Image of Michigan as a Travel Destination

	Speakers:
	Teresa I. Herbowicz Research Specialist, Tourism Resource Center Michigan State University		Donald F. Holecek Professor Michigan State University
	Description: A battery of fifteen image statements about Michigan as a travel destination was a part of a much bigger telephone survey conducted by the Tourism Resource Center at Michigan State University. This Michigan Travel Market Survey ran from January 1996 till June 2003 and, on average, yielded 425 completed interviews per month. Interviews were conducted of randomly selected households in Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Wisconsin and the province of Ontario. The main goal for asking respondents to rate individual image questions on scale from 1 to 10 was to track changes in attributes of Michigan as a tourist destination as an indirect measure of effectiveness of the promotional campaigns launched by the state travel office in the Great Lakes region. A few years ago, the office also adopted a policy of promoting the state in three or four out-of-state market areas and pulling out from promoting Michigan destinations to Michiganders. Since the overall database contains several thousand cases, we are able to segment the image sample based on different criteria: By travel behavior (visited Michigan within last 12 months, ever and never) By in-state versus out-of-state travelers to/in Michigan By individual state- by relative ranking of the attributes By time period, etc. Based on our preliminary analysis, most negative changes in ratings of the attributes over time occurred in the Michigan resident segment, which generates over 55% of the overall pleasure travel in the state. A majority of positive changes in Michigan image occurred among out-of-state residents who never traveled to Michigan. Further analyses of factors that might have impacted such changes in image will have to be done (e.g., general perception of quality of life, consumer confidence, state economy, etc.), but the results of this study bring some interesting questions to mind about the benefits and costs of the state's prevailing promotion policy.