1. 1 | P a g e
National Tsinghua University
Master’s Thesis
國立清華大學
碩士論文
Business Model Review
Traveller Centric Service Collaboration Platform
以旅客為中心的服務合作平台之商業模式研究
Department : Executive Master of Business Administration
College of Technology Management
Name : Daver Ka Fai Lau (劉家輝)
Student number : 100075536
Advisory Professor : Professor Bou-Wen Lin (林博文)
中華民國 102 年 6 月

2. 2 | P a g e
Contents
I. Definition of Terms ................................................................................................8
II. Abstract..................................................................................................................9
III. Acknowledgement ...............................................................................................12
IV. Research Background and Motivation.................................................................14
Travel Service Value Chain [TS-VC] = [D-VC] + [S-VC]..............................................14
Nature of T&T Fragmentation of S-VC..................................................................14
T&T and Technology Impact ....................................................................................15
Problem Definition – A Difference in Perspective of The Traveller’s Trip...............17
V. Research Purpose ................................................................................................18
A Tool for Service Collaboration - Dynamic Itinerary ..............................................18
VI. Literature Review.................................................................................................19
Overview of the Global Travel and Tourism Industry (T&T)....................................20
T&T an Economic Growth Engine ........................................................................20
3 Notable Characteristics of T&T – Seasonal, Resilience and Growth ................21
T&T from 2011 to 2021........................................................................................22
“Who is who” in TS-VC.............................................................................................23
Who is who in [TS-VC] – Traveller........................................................................24
Who is who in [TS-VC] → [S-VC] ..........................................................................27
Who is who in [TS-VC] → [D-VC]..........................................................................27
Before Dotcom - Relationship between [D-VC] and [S-VC].................................27
After Dotcom - Relationship between [D-VC] and [S-VC]....................................28
Customer Relationship, Channel Priorities - Perspective of s-VC........................28
Channel Conflict, Threat of Disintermediation – Perspective of d-VC ................29
Travel Trends in Asia Pacific – 2011 to 2030 ...........................................................30
The Me Effect.......................................................................................................30
The Red Tape Effect .............................................................................................32
The Leapfrog Effect..............................................................................................34

3. 3 | P a g e
The Barbell Effect.................................................................................................37
Implications of the 4 Effects for s-VCs in Asia Pacific region and global T&T......39
VII. Research Methodology.....................................................................................41
Business Model Canvas........................................................................................41
VIII. Research Objective and Scope..........................................................................46
IX. Initial Service Collaboration Initiatives – Airline Alliances within s-VC [airline]..47
Today - Difference in Perspective of the Traveller Itinerary ...................................56
Mr. T’s Itinerary........................................................................................................58
Mr. T’s Travel Experience.........................................................................................59
Mr. T’s Calendar.......................................................................................................61
Dynamic Itinerary - A Tool for Service Collaboration ..............................................63
X. Business Models for SCP(tc).................................................................................66
XI. Potential Candidates for SCP(tc)..........................................................................73
Expedia, [D-VC](OTA)...............................................................................................73
Expedia “As-is” Business Model...........................................................................75
SWOT Analysis – Expedia “As-is” Business Model...............................................78
Amadeus, [D-VC](GDS).............................................................................................84
Amadeus “As-is” Business Model ........................................................................86
SWOT Analysis – Amadeus “As-is” Business Model ............................................90
Google, [D-VC](Search Engine) ................................................................................96
Google “As-is” Business Model............................................................................96
SWOT Analysis – Google as “As-is” Business Model..........................................101
SWOT – 9 Blocks Cumulative Summary Chart – “As-is” Business Model..............106
SWOT – 9 Blocks Cumulative Summary Chart – SCP(tc) Business Model
Incorporated ..........................................................................................................106
First Mover Advantage for SCP(tc).........................................................................106
XII. Conclusions and Recommendations...............................................................110
Summary................................................................................................................110

4. 4 | P a g e
Recommendation for Future Research..................................................................111
XIII. Literature Reference.......................................................................................112
Literature ...............................................................................................................112
Websites ................................................................................................................113

5. 5 | P a g e
Table of Figures
Figure 1 : International tourist arrivals, 2000-2010, World Tourism Organization
(UNTWO)......................................................................................................................21
Figure 2 : World Travel & Tourism outlook, Oxford Economics/WTTC.......................23
Figure 3 : High level overview of stakeholders of Travel Service Value Chain TS-VC..24
Figure 4 : World: Travel & Tourism's direct contribution to GDP - business vs leisure
travel, 2011 ..................................................................................................................24
Figure 5: Business travel as a driver of economic growth, Travel & Tourism 2011,
World Travel & Tourism Council..................................................................................26
Figure 6 : Outbound traveller over 65 years of age by country of origin, Shaping the
Future of Travel in Asia Pacific.....................................................................................31
Figure 7 : International business departures by women between 2011 and 2030,
Shaping the Future of Travel in Asia Pacific.................................................................32
Figure 8 : Outbound travellers by country from 2010-2030, Shaping the Future of
Travel in Asia Pacific.....................................................................................................33
Figure 9 : Outbound departure by countries in 2010, Shaping the Future of Travel in
Asia Pacific ...................................................................................................................34
Figure 10 : Survey of 1,531 Asia Pacific Travellers, Shaping the Future of Travel in Asia
Pacific...........................................................................................................................35
Figure 11 : Proportion of travellers with aspirations to go on a cruise holiday, by age
group, Shaping the Future of Travel in Asia Pacific .....................................................36
Figure 12 : Asia Pacific high speed rail networks (km) - Shaping the Future of Travel in
Asia Pacific ...................................................................................................................37
Figure 13 : Asia Pacific middle class, 2011 - 2030, Shaping the Future of Travel in Asia
Pacific...........................................................................................................................38
Figure 14 : Travel expenditure in Asia Pacific by origin of traveller 2011 - 2030,
Shaping the Future of Travel in Asia Pacific.................................................................39
Figure 15 : The Business Model Canvas, Business Model Generation ........................42
Figure 16 : Airline Application Architecture, 2012 Travel Technology Research ........48
Figure 17 : Altéa CMS share of global airline alliance boarded passengers, 2012
Amadeus Taiwan Limited.............................................................................................49
Figure 18 : Star Alliance: http://www.staralliance.com/en/about/member_airlines/,
June 2013.....................................................................................................................50

6. 6 | P a g e
Figure 19 : Star Alliance Statistics,
http://www.staralliance.com/en/about/member_airlines/, June 2013 ....................50
Figure 20 : Oneworld Alliance: http://www.oneworld.com/general/about-oneworld/,
June 2013.....................................................................................................................51
Figure 21 : SkyTeam: http://www.skyteam.com/en/About-us/Our-members/, June
2013 .............................................................................................................................52
Figure 22 : Alliances boarded passengers including associated and future members
(million passengers), Travel Technology Research, June 2013 ...................................53
Figure 23 : Same-Domain competition (RED) vs. Cross-Domain competition (BLUE).
Cross-Domain competition is in line with traveller’s perspective and service
expectation ..................................................................................................................54
Figure 24 : Generalized view of stakeholders in selected s-VC domains of interest for
a traveller. There are 3 choices for the airline domain, 4 choices for the car rental
domain, 3 choices for the resort domain, 6 choices for the hotel domain and 9
choices for the restaurant domain ..............................................................................55
Figure 25 : Traveller selected services provider a1, c2, r3, h4 and r5. The gaps
between the columns represent a lack of ownership between the service transition
points from one s-VC to the next.................................................................................56
Figure 26 : A hypothetical scenario of the itinerary of a traveller known as Mr. T.....58
Figure 27 : Calendar view of Mr. T's itinerary..............................................................62
Figure 28 : Mr. T and his perceived linkages among the sVCs.....................................62
Figure 29 : Unique and non-shared views of sVCs toward Mr. T ................................63
Figure 30 : Summary of the 7 core concepts of Dynamic Itinerary.............................66
Figure 31 : Business model canvas for SCP(tc) ............................................................67
Figure 32 : Dynamic Itinerary of Mr. T with Travel Service Proposals from d-VC/s-VC
depicted by oval shapes in areas which were previously unfilled...............................69
Figure 33 : Traveller's perspective of options available through the Travel Service
Proposal under SCP(tc). Purple colour boxes represent traveller’s selection............70
Figure 34 : Curved arrows between the purple boxes (selected s-VCs) represent the
communications of the s-VCs as facilitated under SCP(tc)..........................................71
Figure 35 : SCP(tc) / Traveller Centric Service Collaboration Platform – sVCs are all
connected and having a common perspective of the traveller itinerary under
Dynamic Itinerary.........................................................................................................73
Figure 36 : Business Model Canvas for Expedia...........................................................75
Figure 37 : Business Model Canvas for Amadeus "As-is" Business Model..................86
Figure 38 : Business Model Canvas Google "As-is" Business Model ...........................96

7. 7 | P a g e
Table of Tables
Table 1 : Travel & Tourism's global economic contribution, 2000-2010, WTTC/Oxford
Economics ....................................................................................................................22
Table 2 : Two dimensional segmentation adopted by the report...............................25
Table 3: Expedia's portfolio of 10 companies and associated services, Expedia 2012
Annual Report..............................................................................................................74
Table 4 : Strength and Weakness - 9 Blocks Rating for Expedia..................................80
Table 5 : Threats - 9 Blocks Rating for Expedia............................................................80
Table 6 : Opportunities - 9 Blocks Rating for Expedia .................................................81
Table 7 : Expedia – Strengths and Weaknesses – 9 Blocks Rating under SCP(tc)
platform enabled business model ...............................................................................83
Table 8 : Expedia -Threats - 9 Blocks Rating under SCP(tc) platform enabled business
model ...........................................................................................................................84
Table 9 : Expedia - Opportunities - 9 Blocks Rating under SCP(tc) platform enabled
business model ............................................................................................................84
Table 10 : Strengths and Weaknesses - 9 Blocks Rating for Amadeus........................90
Table 11 : Threats - 9 Blocks Rating for Amadeus .......................................................91
Table 12 : Opportunities - 9 Blocks Rating for Amadeus.............................................92
Table 13 : Amadeus Strengths and Weaknesses 9 Blocks Rating with SCP(tc) platform
enabled business model ..............................................................................................94
Table 14 : Amadeus Threats - 9 Blocks Rating with SCP(tc) platform enabled business
model ...........................................................................................................................94
Table 15 : Amadeus Opportunities - 9 Blocks Rating with SCP(tc) platform enabled
business model ............................................................................................................95
Table 16 : Strengths and Weaknesses - 9 Blocks Rating for Google..........................102
Table 17 : Threats - 9 Blocks Rating for Google.........................................................103
Table 18 : Opportunities - 9 Blocks Rating for Google...............................................104
Table 19 : Google Strengths and Weaknesses - 9 Blocks Rating with SCP(tc) platform
enabled business model ............................................................................................105
Table 20 : Google Threats - 9 Blocks Rating with SCP(tc) platform enabled business
model .........................................................................................................................105
Table 21 : Google Opportunities - 9 Blocks Rating with SCP(tc) platform enabled
business model ..........................................................................................................106
Table 22 : SWOT 9 Blocks Cumulative Summary Chart - "As-is" Business Model.....106
Table 23 : SWOT 9 Blocks Cumulative Summary Chart - SCP(tc) Business Model ....106

8. 8 | P a g e
I. Definition of Terms
IATA International Aviation Transport Authority
CRS Computer Reservation System
FIT Free Independent Tourism
FSC Full Service Carrier
GDS Global Distribution System
LCC Low Cost Carrier
PNR Passenger Name Record
PSS Passenger Service System
SCP(tc) Traveller Centric Service Collaboration Platform

9. 9 | P a g e
II. Abstract
World Travel and Tourism Council’s Travel and Tourism 2011 report forecasted the
global travel and tourism industry to sustain a high growth rate from 2011 to 2021.
Travel and tourism (T&T) is a highly fragmented industry because there are many
stakeholders in the travel service value chain [TS-VC], for both distribution and
service fulfilment.
The advent of the internet has fundamentally changed the relationships among the
stakeholders in [TS-VC]. In particular, service fulfilment providers of [TS-VC]’s strong
desire to establish direct relationship with the travellers, together with the
increasing acceptance of self-booking tools by the travellers have created a
significant threat for stakeholders in the distribution component of the travel service
value chain.
On the service fulfilment side, the concept of a seamless traveller experience is a
concept that is gaining importance, but if one is to look at the traveller experience
through every touch point of the [TS-VC] today, the traveller’s experience is far from
seamless.
Despite technological advances in travel distribution solutions, service fulfilment
providers in the [TS-VC] continue to serve travellers independently and with little to
no collaboration. From a technology perspective, the concept of service
collaboration among service fulfilment providers in the [TS-VC] is both a gap to be
fulfilled and an opportunity to create value for the traveller.
To date, there has been no significant development in travel service collaboration
technology for service fulfilment providers in T&T, due to the lack of [1] data
integration strategy among service fulfilment providers and subsequently [2] a viable
business model to motivate stakeholders in the travel service value chain to invest in
such technology.
This report recommends a [1] a high level customer centric data sharing concept to
serve as a basis for the development of a data integration strategy to enable
collaboration among service fulfilment providers and [2] a business model (“To-be”
business model) for the development and adoption of service collaboration
technology, named as the Traveller Centric Service Collaboration Platform for travel

10. 10 | P a g e
service fulfilment providers to bring about a more seamless traveller experience for
the high yield Fully Independent Traveller (FIT) segment. This report also compares
the “As-is” business models for selected companies in the distribution component of
[TS-VC] to the “To-be” business model based on a SWOT analysis on the 9 Blocks
Business Model Canvas to determine the company with the highest rating to adopt
the “To-be” business model.

11. 11 | P a g e
摘 要
世界觀光旅遊委員會(World Travel and Tourism Council) 的 2011 年旅遊報告，預測了全球觀光產
業從 2011 年到 2012 年將維持髙成長率。
觀光(T&T)是一個髙度分散的產業，因為在旅遊服務價值錬裏為了分銷及服務的提供, 存在著許
多利害關係者。
網際網路的出現已從根本上改變了旅遊服務價值鏈裏利害關係人間的關係。特別是，旅遊服務
價值鏈的服務供應商強烈渴望與旅客建立直接的關係，並同時藉由旅客提升自助預訂工具的接
受度。這些對旅遊服務價值鏈的分銷部份的利害關係人造成了重大的威脅。
在服務提供方面，無接縫旅客經驗是一個越來越重要的槪念。但如果人們透過現今旅遊服務價
值鏈的每一個接觸點來看旅客經驗，這旅客經驗絶算不上無接縫。
儘管旅遊分銷解決方案的技術進步，但旅遊服務價值鏈裏的服務供應商仍持續獨自地，幾乎沒
有以其他協作的方式來服務旅客。從一個科技的觀點來看，服務供應商之間的服務協作概念，
是一個待填補的缺口同時也是一個為旅客創造價值的機會。
至今，對觀光產業的服務供應商而言，在旅遊服務協作的技術上還沒有重要的發展，因為在服
務供應商之間缺乏[1]資料整合的策略，接著[2]可行的商業模式以激勵在旅遊服務價值鏈裏的利
害關係者投資在這樣的科技上。
這份報告建議 [1]一個簡要以顧客為中心的資料分享槪念做為資料整合策略發展的基礎，以使服
務供應商間能夠達成協作。[2] 一個以服務協作科技開發及使用為目地的商業模式 (＂To-Be"商
業模式），命名為旅客導向服務協作平台 (Traveller Centric Service Collaboration Platform)，它讓
旅遊服務供應商為髙產值完全獨立的客群，帶來一個更無縫的旅客經驗。這份報告也為在價值
鏈中的分銷部份中所選出的公司，將 “As-is"的商業模式，與以九區塊商業模式圖(Business
Model Canvas)上的 SWOT 分析為基礎的 To-be"的商業模式做比較，以決定評價最高的公司來採
用 “To-be”的商業模式。

12. 12 | P a g e
III. Acknowledgement
I would like to thank my parents for the importance they have always placed on
education. At the age of 43, my mother continued to encourage me to pursue
further studies with even greater enthusiasm than in my younger years. 2 years
have gone by too quickly. During the first 20 years, learning was focused on intense
knowledge acquisition and skills development. The emphasis was on relative
performance based on standardized tests. Since my junior years, the intensity has
now increased for the younger generations. After 20 years of career pursuit, to
return to the school environment was very special. Some may view it as a luxury; I
view it as a personal investment and an opportunity to set an example to the
children for lifelong learning. When my son of 7 years old decided his 2nd
grade
homework was no longer too much for him (he looked over to my table and realized
that I had a lot more homework than he did), it was a memorable moment.
My original intention was to develop a way to link up the Home Stay accommodation
in Taiwan for the distribution of these travel services globally. It was through the
patient guidance and encouragement of my Advisory Professor, Mr. Bou-Wen Lin,
that I used the initial Home Stay accommodation idea to openly explore the
unfulfilled gaps in the travel service value chain on a global level. This exploration
has cumulated into the current dissertation topic “Business Model Review Traveller
Centric Service Collaboration Platform”. It was an unexpected destination from the
original starting point. In the review sessions, Professor Bou-Wen Lin continued to
ask urge me to “make things simpler”. It was a labouring exercising of the mind, and
I believe the concept of the Dynamic Itinerary represents the end result of this
simplification exercise and serves as the basis for the business model for the
Traveller Centric Service Collaboration Platform. The dissertation was thus an
innovative exercise that was very much facilitated by the stimulating environment of
the EMBA program at the College of Technology Management, National Tsinghua
University. I am pleased to have put forward the concepts and idea in this
dissertation not only because I believe in the business potential of the model, but it
also represents an alternate model for travel content aggregation where the
traveller is at the centre of the relationship among the stakeholders in the travel
service value chain.

13. 13 | P a g e
I would also like to thank Professor Kenneth Kin for his strong leadership and
demonstration of excellence in everything he does (and accepting me into the NTHU
EMBA program), Professor Fu-Ren Lin and Professor Soumya Ray for the fruitful
discussion of service sciences, Professor C. C. Li for his unwavering stance on
principle based decision and character development of a leader, Professor Hung-
Chang Chiu for the joy and smile he gave to marketing, Professor Che-Chun Lin for
his excellent class preparation and dedication to every class, Professor Shih-Chang
Hung for being the master strategist, Professor Chao-Hsi Huang and Professor Bao-
Taa Chang for the excellent first course in economics, Professor Chen-Fu Chien for
introducing the fascinating science of decision making, Professor Yuet-Yee Law for
her enthusiasm in teaching, Professor Chin-Tay Shih for showing the great potential
and mission of the technology industry and Professor Swee-Huat Lee for helping me
“See the Shark”. All of these have brought about reflections, broader thinking and
new perspectives before I started the dissertation exercise.
I would like to express my gratitude to all professors that have taught me during my
E13 years at NTHU, to Sophie Weng for introducing me to the NTHU EMBA program,
Mr. Jeff Chu for his recommendation, Professor Bou-Wen Lin for his guidance and
friendship, and my wife April for her loving support.
劉家輝
Daver Lau

14. 14 | P a g e
IV. Research Background and Motivation
Travel Service Value Chain [TS-VC] = [D-VC] + [S-VC]
In this report, the travel service value chain [TS-VC] is categorized into two
subcomponents, namely a Distribution Value Chain [D-VC] subcomponent and a
Service Fulfilment Value Chain [S-VC] subcomponent. [D-VC](domain) is used to
denote a specific domain of [D-VC] e.g. [D-VC](OTA) represents the OTA domain of
the Distribution Value Chain. [S-VC](domain) is used to denote a specific domain of
the [S-VC] e.g. [S-VC](airline) is used to denote the airline domain of Service
Fulfilment Value Chain. s-VC is used as a generic reference for provider within [S-VC].
Similarly, d-VC is used as a generic reference for provider within [D-VC].
Nature of T&T Fragmentation of S-VC
Traditionally, an airline in the [S-VC](airline) domain views the world as consisting of
all other competing airlines and itself. Similarly, a hotel in the [S-VC](hotel) domain
views the world as consisting of all other competing hotels and itself. As the demand
for travel increases on a global level, more players enter into their respective
domains of [S-VC]. New domains of [S-VC] are also being formed when new services
with viable business models are being innovated.
For a destination where there are the following choices in each of the domains of [S-
VC]:
“n” choices of airline
“m” choices of airport pick-up services
“o” choices of hotels
“p” choices of restaurants
“q” choices of shopping malls
A travellers has (n x m x o x p x q) possible combination of service providers. While
this represents a large number of choices for travellers, competition is primarily

15. 15 | P a g e
within the same domain. There is limited collaboration across the different domains
of [S-VC].
Due to the fragmentation nature of T&T, information pertaining to [S-VC] has also
been highly fragmented. For a traveller, there is therefore a basic need for the
ocean of s-VCs information be packaged or aggregated in a meaningful manner in
order to better understand the available choices of s-VC products and services. In
parallel, s-VCs also need to have an effective means to reach the potential customer.
In the example used in this section, a s-VC has a probability of 1/(n x m x o x p x q) to
be selected if it is part of the recommendation being offered to the potential
customer. d-VCs therefore exist to fulfil the information aggregation need in the
traveller research and decision process, as well as the basic channel need of s-VCs.
T&T and Technology Impact
As of 2013, the state of T&T is such that the massive digitization of information and
the availability of high speed internet access through multi-channel devices have
brought about fundamental changes in the relationship among stakeholders of TS-VC.
The development of the Internet enabled s-VCs to establish direct distribution
relationship with the travellers. This has undermined the positions of the d-VCs and
created channel conflict between s-VCs and d-VCs. Prior to the Internet, s-VCs relied
heavily on d-VCs for the distribution of its products and services. It will not be
inaccurate to say that s-VC has outsource its’ distribution work to d-VCs and in the
process, became out of touch with the end customers and markets. s-VCs felt the
increasing power from the d-VCs and worst of all, it felt out of control in “who to sell
to?”, “how to sell?” and “what price to sell at?”. The Internet gave s-VCs a choice
towards increasing self-reliance. Yet, the Internet also gave travellers a lot more
information and choices than the pre-Internet age. These include information
pertaining to “the other” s-VC competitors within the same [S-VC](domain). The
Internet was an important game changer for T&T. As technology continued to open
up new possibilities for people and companies to interact with and relate to one
another the relationship balance among the stakeholders in [TS-VC] is far from being
at equilibrium. With reference to the Internet being a game changer for the T&T, it
is not an understatement that as of the writing of this report, the game rules are still
being redefined.

16. 16 | P a g e
While travel industry leaders continue to articulate the value of a seamless traveller
experience, this concept is only realizable if there is a consistent perspective with
regard to the traveller itinerary among the traveller and the s-VCs listed on the
traveller’s itinerary.

17. 17 | P a g e
Problem Definition – A Difference in Perspective of The Traveller’s Trip
Today, a FIT traveller may receive an itinerary from a travel agent. The itinerary
provides a detailed summary of all s-VCs rendering service to the traveller that may
include information of departure flight, car rental at the arrival airport, airport pick-
up, hotel accommodation, departure airport and return flight etc. From the
perspective of the traveller, every piece of information pertaining to the s-VCs on the
itinerary is an integral part of the complete trip. The itinerary serves not only as a
reminder to the traveller of his or her travel agenda; it is also a reflection of the
service delivery expectation of the traveller on each of the s-VCs on the itinerary.
While this is the perspective of the traveller, most s-VCs on the itinerary, has a very
different perspective from that of the traveller. Most s-VCs, due to lack of visibility
of the traveller itinerary, view the traveller arrival as a simple, discontinuous, one-
time event, with no awareness of where the traveller came from, nor where the
traveller will go to next.
This fundamental perspective difference between a traveller and the s-VC on the
traveller’s journey is a reflection of the challenges in sales and service collaboration
initiatives rooted in the lack of data integration and adoption of interoperability
standard among independent s-VC. While this challenge is not unique to the travel
industry, the high fragmentation of the travel industry characterized by a very large
number of independent s-VCs has made adoption of a common standard extremely
difficult.
To date, there has been limited breakthrough on the adoption of data integration
models among s-VCs (s-VC centric data integration models). This report aims to
demonstrate a traveller centric data integration approach as a viable solution to
enable a consistent perspective on the traveller itinerary, between the traveller, and
all the s-VCs listed on the traveller’s itinerary. It is by resolving the data integration
issues that viable business models can be developed for the Traveller Centric Service
Collaboration Platform to increases the chance for s-VCs to deliver a seamless
traveller experience.
In this report, a seamless traveller experience is supported by the following 2 simple
premises:

18. 18 | P a g e
(1) When a traveller traverses from one s-VC to the next s-VC on his or her
itinerary, the first s-VC knows where the traveller is going to, while the
second s-VC knows where the traveller is coming from
(2) When a traveller has available time slots on his calendar while he or she is
travelling, there are choices of services for the traveller to review and
purchase
V. Research Purpose
A Tool for Service Collaboration - Dynamic Itinerary
As of the writing of this report, the lack of adoption of data integration standard has
been the key barrier to the development of service collaboration technology among
s-VCs. In order to develop a business model for the Traveler Centric Service
Collaboration Platform for s-VCs, this report proposes a high level description of a
traveler centric concept for data integration, named by the author of the report as
the “Dynamic Itinerary” to facilitate service collaboration among s-VCs in the same
or different service domains. Dynamic Itinerary is positioned as a core element for
SCP(tc).
This report proposes a business model for SCP(tc) and is intended as a first
document of its kind to serve as a stimulus to d-VC stakeholders in D-VC to review
the value of being a first mover to develop Traveler Centric Service Collaboration
Platform enabled business models.

19. 19 | P a g e
VI. Literature Review
This report reviews the opportunity of T&T from the perspective of technology
enabled business model. More specifically, how technology can serve as an enabler
to a more seamless traveler experience for the traveler as he or she traverses the TS-
VC. This in turn, gives rise to opportunities of new business models for the d-VCs
and s-VCs.
This report makes a first assumption that T&T will continue to be a growth industry
until 2020. As such, not only will more people travel, there will also be an increasing
ratio of FIT travelers vs. total travelers (FIT travelers + Group travelers). The second
major assumption of the report is that technology will play an increasingly important
role to sustain the growth of T&T.
The following literatures serve as supporting references to the stated assumptions
and will be referred to in the section: Overview of the Global Travel and Tourism
Industry.
 WTTC 2011 Annual Report
 Shaping the Future of Travel – The big FOUR travel effects

20. 20 | P a g e
Overview of the Global Travel and Tourism Industry (T&T)
Once upon a time, travel was to transport someone from point A to point B to fulfil
specific purposes. Whether it was for personal or business purposes, travel was
reserved for the minorities who could afford to do so.
World trades and industrialization have brought about a steady increase in the
wealth of individuals and nations. The increasing demand for travel attracted not
only an increasing number of new entrants in each of the s-VC domains, but, more
importantly, it propelled technology advancement across the full spectrum of
transportation providers to enable a greater number of travellers to be transported
in shorter time and at lower cost. In particular, the last attribute of lower cost,
championed by Low Cost Carriers in the last 2 decades have made the concept of
“travel for the masses” an affordable reality.
From boats to ships, small jet airplane to Boeing 747, train to high speed rail, the
modes of transportation bring about an overwhelming combination of
transportation choices. Yet, travel has evolved to be much more than transporting
someone from point A to point B.
Whether it is a foreign language with different tonality, or the aroma of a dish
prepared by unheard of recipes ingredients or even just the chance of meeting a
foreigner and become friends, the allure of the travel experience has never subsided
for those with a curious mind and a discretionary income. The first hand travel
experience (“being there”) cannot be replaced by reading books, watching video on
Youtube.com or even virtual reality world of Second Life, although information from
these channels are useful inspirations to motivate consumer to conduct research and
planning to support his or her travel decision process. The rich exploratory
possibilities of cultural diversities can only be experienced first-hand by a traveller.
T&T an Economic Growth Engine
According to the World Travel and Tourism Council’s Travel & Tourism 2011 annual
report, nearly 260 million jobs are supported by T&T, either directly in the industry
(100 million jobs) or in related sectors (160 million jobs), accounting for USD 6 trillion
and contributing to 9% of global GDP. The travel and tourism demands attract
investments. In 2011, 4.5% of the total capital investment (USD 650 billion) in the

21. 21 | P a g e
world is related to T&T. The large economic impact of T&T is thus supported by
many stakeholders in [TS-VC].
3 Notable Characteristics of T&T – Seasonal, Resilience and Growth
One of the notable characteristics of T&T is its seasonal nature that is largely
dependent on the destination as well as the traveller’s segmentation. The cyclical
concept of seasonality, however, is highly susceptible to external factors such as
terrorist attacks, natural disasters, epidemic concerns and political instability. 911,
SARS, global financial crisis and Iceland volcanic eruptions are historical events that
have negatively impacted T&T after year 2000. Each of these crisis incidents, at the
time has created uncertainties among stakeholders of the [TS-VC] on the future of
T&T. Yet, over and over again, travellers have collectively reassured stakeholders of
the [TS-VC] by not only returning to the pre-crisis level of travel, but even surpassing
it.
Figure 1 : International tourist arrivals, 2000-2010, World Tourism Organization (UNTWO)
From 2000 to 2010, international arrivals grew from 647 million to 940 million at an
average growth rate of 3.4%, with total arrival volumes decreased only in 2001
(9/11), 2003 (SARS) and 2009 (global economic recession). Despite the negative
impacts, T&T achieved impressive growth rates in each of the following six economic
indicators:

22. 22 | P a g e
Table 1 : Travel & Tourism's global economic contribution, 2000-2010, WTTC/Oxford Economics
T&T as an industry has thus far consistently demonstrated high resilience and growth.
T&T from 2011 to 2021
WTTC Travel & Tourism 2011 Report predicted T&T’s growth to outpace that of the
global economy where T&T is expected to account for:
(1) 10% of global GDP or USD 9,227 billion by 2021
(2) 10% of global employment or 325 million jobs
The following diagram compares T&T impact on global GDP and Employment
between 2011 and 2021.

23. 23 | P a g e
Figure 2 : World Travel & Tourism outlook, Oxford Economics/WTTC
“Who is who” in TS-VC

24. 24 | P a g e
Figure 3 : High level overview of stakeholders of Travel Service Value Chain TS-VC
Who is who in [TS-VC] – Traveller
As of 2011, WTTC recorded global leisure travel spending to reach USD 2,9626 billion,
77% of total expenditure, with business travel accounting for USD 899 billion, 23% of
total expenditure.
Figure 4 : World: Travel & Tourism's direct contribution to GDP - business vs leisure travel, 2011
This report adopts a 2 dimensional segmentation for travellers. The first dimension
pertains to whether the traveller travels as an individual or in a small group of less
than 9 (FIT) or with other travellers that are more than 9 travellers (Group). The 2nd
dimension pertains to whether the traveller travels for the purpose of business or
leisure.
Traveller Segment adopted
by Report
Business Leisure
FIT Segment of Interest
addressed by the report
Segment of Interest
addressed by the report

25. 25 | P a g e
Group Not addressed by the
report
Not addressed by the
report
Table 2 : 2 dimensional segmentation adopted by the report
This report focuses on the FIT Traveller or Blue area in the above chart.
Notable Characteristics of the FIT Travellers
Seasonality is an inherent characteristic of T&T. This is particularly so for the leisure
travel segment. This report uses the terms FIT Business and FIT Leisure
segmentation to distinguish the two types of travellers.
FIT Business Traveller
Business travellers used to bring about an image of a business executive that rushed
in and out of airports and meetings. In the era where work life balance is increasing
in importance, some companies even encourage employees to take leave to further
explore the destination after the business meeting. As such, it has become
increasingly common for FIT Business traveller’s itinerary to be extended to include a
leisure component. This could be in the form of a local package after a day’s
meeting, or an extended stay at the country where the meeting took place, at the
own expense of the business traveller. For example, a FIT Business traveller flew in
from London to Taipei for 2 days meeting that started on Monday and ended on
Tuesday evening may elect to extend the stay for 2 more days to explore the country
side at his or her own costs. FIT Business traveller are commonly known to be
frequent travellers, middle class with a reasonable level of disposable income,
demanding but are willing to pay a higher price for product and services that meet
his or her needs. FIT Business traveller mostly relies on information that is made
available to him or her, after arrival at the country of business, for his or her post-
business leisure research/planning. From the s-VCs in the accommodation business,
the FIT Business traveller is attractive from both an incremental revenue perspective,
as well as from the perspective of increasing occupancy rate during low season.
Once a business meeting time is fixed, a FIT Business traveller’s flight schedule has
limited flexibility. FIT Business traveller’s travel arrangement is commonly arranged
by a travel agency or a Travel Management Company (TMC). While corporate travel
policy takes into account cost consideration in the selection of s-VCs, it must be

26. 26 | P a g e
balanced by an equally important consideration that the FIT Business traveller must
arrive on time for a business meeting. In a situation where a decision needs to be
made between costs and on time arrival for a meeting, the latter takes priority. FIT
Business traveller is not usually involved in the selection of s-VCs. FIT Business
traveller is by default frequent traveller by profession, and has a higher receptivity to
new environments and cultures. The economic impact of the FIT Business traveller
in global corporate productivity, return on investment yield has also been well
researched.
Figure 5: Business travel as a driver of economic growth, Travel & Tourism 2011, World Travel & Tourism
Council
FIT Leisure Traveller

27. 27 | P a g e
Similar to the FIT Business traveller segment, the FIT Leisure traveller segment is also
considered as expert travellers. Some of these travellers gain their preference for
independence from being a FIT Business traveller, and turn into FIT Leisure traveller
during vacation times. Others may have started to travel in a group setting, and was
no longer satisfied by the inflexibility of traditional “one size fits all” group travel
services. Depending on the price sensitivity of FIT Business traveller, there can be
more flexibility in the flight schedule arrangement, choices from [S-VC](airline) as
well as other s-VCs in [TS-VC]. The FIT Leisure traveller is less easily satisfied by
standard travel service, and would be willing to expend substantial time to conduct
research over the internet, not only to look for the most competitive price, but also
for the combinations of s-VC services that would have the closest match to his or her
travel preferences. FIT Leisure traveller has more flexibility in travel schedule as
compared to the FIT Business traveller.
Who is who in [TS-VC] → [S-VC]
[S-VC] represents the Service Fulfilment Value Chain component of [TS-VC]. Please
refer to Figure 4 for a non-exhaustive list of the s-VCs.
Who is who in [TS-VC] → [D-VC]
[D-VC] represents the Distribution Value Chain component of [TS-VC]. Please refer
to Figure 4 for a non-exhaustive list of the d-VCs.
Before Dotcom - Relationship between [D-VC] and [S-VC]
Prior to the dotcom era of 1995, an s-VC relied primarily on one or more d-VCs to
distribute its offerings. This model, a Business-to-Business-to-Consumer (B2B2C)
model was cost effective for s-VCs because d-VCs possess marketing resources,
including brand and channels to reach the consumer. In certain cases, the consumer
had already purchased through d-VC. In the scenario that consumer approached s-
VC for a direct purchase of a particular product or service, most s-VCs would price
higher than their cooperating d-VCs to encourage consumers to buy through d-VCs.
By relying on the co-operating d-VCs, an s-VC does not need to develop its’ own
channel. d-VCs and s-VCs interacted and related to the consumer pertaining to the
services rendered during the respective junctures of the travel service value chain.
The fees associated with d-VCs were generally dependent on attributes of the
distribution channels, including reach, scope and conversion rate of these channels.

28. 28 | P a g e
While d-VC contributed to the sales for s-VC, the cost of distributing through d-VCs
and customer ownership have been two on-going concerns.
It is a basic principle that all members of s-VC have a keen interest to distribute
through a lower cost channel when channel performance remains constant.
After Dotcom - Relationship between [D-VC] and [S-VC]
Since the dotcom era, Internet technology enabled s-VC for the first time to explore
direct distribution model or Business-to-Consumer (B2C) model with a promise of a
lower distribution cost, and direct relationship with the customer.
The benefits of a B2C distribution model motivated s-VCs and interested technology
companies to invest in B2C distribution technology. The B2C distribution technology
would enable s-VC partners to balance between B2B2C and B2C distribution, thus
reducing the risk of over reliance on B2B2C channels. This would pre-empt the
scenario whereby d-VC attained an overly strong bargaining positioning for
distribution fees.
s-VC’s pursuit of a balanced distribution strategy resulted in channel conflict
between s-VCs and d-VCs thus setting off the era of disintermediation (“Cut out the
middleman!”) whereby, B2B2C model continues to be challenged by B2C model
where the d-VCs (“The middleman”) were viewed as “not adding value”, “outdated”,
and “blocking” between the s-VCs and their customers.
Customer Relationship, Channel Priorities - Perspective of s-VC
From an s-VC perspective, the market place is consisted of customers with simple
needs and a purchase history of its products and services. The consumer may have
many needs, but an s-VC is only concerned primarily about matching the needs of
the consumer with its own products and services. Wherever feasible, an s-VC
prefers to sell directly to its customers through its B2C channel. Despite the services
rendered by the d-VCs along the travel service value chain, s-VCs believe they own
the relationship with the customer. Indirect B2B2C channels are less preferred but
will be continued as complements to the B2C channel.
As a recent example from the airline industry, since 1995, Full Service Carrier (FSC)
introduced B2C internet distribution model to complement the B2B2C distribution

29. 29 | P a g e
model through travel agencies. Despite the strong resistance from travel agencies at
the outset, FSCs exhibited persistence and have gained grounds in the B2C internet
distribution model. Low Cost Carriers (LCC), a major challenger to the FSC model,
adopted a B2C internet distribution strategy at the outset. Direct B2C internet
channel was thus a top strategic priority for s-VC.
Channel Conflict, Threat of Disintermediation – Perspective of d-VC
From the d-VC perspective, as there are multiple stakeholders in the d-VC, a B2C
distribution strategy adopted by an s-VC would mean that all stakeholders in the d-
VC were under the threat of being by-passed. In response to the threat of
disintermediation, d-VC members developed strategy to secure first entry point for
consumer by being “One-stop Shop” or “Total Solution Provider” to differentiate
from s-VC B2C Internet distribution models that focus on single product/service. The
strategy implementation included (1) an increase in differentiation through
diversifying content sources i.e. selling multiple products and services from different
s-VCs, offering choices that a single s-VC is unable to offer (2) increase customer
relationship through loyalty programs and wherever possible (3) replace or by-pass
other d-VCs in the D-VC to increase margin and sales volume. The latter was aimed
at enhancing its bargaining power with s-VC.
The advent of the Internet has been highly disruptive to the travel distribution value
chain. It has not only empowered s-VC to pursue B2C Internet distribution strategy,
creating channel conflicts with d-VCs, it has also set off significant channel conflicts
among d-VC members.
To date, the investments and advances in technology for T&T industry have been
primarily focused in the [D-VC] subcomponent of the travel service value chain. As
such, there has also been a much higher level of technology adoption by the d-VCs.
In contrast, there has been comparatively low level of investment in technology in
the [S-VC] subcomponents of the travel service value chain.
It is under the co-operative and yet hypercompetitive relationship between d-VC and
s-VC that this report reviews the service collaboration gap among s-VCs in the travel
service value chain.

30. 30 | P a g e
Travel Trends in Asia Pacific – 2011 to 2030
In the T&T and Economic Growth Engine section of this report, the positive economic
impact of tourism growth was reflected in global GDP contribution, job creation and
capital investment of T&T.
Tourism Towards 2030, a long-term forecast by UNWTO predicted that the average
annual growth rate from 2011 to 2030 to be in the range of 3.0% to 3.5% per annum.
This section provides an overview of the driving forces behind global T&T growth
with an Asia Pacific focus based on research conducted by Frost & Sullivan and
commissioned by the Amadeus IT Group S.A. The result of the research was
documented in the white paper “Shaping the Future of Travel in Asia Pacific”.
The research identified four dominant effects driving T&T growth in the Asia Pacific
region. The research encompass both developed and emerging markets, including
Australia, China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Korea and Singapore. 13 in-depth
interviews were conducted with T&T leaders in the Asia Pacific region from industry
associations, national tourism boards, airlines, hotels and travel agents. Survey was
conducted on 1,531 business and leisure travellers from the selected markets.
The report noted the observation that as economic gaps among different countries
in the Asia Pacific region narrows, individual travel behaviour is expected to become
more prevalent. This is driven by narrowing wealth gap between developed and
emerging economies and the liberalization of trade and travel, as well as higher
accessibility to travel products and services. The dominant effects in turn will bring
about a broader spectrum of people who will travel for more divergent reasons, with
a broader range of aspirations and expectations from the travel experience.
The identified dominant effects are as follows:
(1) The Me Effect
(2) The Red Tape Effect
(3) The Leapfrog Effect
(4) The Barbell Effect
The Me Effect

31. 31 | P a g e
The Me Effect states that fragmentation of the travel market will continue to increase due to
an increasing number of niche markets, including seniors, Female Business Travelers, Visiting
Friends and Relatives (VFR), Small-to-Medium Enterprises (SME) and self-managed travel.
This report will cover the niche market of Senior and Female Business Travelers. The
following chart compares outbound traveler over 65 years of age, by country of origin.
Figure 6 : Outbound traveller over 65 years of age by country of origin, Shaping the Future of Travel in Asia
Pacific
In the above chart, Japan, Australia and Singapore exhibited marginal growth in the 65+ age
group while significant growth is exhibited in India, China and Indonesia, with respective
growth rate of 463%, 630% and 456%. This growth will bring about a growth of 200% (+20
million) by 2030. It is worthy to note that there is a wealth disparity between travelers from
emerging countries and developed countries.
The following diagram depicts international business departures by women between 2011
and 2030.

32. 32 | P a g e
Figure 7 : International business departures by women between 2011 and 2030, Shaping the Future of Travel in
Asia Pacific
The number of international business trips made by female business travelers is expected to
increase by 250% from 2011 to 2030. While numbers are relatively low in 2011, by 2030,
the growth will become significant. India is expected to experience an increase of 891%,
while Indonesia traces behind at growth rate of 288%, followed by China with a growth rate
of 232%. The latter also has the highest volume. The reason behind this growth rate is that
female now accounts for 50% of graduates across the region. This group will likely assume
executive positions or roles that require business travel.
The Red Tape Effect
The term “red tape” is traditionally used in the context of administrative documents
in relation to important matters. In the report, the Red Tape Effect has a positive
theme, as it refers to the breaking down of barriers to travel within the Asia Pacific
region through a reduction in administration through the introduction of process
automation technology, and an increase in integration regional economies.
In Asia Pacific, there were 53 free trade agreements in 2000. As of September 2012,
there were 250 free trade agreements in different stages of development. As
governments see the economic growth fuelled by intra-Asian trade, integration
across the region is expected to gather pace and governments will continue to
liberalize trade regulations. This is expected to significantly impact trade related

33. 33 | P a g e
travel, as trade and investment integration will be matched by liberalization of visa
requirements and air traffic agreements. Whereas, people may have travelled
domestically or internationally to the US or Europe for the purpose of trade, trade
regulation liberalization in the Asia Pacific region is expected to drive significant
increase in numbers for both business and leisure traveller. The following chart
depicts outbound travellers by country from 2010-2030:
Figure 8 : Outbound travellers by country from 2010-2030, Shaping the Future of Travel in Asia Pacific
The above chart showed that growth will be strongest from emerging markets where
red tape may traditionally be held back access to outbound travel, be it visas
restriction or a tendency for domestic travel.
The following chart depicts outbound departure by countries in 2010

34. 34 | P a g e
Figure 9 : Outbound departure by countries in 2010, Shaping the Future of Travel in Asia Pacific
The above chart demonstrated a significant difference in growth potential between
developed market and emerging market. In the above chart, Australia, a developed
market recorded that 30% of its population or 7.1 million people travelled internally
in 2010. When compared to emerging market India, only 1% of India’s population
travelled in 2010. 1% of India’s population is equivalent to 13 million people, a
figure that is close to twice of Australian who travelled in 2010. As countries
liberalize trade regulations, there is significant growth potential for emerging
economies.
The Leapfrog Effect
Leapfrog implies something that jumps over or ahead of something else to gain
advantage, or skips certain steps in a process. Leapfrogging in traditional behavior
has been particularly apparent in the field of technology.
Information technologies, large scale roll-outs of transport technologies and
infrastructure developments in the region e.g. 4G networks, high speed rail (HSR)
and sea port development and upgrade will enable Asia to leapfrog existing global
behaviors.

35. 35 | P a g e
The following chart depicts proportion of travelers who used smartphones for travel
related arrangements and bookings for business and leisure travelers for the
surveyed markets in 2012.
Figure 10 : Survey of 1,531 Asia Pacific Travellers, Shaping the Future of Travel in Asia Pacific
It is worthy of mention that the study noted certain regions of Indonesia previously
lacking in fixed phone line, traditional mobile phone or the internet started to access
the internet directly via smartphone or tablet. The access to the internet has
created a reliance on social media as a tool to support the traveller’s trip planning,
the traveller’s journey, and the traveller’s overall experience. This in turn is
influencing how s-VCs interact with the customers to enhance the value and
perception of the s-VCs’ brands.
The leapfrog effect is exhibited in a survey for age group 18-30 on their interests in
cruise vacation. The following chart depicts the survey result:

36. 36 | P a g e
Figure 11 : Proportion of travellers with aspirations to go on a cruise holiday, by age group, Shaping the Future
of Travel in Asia Pacific
Traditionally, the common perception is that cruise vacation is associated with senior
citizens or retirees. The above chart demonstrated that there is a strong desire from
age group 18-30 to take cruise vacation, with Australia and India being the most
pronounced. This trend arises from the emerging middle classes who may seek to
emulate their counterparts in Europe and North America to take all-inclusive cruise
holidays, visiting multiple locations within a shorter holiday. The strong growth in
the surveyed markets is attributed to the lower annual leave allowances where
visiting 3 countries in 7 days are appealing.
The final illustration of the Leapfrog Effect pertains to High Speed Rail (HSR). The
successful adoptions of high speed rail in Japan and Taiwan have stimulated a
greater level of HRS investment in the Asia Pacific region. As of the writing of this
report, Asia Pacific’s HRS covered distance has exceeded Europe’s 10,000 km
network. The following chart shows where HSR network are being planned or
business cases are seriously being reviewed in India, Australia, Indonesia and
Singapore (linking with Kulua Lumpur) accounting for 50,000 km by 2030. This
development could have a significant impact on high frequency routings of short
distance for Full Service Carriers as well as Low Cost Carriers.

37. 37 | P a g e
Figure 12 : Asia Pacific high speed rail networks (km) - Shaping the Future of Travel in Asia Pacific
The Barbell Effect
The Barbell effect, referring to the weights in a gym, depicts travellers at two ends of
the wealth spectrum. With the growth in the consuming classes from China, India
and Indonesia, the Barbell Effect refers to the growth particularly at the upper and
lower ends of the travel market, namely the super-rich (High Net Worth Individuals /
HNWI) and the emerging middle class at the other end of the spectrum. Middle
class was defined as having USD 5000 per household income.
From 2011 to 2030, over 100 million people will be entering the middle class in Asia
Pacific every year; as such the middle class in Asia will increase almost four times by
2030, with the majority of the increase coming from India and China. The study
noted that the people from the emerging middle class will generally be travelling on
a budget, and will stimulate high growth in the budget end of the travel scale,
including budget [S-VC](hotel) and [s-VC](airlines). In parallel, there will be an
enormous growth in the numbers of the very wealthy in the Asia Pacific region or the

38. 38 | P a g e
other end of the barbell, particularly in emerging economies of China, India and
Indonesia. For these individuals, travel is often the preferred form of leisure
expenditure, whether it is through a private jet or ultra-luxury hotels and resorts.
Cap Gemini estimated that by 2030, HNWIs will grow seven-folds in China, reaching
3.5 million HNWIs and six-folds in India, reaching 1.1 million HNWIs. The following
chart depicts the increase in middle class in the stated Asia Pacific countries from
2011 to 2030.
Figure 13 : Asia Pacific middle class, 2011 - 2030, Shaping the Future of Travel in Asia Pacific
In relation to the emerging middle class is the increase in overall discretionary
income for travel expenditure. The following chart depicts the change in travel
expenditure for the surveyed markets from 2011 to 2030.

39. 39 | P a g e
Figure 14 : Travel expenditure in Asia Pacific by origin of traveller 2011 - 2030, Shaping the Future of Travel in
Asia Pacific
Australian, Korean and Japanese travellers have traditionally dominated travel
expenditure in 2011. The travel expenditures for these developed markets are
expected to remain stable from 2011 to 2030. As for the emerging markets, India
alone will have increased from USD 13.3 billion to USD 91.2 billion or seven-fold.
During the same period of time, China’s travel expenditures are expected to increase
by three-fold, from USD 60 billion to USD 199 billion.
Implications of the 4 Effects for s-VCs in Asia Pacific region and global T&T
Where group travel is typically characterized by a “One Size Fits All” philosophy, the
4 Effects have shown that one size, increasingly, does not fit all. Indeed, all parts of
[TS-VC] need to clearly define its target audience and develop strategy that takes
into account the Me Effect and leveraging on “Big Data” to better determine the
specific niche segment for a traveller. As such, s-VCs need to recognize and respond

40. 40 | P a g e
to traveller’s differing needs and demands with the necessary infrastructure in place.
While technology remains a strategic tool for s-VCs to turn the 4 Effects into business
opportunities, the mobile and social media revolution also points to new channel
possibilities for s-VCs to not only better understand a traveller’s needs, but, to
consider the possibility of harvesting the high growth travel market from an
individual service provider effort to one of collaboration among s-VCs in the TS-VC.

41. 41 | P a g e
VII. Research Methodology
The report makes use of the Business Model Canvas template, created by Alexander
Osterwalder and Yves Pigneur to introduce the key stakeholders in [TS-VC], in the
context of the T&T external environment in 2013. The SCP(tc) business model was
first presented under the Business Model Canvas template.
The “As-is” business models of selected stakeholders in [TS-VC] will also be
presented under the Business Model Canvas template. Each of the 9 Building Blocks
of the “As-is” business model will be evaluated based on an adjusted checklist
originally presented in the Business Model Generation book of Osterwalder and
Pigneur for rating the business model’s strengths/weaknesses, opportunities and
threats. The report then consolidates and compares the checklist rating for the
respective stakeholders in [TS-VC] over the 9 Building Blocks. The report then
repeats the above exercise for each of the stakeholders, with the hypothetical
scenario that it would become a SCP(tc) provider, using the SCP(tc) business model
as the “To-be” business model.
The report then compares the differential rating between the “As-is” and “To-be”
models over the 9 Building Blocks. The report also comments on whether there is a
first mover advantage for the reviewed company to become a SCP(tc) provider. The
report concludes with a recommendation for direction of future research on the
SCP(tc) business model.
Business Model Canvas
The Business Model Canvas is a tool designed by Alexander Osterwalder for the
systematic development of new business models or the documentation of existing
business models. Osterwalder decomposed all business models into 9 essential
Building Blocks. The following is the Business Model Canvas template the will be
used for the rest of this report:

42. 42 | P a g e
Figure 15 : The Business Model Canvas, Business Model Generation
Overview of the 9 Building Blocks
The 9 Building Blocks together bring forward the most important essence of a
business model. The following is a description of each of the Building Blocks and the
important questions to consider in constructing each of the Building Blocks.
Block 1 Customer Segments
The Customer Segments Building Block defines the different groups of people or
organizations an enterprise aims to reach and serve. In the Customer Segment Block,
the most important questions to address are:
(1) For who is the business model is creating value for?
(2) Who are the most important customers?
The customers segments may include:
Mass market / Niche market / Segmented / Diversified / Multi-side platforms (or
multi-sided markets)

43. 43 | P a g e
Block 2 Value Propositions
The Value Propositions Building Block describes the bundle of products and services
that create value for a specific Customer Segment as identified in the Customer
Segment Block, as such the most important questions to address in the Value
Proposition Block are:
(1) What value does the business model delivers to the customer?
(2) Which one of the customer’s problems will the business model solve?
(3) Which customers’ needs will the business model be satisfying?
(4) What bundles of products and services will be offered to each Customer
Segment as outlined in Block 1
The following is a non-exhaustive list of value creation possibilities:
Newness / Performance / Customization / “Getting the job done” / Design
“Brand/Status” / Price / Cost reduction / Risk reduction / Accessibility /
Convenience/Usability
Block 3 Channels
The Channels Building Block describes how a company communicates with and
reaches the Customer Segments in Block 1 to deliver a Value Proposition in each of
the 5 distinct channel phases of (i) Awareness (ii) Evaluation (iii) Purchase (iv)
Delivery (v) After sales.
As such, the most important questions to address when evaluating the Channel
Building Block are:
(1) Through which Channels do the Customer Segments want to be reached?
(2) How are the Customer Segments being reached today?
(3) Are the Channels integrated? What is the level of integration?
(4) Which Channel is most effective?
(5) Which Channel is most cost-efficient?
(6) How are the Channels integrated with the workflows of the customers?
Channels can be either Direct or Indirect and can be owned by the company (owned
Channels) or partner Channels.

44. 44 | P a g e
Block 4 Customer Relationships
The Customer Relationships Building Block describes the types of relationships a
company establishes with specific Customer Segments. More than one type of
relationship can co-exist with a specific Customer Segment.
The questions to address when reviewing the Customer Relationship Block are as
follows:
(1) What type of relationship does each of the Customer Segments expect a
company to establish and maintain with them?
(2) Which of the relationships in (1) have been established?
(3) How are the relationships identified in (2) integrated with the rest of the
business model?
Categories of Customer Relationships may include the following:
Personal assistance / dedicated personal assistance / Self-service / Automated
services / Communities / Co-creation
Block 5 Revenue Streams
The Revenue Streams Building Block represents the cash a company generates from
each Customer Segment (costs must be subtracted from revenue to create earnings)
The questions to address when reviewing the Revenue Streams Block include the
following:
(1) For what value are the customers really willing to pay?
(2) For what do the customers currently pay?
(3) How are the customers currently paying?
(4) How would the customers prefer to pay?
(5) How much does each Revenue Stream contribute to overall revenues?
Common revenue streams include the following:
Asset sale / Usage fee / Subscription fees / “Lending / Renting / Leasing” / Licensing

45. 45 | P a g e
Block 6 Key Resources
The Key Resources Building Block describes the most important assets required to
make a business model.
Key questions pertaining to Block 6 include the following:
(1) What Key Resources are required by the Value Proposition Building Block
(2) What Key Resources are required by the Distribution Channels Building Block
(3) What Key Resources are required by the Customer Relationships Building
Block
(4) What Key Resources are required by the Revenue Streams Building Block?
Common key resources include the following:
Physical / Intellectual / Human / Financial
Block 7 Key Activities
The Key Activities Building Block describes the most important things a company
must do to make its business model work
Key questions pertaining to Block 7 include the following:
(1) What Key Activities are required by the Value Proposition Building Block
(2) What Key Activities are required by the Distribution Channel Building Block
(3) What Key Activities are required by the Customer Relationship Building Block
(4) What Key Activities are required by the Revenue Streams Building Block
Key activities classification:
Production / Problem solving / “Platform/Network”
Block 8 Key Partnerships
The Key Partnerships Building Block describes the network of suppliers and partners
that make the business model work

46. 46 | P a g e
Key questions pertaining to Block 8
(1) Who are the Key Partners?
(2) Who are the key suppliers?
(3) Which Key Resources are required to acquire from partners?
(4) Which Key Activities do partners perform?
Motivations for partnership creation include (1) optimization and economy of scale
(2) Reduction of risk and uncertainty (3) Acquisition of particular resources and
activities
Block 9 Cost Structure
The Cost Structure describes all costs incurred to operate a business model
Key questions pertaining to Block 9
(1) What are the most important costs inherent in the business model?
(2) Which Key Resources are most expensive?
(3) Which Key Activities are most expensive?
Cost Structures: Cost-driven, Value-drive
Attributes of Cost Structures: Fixed costs, Variable costs, Economies of scale,
Economies of scope
VIII. Research Objective and Scope
The report reviews the “As-is” business models of selected stakeholders in the [D-
VC], and a search engine company. The selected d-VCs have been chosen as they (1)
have a global business base (2) are leading players in the respective area of business
in terms of revenue, market share and profitability and (3) have a substantial
customer database. The later enables the d-VC to leverage on the established
“linkages with s-VCs”, to create “linkages among the s-VCs” (“Connecting up the
Service Dots to form a service web”), thus using the network nature of [D-VC] to
transform [TS-VC] into a “Global Integrated Travel Service Network”. d-VCs thus act
as a service collaboration enabler among s-VCs.

47. 47 | P a g e
The selected d-VCs include: [1] Expedia, largest online travel agency [2] Amadeus IT
Group, the largest travel global travel technology and distribution company and [3]
Google, the largest search company.
IX. Initial Service Collaboration Initiatives – Airline Alliances within
s-VC [airline]
The beginning of airline’s passengers transport services was marked with excitement
in the world, as it was a true novelty to travel from “A to B”. Politics, trade and
tourism have always been important economic considerations on whether an airline
flies to a destination or not. After all, as many seats as possible need to be sold at a
high enough price point, to not only breakeven, but at a reasonable margin to justify
for the opportunity cost for capital invested. For those airlines that also provide
cargo transportation services, this latter offering also helps airline to improve its
revenue generation opportunity between any two points. Except for a very small
number of airlines, an airline passenger service is a low margin business due to its
high fixed cost. All airlines however are highly sensitive to the global economy,
natural disasters and political instability. In the mid-1990s a number of airlines
started to form alliances, with the aim to leverage on alliance partners routings and
capacity to provide travelers with greater number of destinations and flight routing
choices, while achieving cross-selling among alliance airlines under the alliance
brand. As of today, there are 3 global airline alliances, namely, Star Alliance,
Oneworld and Sky Team. One of the common objectives of the airline alliances is
the requirement for traveler to be served under the same service standard across
alliance airlines. In order to fulfill this, a basic requirement was for all airlines
participating within an airline alliance to have visibility of a traveler’s data, including
information pertaining to loyalty program e.g. Platinum card, Gold card, Silver card,
customer preferences, customer history and traveler itinerary. As such, independent
of which airline is serving the traveler, the service staff of an airline belonging to an
alliance will have the same view of the customer.
Note: The Passenger Name Record (PNR) is an industry acronym for the electronic
data record containing details of the service segments of a particular passenger. The
PNR contains essential information used to create the traveler itinerary.

48. 48 | P a g e
A major challenge faced by the founding members of the airline alliances was the
fact that each airline has its own Passenger Service System (PSS) that includes the
airline’s internal reservation and ticketing system (this is used by an airline to service
a traveler, either for booking and ticketing services for the direct and indirect
channels), departure control system (used for airport check-in and boarding), and
inventory system (determines the inventory to release based on travel agency and
channel). The following is a diagram from Travel Technology Research Limited,
capturing the core IT components of a full service airline. Please note that PSS is
positioned at the center of airline IT systems and is commonly referred to as the
“heart of an airline”
Figure 16 : Airline Application Architecture, 2012 Travel Technology Research
In order for the airline alliance members to achieve communications with other
members, it needed to connect to all other alliance members. For an airline alliance
with 10 members, it would mean the establishments of 90 data links. Similarly,
exchanging data among airline alliance members would require data mapping efforts
of a similar level.
One of the major developments in the last decade in airline technology is the
emergence of community based PSS platform spear headed by Amadeus IT Group
S.A (Amadeus), known as Amadeus Altéa Customer Management System (Altéa
CMS). In short, Amadeus offers a cloud based PSS solution platform to airlines using

49. 49 | P a g e
an outsource model whereby, an airline no longer needs to invest IT resources to
develop individual PSS that has limited connectivity to other airlines, but can
leverage on Altéa CMS to satisfy its PSS needs, as well as the ability to have a high
level of connectivity with other airlines. Connectivity refers not only to the basic
data communication between the airlines, but, the ability to operate on the data.
Similar to other cloud based solutions, scalability is at the heart of the Altéa CMS
whereby, the architecture was specifically designed for resource sharing, including
the PNRs of the airlines based on pre-agreed security allowance. This means that if
one airline would like to share some or all of the PNRs of its customers to another
airline partner, for (1) consistent perspective of a traveler’s itinerary and (2) ability to
make changes to the PNR e.g. flight changes, it can do so without the need for
additional IT development, as Altéa CMS act as a common service platform that
satisfies such needs. In fact, travel agencies and other s-VCs and d-VCs who
subscribe to the Amadeus reservation desktop solution has the ability to leverage on
the similar functional and data resources as the airlines.
Since the commencement of airline alliances in the mid-1990s Altéa CMS has served
as the enabling solution that satisfies the airline alliance needs as stated earlier. The
following diagram states the percentage of airlines within a global airline alliance
that has adopted Altéa CMS:
Figure 17 : Altéa CMS share of global airline alliance boarded passengers, 2012 Amadeus Taiwan Limited

50. 50 | P a g e
The following screen captures were taken from the official websites of the 3 global
alliances to illustrate the state of the global airline alliances in the [S-VC](airline)
domain as of June 2013 as enabled by Altéa CMS:
Figure 18 : Star Alliance: http://www.staralliance.com/en/about/member_airlines/, June 2013
Figure 19 : Star Alliance Statistics, http://www.staralliance.com/en/about/member_airlines/, June 2013

51. 51 | P a g e
Figure 20 : Oneworld Alliance: http://www.oneworld.com/general/about-oneworld/, June 2013
SkyTeam: http://www.skyteam.com/en/About-us/Our-members/

52. 52 | P a g e
Figure 21 : SkyTeam: http://www.skyteam.com/en/About-us/Our-members/, June 2013
From the perspective of moving towards a seamless traveler experience in the [S-VC]
(airline) domain, global airline alliances, enabled by community based PSS platform,
represents a significant differentiation within the [S-VC](airline) domain. Namely,
those airlines which belong to an alliance are able to provide more choices to its
travelers, in terms of destinations, scheduled flights as well as the ability to
accumulate loyalty points when flying on alliance partner airlines. Those that do not
belong to a global alliance naturally will not be able to provide these benefits.

53. 53 | P a g e
Figure 22 : Alliances boarded passengers including associated and future members (million passengers), Travel
Technology Research, June 2013
According to Travel Technology Research Limited the 3 global airline alliances
accounted for 1704 million passengers out of a total of 3071 million passengers in
2012, accounting for 55% of the world’s passenger.
In the [D-VC](hotel) domain, Leading Hotels of the World Ltd, Global Hotel Alliance
(GHA) are examples of companies that have been formed specifically to promote [S-
VC](hotel). As compared to global airline alliances where technology was an enabler
for service consistency among participating members of [S-VC](airline), there is
comparatively less technology development for [S-VC](hotel) domain members who
participate in a hotel alliance.
s-VC alliances to-date rest primarily within the same domain (“Same-Domain Alliance”
approach). Apart from Tour Operators, there are few alliances consisting of s-VC
from different domains or alliance along the TS-VC (“Cross-Domain Alliance”
approach) beyond brand exposure and reward point accumulation.
This report takes the position that, while the Same-Domain Alliance approach is an
important step for [S-VC](airline), there is a growth limit to this approach as it is
domain focused and is not aligned with the total potential value that a traveller is

54. 54 | P a g e
willing to spend on a trip i.e. airline alliance members are not considering the total
addressable opportunity for the traveller itinerary. If one is to use the Chinese
analogy of a frog under the well, where the frog is only able to see the area of the
sky above the well, Same-Domain Alliance approach among [S-VC](airline) have a
much wider “sky” (Total Traveller Itinerary Value) beyond that which is above the
“well” (ticket sale).
Figure 23 : Same-Domain competition (RED) vs. Cross-Domain competition (BLUE). Cross-Domain competition
is in line with traveller’s perspective and service expectation
Despite the best efforts from s-VC alliances, there is a fundamental challenge to
move beyond the Same-Domain Alliance approach. This is due to both commercial
considerations as well as the basic challenge to have a significant number of
stakeholder within a specific s-VC domain or cross s-VC domains to adopt a common
data exchange standard, let alone data exchange standard.
The following diagram is a generalized view of stakeholders in selected s-VC domains
of interest for a FIT traveller. A FIT traveller, who does not purchase a pre-packaged
tour product from a tour operator that includes the domain services of interest of [S-
VC], would need to buy separately from each of the s-VC domains represented as
“columns”.
Note: In the [TS-VC], it is the accepted modus operandi of sVCs serving the FIT
traveller to not only serve independently as a sVC, but the FIT traveller is expected to

55. 55 | P a g e
ultimately take up a personal responsibility to make sure that his or her journey is
seamless during the service transition points from one sVC to the next sVC. The
“gaps” between the s-VC columns in the diagram below represent the lack of
ownership (“no man’s land”) at the service transition points when a traveler move
from one s-VC to the next s-VC. The traveller is expected to be responsible to make
sure that “everything works out” for him or her.
Figure 24 : Generalized view of stakeholders in selected s-VC domains of interest for a traveller. There are 3
choices for the airline domain, 4 choices for the car rental domain, 3 choices for the resort domain, 6 choices
for the hotel domain and 9 choices for the restaurant domain
The following diagram depicts the perspective of the traveller after he or she selects
a1 from [S-VC](airline), c2 from [S-VC](car), r3 from [S-VC](resort), h4 for [S-VC](hotel)
and r5 for [S-VC](restaurant). The “gaps” remain unchanged in that, there is little to
no communication between the s-VC domains on data relevant to the traveller e.g.
where does the traveller come from, where will the traveller go to next, what were
the traveller’s purchase history, what are the traveller’s preferences?
airline
a1
a2
a3
car
c1
c2
c3
c4
resort
r1
r2
r3
hotel
h1
h2
h3
h4
h5
h6
restaurant
r1
r2
r3
r4
r5
r6
r7
r8
r9

56. 56 | P a g e
Figure 25 : Traveller selected services provider a1, c2, r3, h4 and r5. The gaps between the columns represent
a lack of ownership between the service transition points from one s-VC to the next.
As the number of FIT travellers increase in accordance with the 4 Effects noted
earlier in the report, there will be a greater demand for different travel products and
services at a rate that far exceeds the speed of s-VC platform and data integration
based on the provider centric, Same-Domain Alliance approach.
This report takes the position that the most important priority for s-VCs today is not
only to establish a direct distribution channel, and by-pass as many d-VCs as possible
to attain the lowest distribution cost, but that it needs to relook at its role in relation
to the Total Traveller Itinerary Value, and whether there is any opportunity to
collaborate with other partners, design travel service proposal to enhance customer
intimacy, cross-sell, up-sell, price based on inventory to pave the way for a returning
satisfied and happy customer.
Today - Difference in Perspective of the Traveller Itinerary
As stated in Section III, there is a fundamental difference between the travelers and
the s-VCs perspectives on the traveler’s journey.
The report will use Mr. T below as a hypothetical traveler who has the following
travel needs:
airline
a1
car
c2
resort
r3
hotel
h4
restaurant
r5

57. 57 | P a g e
Mr. T needs to go to Toronto from Taipei for 2 business meetings in the week of 1st
July. The first meeting will be held at 3:00 pm at Location A in Toronto on 3rd
July.
The 2nd
meeting will be held on 4th
July at 10:00 am at Location B in Toronto. Mr. T
checked on Google Map to confirm on the locations of the meeting places. Mr. T
realized that Location A and B are both in the downtown Toronto area, and as such
Mr. T preferred to also stay in downtown Toronto at a hotel that is not too far from
the meeting locations. As Mr. T has never been to Toronto before, and he still has
15 vacation days left for this year and he has hardly taken any holidays due to very
good business, he asked his travel agent to extend his stay in Toronto for 2 more
days to be charged to him personally. Mr. T will return from Toronto to Taipei on 6th
July. Last but not least, Mr. T requires airport transfer services for onward and
return part of the trip.

58. 58 | P a g e
Mr. T’s Itinerary
The above was communicated to Mr. T’s corporate travel agent who made the
following itinerary recommendations for Mr. T:
Itinerary for Mr. T
1st
July
15:00 Airport transfer
Mr. T’s office to the Taipei airport
18:40 EVA Airways (BR 036)
Direct flight from Taipei to Toronto with a total duration of 14:25
21:05 Airport transfer
Pick-up Mr. T from airport and transfer to Royal York Hotel
6th
July
22:00 Airport transfer from Royal York Hotel to Toronto airport
7th
July
01:30 EVA Airways (BR 035)
Direct flight from Toronto to Taipei with a total duration of 15:10
8th
July
04:40 Airport transfer from Taipei airport to Mr. T’s home
Figure 26 : A hypothetical scenario of the itinerary of a traveller known as Mr. T

59. 59 | P a g e
Whereas, Mr. T sees every piece of information on the itinerary pertaining to the s-
VCs noted above to be an integral part of the complete trip, except for the [S-
VC](airport transfer) each of the s-VCs on Mr. T’s itinerary view Mr. T’s arrival as a
simple, discontinuous, one-time event, with no awareness of where Mr. T came from,
nor where Mr. T will go to next.
Mr. T’s Travel Experience
For illustration purposes, the following is what happened during Mr. T’s trip.
1st
July – Mr T’s Departure Experience
Mr. T drove to work on 1st
July, bringing his computer bag and luggage with him.
Mrs. T gave Mr. T a large luggage that is only half full, after packing. The rest of the
space is intended for shopping that Mr. T will do on behalf of Mrs. T. Originally Mrs.
T was planning to join Mr. T on this trip, but, due to a shift in her company’s project
schedule, Mrs. T was no longer able to join Mr. T. The original idea was that, when
Mr. T was engaged in meeting, Mrs. T would go shopping around Toronto. “Shop
until you Drop” has always been Mrs. T travel philosophy. Mrs. T gave CAD 1500
cash to Mr. T for her shopping list (USD 750) as well as Mr. T’s leisure travel (USD
750).
Mr. T finished all his meetings at 14:00 and as there is still time left before airport
transfer, he decided to go onto the Internet to find out more about Toronto and how
he can best make use of his time outside of the business meetings. After all, he has
planned to explore Toronto outside of the scheduled meetings at Location A and
Location B. Mr. T has noted down CN Tower and Niagara Falls as point of interest.
Before Mr. T had a chance to read more online reviews about Toronto destinations,
his secretary called at 14:45 that airport transfer service has arrived ahead of time.
As it has been raining in the past 3 hours, Mr. T decided that it is better to head out
to the airport earlier to avoid potential traffic situation.
Upon arrival at the airport, Mr. T was dropped off at the area for EVA AIRWAYS
check-in. As a business class traveller, Mr. T went to the business class check-in
counter, presented his passport, and received a boarding pass and lounge pass
promptly. It is only 16:30 and boarding does not commence until 18:00. “What to
do for 1 hour and 30 minutes?” After passing through custom, Mr. T still has 1 hour

60. 60 | P a g e
and 15 minutes before boarding, and decided to roam around the duty-free area, to
get some inspiration of gifts to buy for his wife. Before doing so, he first checked
how far the duty free area is from the boarding gate, as he will need to leave 20
minutes for an enjoyable walk from the duty free area to the boarding gate,
reminding himself to refrain from buying anything for himself or the family at this
stage, as it would mean carrying all the way to Toronto and back to Taipei (unless
something very special comes up). Along the way, he realized that, he has not had a
chance to buy any small gift for the business partners in Toronto, and it would be
rude to arrive into the meetings empty handed. The other option is to buy the gift in
Toronto, but to buy a gift in Toronto for the business partners would appear to be an
afterthought and will reflect negatively on him and the company. Mr. T then went
quickly to the duty-free shops, and before long, he bought two boxes of pineapple
cakes and two boxes of Oolong tea all paid VISA credit card. Mr. T looked at his
watch again, and it is 10 minutes after boarding started. Mr. T, walked quickly to the
boarding gate, with his computer bag and the duty-free gift bag, thinking that,
“Hopefully there won’t be too many people flying to Toronto on a Monday
afternoon!”
Mr. T finally boarded the plane, and only 2/3 of the business class cabin was full. No
one was seated beside him. Mr. T realized that, the 2 business meetings in Toronto
could be very challenging as the manufacturing cost has been rising steadily, and he
needed to announce a new pricing for his company product lines that will not be
welcome by the business partners. All of these can be left to 3rd
and 4th
July. For
now, Mr. T just wanted to relax and indulge himself, to catch up on a few movies he
never had a chance to watch, and just take it easy for the 14 next hours flight.
1st
July – Mr. T arrived into Toronto
The plane landed on time. Mr. T had a few hours of “unintended” sleep between the
movies and the meals. It is Mr. T’s strategy to not sleep on flights to North America
in an attempt to adjust quickly to the time difference. It didn’t work out as intended
but no complaints as flying from Taipei to Toronto, time is in Mr. T’s favor and he still
has Tuesday to adjust.
After custom, Mr. T picked up his luggage and exit to the arrival hall. Upon exit, Mr.
T looked around and saw many card boards held up in the air by drivers with
different names on it. After scanning the boards twice, he saw his name and thought
“Finally!” On the way to the hotel, Mr. T asked the driver for a few more suggestion

61. 61 | P a g e
for sight-seeing places in Toronto and before long, Mr. T arrived at the hotel, paid
the driver via his credit card, and was helped by the hotel concierge with his luggage.
Hotel reception asked for Mr. T’s passport, credit card for guarantee and after 5
minutes, received the key to the room and breakfast voucher, and thought “Finally!”
and went up to his room, awaiting for the porter to bring his luggage to the room.
Mr. T was pleased that the porter brought his luggage to the room within 10 minutes.
Mr. T called to Mrs. T to confirm he has safely arrived, and then called up the room
service to bring him an iron and an ironing board to iron his suits and shirts. Before
long, Mr. T’s jet lag got the better of him, and he felt asleep.
Mr. T wasn’t sure if he slept well or not, but, he was awake, and when he looked at
the clock, it was only 4:30 am! Mr. T decided to take out his laptop, check some
emails, updated the presentation for the 2 business meetings. By 6 am, Mr. T
decided to go to the gym and exercise. Mr. T believed that exercise can help to
biological clock to adjust quickly. By 9 am, Mr. T finished his exercise, shower and
even had breakfast. 2nd
July was a beautiful day in Toronto. Compared to the hot
and humid weather in Taipei, Mr. T decided to ask the concierge how to reach the
various scenic areas of interest and started the walking tour in Toronto. By 3pm, Mr.
T bought a few small gifts, had a hamburger lunch at a local restaurant, picked up
some brochures for Niagara Falls and CN Tower, got lost on 2 occasion, and finally
got directions from kind hearted Canadian who gave directions for Mr. T to return to
the hotel. Mr. T had an initial feeling of the city, and was really wondering how to
best plan out his precious time to make the best out of this business trip.
3rd
to 7th
July
There are three certainties about the period from 3rd
to 7th
July. The first certainty is
that Mr. T has completed his meeting at Location A. The 2nd
certainty is that Mr. T
has also completed his 2nd
meeting at Location B. The 3rd
certainty is that Mr. T
would have purchased most, if not all of the shopping list for Mrs. T. What was not
certain was how Mr. T spent his remaining CAD 750 during the time slots outside of
his schedules business appointments.
Mr. T’s Calendar
The following is the calendar view of Mr. T’s week in Toronto:

62. 62 | P a g e
Figure 27 : Calendar view of Mr. T's itinerary
The following diagram depicts the perspective of the traveler towards the s-VCs
where the green strip represents the perceived “virtual” linkages among the s-VCs
Figure 28 : Mr. T and his perceived linkages among the sVCs

63. 63 | P a g e
The following diagram depicts the perspective of each of the s-VCs toward Mr.T
Each s-VC has its unique and “non-shared” view of Mr.T
Figure 29 : Unique and non-shared views of sVCs toward Mr. T
Dynamic Itinerary - A Tool for Service Collaboration
The first realization is that Mr. T makes use of both of these documents (separately)
before and during the course of his trip. The second realization is that Mr. T’s trip is
consisted of much more than was captured in either the itinerary document or his
calendar.
The core concepts of the Dynamic Itinerary as a new generation travel document is
put forward in this report with the following attributes, using the case of Mr. T as a
reference.
Mr. T’s Perspective of the Dynamic Itinerary
Concept 1 Dual Perspectives of the Dynamic Itinerary (“To-go” vs. “To-do”)
 Combined perspectives of M. T’s Traditional Itinerary with Mr. T’s Calendar. The
Dynamic Itinerary therefore has dual perspectives for Mr. T. The first
perspective being that of the Traditional Itinerary or a highly summarized

64. 64 | P a g e
version of the key transportation components. This is referred as the “To-go” or
the transportation/accommodation part of the Dynamic Itinerary. The second
perspective being that of the Calendar or the “To-do” part of the Dynamic
Itinerary. The details of the “To-do” are only visible to Mr. T.
 Dynamic Itinerary can be accessed by Mr. T in the following ways (1) Dynamic
Itinerary – Traveller App (2) Dynamic Itinerary – Traveller standalone web-site (3)
Mr. T’s calendars application that have been integrated with the Dynamic
Itinerary functionality
Concept 2 Sharing of Dynamic Itinerary based on Traveller Permission
 Sharing with Friends and Families: Mr. T has the choice to share parts of or all of
the information in the Dynamic Itinerary to friends and families. The sharing
may also include Mr. T’s historical itineraries. Mr. T’s friends and families have
the option to leave comments and feedback to each of the itineraries.
 Sharing with d-VCs and s-VCs: Mr. T also has the choice to share parts of or all of
his Dynamic itinerary and historical itineraries to d-VCs and/or s-VCs. The
shared Dynamic Itinerary enables those with the shared view to have visibility of
when Mr. T is occupied, and which time slots of Mr. T’s calendar are available.
The d-VCs and s-VCs include those that are already on Mr. T’s itinerary, and
those who are participating in SCP(tc) and not on Mr. T’s itinerary but may
provide additional service recommendations to Mr. T before or after arrival at
his destinations.
 d-VCs and s-VCs participating in SCP(tc) will be able to access Dynamic Itinerary
of Mr. T in the following ways (1) Dynamic Itinerary – Service Providers App (2)
Dynamic Itinerary – Service Provider standalone web-site. It is within these
environments that Service Providers of SCP(tc) interacts with Mr. T.
Concept 3 Request for Travel Service Proposal (RFP)
 The Dynamic Itinerary includes an indicator that specifies whether Mr. T would
like to receive service proposals from d-VCs and s-VCs
 Mr. T may specify interest and budget
Concept 4 Proposing Travel Service Program

65. 65 | P a g e
 For d-VCs with access to the Dynamic Itinerary of Mr. T, this means the
opportunity to sell packaged s-VC services to Mr. T. d-VCs may need to re-
confirm with s-VCs on s-VC inventory situation before responding to Mr. T
 For s-VC with access to the Dynamic Itinerary of Mr. T, this means the
opportunity to sell directly to Mr. T, or invite other SCP(tc) participating s-VCs to
join the service provision i.e. cross selling
 Participating d-VCs and s-VCs may share active and historical itineraries of other
travellers, with or without traveller contact, for Mr. T’s reference based on his
permission. For active itineraries, there may be different levels of information
as permitted by other travellers who have accepted a specific Proposed Travel
Service Program, and also the number of remaining slots. For historical itinerary
data, this may include summary of statistics of itineraries, ranked by the number
of travellers elected to Proposed Itinerary N by months, prices, with the option
to further drill down on review comments.
Concept 5 s-VC Direct Sell based on Inventory Situation
 s-VCs may respond to RFP based on inventory in relation to the latest inventory
situation. Depending on the needs and budget level of Mr. T, s-VC may respond
to the RFPs based on a sales strategy that matches with its current inventory
situation.
Concept 6 Alliance - s-VC may bring in other “s-VC partners” to respond to a RFP
 To maximize cross-sell opportunity, s-VC may bring in “s-VC partners” (other s-
VCs that may enhance the overall value of the RFP to Mr. T)
Concept 7 Service Collaboration
 For those s-VCs who are already on Mr. T’s itinerary, it means that there is now
full visibility of where Mr. T is coming from, when Mr. T will arrive, when M. T
will depart and where Mr. T will go next. This means that, all staff that is to
service Mr. T would already have specific information about Mr. T to ensure that
Mr. T will not only be welcomed upon arrival, but, that appropriate service
action be taken