, Singapore Dr. Satish C. Sharma CMD & Professor of Management, Maharaja Group of Colleges, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India Dr. Surender Singh Narta Professor & Director, University College of Business Studies, Himachal Pradesh University, Shimla, India Dr. Asim Kumar Sen Principal, St. Francis Institute of Technology, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India Dr. R. Gopal Director, Dean & Head, Department of Business Management, Padmashree Dr. D. Y. Patil University, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India Dr. Shivakumar R. Sharma Ex-Dean, Babu Banarasi Das Group of Educational Institutions, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India Prof. (Dr.) Eric Van Genderen Professor & Associate Dean, Institute of Management Technology, Dubai, United Arab Emirates Dr. Rajvir Yadav Professor & Head (Farm Machinery & Power), Junagadh Agricultural University, Junagadh, Gujarat, India Prof. R. K. Ojikutu Professor, Department of Actuarial Science & Insurance, Faculty of Business Administration, University of Lagos, Lagos, Nigeria Enrico Ivaldi, Professor, Department of Economics, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy Dr. Anirudh Pandey Distinguished Independent Professional Psychologist, HR Consultant & Visiting Professor, Lucknow, UP, India Dr. Rohit Vishal Kumar Associate Professor, Department of Marketing Management, Xavier Institute of Social Service, Ranchi, Jharkhand, India Dr. Ruth Wolf Lecturer, Interdisciplinary Department of Social Sciences & Economics, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel Dr. Christopher Raymond Lecturer (Global Business), Khon Kaen University International College, Khon Kaen, Thailand Hardeep Singh Training and Placement Officer, Ferozepur College of Engineering & Technology, Ferozepur, Punjab, India Shreyas Srivatsan Manager (Organization & Dealer Development), Tata Motors Limited, South Regional Office, Bangalore, India MERC Global’s International Journal of Management ~ v ~ EDITORIAL BOARD Jose G. Vargas-Hernandez, Research professor, University Center for Economic and Managerial Sciences, University of Guadalajara, Jalisco C.P., Mexico Prof. (Dr.) P. R. Bhatt Professor, Indian Institute of Management (IIM), Kozhikode, Calicut, India. Visiting Professor, Othman Yeop Abdulla Gradduate Scool of Business, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Sintok, Malaysia Dr. Pinaki Ranjan Bhattacharyya Professor & Dean (Academics), Doon Business School, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India Dr. Jagathy Raj V. P. Professor, School of Management Studies, Cochin University of Science and Technology, Kochi, Kerala, India Dr. Suresh Chandra Bihari Professor in Banking & Finance, IBS Hyderabad (Deemed University), Hyderabad, (A. P.), India Dr. Jashim Uddin Ahmed Associate Prof. & Director of BBA Program, School of Business, North South University, Bashundhara R/A, Dhaka, Bangladesh Dr. Devendra Prasad Pandey Reader, Faculty of Rural Development & Business Mgt. Mahatma Gandhi Chitrakoot Gramodaya University, Chitrakoot, Satna, Madhya Pradesh Dr. R. Azhagaiah Associate Professor, K. M. Centre for Post Graduate Studies, Pondicherry Central University, Puducherry, India Dr. Naila Aaijaz Associate Professor, University Malaysia Kelantan, Kelantan, Malaysia Dr. Neeraj Kaushik Associate Professor, The Technological Institute of Textile & Sciences, Bhiwani, Haryana, India Dr. Ekta. S. Sharma Assistant Professor & Head (MBA Programme), AM School of Management, Ahmedabad University, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India Dr. Md. Hassan Jafri Assistant Professor, Gaeddu College of Business Studies, Royal University of Bhutan, Gedu, Bhutan Dr. Meenakshi Gupta Assistant Professor, School of Business Economics, Shri Mata Vaishno Devi University, Katra, Jammu & Kashmir, India Dr. Sanjay Manocha Assistant Professor, Institute of Management and Research, Bharati Vidyapeeth University, New Delhi, India Dr. Sheetal Mundra Assistant Professor, Institute of Management, JK Lakshmipath University, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India Dr. Nidhi Kesari Assistant Professor, Department of Commerce, Acharya Narendra Dev College, University of Delhi, Delhi, India Dr. Muhammad Sabbir Rahman Senior Lecturer & Coordinator MBA, Graduate School of Management, Multimedia University, Cyberjaya, Malaysia F. F. Olowokudejo Lecturer, Department of Actuarial Science & Insurance, Faculty of Business Administration, University of Lagos, Akoka, Lagos, Nigeria Zaherawati Zakaria Senior Lecturer, Department of Administrative Science & Policy Studies, Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM) Kedah, Kedah, Malaysia Robert Nzaro Lecturer & Acting Chairperson, Department of Banking and Finance, Bindura University of Science Education, Bindura, Zimbabwe Mujtaba M. Momin Faculty Member (Business Administration), Salman Bin Abdul Aziz University, Wadi Al Dawaser Campus, Riyadh Region, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia M. A. Azouzi Assistant Teacher, The Higher Institute of Applied Studies in Humanities From Sbeïtla, University of Kairouan, Sbeitla, Tunisia PUBLISHED & PRINTED BY Management Education & Research Consortium Global (MERC Global) Yadav Nagar, Kusmara, Tah.- Bhongon, Dist.- Mainpuri, Uttar Pradesh, Pin: 206303, India Contact: +919604136798 / +919561346798, Email: mercglobal@rediffmail.com and info@mercglobal.org Web: www.mercglobal.org MERC Global’s International Journal of Management ~ vi ~ ISSN 2321 – 7278 (Print) and ISSN 2321 – 7286 (Online) Volume 1, Issue 1, July – 2013 Table of Contents Students' Perception About Management Education in India and USA Bhavna R. Shetty Rajashree Gujarath 01-14 Socioeconomic Impact of Employment Generation Program on Poor Urban Women Sangita Kamdar 15-35 Socioeconomic Status of Scheduled Tribes D. Pulla Rao 36-50 CONQUAS Systems for High Quality Project Management Amit Kamath R. Jayaraman 51-67 Gap Analysis of Stakeholders' Perception in Tourism Industry Rajashri Ramesh Chavan Sarang Shankar Bhola 68-77 Buying Practices and Consumer Rights Awareness Amongst Management Students Manoj S. Kulkarni M. B. Mehta 78-85 MERC Global’s International Journal of Management, Vol. I, Issue I: July - 2013 ~ 68 ~ Gap Analysis of Stakeholders’ Perception in Tourism Industry Rajashri Ramesh Chavan 1 and Sarang Shankar Bhola 2 1 Assistant Professor, Karmaveer Bhaurao Patil Institute of Management Studies and Research, Varye, Satara, Maharashtra, India. 2 Associate Professor, Karmaveer Bhaurao Patil Institute of Management Studies and Research, Varye, Satara, Maharashtra, India. ABSTRACT The paper mainly focused to determine the stakeholder profile and establish the perception gap between tourist and service providers mainly hoteliers and tour operators. A research framework is constructed and tested using data produced by three independent surveys of tourists and tourism service providers viz. hoteliers and tour operators from the 10-tourist sites viz. Aundh, Sajjangarh, Kas, Thoseghar, Ajinkyatara, Mahabaleshwar, Panchgani, Pratapgarh, Wai and Koyna of Satara district. The study concluded that there is a difference of opinion amongst stakeholders in case of satisfaction and importance of those 33 available tourist services and amenities in the district. KEYWORDS Services, Perception, Gap Analysis, Tourism Industry, Maharashtra INTRODUCTION Satara district of Maharashtra State is an upcoming tourist destination surrounded by natural scenic beauty. The district comes into limelight due to the recognition of Kas Plateau in world heritage site. The Satara has a rich Maratha history. Two hill stations of Maharashtra are in Satara district. It observed that flow to tourist surrounding of Satara prefer for weekend touring. The flow of tourist arrival has risen. Equally, worth seeing tourism products are available in the district. To develop Satara as an all-round tourist destination foremost thing is to develop basic infrastructure. The government is putting their efforts for the development of basic infrastructure. The existing tourist services and amenities need to check to attract and satisfy the arriving tourist as well as to understand the perception of tourist and tourism service providers. The need arises to understand the perceptual gap between them. Therefore, the main objective of this study is the investigation of the perceptual gap between the tourist who visited destinations of Satara district and tourism service providers‟ estimation. Destination competitiveness can be improved with marketing tool a gap analysis. This paper consists of a brief review of researches; methodology adopted for this study, results & Gap Analysis of Stakeholders’ Perception in Tourism Industry Chavan & Bhola ~ 69 ~ discussion, which consists of the demographic profile of stakeholders, tabular presentation of the satisfaction level of stakeholders with its interpretation, tabulation of perception of stakeholders on importance towards the tourist services and amenities available in Satara, and hypothesis testing followed by conclusions. REVIEW OF LITERATURE There are different parameters to understand the perception gap between stakeholders of the tourism industry. To identify these parameters, we reviewed some related journals and notices in the following manner. Narayana et al. (2009) persistent to identify dimensions of service quality and their corresponding measurement variables in the tourism industry by focusing on India, as South Asian destination and they used 10 dimensions viz. information, hospitality, core-tourism experience, value for money, hygiene, fairness of price, amenities, logistics, food and security are used to measure the perception of the tourist regarding their expectation about the destination and the performance of the destination to measure the gap between expectation and performance to determine the satisfaction that results to service quality. These dimensions can also used to quantify the perception of the service provider (i.e. tour operators, hoteliers, destination managers or officials in the tourist department of the country) about the expectation of tourist and how the tourist perceived performance of destination measured to compare the input on customer‟s own perception will highlight the gap in service providers‟ perception. Lopez-Toroa et al. (2010) studied existing perceptions on the quality of Nerja as a tourist destination by using a measurement tool to define and quantify perceived quality levels and mainly focused to identify the factors and dimensions of the caliber of a tourist destination and their importance from the tourist‟s point of view. The results of their study indicate that the most valued aspects when describing the advantages of a tourist destination was the quality offered by hotel services, which coincides with the highest rating obtained. Zouni, and Kouremenos (2008) describes the gap analysis an effective marketing tool for a better understanding of the customer‟s perspective and found that there were three areas of over perception, first attraction, prompt service delivery by personnel, food variety, competitive price, tourism trade, product assortment, and shop personnel friendliness lower than providers expected. Second, tourism service providers overestimate satisfied with the tourism trade of the destination. Third, suppliers overestimate most aspects of tourist‟s attitudes towards the destination and residents, as they rate them above expressed by tourists themselves by service suppliers. MERC Global’s International Journal of Management, Vol. I, Issue I: July - 2013 ~ 70 ~ After packing, the revaluation of some relevant literature, we found that researchers had conducted research at popular tourist destination, which are already well developed. However, there is a gap that no one has gone to check out the gap analysis on upcoming tourist destination of Satara district for tourism services and opportunities with the intention to develop basic infrastructure at initial stage. Here, we want to bridge the gap with this theme. Satara is being a district and currently is emerging as a tourist destination for the vicinity of tourists these parameters (mentioned in the review) do not suitable to work out for the study of the district. The foremost thing to develop Satara as a tourist destination, basic infrastructure and tourist amenities must be usable. Therefore, we selected 33 tourist services and amenities, which were compiled under nine heads, viz. „Air Connectivity‟, „Rail Connectivity‟, „Road Connectivity‟, „Civic Administration‟, „Traffic and Transport Management‟, „Tourist Facilities‟, „Taxes/Permits‟, „Maintenance and Management of Tourist Attraction‟ and „Other Services‟ from Ministry of Tourism, Government of India, 2010 Report of Marketing Research to measure the perception gap between stakeholders of the tourism industry with the intention that prevention is better than cure. METHODOLOGY This study focuses to determine the perception gap between tourist and service providers i.e. hoteliers and tour operators in case of satisfaction and importance of tourist services and amenities. The methodology adopted to suffice the objectives are 3 independent schedules were carried out and took purposive random samples of 326 tourists at 10 different tourist locations, 40 hoteliers and 10 tour operators. Schedule consist 1 st part related to personal data and 2 nd part highlights the perception on satisfaction level and importance level with regards to 33 items which summarized the tourist services and amenities. Responses regarding the perception have been taken on five-point Likert scale in order to measure the perception level. Data analysed with descriptive statistical tools and inferential tools i.e. Spearman‟s rank correlation coefficient and one sample „t‟ test. Hypothesis H0: There is no perceptual difference between tourist and service provider (hoteliers and tour operators) towards the tourist services and amenities. RESULTS & DISCUSSION Demographic Profile of Stakeholders Tourists flow is from all over the Maharashtra. The gender ratio is equally beneficial. Budget hotels are more preferred to stay rather than star hotel. Tourist tends to visit destinations Gap Analysis of Stakeholders’ Perception in Tourism Industry Chavan & Bhola ~ 71 ~ within the vicinity of town to celebrate weekends. Entertainment and shopping is lesser preferred by tourists. Food and drinks, accommodation, transport, information material and packaged tours are perceived to be fair. Hotels of all categories are found in Satara i.e. resorts, star graded and downtown. 60 % of the Resorts were established during 1980-2000. 50% of the star graded hotels were established prior to 1970 and 50% after 2000. 59.09% Downtown hotels were built after 2000 and other category hotels were (88.89%) established after 2000. The majority of hotels i.e. 75.86% serves both vegetarian and non-vegetarian food and 24.14% are pure vegetarian. Most of the tour-operating organization i.e. 90% is proprietary. Out of them 66.67% organization established prior to 2005 and the rest after 2005. A few tour operators from Mahabaleshwar, Kolhapur, and Mumbai arrange package tours of Satara. 60% of sample tour operators have handled more than 1000 tourists each in a year. Satisfaction Level of Stakeholders Table 1 presents the responses regarding the satisfaction of tourists, hoteliers, and tour operators‟ about services and amenities in Satara. Table 1 depicts stakeholder satisfaction level towards 33 tourist services and amenities. Tourists are strongly satisfied with the promptness of the ticketing window of the monuments/tourist attraction, telephone/mobile services, conservation of heritage sites and behaviour of service personnel at wayside restaurants and Dhabas. Whereas, hoteliers are strongly satisfied with the telephone and mobile services, hygiene in wayside restaurants and Dhabas, availability of commercial transportation and the behaviour of the drivers of commercial transportation. Tour operators are strongly satisfied with the availability of hotels, the availability of commercial transportation, behaviour of commercial transportation and mobile or telephone services since the mean score of these items is more than 3. However, tourists are strongly dissatisfied with the air and rail connectivity, public utilities at the tourist attraction and levels of road taxes on vehicles. Whereas, hoteliers are dissatisfied with air and rail connectivity, public utilities and parking facility at the tourist attraction and tour operators are with the air connectivity, public utilities at the tourist attraction, sewage and drainage system, condition of city roads and traffic management since the mean score of these items is less than 3. MERC Global’s International Journal of Management, Vol. I, Issue I: July - 2013 ~ 72 ~ Table: 1 Satisfaction of Tourism Stakeholders towards the Tourist Services and Amenities Tourist Service and Amenities Tourists’ Satisfaction Hoteliers’ Satisfaction Tour Operators’ Satisfaction Mean Rank S.D. Mean Rank S.D. Mean Rank S.D. Air Connectivity Status 1.29 33 0.49 1.17 33 0.38 1.71 33 1.11 Rail Connectivity Status 1.96 32 0.76 2.20 32 0.91 2.90 15 0.99 Quality of the Roads 3.17 16 0.95 2.90 25 1.08 3.00 11 0.94 Quality of Way Side Amenities Available on This Road 3.30 14 0.80 3.40 16 0.98 2.80 18 1.40 Public Conveniences Along Roads/Streets 3.02 23 0.96 3.13 22 1.18 2.60 22 1.35 Sewage and Drainage System 3.11 20 0.94 3.00 24 1.13 2.11 31 0.78 Garbage Disposal 3.16 17 0.85 3.10 23 1.12 2.30 28 1.06 Condition of City Roads 2.79 29 1.09 2.90 25 1.13 2.20 29 1.14 Drinking Water Supply 3.43 11 0.81 3.67 12 0.77 2.80 18 1.14 Condition of Street Lighting 3.40 12 0.86 3.40 16 1.01 2.90 15 1.20 Traffic Management 2.92 28 1.12 2.90 25 1.30 2.20 29 0.92 Condition of Traffic or Transport Signage 3.10 21 1.02 3.73 11 0.82 3.00 11 1.15 Availability of Commercial Transportations 3.52 10 0.83 4.13 2 0.52 3.90 2 0.74 Behaviour of the Drivers of Commercial Transportations 3.75 6 0.71 4.13 2 0.40 3.80 3 0.79 Availability of Authorized Tour Operators 2.99 24 0.87 3.58 13 0.75 3.40 10 0.97 Availability of Hotels 3.55 8 0.90 4.03 4 0.53 4.00 1 0.82 Behaviour of Service Staff at the Hotel 3.67 7 0.74 3.83 8 0.90 3.60 6 0.70 Tariff Structure of the Hotel Rooms 3.12 19 0.82 3.38 18 0.78 3.50 7 0.85 Hygiene at Wayside Restaurants and Dhabas 3.16 18 0.97 4.03 4 0.80 3.44 8 0.88 Availability of Petrol Pump 3.09 22 1.11 3.25 20 1.10 3.70 5 0.48 Behaviour of Service Personnel at Wayside Restaurants and Dhabas 3.76 4 0.67 3.75 10 0.49 3.44 8 0.88 Levels of Road Taxes on Vehicles (Tax Rates) 2.78 30 0.94 3.14 21 0.72 2.67 21 1.32 Administration of the Road Taxes 2.99 25 0.95 3.36 19 0.64 2.89 17 1.17 Public Utilities at the Tourist Attraction 2.65 31 1.25 2.24 31 1.15 2.10 32 0.88 General Cleanliness Tourist Attraction and Area Around it 3.25 15 0.97 2.85 28 1.00 2.50 24 0.97 Condition of Signage Within the Tourist Attraction 3.36 13 1.25 3.43 15 0.75 2.60 22 0.97 Parking Facility at the Tourist Attraction 2.95 27 1.24 2.63 30 1.19 2.50 24 0.97 Availability of Trained Tourist Guides 2.98 26 1.10 3.46 14 1.02 2.40 27 1.35 Behaviour of the Guides at the Tourist Attraction 3.53 9 0.75 3.94 7 0.61 3.00 11 1.22 Conservation of Heritage Sites 3.76 3 0.85 2.76 29 1.02 2.50 24 0.97 Promptness at the Ticketing Window of the Monument/Tourist Attraction 4.19 1 0.65 4.00 6 0.55 3.00 11 0.87 Power Supply Situation 3.75 5 0.66 3.78 9 0.77 2.80 18 1.03 Telephone/Mobile Services 3.93 2 0.86 4.43 1 0.55 3.80 3 1.23 (Source: Survey Data) Gap Analysis of Stakeholders’ Perception in Tourism Industry Chavan & Bhola ~ 73 ~ Perception of Stakeholders towards the tourist Services and Amenities available at Satara on importance scale Table: 2 Distribution of importance level among Tourism Stakeholders towards tourist services & amenities Tourist Service and Amenities Tourists’ Importance Hoteliers’ Importance Tour Operators’ Importance Mean Rank S.D. Mean Rank S.D. Mean Rank S.D. Air Connectivity Status 2.83 33 1.30 3.18 33 1.39 2.6 33 1.43 Rail Connectivity Status 3.10 32 1.23 3.53 32 1.13 3.1 32 1.2 Quality of the Roads 4.45 8 0.56 4.40 6 0.55 4.6 3 0.52 Quality of Way Side Amenities Available on This Road 4.29 15 0.68 4.25 19 0.49 4.2 20 0.42 Public Conveniences Along Roads/Streets 4.23 18 0.66 4.33 11 0.47 4.2 20 0.63 Sewage and Drainage System 4.20 24 0.65 4.43 3 0.50 4.3 11 0.48 Garbage Disposal 4.21 19 0.65 4.43 3 0.50 4.3 11 0.67 Condition of City Roads 4.39 13 0.57 4.48 2 0.51 4.6 3 0.7 Drinking Water Supply 4.44 9 0.56 4.43 3 0.50 4.8 1 0.42 Condition of Street Lighting 4.24 7 0.67 4.15 26 0.43 4.2 20 0.63 Traffic Management 4.42 11 0.61 4.25 19 0.49 3.9 30 1.1 Condition of Traffic or Transport Signage 4.47 7 0.58 4.28 17 0.45 4.5 5 0.53 Availability of Commercial Transportations 4.32 14 0.59 4.30 16 0.56 4.2 20 0.42 Behaviour of the Drivers of Commercial Transportations 4.16 26 0.69 4.35 10 0.48 4.5 5 0.53 Availability of Authorized Tour Operators 3.14 31 1.24 4.05 29 0.45 4 29 0.82 Availability of Hotels 4.14 27 0.96 4.38 8 0.49 4.5 5 0.53 Behaviour of Service Staff at the Hotel 4.20 23 0.54 4.33 11 0.47 4.2 20 0.42 Tariff Structure of the Hotel Rooms 4.16 25 0.52 4.21 24 0.52 4.2 20 0.42 Hygiene at Wayside Restaurants and Dhabas 4.26 16 0.52 4.40 6 0.50 4.3 11 0.48 Availability of Petrol Pump 4.20 22 0.54 4.28 17 0.60 4.3 11 0.67 Behaviour of Service Personnel at Wayside Restaurants and Dhabas 4.21 21 0.57 4.15 26 0.43 4.2 20 1.03 Levels of Road Taxes on Vehicles (Tax Rates) 3.97 30 0.64 3.94 31 0.47 4.3 11 0.67 Administration of the Road Taxes 4.04 29 0.57 4.00 30 0.59 4.3 11 0.48 Public Utilities at the Tourist Attraction 4.59 4 0.55 4.33 11 0.47 4.5 5 0.71 General Cleanliness Tourist Attraction and Area Around it 4.60 2 0.57 4.33 11 0.47 4.3 11 0.67 Condition of Signage Within the Tourist Attraction 4.57 6 0.55 4.25 19 0.44 4.2 20 0.63 Parking Facility at the Tourist Attraction 4.58 5 0.56 4.38 8 0.49 4.3 11 0.67 Availability of Trained Tourist Guides 4.21 20 0.91 4.23 23 0.58 4.3 11 0.48 Behaviour of the Guides at the Tourist Attraction 4.09 28 0.77 4.24 22 0.61 4.2 20 0.44 Conservation of Heritage Sites 4.60 2 0.58 4.20 25 0.55 4.5 5 0.53 Promptness at the Ticketing Window of the Monument/Tourist Attraction 4.39 12 0.59 4.11 28 0.52 3.9 30 0.74 Power Supply Situation 4.44 10 0.67 4.33 11 0.47 4.4 10 0.7 Telephone/Mobile Services 4.72 1 0.46 4.58 1 0.50 4.8 1 0.42 (Source: Survey Data) MERC Global’s International Journal of Management, Vol. I, Issue I: July - 2013 ~ 74 ~ Table 2 shows the distribution of importance level towards tourist services and amenities in the view of three-sample unit viz. tourist, hoteliers and tour operators. Table 2 reveals that air and rail connectivity, availability of tour operators as if services are less important in the sight of all the stakeholders. However, some level of road taxes on the vehicles opinion of hoteliers and tourists are the same i.e. least significant. As per tour operators‟ opinion traffic management and promptness at the ticketing window of the monument/tourist attraction are least important. Administration of the road taxes is least important as hotelier‟s opinion. All stakeholders felt telephone and mobile is the most important service. However, preservation of heritage, public utility and general cleanliness at tourist attraction are most important as per tourist opinion. Hoteliers and tour operators felt most important civic amenities viz. sewage and drainage system, garbage disposal, condition of city roads and drinking water supply. Tour operators felt quality of roads is most important for tourism development in Satara. Hypothesis Testing The hypothesis is tested with Spearman‟s rank correlation between perception of stakeholders towards the satisfaction level of tourist services and amenities. Spearman‟s rank correlation coefficient score is 0.358 between tourist and hoteliers, with .041 „P‟ values, which is significant at 0.05 levels. Whereas, Spearman‟s rank correlation coefficient score is 0.294 between hoteliers and tour operator, with 0.000 „P‟ values, which is significant at 0.01 level (2-tailed). However, Spearman‟s rank correlation coefficient score is 0.767 between tourist and tour operators with 0.97 „P‟ value, which is more at 0.05 levels, which is insignificant. Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected with sufficient evidence to understand the perception gap between tourist & hoteliers and hoteliers & tour operators. However, the null hypothesis is bound to be accepted since the evidence to reject is not enough with the perception gap between tourist and tour operators. Thus, perception of tourists and hoteliers has a significant relation whereas the tour operator does not. There is a gap between the perception of tourist and tour operator a service provider and not between the tourist and hoteliers. One sample „t‟ test has been used with a test value „3‟. Table 3, 4, 5 and 6 narrates the „t‟ test. Table 3: One-Sample Statistics Sr. Satisfaction N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean 1 Tourist 33 3.1933 .54809 .09541 2 Hoteliers 33 3.3221 .66781 .11625 3 Tour Operators 33 2.9109 .59167 .10300 Gap Analysis of Stakeholders’ Perception in Tourism Industry Chavan & Bhola ~ 75 ~ Table 4: One-Sample Test Sr. Satisfaction Test Value = 3 t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper 1 Tourist 2.026 32 .051 .19333 -.0010 .3877 2 Hoteliers 2.771 32 .009 .32212 .0853 .5589 3 Tour Operators -.865 32 .393 -.08909 -.2989 .1207 The calculated „t‟ is significant in the case of hoteliers since the „p‟ value is 0.009. The same is insignificant in case of tour operators and the „t‟ is on the border since the „p‟ value is .051 regarding tourist and 0.393 regarding tour operator. Overall satisfaction count dwindles around mid point i.e. test value 3 which is not much significant. Spearman‟s rank correlation was also used to assess the perception of stakeholders towards the importance level of tourist services and amenities. Spearman‟s rank correlation coefficient score is 0.479 and 0.565, 0.642 respectively, with .005, 0.001 and .000 „P‟ value respectively, which is significant at (tourists and hoteliers), (tourist and tour operators) and (hotelier and the tour operator) 0.01 levels (2-tailed). Thus, it showed that there are sufficient grounds to reject null hypothesis i.e. there is no difference in the perception of stakeholders towards the importance level of tourist service and amenities. It implies there is a disruption in the perception of stakeholders. Thus, the alternative hypothesis is accepted. Table 5: One-Sample Test Sr. Importance Test Value = 3 t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper 1 Tourist 16.398 32 .000 1.20788 1.0578 1.3579 2 Hoteliers 26.456 32 .000 1.22758 1.1331 1.3221 3 Tour Operators 16.988 32 .000 1.23401 1.0860 1.3820 The calculated „t‟ is significant in the case of hoteliers and tour operators since the „p‟ value is 0.00. Overall importance count dwindles around point i.e. test value 4 which is significant. Thus with Spearman‟s rank correlation and one sample „t‟ test, hypothesis test is significant, Table 4: One-Sample Statistics Sr. Importance N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean 1 Tourist 33 4.2079 .42315 .07366 2 Hoteliers 33 4.2276 .26655 .04640 3 Tour Operators 33 4.2340 .41730 .07264 MERC Global’s International Journal of Management, Vol. I, Issue I: July - 2013 ~ 76 ~ then it is proved that there are sufficient grounds to reject null hypothesis i.e. there is no difference in the perception of stakeholders (tourist and service providers). The alternative hypothesis is accepted i.e. there is a difference in the perception of stakeholders or there is a gap between the perception of tourist and service providers. CONCLUSION It is concluded from the study that the tourists flow is from Maharashtra with equal gender. Budget hotels are more preferred and tends visit to celebrate weekends. Entertainment and shopping are lesser preferred and are perceived to be fair. Hotels of all categories i.e. resorts, star graded and downtown found in Satara district. Most of them are established during 1980- 2000. Majority serves both vegetarian and non-vegetarian food and few 24.14% are pure vegetarian. Most of the tour operating organizations are proprietary. Few of them arrange package tours of Satara and have handled more than 1000 tourists each in a year. Difference found in the opinion between the perception of tourist and tourist service provider (tour operators and hoteliers) in case of satisfaction level and importance level of tourist service and amenities in Satara district. It is proved that in case of satisfaction level there is no sufficient evidence to reject null hypothesis i.e. there is no difference between the perception of tourist and tour operator. There is enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis i.e. there is no difference between the perception of tourist and hoteliers as well there is no difference between the perception of hoteliers and tour operators. One sample „t‟ test also supports these decisions. In case of the importance of tourist service and amenities, it is shown that there is sufficient grounds to reject null hypothesis i.e. there is no difference between the perception of tourist and service provider (hoteliers and tour operators). This also supported by one sample „t‟ test. Consequently, it found that there is an opening between the perception of tourist and service providers. The finish is a bundle of services and products, and providers of these services and products have conflicting and sometimes incorrect impressions of the views and evaluations of their visitors. The gap analysis used in this field is critical because it can be an extremely useful tool for management to use in identifying service problems or service fail points in the tourism industry in destinations. REFERENCES 1. http://tourism.nic.in/TourismDivision/AboutContent.aspx?Name=Market%20Research %20and%20Statistics&CID=46, (accessed 2 October 2011). 2. http://tourism.nic.in/TourismDivision/AboutContent.aspx?Name=Market%20Research %20and%20Statistics&CID=45, (accessed 5 February 2012). Gap Analysis of Stakeholders’ Perception in Tourism Industry Chavan & Bhola ~ 77 ~ 3. http://www.maharashtra.gov.in/mtourist/MTCAD/Pages/Scheme.aspx, (accessed 4 August 2011). 4. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/14783360903553164 (accessed 2 February 2012). 5. Lopez-Toroa, Alberto A.; Diaz-Munoza Rocıo and Perez-Moreno, Salvador (2010), “An assessment of the quality of a tourist destination: the case of Nerja, Spain”, Total Quality Management, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 269-289. 6. Ministry of Tourism, Govt of India (2012), “Infrastructure Gaps in Tourism Sector at Five Tourist Destinations in India Based on Perception of Tourists”, New Delhi, available at: http://tourism.gov.in/writereaddata/Uploaded/Tender/053120110313488.pdf, (accessed 5 August 2012). 7. Narayana, Bindu; Rajendrana, Chandrasekharan; Saia, L. Prakash and Gopalan, Ram (2009), “Dimeshions of Service quality in tourism-an Indian perspective”, Total Quality Management, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 61-89. 8. Zouni, Georgia and Kouremenos, Athanassios (2008), “Do tourism providers know their visitors? An investigation of tourism experience at a destination”, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 282-297. MERC Global’s International Journal of Management ISSN 2321 – 7278 (Print) and ISSN 2321 – 7286 (Online) ~ a ~ CALL FOR PAPERS Authors are invited to submit articles, research papers, abstract of doctoral dissertations, book reviews, case studies, short communications & bibliographies for MERC Global's International Journal of Management, which is an international peer-reviewed, open access quarterly journal of management science, being brought out with a view to facilitating effective dissemination of the latest thinking and research with regard to various management issues and problem solving methodology relevant for practicing executives as well as for academicians & researchers working in the field of management around the globe. The author(s) can submit the soft copy of manuscript anytime in MS Word format after preparing the same as per our submission guidelines at: editorijm@rediffmail.com SUBMISSION GUIDELINES 1. MERC Global welcomes original manuscripts of researchers from diverse countries, provided they fall within the aims and scope of MERC Global’s IJM. The paper should be as concise as the subject matter and research method permits. 2. The articles, research papers, abstracts of doctoral dissertations, book reviews, case studies, short communications and bibliography should focus on management principles and practices. 3. Soft copies of the paper should be in MS Word 2003 or 2007 format and articles shall be accepted from any country submitted in English language only. 4. The length of the article should be between 2000 and 8000 words, inclusive of tables and figures. Material should be formatted in Times New Roman, font size 12 and single-spaced. 5. Tables and charts should appear at the end of the text indicating the likely place in the text where it is to appear. All tables and charts should be numbered serially. 6. Manuscripts should be submitted as per order: front page, abstract along with key words, introduction, relevant literature review, methodology, results & discussion, conclusion and references. 7. The front page should include the following: (a) The title of the article (b) Name of authors and complete address for communication (c) Name of the corresponding author (d) E-mail address of all authors with contact numbers (e) Acknowledgements (f) Brief biographical sketch of the authors 8. Following the front page, from the second page, start with an abstract of about 200 words exactly conveying the content of the article (i.e. purpose, methodology, major findings, and implications of the research) and key words up to 10. 9. There will be no footnotes and citations may be made within the text. However, a set of references will have to be given at the end alphabetically and so numbered. References to publications must be in Harvard style and carefully checked for completeness, accuracy and consistency. MERC Global’s International Journal of Management ISSN 2321 – 7278 (Print) and ISSN 2321 – 7286 (Online) ~ b ~ 10. References should be cross- referenced in the text by using the author's last name and publication date in the style of (Kay, 2010 for single author; Kay and Jay, 2010 for two authors, and Kay et al., 2010 for multiple authors). 11. List of references should appear on a separate page as per the format indicated below: a) Articles in Journals Shetty, Bhavna R. and Gujarathi, Rajashree (2013), "Students' Perception About Management Education in India and USA", MERC Global's International Journal of Management, Vol. 01, Issue: 01, pp. 01-14. b) Books Pradhan, S. (2009), Retailing Management- Text & Cases, Tata McGraw Hill Publishing Company Ltd., New Delhi, India. c) Chapter in Books Bhattacharya, A. K. (2004), “Corporate Financial Reporting” in Reed and Mukherjee, eds, Corporate Governance, Economic Reforms and Development” pp. 94-115. d) Published Conference Proceedings Kumar, A. (2011), “Ascendancy of Store Image on Customer Behaviour: An Empirical Analysis”, Recent Trends in Business, Management and IT proceedings of the international conference in Pune, India, 2011, pp. 240-246. e) Working Papers Jack, P. (2011), "Reward System: Does it really works", working paper, University Business School, University of Pune, Pune, 28 June. f) Web Sites Kamdar, Sangita (2013), "Socioeconomic Impact of Employment Generation Program on Poor Urban Women", MERC Global's International Journal of Management, Vol. 01, Issue: 01, pp. 15-35, available at: http://www.mercglobal.org/ijm-vol1-issue1-july2013.html (accessed 1 August, 2013). g) Newspaper Articles (Authored) Chawala, P. (2009), "Economic Development", Indian Express, 21 June, pp. 5-9. h) Newspaper Articles (Non-Authored) The Hindu (2010), "Economic Reforms", 2 April, pp. 5. Please mail your contributions to, The Executive Editor of MERC Global’s IJM and send a soft copy to editorijm@rediffmail.com or publication@mercglobal.org with an explicit declaration to the effect that the work is original, has not been published elsewhere and is not being considered by any other journal.. ALL CORRESPONDENCE MAY BE ADDRESSED TO The Executive Editor, MERC Global’s International Journal of Management E-mail: editorijm@rediffmail.com and mercglobal@rediffmail.com URL: http://www.mercglobal.org/merc-globals-international-journal-of-management.html