The Delphi Method

The Delphi method is a technique for structuring a group communication process in order to effectively allow a group of individuals, as a whole, to consider a complex issue (Linstone & Turoff 1975). The technique usually involves the administration of three or four rounds of questionnaires involving the same panel of experts for each round. The aim is for a consensus to be reached amongst the experts over the various rounds of the survey (Robinson 1991). The process is structured as after each successive round, feedback is provided to the group that summarises the group judgements. As such, it provides opportunity for individuals to revise their views with some degree of anonymity (Linstone & Turoff 1975).

There are a number of alternative group communication techniques, namely, conference telephone calls, committee meetings and formal conferences or seminars and the Delphi method (Linstone & Turoff 1975), however, one of the major

advantages of the Delphi method over the other group techniques is that the Delphi process is anonymous. As a result, this allows the group members the greatest degree of freedom from restrictions on their expression. The anonymity gives the Delphi method an advantage over other methods, which can be influenced by opinion leaders, or those with strong personalities or higher status (Delbecq, Van de Ven & Gustafson 1975). In addition, the method allows for ‘increased attention to each idea and increased opportunity for each individual to assure that his or her ideas are part of the group’s frame of reference’ (Delbecq et al. 1975, p. 9). Another advantage of the Delphi method is that members of the panel can be located in widespread geographical locations, as the questionnaires can be mailed, faxed or emailed to them. As discussed below, the Delphi method has been applied to research issues in a range of fields including tourism and special events.

4.2.1

Delphi Studies in the Tourism Research

Delphi studies have been used widely in tourism research by a number of authors. These studies have fallen into three key areas, namely, forecasting future scenarios (See, for example, Lee & Kim 1998; Liu 1988; Lloyd, La Lopa & Braunlich 2000; Tideswell, Mules & Faulkner 2001), exploring tourism management issues (See, for example, Garrod & Fyall 2000; Kaynak & Macaulay 1984; Weber & Ladkin 2003) and developing sets of impacts and indicators (See, for example, Carlsen et al. 2001; Green, Hunter & Moore 1990; Miller 2001; Runyan & Wu 1979). The two studies that are most relevant to the current research are those by Miller (2001) and Carlsen, et al. (2001).

The aim of the study by Miller (2001) was to consult with a panel of tourism experts in order to identify what they believed constituted sustainable tourism, what criteria are necessary for successful indicators and which indicators can promote a more sustainable form of tourism. Miller (2001) noted that the development of a thorough list of impacts or issues prior to the first round of a Delphi study increases the efficacy of the method as well as reduces the number of rounds that need to be completed, without reducing the value of the comments received (Miller 2001). A previous study by Green, et al. (1990) had been criticised for its lack of depth in the preliminary

literature search, and Miller (2001) sought to address this by conducting an extensive pre-study development of a list of impacts. As outlined in the previous chapter, the present study also undertook an extensive pre-study review of event evaluation literature and actual impact assessments.

The study by Carlsen, et al. (2001) conducted face-to-face interviews with event professionals and consultants to establish an initial list of event evaluation criteria prior to conducting the Delphi survey. The pre-study stage involved consulting with a group of 55 event management industry experts to ‘identify the benefits, limitations and barriers to implementation of industry standards for event evaluation’ (p. 78) . The Delphi technique was employed to systematically combine the knowledge and opinion of the event experts, in order to arrive at an informed group consensus about which impacts should be used in the evaluation of events. One of the failings of the study was that the consultations did not include special event practitioners, which may have provided realistic judgements on the evaluation criteria in terms of the usability of the indicators/measures. This view is supported by the approach adopted by Runyan and Wu (1979) who consulted with residents to gather lay opinions on potential tourism impacts. In contrast to the study by Carlsen, et al. (2001), the present research included a number of event practitioners in the panel of experts.

In summary, the Delphi method can be applied when the consensus of experts on an uncertain and complex and often intangible issue is desired (Linstone & Turoff 1975). Moreover, it is an appropriate method to use in order to communicate with respondents who are situated in widespread geographical locations, as it would be extremely difficult and expensive to bring these people together for any other group technique. The present study undertook significant pre-study research in order to arrive at a position where the most appropriate way to move forward is by using the knowledge of event experts. Under these circumstances, it is therefore appropriate to adopt the Delphi technique for this study. In contrast to the previous studies that used a traditional paper-based survey instrument, the present Delphi study was administered via a Web-based survey. The process for achieving this is presented in the following section.