Prioritisation of Key Performance Indicators in an Evaluation Framework for Determining the Economic Value and Effectiveness of Internet Room Diagramming Solutions by the Application of AHP

  • Kuan-Wen Lin
  • Andrew J. Frew
  • Joe Goldblatt
Conference paper


Previous studies suggest the effectiveness of eBusiness applications such as Room Diagramming Solutions could be monitored through a hierarchical evaluation framework in the post-adoption stage. However, an evaluation model should not only indicate what is important to be measured but also each measurement should be weighted. This study uses an Analytic Hierarchy Process survey conducted with venue operators in the U.S. chain hotel systems for generation of the priorities and weightings of the criteria which had been previously identified. Perceived stakeholder and social pressure was weighted as the most important indicator. Information and Communication Technologies impact on customer satisfaction was considered with high priority, and which echoes relevant research. The criteria prioritised could be adopted to conduct further research concerning performance measurements such as the ICT Balanced Scorecard for strategic management. The research approaches used could also be applied to performance measurements for innovative ICT applications such as social media.


ICT impact Meetings and events Room diagrams ICT effectiveness AHP 


  1. Benlian, A. (2010, June 7–9). Which type of software model is first choice? An AHP-based comparison of traditional, open-source, and on-demand office suites on the fulfillment of evaluation criteria. In P. M. Alexander, M. Turpin & J. P. V. Deventer (Eds.), 18th European Conference on Information Systems, ECIS 2010. Pretoria, South Africa.Google Scholar
  2. Bielski, L. (1997). PCMA expands hotel inspections. Retrieved January 3, 2013, from
  3. Buglione, L., Abran, A., & Meli, R. (2001). How functional size measurement supports the balanced scorecard framework for ICT. In FESMA-DASMA 2001 (4th European Conference on Software Measurement and ICT Control) (pp. 259–272). Heidelberg, Germany.Google Scholar
  4. Buhalis, D. (1998). Strategic use of information technologies in the tourism industry. Tourism Management, 19(3), 409–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Buhalis, D., Leung, D., & Law, R. (2011). eTourism: Critical information and communication technologies for tourism destinations. In Y. Wang & A. Pizam (Eds.), Destination marketing and management: Theories and applications (pp. 205–224). Wallingford: CAB International.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Casanova, M. B., Kim, D. Y., & Morrison, A. M. (2005). The relationships of meeting planner’s profiles with usage and attitudes toward the use of technology. Journal of Convention & Event Tourism, 7(3), 19–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cho, Y., Wang, Y., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (2002). Searching for experiences: The web-based virtual tour in tourism marketing. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 12(4), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cooper, D. R., & Schindler, P. S. (2006). Business research methods (9th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  9. Crouch, G. I. (2011). Destination competitiveness: An analysis of determinant attributes. Journal of Travel Research, 50(1), 27–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Davis, C. (2005). Meetings Beat. Retrieved January 3, 2013, from—2005-02-07/?a=btn
  11. E-Hospitality. (2011). MeetingMatrix International to Provide iPlan™ Interactive Floor Plans to Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide. Retrieved January 3, 2013, from
  12. Ettlie, J. E., & Vellenga, D. B. (1979). The adoption time period for some transportation innovations. Management Science, 25(5), 429–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fenich, G. G. (2012). Meetings, expositions, events and conventions: An introduction to the industry (3rd ed.). London: Pearson/Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  14. Fiore, A. M., Kim, J., & Lee, H. (2005). Effect of image interactivity technology on consumer responses toward the online retailer. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 19(3), 38–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Forman, E. H., & Gass, S. I. (2001). The analytic hierarchy process—an exposition. Operations Research, 49(4), 469–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fuchs, M., Witting, C., & Höpken, W. (2009). eBusiness readiness, intensity and impact: An Austrian hotel study. In W. Höpken, U. Gretzel, & U. Law (Eds.), Information and communication technologies in tourism 2009 (pp. 431–442). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fuchs, M., Höpken, W., Föger, A., & Kunz, M. (2010). E-business readiness, intensity, and impact: An Austrian destination management organization study. Journal of Travel Research, 49(2), 165–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Goldblatt, J. (2011). Special events: A new generation and the next frontier. Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  19. Ham, S., Kim, W. G., & Jeong, S. (2005). Effect of information technology on performance in upscale hotels. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 24(2), 281–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Horan, P. (2010). Developing an effectiveness evaluation framework for destination management systems. PhD Thesis, Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  21. Hsieh, L., Chin, J., & Wu, M. (2006). Performance evaluation for university electronic libraries in Taiwan. Electronic Library, 24(2), 212–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ip, C., Law, R., & Lee, H. A. (2012). The evaluation of hotel website functionality by fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 29(3), 263–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Ives, B. (1991). Executive involvement and participation in the management of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 15(2), 205–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jones, D. L., & Baloglu, S. (2006). What hotel sales and marketing executives should know before investing dollars in sales technology. Journal of Convention & Event Tourism, 8(1), 31–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kahraman, C., Demirel, N. Ç., & Demirel, T. (2007). Prioritization of e-government strategies using a SWOT-AHP analysis: The case of Turkey. European Journal of Information Systems, 16(3), 284–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kim, D. Y., Jang, S., & Morrison, A. M. (2011). Factors affecting organizational information technology acceptance: A comparison of convention and visitor bureaus and meeting planners in the United States. Journal of Convention & Event Tourism, 12(1), 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kuan, K. K. Y., & Chau, P. Y. K. (2001). A perception-based model for EDI adoption in small businesses using a technology-organization-environment framework. Information and Management, 38(8), 507–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lee, S., Close, A. G., & Love, C. (2010). How information quality and market turbulence impact convention and visitors bureaus’ use of marketing information: Insights for destination and event marketing. Journal of Convention & Event Tourism, 11(4), 266–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lee, W., Tyrrell, T., & Erdem, M. (2013). Exploring the behavioral aspects of adopting technology: Meeting planners’ use of social network media and the impact of perceived critical mass. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, 4(1), 6–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lin, K.-W., Frew, A. J., & Goldblatt, J. (2013). The development of an evaluation framework for determining the economic value and effectiveness of internet room diagramming solutions. In L. Cantoni & Z. Xiang (Eds.), Information and communication technologies in tourism 2013 (pp. 339–351). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. McKenna, H. P. (1994). The Delphi technique: A worthwhile approach for nursing? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 19, 1221–1225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. O’Connor, P. (2004). Using computers in hospitality (3rd ed.). London: Thomson.Google Scholar
  33. O’Connor, P., & Frew, A. J. (2004). An evaluation methodology for hotel electronic channels of distribution. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 23(2), 179–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. PricewaterhouseCoopers. (2011). The economic significance of meetings to the U.S. economy: Executive summary. Alexandria: Convention Industry Council.Google Scholar
  35. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  36. Rogers, T. (2008). Conferences and conventions (2nd ed.). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.Google Scholar
  37. Saaty, T. L. (2000). Decision making for leader (3rd ed.). Pittsburgh: RWS.Google Scholar
  38. Saaty, T. L. (2005). The analytic hierarchy and analytic network processes for the measurement of intangible criteria and for decision-making. In J. Figueira, S. Greco, & M. Ehrogott (Eds.), Multiple criteria decision analysis: State of the art surveys (pp. 345–407). Boston: Springer Science + Business Media.Google Scholar
  39. Tallon, P. P., & Kraemer, K. L. (2007). Fact or fiction? A sensemaking perspective on the reality behind executives’ perceptions of IT business value. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(1), 13–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tallon, P. P., Kraemer, K. L., & Gurbaxani, V. (2000). Executives’ perceptions of the business value of information technology: A process-oriented approach. Journal of Management Information Systems, 16, 145–173.Google Scholar
  41. Tornatzky, L. G., & Klein, K. (1982). Innovation adoption-implementation a meta analysis of findings. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, EM-29(1), 28–45.Google Scholar
  42. Torrence, S. (2003). 21st Century site selection. Retrieved January 3, 2013, from
  43. Tsai, H. Y., & Ho, P. T. (2009). Assessing site selection criteria for Taiwan lantern festival by analytic hierarchy process. Event Management, 12, 187–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. von Solms, S. (2009, July 29–August 1). Homogeneity and choice aggregation in the analytic hierarchy process. In The International Symposium on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (ISAHP) 2009, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.Google Scholar
  45. Yuan, Y. L., Gretzel, U., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (2006). The role of information technology use in American conventions and visitors bureaus. Tourism Management, 27(2), 326–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zhu, K., Dong, S., Xu, S. X., & Kraemer, K. L. (2006). Innovation diffusion in global contexts: determinants of post-adoption digital transformation of European companies. European Journal of Information Systems, 15, 601–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Zopounidis, C., & Doumpos, M. (2000). Intelligent decision aiding systems based on multiple criteria for financial engineering. AH Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Arts, Social Sciences and ManagementQueen Margaret UniversityEdinburghUK

Personalised recommendations