POR-424-07
Contract # 08170-070592/001/CY
Contract award date: 2008-02-28
Prepared for
Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada
Lester B. Pearson Building
125 Sussex Drive
2nd floor
Ottawa (Ontario) K1A 0G2
Kevin.Chappell@international.gc.ca
The Strategic Counsel is pleased to present Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada with this report on a series of 18 focus group discussions conducted in six Canadian cities among international travellers and travel agents. These groups were designed to evaluate updated public outreach tools designed by the Consular Affairs Bureau with the aim of informing Canadians on the precautions and/or considerations to be taken into account when travelling abroad.
The qualitative research program covered in this report represents the first phase of a two-phase research project commissioned by Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada. The second phase of research was quantitative in nature and consisted of an intercept survey of 817 international travellers conducted at airports in Canada's three largest cities: Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver. The findings from this phase of the research program are detailed in a second report provided under separate cover.
Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada (DFAIT) is required to help ensure the safety and security of Canadians in our global environment in part by providing Canadians travelling abroad with consular assistance on behalf of the Government of Canada. The Client Services Division of DFAIT's Consular Affairs Bureau helps to fulfill this mandate by regularly producing and updating a series of communications tools designed to help Canadians plan for and experience a safe and successful journey abroad.
In order to provide Canadians travelling abroad with the most current information available and to maximize the effectiveness of their communications, over the past several years DFAIT has conduct periodic evaluations of the visibility and the effectiveness of its communication tools among travellers and travel professionals. This 2008 qualitative study builds upon the findings of similar previous studies completed in 2006 and 2007.
The qualitative component of the current program of research aimed to provide an in-depth evaluation of the effectiveness of DFAIT's 2007/2008 communications tools, to gain insight as to how future publications and materials might be improved upon, and to broaden DFAIT's current understanding of travellers' and travel professionals' information requirements when preparing for travel abroad.
As such, the main objectives of the research were to:
In order to address the above objectives a series of 18 focus groups were conducted between March 4th and March 11th, 2008 in six Canadian cities which were identified as key points of origin for many international travellers: Halifax, Quebec City (in French), Montreal (in French), Toronto, Calgary and Vancouver.
Three groups were held in each center. Two of these groups were conducted among representatives of the general public who had travelled abroad at least once in the past 24 months and/or who intended to travel abroad within the next 12 months. The groups were segmented by age, with one of these groups in each location comprised of participants aged 18 to 29 years, while the other group was comprised of participants aged 30 years and above. Screening was also conducted at the recruiting stage to ensure that each participant in the general public groups met the following criteria:
Beyond these fundamental screening criteria, participants were recruited to ensure a reasonable mix of gender, educational attainment and household income. It was also ensured that the participants reflected a cross-section of those who have traveled beyond the U.S. to destinations off the North American continent. A $50 incentive was offered to each participant who attended these groups.
The third group in each city was comprised of travel industry professionals. Efforts were made to recruit more senior individuals from a diverse range of travel agencies in each of the locations. This helped ensure that the travel agent's views and usage of the outreach tools were not overly influenced by differing levels of experience in the field. Given that these groups represented professionals whose participation required them to take time away from their working day, a higher incentive of $100 per participant was offered.
All focus group sessions were approximately two hours in length and a maximum of ten participants were recruited for each group. During the course of these two-hour discussions held with members of the public and travel agents, a range of publications and documents were evaluated:
| Outreach Tools | General Population Groups | Travel Professional Groups |
|---|---|---|
| Bon Voyage, But… brochure | X | X |
| Travel Report - Mexico document | X | X |
| Travel Report - Columbia document | X | X |
| Main page of the Consular Affairs Bureau web site | X | X |
| Drugs and Travel: Do's and Don'ts Fact Sheet | X | X |
| Travel Counsellor's Checklist | – | X |
| Registration of Canadians Abroad document | X | – |
The reader should note that findings from qualitative research are not statistically reliable, and unlike national surveys, cannot be extrapolated to the broader target population with any degree of statistical validity. While participants are recruited in a manner that takes into account representation by key demographic characteristics, the groups cannot be positioned as representative of the broader travelling population. Nevertheless, focus groups are a highly effective research tool and remain a suitable methodology for the purpose and objectives of this research, particularly as it was important to be able to put documents in front of participants and have them react to content as well as look and format. The findings generated from this research provide DFAIT with useful insight for developing and refining future outreach tools, based on target audiences responses to, and evaluations of, the current communications materials.
The analysis that follows provides readers with a sense of broad patterns across all of the groups as well as unique or interesting comments among specific groups or particular participants, where such comments are deemed to provide useful insight with respect to advancing the objectives of the research.
Relative to previous years during which similar evaluations were conducted, less time was spent in the focus groups conducted this year on the topic of information sources in order to focus more time and provide more insight into specific publications and communications tools.
The findings from 2008 are generally consistency with those from 2006 and 2007 with respect to the sources that travel agents and travellers draw upon when planning and preparing for a trip abroad. Noteworthy is that when prompted, while many expressed fairly low expectations with regards to the type and extent of travel information produced by the Government of Canada, most participants were very pleasantly surprised by the variety and quality of the information tools that were presented to them during the group discussions.
Top-of-mind elements typically discussed when advising clients about their travel abroad included tourist attractions, accommodations, flight information, travel insurance and country entry/exit requirements as well as health and/or vaccination requirements. Many travel agents also mentioned that they regularly advise their clients to make photocopies of their travel documents before leaving in case they were to lose them.
While most travel agents indicated that they would follow an official warning issued by the Government of Canada regarding a destination, generally speaking a more in-depth discussion of security matters would be discussed with clients at the discretion of the agent. When prompted about security and safety issues as well as cultural norms in foreign countries, many acknowledged that while these are important considerations, discussions on these topics usually occurs at a later stage in the booking process. When the topic of security and safety is broached with a client, the dialogue tends to focus on the laws, culture and customs of a certain country, e.g. the appropriate clothing for women to wear in certain locations.
The main sources of information on travel destinations for travel agents were:
As in previous years, while the Government of Canada was viewed as a highly credible source of information on the political and economic state of foreign countries, many travel agents were somewhat reluctant to rely heavily on Government information as they perceive their objectives or their mandates to be inconsistent. Travel agents are in the business of promoting travel. While taking the responsibility of their clients' safety very seriously, they often view information from the Government of Canada as "exaggerated" or "inflammatory" in the sense that they believe the dangers of overseas travel are often overstated simply in order to meet their responsibility to warn and protect Canadians travelling abroad. Additionally, some had the impression that it was difficult to obtain information from the Government of Canada. These types of comment reflect the ongoing frustration of those attempting to access government information on the web and/or by using search engines on Government of Canada web sites which are viewed as imprecise. As a result, only a minority of travel agents considered information from the Government of Canada as one of their primary sources. Interestingly, many assume that some of the information they receive or access via in-house or travel booking databases draws upon the latest Government of Canada information.
On balance travellers' top-of-mind concerns when planning a trip centred on costs, local attractions, the climate and convenience with respect to ease of travel. While matters related to health, safety and security were perceived to be important; in general these subjects were not an active consideration in the initial decision-making process as most took it as a given that the destinations they were travelling to were relatively secure.
Those among the younger groups in particular had the sense that security concerns regarding travel are commonly exaggerated, and that nothing would happen if they simply employed common sense and remained within the boundaries of the main tourist areas. By contrast, the older groups were generally more actively cognizant of safety and security issues when travelling, and often indicated that they usually purchased travel insurance before their departure (unlike their younger counterparts). Younger participants were also more inclined to believe that someone, either a family member or the government, would quickly respond should they find themselves in some sort of trouble abroad.
When searching for information about international travel, as in previous years travellers once again relied primarily on the Internet as their primary information source. While they trusted most of the content that they found on travel websites and destination country websites, most preferred to use a search engine to find what they were looking for (e.g. Google) and generally felt that they were knowledgeable enough to filter out the less credible sources of information.
Again in line with previous years' findings, the Government of Canada was perceived to be an extremely credible source of information on travelling in foreign countries. Interestingly, however, this source was seldom used by travellers when planning their trips abroad. Similarly to the views expressed by travel agents, many travellers had the impression that finding and navigating through information on Government of Canada web sites would be a complex and time consuming task.
The 2008 booklet received very positive reviews from travel agents and travellers alike, although the challenge of raising awareness of its existence remains especially as travel agents do not actively promote the booklet to their clients. Moreover, the increasing propensity to book travel online means that a relatively small share of the travelling public is exposed to the booklet, when they pick up their passport, for example.
The inclusion of what was felt to be corporate advertising in the brochure was identified as an issue in the 2007 evaluation with participants commenting that the advertising distracted from the legitimacy of the brochure's contents. These types of concerns were less predominant in this year's evaluation although some participants felt that the page promoting the Registration of Canadians Abroad resembled an advertisement rather than a government service. For the most part, however, changes made since 2007 appear to have resulted in a vastly improved product as participants were generally overwhelmingly favourable toward the brochure.
Notably, generally positive remarks were offered with respect to the brochure's cover. Most felt that the cover appropriately depicted the "travel abroad" theme although, as was the case in 2007, participants suggested that more emphasis could be placed on the sub-title "Essential Information for Canadian Travellers" (e.g. larger/different font) in order to more effectively draw their attention to the "essential" nature of the content. At the same time, some participants remarked that the imagery on the cover tended to conjure up notions of adventure or exotic travel and thus, a sense that the information contained in the booklet was relevant only to those travelling to less frequented or "out of the way" destinations.
These overall very positive views contrasted with generally low levels of awareness of the brochure: "I wish I had known about this brochure before…how come I didn't?" Very few travellers had seen or used the booklet before, and of those who had, only a handful said they had paid much attention to it. A similar pattern emerged among travel agents, with a relatively small group having seen the brochure before. Travellers expected to find the brochure at passport offices, airports, travel agents' offices and even in other waiting room areas, such as a doctor's office.
A few key elements of the booklet stood out as being particularly attractive or interesting to participants:
While the vast majority of comments about the brochure were overwhelmingly positive, participants did nevertheless provide interesting and useful insights as to how it could be further improved. Suggestions included further modifications to the cover page as noted above, a more logical and sequential structure within and between each section of the report (e.g. the section titled Drugs and Travel: Do's and Don'ts shown on page 11 is next to a textbox with information on Travel in Europe (entry requirements, on page 12. More information on illegal drugs is included later in the brochure on pages 18 and 19), increasing the amount of country-specific information and, where possible, using a larger font size while still maintaining the relatively compact size of the brochure which is widely favoured.
The reactions to the booklet did vary to some extent depending on location and group composition:
Overall, views on the Travel Report: Mexico document could be characterized as moderately positive, with those in the locations of Vancouver, Montreal and Quebec City generally giving the document a more positive rating. The document was seen as thorough, comprehensive and complete. Participants also appreciated the fact that the up-to-date nature of the document and the inclusion of a range of country- specific information, including health information, entry and exit requirements and legalities (e.g. many remarked that the "guilty until proven innocent" nature of Mexican law was an important consideration they were not aware of in addition to the extent of crime throughout much as well as in specific regions).
However, many participants also found the document to be alarmist particularly in its tone, but also in the way in which the information was shown and the sequence. For example, the third section on Safety and Security was viewed by many to be overly negative with information and statistics on crime, theft, assaults, kidnappings and organized crime. While understanding the importance of sharing this type of information with travellers, many felt that positioning it at the front end of the document tended to lend it a weightier and more negative tone. Travel agents in particular expressed serious reservations about sharing this type of information with travellers as a common practice as they felt it could be very off-putting for those who might have even the slightest concerns about travelling abroad. Furthermore, many participants in both groups also said that the seemingly negative tone of the document did not generally correspond to their views of Mexico as a travel destination. At the same time, some felt that the information found in the travel report was exactly the type of information that travellers should expect from the Government of Canada: "The government is not in the business of trying to sell international travel to people, but it wants to share information on safety. That is perfectly normal".
Despite this type of commentary, most participants were pleased to know that this sort of report existed and was available to them, whether they chose to follow the advice or not. Some also indicated that this type of report was a good complement to the Bon Voyage, But… brochure as it contains the type of country-specific details that are lacking in the brochure. The country-specific report had a reinforcing effect on awareness and interest of Consular Affairs, serving to prompt participants to think about other information available on the Consular Affairs Web site.
Subsequent to reviewing the full travel report for Mexico, participants in all groups were asked to review and comment on the cover page for the Columbia travel report. The discussion focused on their reaction to a new a bar chart which as been included on all travel reports. The bar graphic highlights one of four possible warning levels for travel in that country. Additional warnings may be shown, as applicable, for travel in specific regions of the country.
While many participants appreciated some kind of indicator which visually signalled the level of danger associated with travel to the country, there was some confusion as to how to read the chart. This was exacerbated by the choice of colors (red and blue) which were associated with each warning level. For example, blue is not a color that is typically associated with a "go/no go" type of decision, while green, yellow and red are more commonly thought of in this regard. Moreover, the two highest warning levels in the Columbia report are both highlighted in red. This made it difficult for participants to distinguish between the two levels without reading further. Participants also felt that the specific regions associated with a particular warning level should be more clearly laid out, perhaps in table or bullet-style rather than narrative or text-block format. It was generally confusing for participants to work through the two regional warnings as it was difficult to quickly scan the warning and decipher to which regions each applied.
Participants' views regarding the main page of the web site are considerably improved against the comments received a year ago, when many participants complained that the page was too crowded, repetitive and confusing. This year participants commented that the site was well organized, clear and comprehensive in its coverage of issues related to international travel. Many also indicated they would be very interested in visiting the site based on what they could see from the home page; "En tout cas, ça donne le goût d'aller voir sur le site!"
Many participants expressed positive comments about both the interactive world map and what they perceived as comprehensive coverage of issues found on the page. The web page was also perceived to be well-structured, and the use of highlighting features (e.g. red asterisks) was additionally appreciated.
Once again, these very positive comments contrasted with the very low awareness of the web site among participants, especially travellers. On balance it was the travel agents who were generally more aware of the existence of the web site, and many of them had visited it on previous occasions. Most liked the site and perceived it as a go-to source of information for their work related needs. As was the case for other communications tools, Quebec City agents stood out in their high degree of familiarity with the site. One of the agents from the Quebec City group specifically remarked on what he saw as improvements made to the site in recent years.
In general, views on the Drugs and Travel fact sheet ranged from mixed to positive. Most appreciated the importance of covering this type of topic, and perceived the document to be well-written, very clear and informative. Numerous participants also commented on the applicability of the information regarding the requirements for people travelling with prescription drugs
However, there were several concerns raised by some of the younger participants who indicated that they might feel targeted if they received this information as part of their travel documents. Some travel agents agreed with these concerns, and additionally expressed worries that their clients may think they were being targeted if the agents distributed this document to them. Most travel agents indicated they would be unlikely to pass this document along to their clients for this reason.
Other concerns included a perceived disconnect between the drawings (not perceived as serious) and the content (perceived as relevant and serious). Further, participants in the younger groups were concerned about the environmental damage associated with production and distribution of single-issue leaflets such as this fact sheet. They felt the information was adequately included in the Bon Voyage, But… booklet and did not warrant a separate information sheet.
This tool was perceived as very useful for less experienced travel agents. For most of the experienced travel professionals in the groups however, despite being familiar with the checklist, they did not often use it as part of their client interaction. This was due to the fact that their information system allowed them to fill out a similar "checklist" electronically, which could then be printed for their clients' use. Using the checklist provided by the Government of Canada was generally seen as extra paperwork for travel agents to fill out and for their clients to pick up.
Only a handful of travellers and a minority of travel agents had heard of the ROCA service. Due to this low awareness, many questions arose in the groups as to how this service operated, who was eligible and under what circumstances. Others expressed some concerns about the type of personal information that had to be shared in order to register, how it would be used, and whether or not there was a cost involved.
For the most part, participants felt the service was beneficial, particularly for those travelling abroad for a lengthy period of time.