1. African Journal of Business Management Vol. 5(2), pp. 464-480, 18 January, 2011
Available online at http://www.academicjournals.org/AJBM
ISSN 1993-8233 ©2011 Academic Journals
Full Length Research Paper
Orchestrating innovation networks in e-tourism: A case
study
Beatriz Plaza*, Catalina Galvez-Galvez and Ana Gonzalez-Flores
Department of Applied Economics, Faculty of Economics, University of the Basque Country, Avda Lehendakari Agirre
83, 48015 Bilbao, Spain.
Accepted 8 October, 2010
In the traditional perspective of industrial policy, technology becomes the main driver for economic
innovation. Innovation-Networks literature, while rich in descriptions of innovation dynamics and
typologies, is mostly technology focused. A recent and growing literature sees how non-technological
innovations are becoming crucial (for instance, learning by doing) and the tourism sector is not an
exception in this regard. Non-technological innovations in services can also arise from investment in
intangible inputs (for example, strategic networking). The aim of this paper is to analyze the innovation
processes in e-Tourism driven by networking processes. It shows that e-Tourism innovation networks,
although composed of micro-firms, can exert international reach, to the extent that intra-network peer
coaching and Knowledge Intensive Business Services (KIBS) play a key role in innovation transfer to
SMEs.
Key words: Innovations networks, SMEs, knowledge transfer, learning processes, R&D management, ICTs, e-
tourism.
INTRODUCTION
The ICTS revolution and technological innovations in becoming one of the main forces steering strategic
e-tourism renewal efforts of tourism-related businesses around the
sector. Of course, not all tourism-related businesses
E-Tourism, or travel technology, is an expression model innovations are ICT driven, even though present
employed to express the application of Information and strategic planning figures to a great extent in ICT-related
Communications Technology (ICT), to the travel, tourism business model innovations. The recipe to success lies in
and hospitality industries. Growth in ICTs encompasses the fast recognition of buyer needs and in supplying
changes in business practices and strategies, as well as prospective clients with wide-ranging, customized and
industry structures. In fact, ICT technologies are up-to-date products and services that suit their wants.
decoupling the tourism value chain. The Internet is Travellers demand websites to be informative and useful,
altering the industry structure (Porter, 2001) by changing interactive and appealing. The advancement in ICT-s has
barriers to entry, minimising switching costs, transforming empowered the present-day tourist who is becoming well-
distribution channels, making possible price transparency informed and is searching for distinctive value for time
and competition and affecting differentiation and cost and money.
structures. In fact, the tourism industry is taking a lead in Buhalis (2008) stated that, “potential tourists have
e-Commerce applications. Business model innovation is become more independent and sophisticated on using a
world. Advances in ICTs have accelerated a recent wide range of tools to arrange for their trips. These
interest in business model innovation in the tourism include reservation systems and online travel agencies
(such as Expedia), search engines and meta-search
engines (such as Google and Kayak, respectively), des-
tination management systems (such as visitbritain.com),
*Corresponding author. E-mail: beatriz.plaza@ehu.es. Tel: +34 social networking and web 2.0 portals (such as Wayn and
946013641. Fax: +34 946017087. Tripadvisor), price comparison sites (such as Kayak or

2. Plaza et al. 465
Kelkoo) as well as individual suppliers and intermediaries beaches and sunny weather, but also by (2) promoting
sites”. Still, the European Commission through its new tourism-related business models that arise as a
Information Society Technologies Advisory Group result of the new ICT-s; and (3) by setting up tourism-
(ISTAG) in relation to strategic trends of European ITC related Innovation systems.
research shows that current research within the domain In this context, there is an urgent need for investment
of communications and information technologies (ICTs) and innovation to support the tourism industry. The
when applied to tourism is complex and extremely difficult Spanish government is implementing a long-standing
and that the improvement made in this field of expertise policy to target the high-end of the market by promoting
is still insufficient (ISTAG, 2009). ICT technologies are innovation. Spanish policy makers have prioritized the
decoupling the tourism, travelling and mobility value tourism sector significantly and the regional authorities
chain. The Internet is changing the industry structure by are not an exception in this regard. Much emphasis has
altering barriers to entry, reducing switching costs, been placed on the importance of public-private
transforming distribution channels, making possible price innovation partnerships as a backbone to this city/
transparency and competition and affecting cost regional growth. The aim of this paper is to investigate
structures. In this context, there is an urgent need for significant patterns of effective innovation within
innovation networking to support the tourism industry. “Knowledge Intensive Services for Private-Public
Thus, to support this fact, this article explores an Innovation Networks in e-Tourism” through a case study:
innovation network in e-Tourism using a case study in CICtourGUNE, a Competence Research Centre for
Spain. In the following paragraphs the reasons why the tourism, set up to foster interaction between the different
tourism sector and Spain have been selected are actors in the Tourism Innovation and (or) e-Travelling
explained in detail. Why the tourism sector? Tourism is innovation field. It currently has 28 partners, which
one of the fastest growing and largest industries include consulting companies, destination management
worldwide. According to the World Tourism Organization partnerships, universities, technology centres, ICT
(UNWTO), in 2009, international tourist arrivals reached technology suppliers, knowledge intensive business
880 million. UNWTO's ‘Tourism 2020 Vision’ forecasts services (KIBS), tourism companies and development
that international arrivals are expected to reach nearly 1.6 agencies. Why CICtourGUNE? Tourism is a particularly
billion by the year 2020 (Figure 1). Furthermore, the complex industry which involves a set of activities aimed
tourist industry has become global, with its major players at attracting visitors to a geographical area, receiving
extending their cooperation to reach local SMEs these visitors and satisfying their demands. It
(management contracts, branding, global reservation encompasses transportation; services in the place of
systems, franchising). Why Spain? The World Tourism origin (travel agencies, tour operators, online information
Organization reports the most visited countries from 2006 services); residential infrastructures (hotels, apartments,
to 2009 by the number of international travellers. The top second homes, camp sites); and services at the place of
visited countries from 2006 to 2009 are France, United destination (banking, accommodation, foodservice,
States and Spain. France continues to lead the ranks in leisure, sports, culture, health care, insurance or
terms of tourist arrivals (with 74.2 million tourists in 2009), security). All these services articulate a highly complex
followed by the USA (54.9 million international visitors) value chain, and it is for this reason that networking
and Spain (52.2 million international tourist arrivals). becomes a critical fundamental of tourism firms aiming to
Worldwide, international visitors declined by 4.3% in maintain and improve their competitive position. It is also
2009. Despite this overall decline, France, the USA, for this reason that CICtourGUNE, an innovation network
Spain, China and Italy retained their positions as the top for tourism, was set up. Centres for the promotion of
5 destinations. innovation in the tourism sector have existed since 2000
In 2001, Spain overtook the US as the second leading in Spain. These include SEGITTUR (State Company for
travel destination in the world. However, 2008 witnessed Tourism Information Management), IBIT (Illes Balears
Spain losing its second place to China and the US, due to Innovation and Technology), TECNOTUR (Technology
its maturing tourist market, fierce competition among the Centre of Tourism, Entertainment and Quality Life
destinations combined with fierce competition among Andalusia), CINNTA (Foundation Centre for Innovation in
tourism service providers, and dramatic changes in Tourism Andalusia) and/or ITH (Instituto Tecnológico
consumer behaviours and technologies. Recent Hotelero in Madrid). Different from these research
technological advances have led to the appearance of centres, CICtourGUNE has appeared as a strategic R&D
new players in the industry; new players in the value network within a sector in which networking and
chain have arisen and strategic alliances have become cooperation among stakeholders has turned into a vital
critical to competition on a global scale. In order to solve feature of sustained and sustainable development. It is
these competitive tensions, Spain is developing its travel for this reason that this work analyses the case of
and tourism industry by (1) diversifying its travel and CICtourGUNE. The aim of this article is to evaluate
tourism industry, which no longer focuses just on sandy CICtourGUNE’s networks and to describe how networks

3. 466 Afr. J. Bus. Manage.
Million
Figure 1. UNWO Tourism Vision 2020 (international arrivals). Source: WTO (2001a; b).
with elements literally outside CICtourGUNE play an activities also include R&D that is not directly related to
active role in the networking process. the development of a specific innovation. An innovative
firm is one that has implemented an innovation during the
period under review (Oslo, 2005).
TOURISM INNOVATION
Table 1 summarizes the principal types of innovation.
The technological innovation vs. the non- The tourism sector encompasses a myriad of non-
technological innovation dilemma technological innovations (for example, marketing
innovations and/or organizational innovations). In fact,
Tourism innovation usually begins when governments tourism firms place more emphasis on non-technological
prioritize the tourism sector significantly, and the country innovations than manufacturing firms. These non-
makes a significant effort to attract tourists through robust technological innovations, however, are hard to measure
destination-marketing campaigns and by ensuring their since innovation statistics are still strongly orientated
attendance at many international tourism fairs (Blanke towards technological innovations. Measurement of
and Chiesa, 2009). In other words, up until now public output, factor and knowledge inputs in tourism is one of
authorities have made huge efforts to strengthen the the key areas where initiatives are needed.
demand side of the equation, whereas the supply side of The tourism innovation agenda for the future requires
the equation has remained untouched. In this context, statistical innovation. There is also a need to better
innovation is seen as a priority as it attempts to overcome understand the specificities of innovation in tourism
the challenges associated with conventional tourism. (European Commission, 2007) and to support all forms of
However, let us define innovation more clearly: innovation, not only technological innovation (Gallouj and
Weinstein, 1997). To develop and test new policy
An innovation is the implementation of a new or approaches in support of innovation in tourism and thus
significantly improved product (good or service), or pro- to target innovation in tourism policy as well as to
cess, a new marketing method, or a new organizational promote trans-national cooperation, can all help to foster
method in business practices, workplace organization or the tourism innovation agenda.
external relations. The minimum requirement for an
innovation is that the product, process, marketing method
or organizational method must be new to (or significantly Non-technological innovations in tourism: The
improved for) the firm. Innovative activities are all public-private innovation networks in tourism (PPINT)
scientific, technological, organizational, financial and
commercial steps which actually do, or are intended to, From the traditional perspective of industrial policy, tech-
lead to the implementation of innovations. Innovative nology becomes the main driver for economic innovation.

4. Plaza et al. 467
Table 1. Main types of innovation.
Product innovation
Product innovation is the introduction of goods or services that are new or significantly improved with respect to their
characteristics or intended uses. This includes significant improvements in technical specifications, components and materials,
incorporated software, user friendliness or other functional characteristics. Product innovations can utilize new knowledge or
technologies, or can be based on new uses or combinations of existing knowledge or technologies.
Process innovation
Process innovation is the implementation of a new or significantly improved production or delivery method. This includes
significant changes in techniques, equipment and/or software. Process innovations can be implemented in order to decrease
unit costs of production or delivery, to increase quality, or to produce or deliver new or significantly improved products.
Marketing innovation
Marketing innovation is the implementation of a new marketing method involving significant changes in product design or
packaging, product placement, product promotion or pricing. Marketing innovations are aimed at better addressing customer
needs, opening up new markets, or newly positioning a firm’s product on the market, with the objective of increasing the firm’s
sales.
Organizational innovation
Organizational innovation is the implementation of a new organizational method in the firm’s business practices, workplace
organization or external relations. Organizational innovations can be implemented in order to increase a firm’s performance by
reducing administrative costs or transaction costs, improving workplace satisfaction (and thus labour productivity), gaining
access to non-tradable assets (such as non-codified external knowledge) or reducing costs of supplies.
Source: Based on “Oslo Manual”, 3rd edition, 2005.
Innovation-Networks literature, while rich in descriptions significant patterns? What do the patterns look like?
of innovation dynamics and typologies, is mostly tech- PPINT become effective innovation engines to the extent
nology focused. However, a recent and growing literature that they reduce the innovation transaction costs between
shows how non-technological innovations are becoming at least two actors (nodes or elements) in the network.
crucial (for instance, learning through practice), and the There is clearly room to improve the way in which we
tourism sector is not an exception in this regard (Sundbo, facilitate and support services, R&D and innovation as
Orfila-Sintes and Sørensenc, 2007). Non-technological part of a wider innovation system.
innovations in services can also arise from investment in The tourism industry is highly dependent on public-
intangible inputs (for example, strategic networking). private innovation partnerships in Information and
Changes in people’s tastes and behaviour are (also) Communication Technologies (ICTs), thus making
responsible for changes in products and services technological innovations critical for establishing
(European Commission, 2008). Much emphasis has been competitive advantages (Werthner and Klein, 1999). Yet
placed on the importance of public-private innovation most innovations currently happen outside of the industry
partnerships as a backbone to regional growth. Case and are only later adopted by organizations within the
study research points out that some particular regions tourism industry (Plaza et al., 2009). This is partly due to
have a competitive advantage in innovation partnerships the unique structure of the industry and the particular
over others, yet we have little by way of a satisfactory nature of its products. Tourism experiences consist of a
means of formally studying the networking patterns of variety of products and services, which need to be
these partnerships to demonstrate how the specific case created, marketed and sold by a multitude of businesses.
studies fit into a larger pattern of effective innovation that These businesses are typically small and do not engage
can be applied to more than one place. Nodes and in research and development-related activities, or at least
networks characterize all important innovating not to the extent common in other industries. While colla-
phenomena; interaction, mobility and intangible elements boration is necessary and implemented in some areas,
are becoming increasingly important. However, what are collaborative efforts in tourism are still limited, despite the
the conditions required for Public-Private Knowledge great need for knowledge sharing and cooperation in
Intensive Business Services Networks to become order to effectively sell tourism experiences and destina-
effective innovation partnerships? Are the Knowledge tions (Wang and Fesenmaier, 2007; Novelli et al., 2006).
Intensive Services for Private-Public Innovation Networks Research on innovation networks in the tourism
in Tourism themselves in fact exhibiting robust and industry is still at a early stage but the already existing

5. 468 Afr. J. Bus. Manage.
literature has identified various loci of innovation in exploring the CICtourGUNE public-private innovation network in
tourism (Hjalager, 2002) and has examined innovation at knowledge intensive services. There are ‘5 core dimensions’ by
which each case-study can be categorized. In addition, there are
the destination level (Stamboulis and Skayannis, 2003; some key features to specify different alternatives/variants along
Volo, 2005), within the hotel industry (Weiermair et al., each of the 5 dimensions. These 5 dimensions come from
2005; Orfila- Sintes et al., 2005) as well as within other ServPPIN’s [http://www.servppin.com/] previous theoretical and
small and medium sized tourism enterprises (Pikkemaat empirical understanding of public-private innovation networks:
and Peters, 2005; Pikkemaat and Weiermair, 2007). Although limited in number, these 5 core dimensions are in accor-
Innovation in tourism services is widely accepted as a dance with a number of common issues with innovation networks
(Sundbo, 2010): Static and dynamic patterns of PPINT, factors
value generating activity that is particularly important in influencing their evolution, key factors that determine success at an
creating an advantage for tourism destinations in com- early stage of the life cycle, leadership and innovation, key actors,
petition with other destinations (Hjalager, 2002; Ritchie what are the governance structures, which are the PPINT
and Crouch, 2000; Volo, 2005). As noted by Barras innovation appropriation regimes, potential impacts and policy
(2000) and Hjalager (2009), distinguishing innovation implications (ServPPIN, 2009). The aim of this common framework
is to generate generic knowledge about private/public networks and
types is not necessarily simple, since innovation in one
service innovation, applicable to other case studies worldwide
field leads to subsequent innovations in others. (Table 2).
Several articles on knowledge transfer in connection This research is based on in-depth interviews in the field, of the
with innovation have been published by the ‘African CICtourGUNE network partners. Semi-structured qualitative
Journal of Business Management’ in recent years: Singh interviews were carried out with R and D managers from
and Singh (2009) try to develop an understanding of the CICtourGUNE, firms (consulting companies, technology suppliers
and tourism firms), universities, technology centres, development
changes in innovation in services, from technology agencies and destination marketing organizations (mostly public-
adoption to complex complementary changes in private partnerships) belonging to the network (Figure 2).
technologies, skills and organization. Chuang et al. In the case of the CICtougune technology-transfer agency, the
(2010) discuss the analytical typology of organizational institutional context influences the whole of the innovation and diffu-
innovation in the service industry. Phambuka- sion process. It is for this reason that we devote the next section to
Nsimbi (2010) reviews the literature on clusters and their the study of the Basque Regional Innovation System (RIS).
contribution to building a competitive advantage for
service businesses. Khan et al. (2009) explore the Institutional factors that support the CICtourGUNE PPINT: A
moderating role of organizational size in the relationship rich systemic networking environment
between transformational leadership and organizational
How does the institutional context influence the innovation and
innovation. However, the analysis of an innovation net-
diffusion process? Are regional and national differences important?
work for e-Tourism is a novelty for the whole discipline. Innovation was seen as a priority as it attempted, in the case of
CICtourGUNE as a Public-private Innovation Network Bilbao, to overcome the challenges associated with an old-
in Tourism (PPINT) constitutes an organizational industrialized economy. In the 1970s, 1980s and early 1990s, the
innovation for boosting innovation in e-Tourism (Figures 2 Basque Country went through a very severe crisis; the situation of a
and 3). Therefore, it is an example of non-technological deep recession, marked by uncertain elements (unemployment,
socio-political instability, loss of a reference point in social values
innovation, although at the same time, some of its and so on) that required urgent industrial restructuring. To reverse
partners are actually involved in creating technological these negative dynamics, the Basque Government made a huge
innovations. effort to build a regional innovative infrastructure to support the
In this paper, CICtourGUNE is approached using the modernisation of its traditional industries and nurture new industrial
methodology set up by ServPPIN and service activities. Technological Centres and Parks were
[http://www.servppin.com/] and then the empirical results created in the 1980s as a response to the necessity to upgrade the
level of technology of the obsolete Basque production structure.
of this subsequent innovative networking in tourism are In the 1990s a new demand-driven policy, rather than a top-down
explained. technology scheme, was launched. A whole new typology of
innovation actors flourished throughout the 1990s, in which the
Technology Centres were no longer the only goal (Rico-Castro,
Public-private innovation networks in tourism 2005). Independent R&D units within firms, new research centres,
(PPINT): A case study certification and testing labs, sectoral centres and Universities were
grouped under a common association called SARETEK (the
Basque Science, Technology and Innovation Network) at the
Public-Private Innovation Networks in Tourism (PPINT) is request of the Basque Government. Clusters and cluster-driven
an organizational innovation for boosting innovation in the policies took the lead in the new demand oriented technology policy
tourism sector. rationale. In the year 2007, the Basque Government launched the
Basque Innovation Agency(Innobasque), which is made up of
SARETEK, private companies, public Basque institutions, official
METHODOLOGY representatives of Basque management and employees and all
kinds of organisations connected with innovation. Innobasque has
In this paper, the common methodological framework developed taken the lead in the new innovation networking driven policy,
within the ServPPIN project [http://www.servppin.com/] is used for hence dissolving the old SARETEK. The creation of Innobasque

6. Plaza et al. 469
Figure 2. An e-Tourism Innovation Network Case Study: CICtourGUNE’s partners. Source:
CICtourGUNE.
shows that the regional government is paying increasing attention districts’ or innovative clusters which, although composed
to the challenges of knowledge transfer to SMEs (Olazaran et al., of micro-firms and small-to-medium ones, could
2009). Private-public networks and nodes characterise all nevertheless exert global reach”. (Cooke, 2008).
significantly connected innovative phenomena, and point to a rich
innovation infrastructure.
As part of these efforts, a number of cooperative research Analysis of a case study: The CICtourGUNE strategic
centres (CICs) have been set up to strengthen strategic public- network
private networking. At present, there are CICs for nano-technology
and nano-science, high-performing manufacturing and energy, Tourism experiences consist of a complex variety of
microsystems, biomaterials and biotechnology and lastly, for
tourism innovation, a network called CICtourGUNE.
products and services, which need to be supplied by a
myriad of companies. In this context of multitude
Philip Cooke (2008), an authority on Regional Innovation
businesses within the tourism value chain, much
Systems (RIS), underlines that “three key factors were emphasis is being placed on the relevance of strategic
visible [for the Basque Country]: first, how a de- networking as a backbone for sustained competitiveness.
industrialising region depended upon possessing The centre for cooperative research in Tourism,
intermediary agencies with innovation and industry CICtourGUNE, is a graphic example of that strategy
expertise, independent of the government (though part-
research. CICtourGUNE was set up in 2006 in the city of
funded by so-called generic project-funding distributed by
the Basque government) and of the then new and not San Sebastian (Basque Country, Spain), through the
significantly research active university sector. These collaboration of the Basque Government, the Technology
aspects would project Basque industry into a new future Corporation Tecnalia, Vicomtech Technology Center and
different from the disappeared heritage of steel-making the University of Deusto. Its origin is based on the
and ship-building. Second, how systemic in terms of Competitiveness and Social Innovation 2006-2009
networking connectivity the whole and particularly some
parts of the regional economy were, notably the
Programme of the Basque Government and addresses
Mondragon organisation, amongst the most innovative the need for a strategy of R&D specific to the tourism
networks observable anywhere at the time. Third, how sector, and to further strategic research in the science of
networks could some-times take the form of ‘industrial tourism within a knowledge society.

7. 470 Afr. J. Bus. Manage.
Table 2. Searching for the PPINT Taxonomy.
Product, Process, Organisational (front / back office), System (architectural, supply
Types and Processes of Innovation
chain), Conceptual
Top-down (institutional)/bottom-up (entrepreneurial), caretaker (key actor who is ‘system
Type of Innovation Network integrator’) versus non-caretaker (distributed network), complementary competences,
changes over the life-cycle.
Technological opportunities, social relations (personal likes/dislikes, social norms,
Drivers/Barriers common or different rationalities of public and private sector, e.g. entrepreneurship),
resources (budgets, capital), anticipated benefits, risks.
Institutional factors Legal frameworks, policy push vs. local-level, regulatory environment, rules etc.
Some impact indicators are set up to analyse the networking processes. Organisational
control/structure, innovation performance, actual/potential impacts,
Impacts and policy issues
advantages/disadvantages of this specific ServPPIN. Policy implications are drawn from
this case study.
Source: ServPPIN [http://www.servppin.com].
This collaborative platform is created to: firstly, promote position in the value chain. At the launching of the
the development of new research capabilities in the network, CICtourGUNE was meant to be an interface
tourism sector and secondly, to collect the existing skills between the other players involved. That is, a link
and knowledge that could potentially be applied to between technology centres and tourism businesses. In
tourism. The Cooperative Research Centre aims to be a this way, technology centres, identifying market needs in
nexus between the fields of technology and tourism. It terms of the technology they could offer to the tourism
has since become the main driving force in strategic industry, would be able to undertake technological
research applying advanced services to tourism in the research as a pre-marketing ploy. Thus, the role of
Basque Country. CICtourGUNE is comprised of a CICtourGUNE would be to act as an interlocutor between
network of agents in various areas. Participating as the Technology Centres and industry. The reality,
partners in this network are public institutions, technology however, differs from the initial plans. CICtourGUNE is
centres, universities and private companies who are comprised of an important technological and human
mainly suppliers of technology and knowledge intensive infrastructure, and is strategically located at the same link
services. CICtourGUNE currently has 28 members in the value chain as the Technology Centres.
(Figures 2 and 3). CICtourGUNE is currently operating as a research
CICtourGUNE takes advantage of the existing (technological) centre, in connection with the technology
experience and know-how of the technology centres of companies and consultant firms. In this value chain, the
the Basque Country, Universities and technology-based relationship between the technology centres and
businesses. It is these institutions that guide research CICtourGUNE is collaborative and competitive at the
toward technologies applied to tourism. However, this same link of the value chain, so logically it can give rise
initiative is not unique in Spain. Centres for the promotion to competition concerns.
of innovation in the tourism sector, have existed since The organization presented here is, according to the
2000. These include SEGITTUR (State Company for literature, defined as an innovation network. As noted by
Tourism Information Management), IBIT (Illes Balears DeBebresson and Amesse (1991), innovation networks
Innovation and Technology), TECNOTUR (Technology are characterized by cooperation agreements between
Centre of Tourism, Entertainment and Quality Life members who do not obey in a hierarchical way but
Andalusia), CINNTA (Foundation Centre for Innovation in instead by cooperation based on trust and a common
Tourism Andalusia) and/or ITH (Instituto Tecnológico project. "The networks are not considered innovative
Hotelero in Madrid). arrangements which are robust, solid and hierarchical
systems, but are instead relatively loose, informal,
implicit, of easy decomposition and recombination"
The provider-client technology value chain in tourism (DeBebresson and Amesse, 1991). This definition can be
applied to the network built around CICtourGUNE in
During the few years in which CICtourGUNE has which, as we shall see below, its participants have
developed, there has been a significant change of its formed a diverse spectrum of cooperative relationships

8. Plaza et al. 471
"
#$
% #
!
Figure 3. An e-tourism innovation network case study: CICtourGUNE’s strategic alliances. Source:
CICtourGUNE.
within an organizational structure in which its partners maintains partnerships with the Regional Development
have a low dependence on the network. As noted by Agency of Lower Deba, Debegesa, which has used its
Nalebuff and Brandenburger (1996), low significance or services for testing new technologies (prototypes) in
lack of hierarchical relationships allows network partners order to power new tourism in the region.
to cooperate on an equal level while in competition. The network exceeds the formal partners and
geographical boundaries. This public-private network is
evolving and expanding. In fact, the numbers of larger
Measuring CICtourGUNE as a collaborative network companies providing technology that do not belong to the
CICtourGUNE network is steadily increasing. Particularly
The network created by CICtourGUNE comprises of both relevant are the research projects through which the
national and international heavyweight partners in the centre has established cooperation with companies such
field of R and D in tourism. The collaboration is as Telefonica (CENIT Project) and Philips (Metaverse
particularly intense between technology centres and Project). Moreover, there are other large companies that
technology-based companies through various research are cooperating with this network, such as the Franco-
projects and contracts. Their collaboration on research Belgian ATOS, an ICT technology provider that has
projects is basically produced in conjunction with the created a unit of tourism, and the multinational company
technology centres VICOMTech and Robotiker. With AMADEUS, leading technology provider for the global
regard to the contracts, in some cases the initiative travel industry and tourism. CICtourGUNE may benefit
comes from companies, which demand from from the experience and technological expertise of these
CICtourGUNE a type of technology that they do not pos- large companies, regardless of the asymmetrical
sess, and in other cases the initiative of CICtourGUNE is relationship between these large partners and the SMEs
required, acting as an intermediary between companies. from the already institutionalised network CICtourGUNE.
Among the companies providing technology are Innovalia As in every innovative organization, high doses of trust
and its affiliates. The service providers include Araldi, are required between stakeholders, as well as a clear
Ope Consultores and Eleka. Furthermore, CICtourGUNE division of roles which must be accepted by all. This

9. 472 Afr. J. Bus. Manage.
avoids the problem of illicit appropriation of knowledge however, fall outside the scope of this study.
and technology developed by each of the network An analysis of Figure 5 (strategic agreements) ought to
partners. A feedback system is used by both sides, reveal that CICtourGUNE might well have a relatively
through which the information can flow freely. favoured position in the network, which encompasses 28
CICtourGUNE has also established extensive strategic actors (nodes) with a maximum of 5 ties each. The
partnerships with national and international actors from measurements of centrality are the following:
different fields such as science, technology, research and
tourism, and is part of several scientific networks. Among Degree: CICtourGUNE shows a degree of 1.03 out of 5
CICtourGUNE` strategic alliances is Foundation IBIT
s (Table 3), whereas almost all other actors have a degree
(Illes Balears Innovació i Tecnología). IBIT operates as a of less than 0.5 (Table 3). CICtourGUNE which has more
key organization in the development of tourism in direct ties has greater opportunities because it has
Mallorca, a leading tourism destination in Spain. IBIT has choices.
focused on product development, unlike CICtourGUNE
which has concentrated on investigation. These different
roles can be advantageous for CICtourGUNE to the
extent that a symbiotic relationship is maintained. In Closeness: CICtourGUNE is closer to more nodes than
addition, from the beginning CICtourGUNE has promoted any other node (Table 3). In other words, CICtourGUNE
its incorporation into various scientific platforms, such as is able to reach other nodes through shorter path lengths
eNEM (Spanish Technology Platform on Networked (closeness and farness indicators in Table 3).
audiovisual technologies), INES (Spanish Initiative for
Software and Services), and IFITT (International
Federation for IT and Travel and Tourism). IFITT is a Betweenness: CICtourGUNE lies between many other
leading organization for e-tourism worldwide. pairs of nodes and no other nodes lie between
CICtourGUNE also belongs to the Scientific Committee of CICtourGUNE and other nodes (Table 3).
the Journal of Information Technology and Tourism
(JITT), a leading journal in eTourism. The annual ENTER
conference, contributes towards building up the eTourism In addition to these centrality measurements, cluster
research community, converting eTourism into a main coefficients (Table 4) and density measurements could
area of research and setting up a multidisciplinary group also be calculated. The results show that there are
of researchers on tourism and technology. Most several well defined clusters: On the right side of the
contributors of this group represent the core membership network graph, with a much higher density, a cluster of
of the International Federation of Information Technology the main actors of the Spanish tourism R&D scene is
for Travel and Tourism (IFITT), a world leading entity in found: Segittur, IBIT, CINNTA, Tecnotur or ITH. On the
eTourism. IFITT is an independent global community for top left hand side of the graph, with a much lower density,
the discussion, exchange and development of knowledge the cluster of Spanish universities is found, connected to
about the use and impact of new information and the network through the University of Deusto or
communication technologies (ICT) in the travel and CICtourGUNE. Finally on the lower left hand side of the
tourism industry. graph the cluster of foreign universities can be found. To
summarize, the main Spanish tourism R&D cluster (on
the right hand side of the graph) shows a much higher
Measuring the network density than the CICtourGUNE network as a whole.
There is intensive cooperation within the Spanish tourism
In order to analyse the complexity of the network and the R&D cluster and we can say that CICtourGUNE seems to
relationship between its actors, the following four be well connected to this cluster, which contains the main
indicators were initially used: 1) participation in scientific actors of the tourism R&D system in Spain. However,
journals and conferences, 2) research and prototype there are a number of short comings in connection with
development, 3) participation in research projects and 4) the links between the 2 clusters of universities and the
participation in committees and working groups of Spanish tourism R&D cluster. On the one hand, the
international prestige. However this paper will solely cluster of Spanish universities (on the top left hand side
concentrate on those indicators which concern the stra- of graph 5) shows a much lower density and it also
tegic agreements. Figures 4 and 5 show the network built shows a high dependency on CICtourGUNE and the
around CICtourGUNE. It is clear that the network is much University of Deusto on their way to connection with the
larger than shown, especially if we consider that each of main Spanish R&D cluster. On the other hand, the cluster
the partners of CICtourGUNE also maintains partnerships of foreign universities (lower left hand side of the graph)
with other companies through research projects and also shows a low density and a high path dependency on
contracts. These other relationships, however fall outside CICtourGUNE and ECCA (Austria).

10. Plaza et al. 473
Figure 4. CICtourGUNE’s Overall Networking Dynamics (strategic research projects). Source: Own elaboration.
Lastly, the Spanish R and D cluster enjoys a emphasize collaboration with partners, which are mainly
decentralized network, with several central nodes (in the technology centres and technology-based companies
central multi-hub network), that enables a more efficient such as Innovalia (Figure 4), a joint R and D platform.
transfer scheme. In contrast, in the whole CICtourGUNE Additionally, universities, technology-based companies
network, there is an almost unique central node, which is and foreign institutions have a notable role in this
CICtourGUNE itself, which limits access of the 2 network. The cooperation drivers and barriers have been
university clusters to the main Spanish R&D centres summarised in Table 5.
cluster. These results show a clear concentration of
agents involved with CICtourGUNE. These agents are
basically three institutions: CICtourGUNE, University of Conclusions
Deusto and ECCA-Austria (Figure 5). The personal
relationship between the director of CICtourGUNE and ‘Tourism, travelling and mobility’ is a rising industry in the
the University of Deusto explains the joint work in these world economy, but its potential to innovate has not been
areas. The relationship with ECCA is based on its fully developed. Most innovations currently happen
extensive research experience in e-Tourism. The projects outside of the industry and are only later adopted by

11. 474 Afr. J. Bus. Manage.
Figure 5. CICtourGUNE’s Overall Networking Dynamics (strategic agreements and joint workshops). Source: Own elaboration.
organizations within the tourism industry. This is partly innovation for boosting innovation in tourism SMEs, to
due to the unique structure of the industry and the help clarify the tourism sector’s needs and standardize
particular nature of its product. Tourism experiences some solutions. Table 6 summarizes strengths,
consist of a variety of products and services, which need weaknesses, opportunities and threats of PPINT in the
to be created, marketed and sold by a multitude of light of our research study. “Unlike market exchange,
businesses. These businesses are typically small and do exchange in a network is characterised by giving in
not engage in research and development-related exchange for an uncertain return (uncertain with respect
activities, or at least not to the extent common in other to when, how much and even who). Networks function on
industries. While collaboration is necessary and the basis of trust and reciprocity” (European Commission-
implemented in some areas, collaborative efforts in Directorate-General for Enterprise and Industry, 2008). In
tourism are still limited, despite the great need for any case, it seems that PPINT effectiveness to transfer
knowledge sharing and cooperation in order to effectively innovation to tourism SME-s depends critically on the
sell tourism experiences and destinations. knowledge intensive business services (KIBs) involved in
This work presents a preliminary approach to Public- the PPINT. KIBs sector includes many R&D intensive
Private Innovation Networks in Tourism (PPINT) through firms that provide services to tourism firms, such as ICTs,
a case study: CICtourGUNE. Public-Private Innovation software development, R&D, and non-technological inno-
Networks in Tourism (PPINT) are an organizational vations, which contribute to the upgrading of the tourism

12. Plaza et al. 475
Table 3. CICtourGUNE Network Centrality Indicators.
Degree: Normalized Farness: Closeness: Betweenness:
No. of ties Eigenvalues No. of ties Normalized Scores Normalized Scores
CICtourGUNE 1.03 0.522 27 1.00 0.454
Robotiker 0.44 0.311 43 0.62 0.009
Basquetour 0.25 0.170 48 0.56 0
University of Deusto 0.48 0.264 42 0.64 0.04
Noski Consulting Group 0.25 0.170 48 0.56 0
Vicomtech 0.44 0.311 43 0.62 0.009
ITH 0.59 0.409 39 0.69 0.027
Segittur 0.44 0.320 43 0.62 0.014
Tecnotur 0.48 0.361 42 0.64 0.005
IBIT 0.48 0.361 42 0.64 0.005
CINNTA 0.37 0.289 45 0.60 0
CDTI 0.37 0.289 45 0.60 0
EC3, Austria 0.40 0.291 44 0.61 0.009
ECCA, Austria 0.74 0.452 35 0.77 0.096
OMT 0.22 0.082 49 0.55 0
UOC 0.48 0.340 42 0.64 0.014
Alcala Univ 0.44 0.338 43 0.62 0.004
Balearic Islands Univ 0.25 0.102 48 0.56 0.001
Univ Oviedo 0.25 0.102 48 0.56 0.001
Univ Cadiz 0.25 0.102 48 0.56 0.001
Vienna University of Technology 0.07 0.045 53 0.50 0
University of Applied Sciences 0.25 0.134 48 0.56 0
Worms (Germany)
Univ. of Applied Sciences 0.25 0.134 48 0.56 0
Ravensburg Weingarten
(Germany)
COTEC 0.29 0.128 47 0.57 0.005
x + o Business Solutions GmbH 0.37 0.196 45 0.60 0.011
(Austria)
eCTRL Solutions 0.22 0.154 49 0.55 0
Afidium (France) 0.25 0.134 48 0.56 0
Standards Norway 0.25 0.134 48 0.56 0
Table 4. CICtourGUNE Network Cluster Indicators.
Clustering coefficients No. of pairs
CICtourGUNE 0.42 351.00
Robotiker 1.40 55.00
Basquetour 1.86 15.00
University of Deusto 0.81 66.00
Noski Consulting Grou 2.06 15.00
Vicomtech 1.41 55.00
ITH 1.14 105.00
Segittur 1.61 55.00
Tecnotur 1.56 66.00
IBIT 1.56 66.00

13. 476 Afr. J. Bus. Manage.
Table 4. Cont’d
CINNTA 2.41 36.00
CDTI 2.41 36.00
EC3, Austria 1.60 45.00
ECCA, Austria 0.83 171.00
OMT 1.00 10.00
UOC 1.51 66.00
Alcala Univ 1.94 55.00
Balearic Islands Univ 1.06 15.00
Univ Oviedo 1.06 15.00
Univ Cadiz 1.06 15.00
VUT 0.00
University of Applied Sciences (Germany) 1.33 15.00
Univ. of Applied Sciences (Germany) 1.33 15.00
COTEC 1.00 21.00
x+o Business Solutions GmbH (Austria) 0.86 36.00
eCTRL Solutions 1.90 10.00
Afidium (France) 1.33 15.00
Standards Norway 1.33 15.00
Table 5. CICtourGUNE consortium: Cooperation to develop strategic research towards tourism.
Service activity
R&D partnership in eTourism, eTravelling, Heritage and Creativity; ICT;
Pushing ahead strategic research in tourism sciences; Knowledge-sharing and
Type of innovation
technology transfer.
Product, process and organisational types of innovation.
CICtourGUNE has 28 partners (Figure 3): consulting companies, destination
management partnerships, universities, technology centres, ICT technology suppliers,
tourism companies, and development agencies.
Top-down (institutional).
Type of innovation network One main caretaker (system integrator): strong leadership. Business model innovation
(innovative strategies) requires strong leadership as it often calls for substantial trade-
offs.
The network exceeds the formal partners and geographical boundaries (Figures 4 and
5).
New tourism in Bilbao as a result of the Guggenheim Museum.
The Internet is decoupling the tourism value chain. The tourism industry is highly
dependent on ICT technologies.
The level of trust in a tie is crucial, as elsewhere.
Drivers / Barriers Technology providers: Key actors in the process (Figures 4 and 5).
Caretakers ability to spot and recruit talented people.
Capacity building within the network.
Elements outside the CICtourGUNE play an active role in the networking process
(Figures 4 and 5).

14. Plaza et al. 477
Table 5. Cont’d
Strategically placed ties can dramatically increase network effectiveness (Figure 5).
Technology supplier SME partners have well established R&D structures (e.g.
Innovalia).
CICtourGUNE acts as a contract research centre for consultants-partners and
technology suppliers-partners: CICtourGUNE accounts for part of the R&D
expenditure of these companies.
An Innovation appropriation regime: Difficult to appropriate the cash-flows of
knowledge products. Building up win-win relationships is required.
Institutional factors Initiative surrounded by a systemic networking environment (a Regional Innovation
System).
Impacts and policy issues The etourgune strategy has been institutionalised into a R&D body called
CICtourGUNE.
Table 6. Public-Private Innovation Networks in Tourism (PPINT) overview.
Strengths Weaknesses
PPINT-type initiatives should be supported by a systemic
An innovation appropriation regime: difficult to appropriate the
networking environment (for example, a Regional Innovation
cash-flows of knowledge products and to avoid the illicit
System). This enables quicker access to resources and know-how
appropriation of knowledge and technology. Building up win-win
that cannot be time-effectively/cost-effectively produced internally
relationships is required.
(that is, transaction costs).
The private sector takes an increasing active role as the network Expectations should be managed from the beginning: all the
evolves. Technological SMEs should have a well established R stakeholders must accept a clear division of roles. This
and D umbrella structure which allows fast changes in the contributes to the lessening of tensions.
network’s life-cycle.
A high degree of dependence on public resources. Regional
Elements outside the Network can play an active role in the Government plays a key role in financing Tourism Innovation
networking process. The networking exceeds the formal partners consortia.
and geographical boundaries.
It is important to give priority to developing technology transfer
A remarkably small number of strategically placed ties can organizations and structures, in order to nurture systemic
dramatically increase the effectiveness of the network. public-private strategic cooperation. The SMEs’ effectiveness in
the network depends mainly on the SMEs’ joint R and D
structures (R and D umbrellas). Support for SMEs is requested
to set up effective R and D structures.
Commitment: the higher the commitment of the network partners,
the more resources (money, effort and time) they are prepared to When the innovation network is top-down (institutional) rather
put into the joint programmes. than bottom-up, innovation can not respond to markets needs.
Coordination-oriented ICT infrastructures within the innovation Some networks lack the necessary competence to interact
network can reduce the need for coordination (and thus effectively within the network: this requires capacity building
transaction costs). (instruction and training)
Strategic alliances must be nurtured by networking: networking is Network lock-in: network members become unable to use other
learnt through networking. innovation infrastructures without substantial switching costs

15. 478 Afr. J. Bus. Manage.
Table 6. Cont’d
Public sector entrepreneurs and private sector entrepreneurs
are required
Strategic alliances must be nurtured by networking: networking is
learnt through networking. Transfer of knowledge to the production sector needs to be
more systematically organised: transfer structures must
“catalyse stakeholders`potential for innovation”.
Public policy makers, research centres, and educational
institutions should provide strong support to PPINT.
Opportunities Threats
Upgrading innovation related knowledge-skills and diffusing them
Can cooperation have a negative impact on the PPINT actors?
among PPINT members
Can PPINT fail because of missing links between agents (for
example, missing information transfer)? Missing links may be
due to:
Enabling locally-developed small-scale innovations. poor selection mechanisms
Peer coaching becomes more effective than training. lack of specific competences
misalignment of incentives
lack of information transparency
lack of specific intermediaries (for instance, KIBS)
Shared innovation effects: learning curve effects can be reinforced
Can PPINT fail because of lack of openness (for example, a
to the extent that two or more actors (network nodes) share
temptation to monopolise returns that may lead to ‘lock-in’)?
experience, knowledge and know-how.
Opportunism can hinder the PPINT` effectiveness either
s
because of:
previous adverse experiences
Experience curve effects: density of interaction within the network asymmetrical appropriation of the PPINT generated value, or
can report innovation management efficiency gains as a misalignment of incentives
consequence of more accelerated “learning curves”.
mismatched expectations
lack of shared experience
cultural barriers
Standardization: as innovation sequences (mostly technology- Innovation-oriented experience-curves can come to a sudden
driven innovations and subsequent learning processes) become end when the network is not producing the marketing mix that
more standardized, networking efficiency can increase the market values.
Successful innovations occur at the boundaries of the PPINT,
A decentralized network of managers’ structure is requested
where the needs and challenges of innovation users and the
for effective transfer of knowledge to network partners. Several
potential of the innovations can be connected together, in an
central managers (multi-hub networks) are necessary for
inspiring process that expands beyond both the PPINT insiders
effective cooperation.
and outsiders.
Networking effectiveness relies heavily on sharing tacit
Network managers must strike and follow up network members
knowledge. Effective transfer of tacit knowledge requires intensive
decisively (especially SMEs and micro-firms).
personal contact.
Knowledge Intensive Business Services (KIBS) can play a key Sharing the Vision: a long term strategic planning perspective
role in transferring innovation to SMEs (Figure 6). should be shared by the network stakeholders
PPINT can create a favourable environment for innovation.

16. Plaza et al. 479
Theoretical Value Chain:
Technology
C enters CICtourgune
Value C hain in Practice:
Technology
C enters Consultants
ICT Technolog y
P roviders
C ICtourgune
Figure 6. e-Tourism Technologies Value Chain. Source: Own elaboration.
sector. Nodes and networks characterize all importantly European Parliament (2008). Regulation (EC) No. 294/2008 of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2008
innovating phenomena, in which peer coaching and establishing the Eur. Institute Innov. Techno. Offic. J. L 097,
Knowledge Intensive Business Services (KIBS) play a 09/04/2008 P. 0001 – 0012.
key role in innovation transfer to SMEs (Figure 6). Gallouj F, Weinstein O (1997). Innovation in services. Res. Policy 26
(4–5): 537–556.
Hanneman RA, Riddle M (2005). Introduction to social network
methods. Riverside, CA: University of California.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Hjalager AM (2002). Repairing innovation defectiveness in tourism.
Tour. Manage., 23(5): 465-474.
This work draws on a research carried out for the Hjalager AM (2009). A review of innovation research in tourism. Tour.
Manage., 31(1): 02/10, 1-12
European Commission, ServPPIN project (FP 7), ISTAG (2009). Revising Europe’s ICT Strategy. Report from the Infor-
www.servppin.com mation Society Technologies Advisory Group (ISTAG). Final version.
Khan R, Rehman AU, Fatima A (2009). Transformational leadership
and organizational innovation: Moderated by organizational size. Afr.
REFERENCES J. Bus. Manage., 3(11): 678-684.
Nalebuff BJ, Brandenburger AM (1996). Coopetition, kooperativ
Barras R (1990). Interactive innovation in financial and business konkurrieren. Mit der Spieltheorie zum Unternehmenserfolg.
services: the vanguard of the service revolution. Res. Policy 19(3): Frankfurt. Campus Verlag.
215–237. Novelli M, Schmitz B, Spencer T (2006). Networks, clusters and
Birch K, Mackinnon D, Cumbers A (2008). Old Industrial Regions in innovation in tourism: A UK experience. Tour. Manage., 27: 1141–
Europe: A Comparative Assessment of Economic Performance. 1152.
Regional Studies 99999:1. DOI: 10.1080/00343400802195147 OCDE (2005). Oslo Manual. Guidelines for collecting and interpreting
Blanke J, Chiesa T (2009). The Travel and Tourism Competitiveness innovation dates. Third Edition.
Report 2009. World Economic Forum. Olazaran M, Albizu E, Otero B (2009). Technology Transfer between
Buhalis D, Law R (2008). Progress in information technology and Technology Centres and SMEs: Evidence from the Basque Country.
tourism management: 20 years on and 10 years after the Internet— Eur. Plan. Stud.,17:3,345-363.
The state of eTourism research. Tour. Manage. 29: 609-623. Orfila-Sintes F, Crespi-Cladera R, Martinez-Ros E (2005). Innovation
Chuang LM, Liu CC, Tsai WC, Huang CM (2010). Towards an analytical activity in the hotel industry: Evidence from Balearic Islands. Tour.
framework of organizational innovation in the service industry. Afr. J. Manage., 26(6), 851-865.
Bus. Manage. 4(5): 790-799. Phambuka-Nsimbi C (2008). Creating competitive advantage in
Cooke P (2008). Regional innovation systems: origin of the species, Int. developing countries through business clusters: A literature review.
J. Technol. Learn. Innov. Dev., 1(3):393–409. Afr. J. Bus. Manage., 2(7): 125-130.
DeBebresson C, Amesse F (1991). Networks of innovators. A review Pikkemaat B, Peters M (2005). Toward the Measurement of Innovation-
and introduction to the issue. Res. Policy 20: 363-379. A Pilot Study in the Small and Medium sized Hotel Industry
Erbil Y, Akıncıtürk N (2010). An exploratory study of innovation diffusion Innovation: Hosp. Tour., 6 (3): 89-112.
in architecture firms, Sci. Res. Essays. 5(11):1392-1401. Pikkemaat B, Weiermair K (2007). Innovation through Cooperation in
European Commission (2007). Towards a European strategy in support Destinations: First Results of an Empirical Study in Austria. Anatolia:
of innovation in services: Challenges and key issues for future Int J. Tour. Hosp. Res., 18(1): 67-83.
actions. SEC (2007) 1059, Brussels 27.07.2007. Plaza B, Gonzalez-Flores AY Galvez-Galvez C (2009). Knowledge
European Commission-Directorate-General for Enterprise and Industry Intensive Services for Private-Public Innovation Networks in Tourism:
(2008). Key Lessons in Fostering Transnational Cooperation in The Case of CICtourgune. RESER/Servppin Conference, Budapest
Support for Innovation in Europe. Pro Inno Europe Paper No. 8. 24-25 Sept.

17. 480 Afr. J. Bus. Manage.
Porter M (2001). Strategy and the Internet. Harv. Bus. Rev., 79(3), 63– Sundbo J (2010). Public-private networks and service innovation in
78. knowledge intensive services: A report of European case studies.
Rico-Castro P (2005). Policy-making and organisational shaping: the Studies. URL: http://css.ruc.dk/Publikationer/RR1005.pdf Report no.
role of Basque technology policy in building an environment for 10:5. Denmark: Roskilde University, Centre of Service
Technological Centres. Documentos de trabajo ( CSIC. Unidad de Volo S (2005). Tourism destination innovativeness. In Proceedings of
Políticas Comparadas) Nº. 11. the AIEST (Association Internationale d’Experts Scientifiques du
Ritchie JR, Crouch GI (2000). The competitive destination: a Tourisme) 55th Congress. Brainerd, MN, USA: August, 28 –
sustainability perspective. Tour. Manage., 21(1): 1-7. September, 1, 2005.
Rubalcaba L, Kox H (2007). Business services in European Economic Wang Y, Fesenmaier DR (2007). Collaborative destination marketing: A
Growth. Palgrave-Macmillan. case study of Elkhart county, Indiana. Tour. Manage. 28(3): 863-875.
ServPPIN (2009). The Contribution of Public and Private Services to Weiermair K, Peters M, Frehse J (2005). Innovation in small businesses
European Growth and Welfare, and the Role of Public-Private vs. MNEs. In Proceedings of the AIEST (Association Internationale
Innovation Networks. Deliverable 5.1.2-WP 5. EU 7th Framework d’Experts Scientifiques du Tourisme) 55th Congress. Brainerd, MN,
Programme. USA: August, 28 – September, 1, 2005.
Singh A, Singh V (2009). Innovation in services: Design and Werthner H, Klein S (1999). Information Technology and Tourism - A
Management. Afr. J. Bus. Manage., 3 (12): 871-878. Challenging Relationship. Wien - New York: Springer-Verlag.
Stamboulis Y, Skayannis P (2003). Innovation strategies and World Tourism Organization (2001a). Tourism Market Trends: World
technology for experience-based tourism. Tour. Manage., 24(1): 35- Overview and Tourism Topics.
43. World Tourism Organization (2001b). WTO Tourism 2020 Vision,
STCRC (2008). Sustainable Tourism Cooperative Research Center. Volumes 1-6.
http://www.crctourism.com.au/
Sundbo J, Orfila-Sintes F, Sørensenc F (2007). The innovative
behaviour of tourism firms—Comparative studies of Denmark and
Spain. Res. Policy, 36(1): 88-106.