The Role of CVBs in Visitor Product Development
Darren Rudloff
President & CEO
Cheyenne Area Convention and Visitors Bureau
October 2008
1
CVB Product Development 2
The Role of United States CVBs in Visitor Product Development
Most convention and visitor bureaus (CVBs) in the United States developed as
destination marketing organizations that performed marketing and sales roles for both leisure and
convention markets. As a result, most CVBs have not traditionally participated in developing
visitor product. However, this CVB predisposition to only marketing and sales functions may be
changing. This paper will examine the current roles played by United States CVBs in visitor
product development and determine trends taking place in the CVB industry.
Background
Both academic and practitioner research on the roles of CVBs in visitor product
development is relatively sparse. For instance, major tourism textbooks spend little, if any, time
examining CVB input into product development (Morrison, 2002; Goeldner, 2003). Even when
the textbook covers community planning, visioning, and development issues, CVBs are not
attributed a direct role (Goeldner, pp. 411-460). Likewise, CVB guidebooks produced by
tourism industry groups often skip product development (Ford, 2008; Gartrell, 1994; Harrill,
2003). Even the performance measures recommended for CVBs by International Association of
CVBs (recently renamed Destination Marketing Association International (DMAI)) include no
standards for product development activities (IACVB, 2004).
Apparently both academics and practitioners have not written much about CVB product
development because very few CVBs have been pursuing it. Some research bears this out. In
his 1992 book Tourist Organizations, D. Pearce concluded that U.S. destination marketing
organizations largely left product development to the private sector and failed to intervene in
2
CVB Product Development 3
such issues (Pearce, 1992, p. 189). In 1998, Getz, Anderson, and Sheehan surveyed Canadian
CVBs to determine their level of planning and product development. They found that the “level
of bureau involvement in product development in Canada was revealed to be fairly low, and
while higher levels of involvement occur in destination planning it is often ad hoc and reactive”
(Getz, Anderson, & Sheehan, 1998, p. 338).
However, this lack of CVB focus on product development appears to be changing.
Recently DMAI has promoted CVB destination management, including product development,
through various training initiatives. For instance DMAI’s latest CVB handbook Fundamentals
of Destination Management and Marketing (Harrill, 2005) includes a chapter on product
development. Also, DMAI’s professional development program and CVB accreditation
program both include destination development segments (Purdue University, 2004; The Institute
For Convention and Visitors Bureau Accreditation, 2004) . DMAI’s CVB branding initiative
includes product development as a means to develop a destination brand (Knapp, 2005, pp. 5374), and its recent “Futures Study” includes discussion of the need for destination development
(Destination Marketing Association International, 2008). Finally, trade publications for the
conventions / meetings industry are occasionally noting CVB development roles in articles about
the CVB industry (Russell and Swisher, 2008; Association Meetings, 2008).
Finally, it must be noted that much tourism product development advice can be found in
the efforts of state agricultural extension services and rural development authorities. These
entities offer a variety of useful guidebooks, websites, and workshops on economic development
strategies that routinely include tourism (Texas Agriculture Extension Service, 1995; University
of Wisconsin Extension, 2005; Michigan State University Extension, 2005). Many CVBs and
state tourism offices cooperate with these services to improve their tourism industries.
3
CVB Product Development 4
Methodology
Defining visitor product development is a somewhat tricky task. Getz et al. defined it as
follows: “Product development refers to the creation of attractions or services to be used or
purchased by visitors, including packages” (Getz et al., 1998, p. 331). DMAI’s professional
development coursework produced by Purdue University says that “destination product
development … encompasses the core destination mix of attractions, events, facilities, services
and related visitor infrastructure” (Purdue University, 2004). A slightly different perspective is
offered by Robert Glover:
Tourism product development is setting up and getting ready to ring a cash
register with new dollars brought into a community by visitors with regards to
events (current and historic or cultural), locations (man-made and natural
environment), properties (sites and facilities), materials (guides, books, maps),
and operations (controlled functions and activities that attract and/or
accommodate people) (Glover, 1998).
4
CVB Product Development 5
These definitions include similar components that create a visitor’s experience in a destination.
For the purpose of this paper and its survey of CVB practitioners, the following definition will be
used: Visitor product development is the creation of attractions, visitor packages, services,
events, facilities, and visitor-related infrastructure used by visitors to a destination.
Given a definition of visitor product development, it is now possible to examine the
various roles United States CVBs are playing in product development. The roles are not clearcut and distinct. Instead, a product development continuum exists ranging from no efforts to low
levels of activity (supporting/facilitating products) to high levels of activity (investing/ operating
products) (Purdue University, 2004). A CVB may play a number of these roles, varying its
response to individual projects based upon each projects’ unique set of circumstances.
To determine the current roles played by CVBs in the United States, the author surveyed
the CVB executives of DMAI’s United States membership with brief internet questionnaires in
2005 and 2008. Both surveys had response rates exceeding 40% (2005 – 45%; 2008 – 43%).
Results from the 2005 survey led to several definitional improvements in classifying product
development activities and raised issues for further study. The 2008 survey incorporated these
improvements. While the 2008 and 2005 results are somewhat similar, the modified definitions
prohibit direct comparisons between the data sets. This paper focuses on the improved data from
the 2008 survey, although some of the CVB comments and examples are from the 2005 survey.
The 2008 questionnaire asked the CVB CEO for his or her CVB’s product development
role, CVB budget size, market type, organization type, and any comments on the subject. For
the purpose of the survey, visitor product development roles were identified as follows:
No Role – The CVB markets the visitor products that are available and leaves visitor product
5
CVB Product Development 6
development to other private and public entities.
Minor Role – The CVB does “soft” development such as packaging and acts as a supporter of
"hard" or physical development that is produced by other entities. Ex: Packaging; Creation of
walking tours; Marketing grants to events; Serving on community boards of directors; Providing
support (board resolutions, market research) to developers of public / private physical projects.
Active Role – The CVB acts as a catalyst to create "hard" or physical visitor products. Ex:
Producing feasibility studies for convention centers, attractions, etc; Recruiting attractions,
lodging, and other visitor products; Developing organizations (arts groups, sports commissions,
etc.).
Major Role – The CVB finances and/or operates "hard" or physical visitor products. Ex:
Convention centers, trolley /transportation systems, parking structures, other attractions.
Results
No Role in Visitor Product Development
While the previous Canadian and U.S. research revealed little visitor product development
activity in North American CVBs, the 2008 survey showed otherwise. As Chart 1 shows, only
5.3% of U.S. CVBs stated that they played no role in visitor product development.
Chart 1
Product Development Roles of U.S. CVBs, 2008
6
CVB Product Development 7
45.5%
50%
39.8%
40%
30%
20%
9.4%
10%
5.3%
0%
No Role
Minor
Active
Major
Source: 2008 Survey of U.S. CVB members of DMAI (n=244).
Several philosophical and practical reasons exist for playing no role in visitor product
development. Some argue that a CVB should not directly enter the marketplace and influence
development. Doing so may cause conflicts with existing businesses that are CVB members.
“We feel that it (product development) is a conflict of interest. How do you choose an area
in all fairness?” (2005 survey)
“It can be a delicate situation when tasked with promoting existing business and at the same
time involved with bringing new business that could compete directly. This is particularly
sensitive with membership based organizations.” (2008 survey)
A very practical reason for not entering into visitor product development is the absence of
an official product development mandate and mission. Since CVBs began as sales and marketing
organizations, they do not have expertise and resource base to play such a role (Getz et al. 1998,
7
CVB Product Development 8
p. 339). Several respondents mentioned this, saying they relied upon chambers of commerce,
economic development organizations, city councils, and mayors to take the lead in visitor product
development. CVB size can also be a causal factor in not pursing a product development role as
noted by one executive: “We are a small, one person operation and don’t have the resources at
this time to become more involved with tourism development.” (2008 survey)
An example of a CVB not active in visitor product development is the Chicago North
Shore CVB (2005 survey). According to its executive, the CVB’s area has an abundance of
existing tourism products, most of which have capacity throughout the year. As a result, the
CVB’s mission is to market the products aggressively in an attempt to keep them filled with
visitors. Soliciting and developing additional product is not part of the CVB’s mandate because
doing so would introduce additional competition and capacity.
Minor Role in Visitor Product Development
The survey found that 45.5% of U.S. CVBs reported playing a minor role in visitor
product development. In this role, CVBs produce “soft” development such as packaging and act
as supporters of "hard" or physical development that is produced by other entities. A common
CVB effort in this category is to provide marketing grants for community events with the goal of
increasing overnight stays. In addition, several respondents mentioned providing market
research to hotel and attraction developers.
We initiate, shape, and direct development by others which generate full community
participation and vesting. Our support grants and marketing ensure consistency and initial
quality. (2008 survey)
We consider ourselves to be a resource agency for information on product development
feasibility, etc. We are trying to encourage the office of economic development to take an
active role in providing incentives for visitor product development as they do in
manufacturing. (2008 survey)
8
CVB Product Development 9
A CVB playing a minor role is the Napa Valley Conference and Visitors Bureau (2005
survey). This CVB allows its local chambers of commerce deal with new development.
However, the CVB does work to manage its destination by acting as an apolitical advisor and
facilitator with a variety of competing interests. The CVB executive noted: “We do not solicit
or endorse development projects. We consider ourselves the resource, not the advocate. This
keeps us at the table for the government, environmental groups, and developers.”
Active Role in Visitor Product Development
Almost 40% of CVBs (39.8%) indicated that they play an active role in visitor product
development. No longer passively supporting the plans and developments of other entities, these
CVBs are working to create bricks and mortar products to enhance the visitor experience in their
communities.
Survey respondents described a number of reasons why their CVBs are playing this
activist product development role. First, several commented that it was imperative for the CVB
to be included in community development decisions, echoing the strong statement from one
respondent: “It is the duty of all CVBs to be the voice in their community for the development
and management of the visitor product. … CVBs have earned a place at the table and should not
be shunned.” (2005 survey) Several added that a CVB should have a role in product
development as the “voice of the visitors, educating the industry as to what visitors expect and
want in a visitor experience.” (2008 survey) Another respondent added that his CVB’s product
development efforts helped deliver on the community’s “brand promise.” (2005 survey)
The Chicago Southland CVB is a good example of a CVB that acts as a catalyst to bring
new products to fruition (2005 survey). The CVB works to bring all the relevant players
9
CVB Product Development 10
together to either solve problems (such as dealing with major highway construction problems
with enhanced billboards and signage) or to respond to opportunities (attracting a sports team by
unifying and selling the entire market area). The CVB does not offer financial contributions for
such developments: Its role is to activate and bring together resources from the 60 municipalities
in its jurisdiction.
Major Role in Visitor Product Development
CVBs playing a major role in product development comprise 9.4% of CVB respondents.
These CVBs are actually participating in the financing and operation of visitor products.
Examples of projects financed or operated by CVBs include convention centers, sports arenas,
parks, visitor centers, parking structures, and various attractions. Some of these CVBs have
grant programs that provide seed money for development projects.
The Asheville Convention & Visitors Bureau is an example of such a CVB (2005
survey). The CVB raised its lodging tax from 3 to 4 cents in 2001 with the additional penny
(worth $1.3 million) devoted to a Tourism Product Development Fund. These funds are used for
loans or grants for brick and mortar projects that enhance the Asheville visitor experience. Using
this program, the Asheville CVB has providing funding for a soccer field complex, an
arboretum, a new visitor center, a historic building that houses specialty shops, and a major
downtown park. The Board requires the grant recipient to provide an annual report on progress,
but the Board maintains no other management role in the project.
CVB Organizational Structure and the Product Development Role
Survey results reveal that CVB product development roles vary by the type of
10
CVB Product Development 11
organizational structure used by the CVB as shown in Chart 2. For instance, only 25% of CVBs
in chambers of commerce perform active or major roles in product development compared to
49% for all CVBs. This may be explained by the fact that CVBs in chambers often are young
and/or small CVBs, with relatively small budgets. In addition, chamber CVBs may often be
somewhat subservient to the larger business organization (Ford, p. 123).
CVBs that operate as a part of local government perform product development roles
slightly below the 49% overall average. This less aggressive role may be explained by the
traditional lack of flexibility that local governments often have in terms of operations and
personnel issues (Ford, pp. 18-22). Independent not-for-profit associations are the most common
structure for CVBs in the United States, and they also exhibit product development roles slightly
below the overall average.
CVBs in the miscellaneous organizational types showed the highest levels of product
development activity. Non-profit member associations and other organizational structures had
slightly higher level of product development activity. CVBs organized as special authorities
played active or major product development roles 81% of the time.
Chart 2
CVB Product Development Roles by Organizational Structure, 2008
100%
25%
80%
45%
47%
52%
59%
60%
40%
81%
11
75%
55%
20%
53%
48%
41%
19%
CVB Product Development 12
CVB Size and the Product Development Role
As Chart 3 shows, CVB budget size is related to a CVB’s product development role. In
general, larger CVBs are more likely to play greater product development roles. Among smaller
CVBs (annual budgets under $1 million), 40% report playing substantial or major roles. Among
larger CVBs (annual budgets over $1 million), the figure jumps to 59% playing substantial or
major roles.
Chart 3
CVB Product Development Roles by CVB Budget Size, 2008
12
CVB Product Development 13
100%
2%
9%
10%
90%
19%
80% 31%
PD Role
70%
37%
43%
60%
45%
50%
40% 57%
30%
46%
43%
20%
36%
10%
10%
0%
< $500 K
9%
4%
0%
$500K - $999K
$1 mil - $5 mil
> $5 mil
CVB Budget Size
No Role
Minor
Active
Major
CVB Market Type and the Product Development Role
Produce development roles did not vary much by market type. As shown in Chart 4,
product development roles were fairly consistent between rural, small city, big city suburb, and
big city CVBs. Note the similar percentage of CVBs playing a major role in product
development across the various market types. For clarification, the intent of this question was to
examine various city types, not necessarily size. For instance, the survey defined “big city” as a
city of more than 100,000 people. If “big city” were defined as having a significantly greater
population (for example, above 750,000 population), the data probably would have showed a
greater product development role for the larger cities since they also have the largest CVB
13
CVB Product Development 14
budgets.
Chart 4
Product Development Roles by CVB Market Type
100% 7%
90%
80%
37%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30% 54%
20%
10% 2%
0%
Rural
10%
30%
54%
9%
9%
46%
48%
36%
39%
6%
9%
5%
Small City
Big City Suburb
No Role
Minor
Active
Big City
Major
Conclusions
As stated previously, CVBs have traditionally not been involved in visitor product
development, and as a result, the subject has not received much attention from both academics
and industry groups. However, a significant change is currently occurring in CVB visitor
product development. Industry organizations, media outlets, and CVBs are now paying attention
to visitor product development. Several conclusions arise from the findings of this research.
Importance of CVB Product Development Activity
14
CVB Product Development 15
Survey results reveal that many CVB executives feel very strongly that product
development is a vital activity of their CVBs. Some even feel that the very survival of their
CVBs depends on being successful in product development. Here are some executive comments
on the importance of product development.
Economic development in the area of tourism is critical to development of a sustainable
tourism product and elevates the industry to a more visible level. (2008 survey)
Without further development, we will not grow, so we have to take an active role in
development. It’s almost an act of self preservation for the CVB. (2008 survey)
Increased CVB Product Development Activity
U.S. CVBs are more active in visitor product development than expected. This growth in
CVB product development has occurred only recently, within the past 10 years or so. DMAI has
begun to push this issue, and it is apparently catching on within the CVB industry. Survey
respondents of all sizes and activity levels reported that their involvement in product
development was a relatively recent occurrence:
“It is a relatively recent development - in the past three years we have expanded our
convention center, opened a sports commission and started an arts awareness
partnership.” (2005 survey)
“Our position in product development has increased greatly during the past 3 years.”
(2005 survey)
In addition, many respondents anticipated their product development growing in the future, even
among those executives not currently active in product development.
“In the near future, we will step up an active role in product development.” (2008
survey)
“We need to be more proactive toward these development efforts and are starting to have
these discussions.” (2008 survey)
15
CVB Product Development 16
Some survey respondents revealed feeling pressures from the hospitality industry to be more
proactive in product development:
“We are getting some pressure from members to create events that will put heads in
beds.” (2008 survey)
“With the increase of hotel inventory, our CVB is considering participating on a more
active level with special event development.” (2008 survey)
Growing Product Development Sophistication
Some CVBs are quite sophisticated with their product development goals, strategies, and
programs. Many see their product development role as part of their total destination
management duties where they are actively attempting to shape and improve the visitor
experience in their communities. Others see product development in terms of community
branding and the life cycle of their destination. In light of these sophisticated goals, some CVBs
have added product development committees, product development staff members, and
innovative grant programs to their organizations.
Need for Product Development Research and Guidelines
In light of the growing interest in the subject and greater sophistication, the available
research on CVB product development appears quite minimal. More research on the subject is
warranted. In addition, CVB handbooks from such industry groups as DMAI and the American
Hotel & Lodging Association can continue to increase the attention they pay to CVB product
development to assist CVBs as many enter this new realm of activity.
16
CVB Product Development 17
References
Association Meetings (2008). “The Changing Face of CVBs.” Special advertising section.
Destination Marketing Association International (2008). The Future of Destination Marketing.
Washington, D.C.: author.
Ford, Robert C. and Peeper, William C. Managing Destination Marketing Organizations.
Orlando, Florida: ForPer Publications.
Gartrell, Richard (1994). Destination Marketing for Convention and Visitor Bureaus. Dubuque,
IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.
Getz, D., Anderson, D., and Sheehan, L (1998). Roles, Issues and Strategies for Convention and
Visitors Bureax in Destination Planning and Product Development: A Survey of
Canadian Bureaux. Tourism Management, Vol. 19, No. 4. London, UK: Elsevier Science
Ltd. pp. 331-340.
Glover, Robert E. (1988). Tourism as Economic Development: A Brief Guide for Communities
and Entrepreneurs. Economic Development Contacts Network. Retrieved June 11, 2005
from http://www.economicdevelopment.net/tourism/glover_tpd_98.htm
Goeldner, Charles, & Ritchie, J.R. Brent (2003). Tourism: Principles, Practices, Philosophies.
Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Harill, Rich (2003). Guide to Best Practices in Tourism and Destination Management. Atlanta:
Georgia Institute of Technology (American Hotel Motel Association).
Harill, Rich, editor (2005). Fundamentals of Destination Management and Marketing. Orlando:
American Hotel & Lodging Association Educational Institute.
The Institute For Convention and Visitors Bureau Accreditation. Accredited Destination
Management Organization Program. (Brochure). West Lafayette, Indiana: CFS Office
of Professional Development.
International Association of Convention & Visitor Bureaus (2004). Recommended Standard
CVB Performance Reporting: A Handbook for CVBs. Washington, D.C.; author.
17
CVB Product Development 18
Knapp, Duane and Gary Sherwin (2005). Destination BrandScience. Washington, D.C.:
International Association of Convention & Visitors Bureaus.
Michigan State University Extension (2005). Tourism Area of Expertise Team. Retrieved June
11, 2005 from http://tourism.msu.edu/.
Morrison, Allistair (2002). Hospitality and Travel Marketing. Albany, New York: Delmar
Thomson Learning.
Pearce, D. (1992). Tourist Organizations. Longman: London.
Purdue University CFS Office of Professional Development and Haskayne School of Business at
the University of Calgary (2004). IACVB Executive Program in Destination
Management - Strategic Issues in Destination Management. Purdue University:
Lafayette, Indiana.
Russell, Michelle and Swisher, Peggy (2008). “CVB Update.” Convene. PCMA: May, 2008.
Texas Agriculture Extension Service, A&M University Department of Recreation, Parks and
Tourism Sciences (1995). Developing Tourism in Your Community. College Station,
Texas.
University of Wisconsin Extension (2005). Tourism Business Development Toolbox: Resources
to Assist Tourism Entrepreneurship in Your Community. Retrieved June 11, 2005 from
http://www.uwex.edu/ces/cced/tourism/index.html.
18