Does Motivation and Trust Important for Tourists’ Loyalties? A Quantitative Perspective from Golf Tourism in Bali of Indonesia
on
E-Journal of Tourism Vol.6. No.1. (2019): 88-101
Does Motivation and Trust Important for Tourists’ Loyalties?
A Quantitative Perspective from Golf Tourism in Bali of Indonesia
Panudiana Kuhn1, Komang Gde Bendesa2, Agung Suryawan Wiranatha3 and I Gusti Ayu Oka Suryawardani4
-
1 Doctoral Program of Tourism Studies, Udayana University – Bali 2
-
2 Professor of Tourism Studies, Udayana University – Bali
-
3 Head of Center of Excellence in Tourism, Udayana University – Bali 4Centre of Excellence in Tourism Udayana University - Bali
Corresponding author: [email protected]
ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT
Received
20 January 2018
Accepted
15 February 2019
Available online 18 March 2019
Golf is one of several sport tourist attractions that are increasingly demanding by domestic and foreign tourists during their visit to Bali. Unlike the others type of tourist attractions, golf tourism could be classified as a quality attraction. Tourists who play golf spend more money than other sport activities. Refers to this fact, golf tourism could be an alternative to realizing the establishment of quality tourism in Bali. This work aims to study the significance of the determinants of tourists' satisfaction as well as their loyalty in visiting Bali as a destination that offers golf attractions. Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation from golfers are positioned as the antecedent of the level of satisfaction with their trust to the golf providers acts as the mediation of the causal relationship occured. Using 5-scale Likert questionnaire, the opinions of 113 foreign tourists who played golf in Bali were used to examine the structural equation models that were built. The results of the analysis show that both types of motivation have positive influences on tourist trust in golf operators, and through the trust mediation, these motivations positively influence the level of tourist loyalties. The results of the analysis also showed that tourists’ trust to the golf operators had a significant effect on tourist loyalty. The main findings of this research conclude the vital role of tourists’ trust to the golf operators in Bali in increasing their loyalty to play golf while visiting Bali.
Keywords : golf, trust, satisfaction, loyalties, motivation, SEM.
INTRODUCTION
Background
Tourism along with the agricultural sector, is the main pillar for the economic growth of Bali Province. In the year 2015 the
number of foreign tourist visited to Bali was recorded 4,001,835 people, in 2016 amounted to 4,927,937 people, and in 2017 increased to 5,697,739 people (Bali Provincial Tourism Office, 2018). Based
on these data, Bali Province has a very strategic position in the development of Indonesian tourism.
The rapid development of Bali tourism is inseparable from the dynamics of the external environment, namely: (a) the increased awareness of quality tourism; (b) the better arrangement of national tourism with the establishment of three categories of tourism products; and (c) the increasing new tourism destinations. These conditions signal Bali to start abandon the tourism development paradigm or strategy that is only focused for increasing the number of tourist tourists alone (mass tourism), but dare to turn to a quality tourism development strategy (quality tourism).
According to International Association of Golf Tour Operators (IAGTO), in the year 2012 the value of worldwide golf business is around USD 20 billions (IAGTO, 2013) and become a driving force for the rapid growth of golf tourism in various countries such as Kazakhstan, Nicaragua, Myanmar, and Afghanistan. In addition, the data also show that the spending of golfers are higher than other tourists. Refers to Mr. George Chandra, CEO of The Royale Jakarta Golf Club, foreign tourists that playing golf while their visit to Indonesia generally spend USD 5,000–6,000; or around 5 to 6 times greater than ‘ordinary’ http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eot
tourists that were recorded as much as USD 1,190 (Tourism Ministry of Indonesia, 2015). Those facts show the potential of golf tourism to develop and to establish in Bali, to shift the development agenda from mass tourism towards quality tourism.
Research Objectives
Various marketing theories believe motivation is an important antecedent in determining consumer decisions to buy the goods and/or services. In this work, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation are positioned as the antecedents of tourists' interest in playing golf while in Bali. As a consequence, the tourists’ loyalty to revisit Bali was examined. The causal relationship is built between antecedent and consequent variables, and tourists’ trust on golf operator is placed as the mediator variable. Specifically, this work aims to:
-
1. Study the effects of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation of tourists playing golf in Bali on their trust in golf operators;
-
2. Study the direct effects of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation on tourists’ loyalty to revisit Bali;
-
3. Examine the mediation role of the trust in causal relationship between motivation and tourists loyalty; and
-
4. Elaborate the total effects intrinsic and extrinsic motivation on tourists’ loyalty to revisit Bali.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Motivation has a lot of meaning and definition. For example, Ryan & Deci (2000) interpreted motivation as “… to be moved to do something.”. This definition implies that one person with no motive to acts for doing something will be categorized as an unmotivated person. Mill & Morrison (1998) argued motivation arise when people wants to satisfy his/her need. In general, according to Moutinho (1987), motivation is a driving force to assure a person get satisfaction based on his/her action. Some literatures, for example Ryan & Deci (2000), Bénabou & Tirole (2003), Reinholdt (2007), Yoo, Han and Huang (2012); differentiate the motivation into two types, i.e. intrinsic motivation, and extrinsic motivation. According to Ryan and Deci (2000), the motivation should be viewed from two perspectives, namely (a) the level of motivation, and (b) the orientation of motivation. The level of motivation refers to ‘how much’ of motivation arise in doing certain activity, whilest the orientation points to the ‘type’ of motivation directs one in doing an activity. Both authors, in 1985 introduced
the Self-Determination Theory (SDT) to differentiate type of motivation that responsible for doing an activity based on reasons or goals. They introduced the intrinsic motivation which is refers to the enjoyable or attractiveness of an activity to be experienced, and the extrinsic motivation which refers to doing activity because the actors hope to get separable outcome (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Regarding the rise of electronic marketing on products/services offered in tourism businesses, the trust amongs participant (producers as well consumers) become an important part of marketing strategies. Refers to Mayer and Davis (1995), trust is “the willingness of a party to be vulnerable to the actions of another party based on the expectation that the other will perform a particular action important to the trustor, irrespective of the ability to monitor or control that other party.”. The keypoint of this definition is the willingness to take risk that the experience did not conform the expectation. For golf attraction in Bali, the players take risk that the golf operators as well as the golf course may be not fulfill the advertisement. According to Ratnasingam (2012), the trust can be differentiated into three categories, which are:
-
1. Competence trusts, refers to the ability of producers to provide products and/or services as well as e-ISSN: 2407-392X. p-ISSN: 2541-0857
to demonstrate their capabilities and/or competencies which are match to the promise they offered;
-
2. Predictability trust, refers to the consistency of quality of products and/or services that are perceived by the consumers; and
|
3. Relationship |
trust, |
refers |
to |
|
customers’ |
reliance |
upon |
the |
|
honesty, concern, |
and |
care | |
demonstrated by the providers.
The last concept involved on our work is destination loyalty. Marketing literature noted the repeating purchases or a recommendation to third party by consumers referred to consumers’ loyalty. By considering tourist destinations as a product and/or service offered, the concept of destination loyalty could be applied. Recently, tourism researchers have included the visitors’ loyalty into tourism products/services. Jacoby and Chestnut (1978) cited in Yoon and Uysal (2005; p. 48) argued the measurement of loyalty can be measured in one the following: (a) the behavioral approach; (b) the attitudinal approach; and (c) the composite approach. In our work, we measured golfers’ loyalty by applying the behavioral approach, and has been characterized by sequence of purchase, proportion of patronage, or probability of purchase (Yoon & Uysal, 2005).
METHODOLOGY
The data collection of this work was conducted at five golf resorts in Bali, namely Bali National Golf Club - Nusa Dua, Bukit Pandawa Golf & Country Club, Bali Handara Kosaido Country Club, New Kuta Golf, and Bali Beach Golf Course. Applying the quantitative approach, the data was collected by distributing questionnaires to 113 foreign tourists who played golf at above resorts on September 2017. The statements on the questionnaire are closed statements with 5 degrees Likert’s scale with 1 represents the most negative assessment or perception, and 5 shows the most positive judgment or perception. Item validity and reliability measurement were carried out prior to data collection by spreading it to 35 tourists who played golf at The Bali Beach Golf Course on July 2017. Items that are not or less valid are repaired or eliminated, before the final data collection is carried out. Structural equation model is used as shown in figure 1:
Figure 1. The Operational Model of the Work
To study the effect of intrinsic as well as extrinsic motivation toward the visitors’ loyalties to play golf while visiting Bali, the trust of visitors to the golf operators was positioned as the mediator construct. The hypotheses in our work are as follow:
H1 : The intrinsic motivation of visitors has a positif effect on the their trust to the golf operators. The greater their intrinsic motivation will cause the greater on their trust;
H2 : The extrinsic motivation of visitors has a positif effect on the their trust to the golf operators. The greater their intrinsic motivation will cause the greater on their trust;
H3 : The intrinsic motivation of visitors has a positif effect on the their
loyalties for playing golf while
visiting Bali. The greater their
intrinsic motivation will increased
their loyalties;
H4 : The extrinsic motivation of visitors has a positif effect on the their
loyalties for playing golf while
visiting Bali. The greater their
extrinsic motivation will increased
their loyalties;
H5 : Visitors’ trust to the golf operators mediates the effects of intrinsic as well extrinsic motivation toward their loyalties for playing golf in Bali.
To validate those hypotheses, we applied partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) and we used SmartPLS (Ringle et al., 2014) as an analytical tool. This technique is used with following considerations:
-
1. The sample size is relatively small. Categorized as a non-parametrical technique, PLS-SEM is not limited to fulfill the normality distribution assumption likes its counterpart covariance-based SEM (Kencana & Manutami, 2016). In addition, Tenenhaus et al. (2005) showed PLS-SEM did not loose its power test even for very limited sample;
-
2. The application of PLS-SEM among social researchers tend to increase, recently. According to Bollen (2002) and Tenenhaus et al. (2005), PLS-SEM is a powerful tool to study the causal relationship amongst latent variables.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The Quality of Instrument
Prior to data collecting, we tested the quality of questionnaire by distributing it to 35 golfers at The Bali Beach Golf Course on July 2017. For each of four constructs involved in our model, the item validity and construct reliability are measured. According to Churchill (1979), a reflective item is declared valid to measure a construct if its correlation with the total items in respective construct is greater or equal to 0.30; and the construct is said reliable if its Cronbach’s alpha (α) at least 0.60 (Hair et al., 1995). Using SPSS 25, we checked the quality of instrument by analyzing 31 questionnaires (4 questionnaires were eliminated because they did not completely fill). The result is showed on Table 1.
The table shows all of the contructs have reliable measurement by noting the alpha (α) coefficients are greater than the threshold value 0.60. In addition, for each http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eot
contruct, all of its reflective items have the correlation values are greater than 0.30 as suggested. From these viewpoints, we conclude our questionnaire sufficient to use for data collection.
Table 1. The quality assessment of the
questionnaire
|
Latent Variable |
Code |
Short Description |
Corr elatio n |
α if Delete d |
|
INT01 |
Play golf gives other experiences |
0.300 |
0.722 | |
|
Intrinsic |
INT02 |
Play golf to escape from daily routines |
0.453 |
0.628 |
|
INT03 |
To improve | |||
|
Motivatio | ||||
|
n α Coef. = |
golf’s skill & knowledge |
0.427 |
0.646 | |
|
0.684 |
INT04 |
Like playing/parti cipating in golf activities |
0.418 |
0.643 |
|
INT05 |
Play golf for | |||
|
relaxation & |
0.721 |
0.624 | ||
|
health | ||||
|
EXT01 |
Love to play at new golf |
0.609 |
0.682 | |
|
Extrinsic |
resort | |||
|
Motivatio |
EXT02 |
Interested to | ||
|
n |
play at |
0.756 |
0.639 | |
|
α Coef. = |
famous | |||
|
0.752 |
destination | |||
|
EXT03 |
The resort |
0.534 |
0.706 | |
|
has good |
|
facilities & services |
LOY02 Willing to promote Bali |
0.492 |
0.848 | ||||
|
EXT04 |
The resort has beautiful |
0.533 |
0.712 |
as a golf destination | |||
|
sceneries |
LOY03 Willing to | ||||||
|
EXT05 |
Be a member of a community/g |
0.404 |
0.820 |
revisit Bali on next holidays |
0.801 |
0.764 | |
|
olf club |
LOY04 Willing to | ||||||
|
TRU01 |
The operators have enough experiences |
0.785 |
0.897 |
recommend to friends or relatives for playing golf in Bali |
0.836 |
0.750 | |
|
TRU02 |
The | ||||||
|
Trust to Golf Operators α Coef. = 0.915 |
operators provide safety & security during playing golf |
0.726 |
0.908 |
LOY05 More lilely to choose Bali than the other destination for playing golf |
0.461 |
0.864 | |
|
TRU03 |
The | ||||||
|
operators have good reputation |
0.834 |
0.886 |
Source: Own analysis (2018) The Participants’ Profile | ||||
|
TRU04 |
The | ||||||
|
operators qualified in managing the golf course |
0.783 |
0.896 |
As aforementioned, a hundred and thirteen tourists who play golf while visiting Bali were participate on our work. However, five data were not eligible to | ||||
|
TRU05 |
The operators competent in satisfying the players |
0.806 |
0.892 |
analyze because of incomplete response. The remaining data (a hundred and eight data) were further analyzed. Descriptively, the gender of participant is dominated by male golfers (85 per cent), belong to 26-55 years group (59 per cent), and 31 per cent stated their main job are professional | |||
|
Loyalties α Coef. = 0.835 |
LOY01 |
Willing to say positive things |
0.739 |
0.780 | |||
workers/manager in their own country. Most of them (81 per cent) can be classified as the repeater guests by noting the number of their visit to Bali more than two times, even more than a half of them have been visited Bali at least five times including current visit. From these viewpoints, it can be concluded tourists who enjoyed to play golf while visiting Bali are the loyal tourists, are grouped in the middle ages with middle to upper income level.
In addition, their main motives to visit Bali is for holiday or recreation (57 per cent), than playing golf in the second position (7 per cent). The main reason they come to Bali either for vacation or playing golf is the famous of Balinese arts and culture. The interesting point is the option that visiting Bali because of its (cheap) price takes place at the last reason; it was chosen by 2 participants (1,6 per cent). This fact is a positive indicator to say golf tourism is a proper choice to shift the mass tourism development into quality tourism.
The Measurement Model
Basically, PLS-SEM consists of two sub-models, i.e. (a) the measurement or outer model, and (b) the structural or inner model. Many references regarding SEM recommend to elaborate each of these sub-model, respcetively, before http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eot 95
inferences were made (Hair, Hult, Ringle, & Sarstedt, 2014; Kencana & Darmayanti, 2017; Peng & Lai, 2012). On SEM, the measurement or outer model represents the causal relationship between a construct and its indicators/items. This relationship can be classified into two categories, namely reflective or formative relationship. For the reflective relationship, is characterized by all of items is depended on their respective construct, the researcher has to check the average variance extracted (AVE) and the composite reliability (CR) values. Both values represent the internal consistency as well the convergence of a construct. Refering Hair et al. (2014), to assure a construct has sufficient internal consistency, the CR have to ≥ 0.708; and construct’s convergence is achieved when the AVE ≥ 0.50 (Peng & Lai, 2012). For formative relationship, the researcher has to show the path coefficient(s) from the item(s) to the respective construct is significant. Guiding by the threshold values for the AVE and the CR, we examine the measurement model with the result is showed on Table 2. This table showed intrinsic as well extrinsic motivation has AVE less than the threshold although the CRs are greater than 0.708 as suggested. By carefully inspection of the outer (factor) loading of each items in intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation, we found INT01, INT02, and EXT04 are the items with loading less than 0.60. Despite of its significance values, according to Henseler, Hubona and Ray (2016), the item should be reviewed to become an indicator of a construct if its loading less than 0.60. To do this, we eliminate the item(s) sequently, start from the item with the lowest outer loading value; and the similar inspection was conducted. The final measurement model is listed on Table 3.
Table 2. The result of measurement model
|
Latent Variable |
Item Code |
Stan | ||
|
Factor Loadi ng |
dard Devi ation |
p-value | ||
|
Intrinsic |
INT01 |
0.573 |
0.136 |
0.000 |
|
Motivation AVE = 0.405 |
INT02 |
0.587 |
0.130 |
0.000 |
|
INT03 |
0.654 |
0.113 |
0.000 | |
|
CR = |
INT04 |
0.747 |
0.107 |
0.000 |
|
0.771 |
INT05 |
0.604 |
0.137 |
0.000 |
|
Extrinsic |
EXT01 |
0.761 |
0.156 |
0.000 |
|
Motivation AVE = 0.456 |
EXT02 |
0.724 |
0.161 |
0.000 |
|
EXT03 |
0.672 |
0.112 |
0.000 | |
|
CR = |
EXT04 |
0.560 |
0.162 |
0.000 |
|
0.806 |
EXT05 |
0.643 |
0.146 |
0.000 |
|
Trust to |
TRU01 |
0.781 |
0.053 |
0.000 |
|
Golf |
TRU02 |
0.821 |
0.047 |
0.000 |
|
Operators AVE = |
TRU03 |
0.809 |
0.060 |
0.000 |
|
0.637 |
TRU04 |
0.850 |
0.042 |
0.000 |
|
CR = |
TRU05 |
0.723 |
0.079 |
0.000 |
|
0.897 | ||||
|
LOY0 1 |
0.642 |
0.125 |
0.000 | |
|
Loyalties |
LOY0 2 |
0.839 |
0.123 |
0.000 |
|
AVE = | ||||
|
0.586 CR = |
LOY0 3 |
0.810 |
0.137 |
0.000 |
|
0.875 |
LOY0 4 |
0.856 |
0.141 |
0.000 |
|
LOY0 5 |
0.654 |
0.141 |
0.000 | |
Source: Own analysis (2018)
Table 3 concluded all of the constructs with their respective items have sufficient internal consistency as well convergent validity to represent the measurement model. For intrinsic motivation, the tourists play golf while visiting Bali are mostly driving by motive to play or participating in golf activities. For extrinsic motivation, tourists explain they love to play golf at new golf resort (EXT01) and they are anthusiast to play golf in Bali as a favourite destination around the world (EXT02). Furthermore, their trust to golf operators qualify in managing the golf course (TRU04) and their willingness to recommend to their friends or relatives playing golf in Bali (LOY04) are the items with the greatest outer loading for each of respective construct. Based on the measurement model, we conclude that all of the
contructs or latent variables in the model are worth to analysis their causal relationship in the inner sub-model.
|
Table 3. The result of final |
measurement | |||
|
model | ||||
|
Standa | ||||
|
Factor | ||||
|
Latent |
Item |
rd |
p- | |
|
Loadi | ||||
|
Variable |
Code |
Deviati |
value | |
|
ng | ||||
|
on | ||||
|
Intrinsic |
INT03 |
0.723 |
0.118 |
0.000 |
|
Motivation |
INT04 |
0.836 |
0.099 |
0.000 |
|
= | ||||
|
0.557 | ||||
|
CR = |
INT05 |
0.671 |
0.159 |
0.000 |
|
0.789 | ||||
|
Extrinsic |
EXT01 |
0.762 |
0.175 |
0.000 |
|
Motivation |
EXT02 |
0.743 |
0.181 |
0.000 |
|
= | ||||
|
EXT03 |
0.728 |
0.119 |
0.000 | |
|
0.526 | ||||
|
CR = | ||||
|
EXT05 |
0.665 |
0.161 |
0.000 | |
|
0.816 | ||||
|
Trust to |
TRU01 |
0.786 |
0.050 |
0.000 |
|
Golf |
TRU02 |
0.821 |
0.049 |
0.000 |
|
Operators | ||||
|
TRU03 |
0.798 |
0.071 |
0.000 | |
|
AVE = | ||||
|
TRU04 |
0.846 |
0.048 |
0.000 | |
|
0.636 | ||||
|
CR = | ||||
|
TRU05 |
0.731 |
0.079 |
0.000 | |
|
0.897 | ||||
|
LOY01 |
0.646 |
0.134 |
0.000 | |
|
Loyalties | ||||
|
AVE = |
LOY02 |
0.848 |
0.133 |
0.000 |
|
0.587 |
LOY03 |
0.810 |
0.154 |
0.000 |
|
CR = |
LOY04 |
0.858 |
0.158 |
0.000 |
|
0.875 |
LOY05 |
0.640 |
0.154 |
0.000 |
|
Source: Own analysis (2018) | ||||
The Inner Model
Contrary to variance-based SEM software such as AMOS or LISREL that uses parametrical techniques in estimating the path coefficients for, SmartPLS utilizes a non-parametrical approach in calculating the coefficients between exogenous and endogenous contructs. For the inner model, we applied bootstrap method with 5000 sub-samples. In examining the inner model, in addition to path coefficients and their significance values, Hair et al. (2014) recommend to evaluate the coefficient of determination (R2) for each of endogenous contructs in the inner model. The threshold values to declare an endogenous construct is weak, moderate, or substantial are 0.19, 0.33, and 0.67 (Kencana & Manutami, 2017; Wiranatha, Suryawardani,
Satriawan, Pujaastawa, & Kencana, 2016). The greater the R2, the more power of exogenous constructs in describing the endogenous one. Table 4 shows the result of the inner model by applying bootstraping technique in SmartPLS 3.
Discussion
From table 4, it is clear that both endogenous constructs have been weak described by their exogenous. Despite of this fact, the causal relationship amongst exogenous and endogenous constructs e-ISSN: 2407-392X. p-ISSN: 2541-0857
gives some important points. First, both motivations have significant effects on trust. Intrinsic as well extrinsic motivation of tourists to play golf while visiting Bali is significantly affects their trust to the golf operators. The more their motives, the more their trust to the operators. From this finding, we can not reject the hypotheses H1 and H2 that are stated the intrinsic motivation of players (H1) as well their extrinsic motivation (H2) affect positively their trust to golf operators in five golf courses in Bali.
Secondly, the effect from the intrinsic motivation is slightly greater than the extrinsic motivation. This finding is inline with the work by Yoo, Han and Huang (2012) whom studied intrinsic and extrinsic motivators in promoting elearning. They found intrinsic motivators (effort, attitude, and anxiety) affected the intention to use e-learning more strongly than extrinsic motivators (performance expentancy, social influence, and facilitating condition). Another work that also demonstrated extrinsic motivation did fit to use as an antecedent of trust is conducted by Akhlaq and Ahmed (2013) whom studied the effect of motivation on trust. By setting their work on trust in the acceptance of internet banking in Pakistan, both authors argued only intrinsic motivation is responsible to affect users’ acceptance.
Table 4. The result of inner model
Variabel
Path Coefficients
Latents
|
Direct |
Indirect |
Total | |||||
|
Endo |
Effect |
Effect |
Effect | ||||
|
Exoge nous | |||||||
|
geno us |
Co ef. |
p-val |
Co ef. |
p-val |
Co ef. |
p-val | |
|
ue |
ue |
ue | |||||
|
Intrinsi c Motiva tion |
Trust |
0.2 37 |
0.0 42 |
- |
- |
0.2 37 |
0.0 42 |
|
Extrins ic Motiva tion |
Trust |
0.2 21 |
0.0 14 |
- |
- |
0.2 21 |
0.0 14 |
|
Intrinsi | |||||||
|
c |
Loya |
0.1 |
0.1 |
0.0 |
0.1 |
0.2 |
0.0 |
|
Motiva |
lty |
77 |
20 |
55 |
31 |
32 |
45 |
|
tion | |||||||
|
Extrins | |||||||
|
ic |
Loya |
0.0 |
0.4 |
0.0 |
0.1 |
0.0 |
0.3 |
|
Motiva |
lty |
04 |
89 |
52 |
08 |
56 |
60 |
|
tion | |||||||
|
Trust |
Loya lty |
0.2 34 |
0.0 32 |
- |
- |
0.2 34 |
0.0 32 |
|
Note |
: R2 |
for |
Trust = |
0.156; |
R2 for | ||
|
Loyalty |
= 0.116 | ||||||
* significant at 5 percent; ns not significant
Source : Own analysis (2018)
Third, tourists’ trust to golf operators significantly affect their loyalty. The more tourists’ trust to the operators, the more their level of loyalties. This loyalty is mostly reflects to the willingness to recommend for playing golf in Bali (LOY04) with path coefficient as much as 0.858, than follows by the willingness to promote Bali as a golf destination (LOY02) with path coefficient equal to 0.848. Similar research conducted by Čater & Čater (2009) also confirmed the effect of trust on customers’ loyalty. They found the trust to professional service providers is directly influenced the affective commitment, and in turn will gives positive effect on customer loyalties. Other research that supports our work is conducted by Sarwar, Abbasi, & Pervaiz (2012). The authors studied the effect of customers’ trust on customer loyalty as well and customer retention in cellular operators in Pakistan. They found customers’ trust to the cellular operators had positive and significant effect on their loyalties to the companies, with the effect is equal to 0.559. Considering these two researches, we argue that the visitors’ trust to golf operators in Bali is very important to create their loyalties to revisit Bali.
Finally, both motivations did not show significantly direct influence on tourists’ loyalty to play golf while visiting Bali. Both path coefficients from intrinsic http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eot 99
and extrinsic motivation to tourists’ loyalty as much as 0.177 and 0.004, respectively, did not prove statistically significant. However, by the mediation effect of their trust to the operators, the total effect of intrinsic motivation become significant with the path value increased to 0.232. Noting the golf resort has beautiful sceneries (INT04) as the dominant reflection of tourists’ intrinsic motivation, and their trust that the operators qualified in managing the golf course (TRU04) as the dominant mediator, it can be understood the signicance effect of intrinsic motives to their loyalties.
CONCLUSSION
Conclussion
Regarding this work that aimed to study the causal relationship amongst motivation of foreign tourists playing golf while their visit to Bali, their trust to golf opetrators, as well their loyalties, several points can be concluded:
-
1. Descriptively, the primary motive of foreign tourists to visit Bali is for holiday or recreation and their main reason to come is experienced the famous of Balinese arts and culture as well as to play golf. Noting that price is the least consideration for their coming, than golf tourism is a proper choice to shift the mass
tourism development in Bali into quality tourism;
-
2. The intrinsic motivation of tourists playing golf in Bali is dominated by the desire to enjoy the beautiful sceneries of the golf course, and the extrinsic motivation of tourists playing golf in Bali is dominated their desires to play at new golf resort and the reputation of Bali as a famous tourist destination. In additon, both motivations have direct influence toward tourists’ trust to the golf operators. Their trust that the operators qualified in managing the golf course as well as their capabilities to provide safety & security during playing golf is the keys of the trust in golf tourism in Bali; and
-
3. Noting tourists' trust is the main determinant of the structural equation model developed in this study, the efforts to maintain and increase their trust to the golf operators are vital so that the level of their loyalty to play golf in Bali can be maintained and/or improved.
REFERENCES
Akhlaq, A., & Ahmed, E. (2013). The effect of motivation on trust in the acceptance of internet banking in a low income country. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 31(2), 115–125.
https://doi.org/10.1108/02652321311 298690
Bénabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2003). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation. Review of Economic Studies, 70, 489–520.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7883-6_270-1
Čater, B., & Čater, T. (2009). Emotional and rational motivations for customer loyalty in business-to-business
professional services. Service Industries Journal, 29(8), 1151–1169. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/02642060902764780
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). London, UK: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Henseler, J., Hubona, G., & Ray, P. A. (2016). Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: updated guidelines. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 116(1), 2–20.
https://doi.org/ 10.1108/IMDS-09-2015-0382
Kencana, E. N., & Darmayanti, T. (2017). Causality between Frequency of Visit with Tourists ’ Satisfaction: A Multi - group Analysis. Udayana Journal of Social Sciences And Humanities, 1(2), 128–134.
Kencana, E. N., & Manutami, T. (2017). Structural Model to Evaluate the Effect of Community Participation on
Ecotourism Sustainability. Journal of Physics: Conf. Series, (012030), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.4527 .7525
Mayer, Roger C.; Davis, J. H. (1995). Model of Trust Theory. Academy of Management Review., 20(July), 709– 734.
Moutinho, L. (1987). Consumer Behaviour in Tourism. European Journal of Marketing, 21(10), 5–44.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof
Peng, D. X., & Lai, F. (2012). Using partial least squares in operations management research: A practical guideline and summary of past research. Journal of Operations Management, 30(6), 467–480.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2012.06. 002
Ratnasingam, P. (2012). Customer’s Trust Indicators in the Online Hotel Booking Decision. International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology, 2(2), 192–198. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6d72 /da2246fcfa16281e536e54a829e47a8 20373.pdf
Reinholdt, M. (2007). No More Polarization, Please! Towards a More Nuanced Perspective on Motivation in Organizations. Ssrn, (May). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.982108
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000).
Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54– 67. https://doi.org/10.1006/
ceps.1999.1020
Sarwar, M. Z., Abbasi, K. S., & Pervaiz, S. (2012). The Effect of Customer Trust on Customer Loyalty and Customer
Retention: A Moderating Role of Cause Related Marketing. Global Journal of Management And Business, 12(6), 26–36.
Wiranatha, A. S., Suryawardani, A. O., Satriawan, K., Pujaastawa, I. B., & Kencana, E. N. (2016). Strategi Pemasaran Pariwisata Berbasis Subak di Bali Bagi Wisatawan Mancanegara. Denpasar -- Bali.
Yoo, S. J., Han, S. H., & Huang, W. (2012). The roles of intrinsic motivators and extrinsic motivators in promoting e-learning in the workplace: A case from South Korea. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(3), 942–950.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.12. 015
Yoon, Y., & Uysal, M. (2005). An examination of the effects of motivation and satisfaction on
destination loyalty: A structural model. Tourism Management, 26(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.tourman.2003.08.016
http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eot
101
e-ISSN: 2407-392X. p-ISSN: 2541-0857
Discussion and feedback