Tourism, Security and Safety From Theory to Practice

Interpretations to Dimensions of Practice Importance
Proposition 2 assumed that both importance and usage practices will follow the
constructs generated from the literature and from the in-depth interviews with hos-
pitality industry executives. Four major categories were presented, serving as the
foundations of the questionnaire developed in this study: human resources, mar-
keting, maintenance, and government. The results of the factor analysis partially
supported Proposition 2. For example, the factors generated from the importance
of crisis management practices formed somewhat different dimensions.
Importance factor 1, “reliance on government and marketing,” encompasses all
Tourism Security and Safety: From Theory to Practice
326
H7898_Ch17.qxd 8/24/05 8:53 AM Page 326

---

four practices of the 
government
category, plus three practices related to the 
mar-
keting
category. The addition of marketing practices to the practices of turning to
central and local governments for support can be explained in light of the afore-
mentioned Israeli hospitality industry’s past experience of approaching the gov-
ernment for joint marketing campaigns both domestically and internationally. The
Israel Ministry of Tourism has long been involved in marketing campaigns planned
and implemented jointly with the hospitality industry, usually through the Israel
Hotel Association.
The second factor in the analysis of practice importance, “maintenance cost
cuts,” corresponds to the 
maintenance
category. Cost cuts such as limiting hotel
services and postponing maintenance of buildings and engineering systems all cor-
respond to a very similar dimension. Consequently, the exclusion of practice 17:
Extending credit or postponing scheduled payments, appears to be logical.
The third factor of importance, “lowering prices through labor cutbacks,”
includes the two practices of lowering prices, either list price or price for special
offers (practices 9 and 10). These two practices were originally included in the cat-
egory of 
marketing
. Their grouping seems logical. However, the inclusion of the
last practice in this factor, practice 1: Firing employees to reduce labor force, is
hard to interpret.
Similarly, factor four “finding neglected segments and tightening employment
terms,” included practices from two categories: practice 13: Marketing to new seg-
ments (such as the ultraorthodox Jewish segment) from the 
marketing
category and
practices 3: Decreasing number of working days per week; and 4: Freezing pay
rates, from the 
human resources
category. In sum, factors three and four only par-
tially support Proposition 2. Finally, the fact that all of the categories are repre-
sented in the factors and five practices are excluded enables us to suggest a shorter
version of the original questionnaire, aimed only toward measuring the importance
of hospitality crisis management practices.