Name : Waworuntu, Evi Christy

Course : Marketing &Digital Marketing

Segmentation of the tourism market for Jakarta:

Classification of foreign visitors' lifestyle typologies (Summary & Opinions)

Summary
Tourism market segmentation is considered a valuable marketing tool in creating an effective
tourism marketing strategy. This study investigated the differences in visitors' lifestyles that would
potentially influence their selection of a holiday destination.
Tourism marketers recognize the importance of understanding tourists' interests for influencing their
decisions about holiday destinations. Each destination attracts certain types of tourists, and destination
marketers must understand their needs and wants in order to manage the destination resources and to
attract the right group of tourists. By classifying foreign visitors into different segments, tourism
stakeholders will be able to develop products and services that effectively appeal to each segment.
Lifestyle reflects the way people live and influences their behavior in consuming products or services,
including choosing vacation destinations and activities. The study provide lists elements that are
included in the major dimensions of lifestyle such as in activities, interests, opinions, and to measure
psychographic lifestyle typologies of foreign visitors who traveled to Jakarta.
This study used convenience purposive techniques in selecting samples. Instrument in the
survey form is used and consisted of two parts. First part for filter questions seven questions of
nationality, age, gender, education level, travel arrangement, travel companions, and previous trips to
Jakarta. Second part is consisted of 38 AIO measurement items covering tourists' activities, including
how they spent their time and money, what their interests were, and what opinions they held about
themselves and their surroundings.
Factor analysis of the data identified six lifestyle factors, which were further analyzed using
cluster analysis that performed with K-means clustering procedure. Six factors had high reliability
coefficients and eigenvalues greater than 1.00; culture adventurous, shophaholic, aspiring indulgers,
conservative, sport adventurous, foodie.
Trials analyzing three, four, and five clusters were conducted, and the results were compared to
identify the most appropriate number of clusters. Based on the results of the analyses for three to five
clusters, the four cluster solution appeared to be the most appropriate in terms of cluster
interpretation, meaningfulness, and size.
The cluster analysis revealed four types of foreign visitors:
1. Culture interest shopaholic
2. Sporty culture explorer
3. Aspiring vacationer
4. Want-everything vacationer.
Respondents were clasified into these clusters and discriminant analysis was performed to validate the
result of the cluster analysis. Three canonical discriminant functions were calculated and found to be
statistically significant. In total, 90.8% of the 393 grouped cases were correctly classified, which
indicated a high accuracy rate and suggested that the four clusters were satisfactorily classified.
Significant differences were found between the four groups in terms of age, race, employment status,
number of previous trips to Jakarta, and travel companion.
‘Culture adventurous’ and ‘shopaholic’ factors were important in the first cluster. ‘Culture
adventurous’, ‘foodie’, and ‘sport adventurous’ factors were important in the second cluster. ‘Aspiring
indulger’ and ‘foodie’ factors were important in the third cluster. The fourth cluster was the largest
segment, and all six factors were important in it.
Opinion
This study provided interesting results about each clusters. I am interested in the result of the
Culture Interest Shopaholic. This study stated that this segment consisted of shopping enthusiasts that
like to spend time shopping. But the mean result on the cluster analysis table for Shopaholic variable is
only 4.05 out of 7. On the likert scale that the study used, 4 stands for Neutral. Besides mean, I think the
researcher could also put the standard deviation to see how dispersed the data is in relation to the
mean. This could help to deep interpert the data if Shopaholic standard deviation is spread widely or not
and so to identify do the data contain respondents that scaled Disagree to Strongly Disagree to the
Shopaholic statements. If so, were they still clustered as Culture Interest Shopaholic? I think the mean
value would switch to a higher value if the data that are not actually in this cluster are executed or
replaced with the true data for the cluster. Because Neutral (mean value) in shopaholic could not
literally classified as an important factor for Culture Interest Shopaholic though this paper stated so in
page 35. I also find out based on the mean value, that for respondent in this cluster, besides culture
advneturous, the variable of aspiring indulgers and foodie come before shopaholic. It is quite
intereseting. I think it is better to name this segment as Culture Interest only, where the shopaholic is
also a variable that they would be considered of while travel, but not really as a dominant variable.

I also don’t really feel comfortable about the layout of the table 2 which is the table of
Demographic profile of respondents. The spaces between the items of Employement Status and
Purposes of the trip are not consistent. Perhaps the researcher meant to seperate the dominant items
or else but i was misunderstood it as a break line to the next demographic title. The tables should be
presented carefully to minimize any misleading and to make it easy to understand by the readers.