SOS in the sky: Can technologies make airports ready for “take-off” again? : An exploratory case study of Frankfurt Airport

(1)

SOS in the sky:

Can technologies make

airports ready for “take-off”

again?

MASTER PROJECT

THESIS WITHIN: Business Administration NUMBER OF CREDITS: 15

PROGRAMME OF STUDY: International Marketing AUTHOR: Sidney Hansmeier and Laura van Hulsen JÖNKÖPING May 2021

(2)

i

Master Thesis in Business Administration

Title: SOS in the sky: Can technologies make airports ready for “take-off” again? - An exploratory case study of Frankfurt Airport

Authors: Sidney Hansmeier and Laura van Hulsen Tutor: Brian McCauley

Date: 24th_{of May 2021}

Key terms: Customer experience, Technologies, Airport servicescape, Covid-19, Frankfurt Airport

Abstract

Background: The ongoing global pandemic has brought the aviation industry to its knees. The dramatic decline of passenger numbers is particularly noticeable at airports, such as Frankfurt Airport. Going from a new all-time record of 70,5 million passengers in 2019 to passenger numbers that were lastly reported in 1984, the airport has to re-evaluate the current servicescape to adapt to the new normal. With technologies being an integral feature of today’s society, airports and other service providers increasingly emphasize the use of technologies to enhance the customer experience.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to develop an understanding of how technologies in the airport servicescape impact and reshape the customer experience during the pandemic age.

Method: An exploratory sequential mixed methods research based on a single case study was conducted to fulfill the purpose of this research. The qualitative data was collected through 13 semi structured online interviews aiming to explore how passengers perceive the airport servicescape and the influence of technologies during the pandemic age. Based on the themes and codes generated from the qualitative findings, as well as from previous literature, a theoretical framework was developed. With the help of this framework, the quantitative instrument (online survey) was developed aiming to explore if and which specific attributes of technologies impact and reshape the customer experience at Frankfurt Airport during Covid-19.

Conclusion: All technologies available at Frankfurt Airport were perceived as positive

during Covid-19. Especially speed and convenience (easy usability) were the most striking technology-specific attributes for the overall customer experience at the airport. Yet, due to the decreased airport traffic and reduced personnel, the currently changed airport servicescape had an influence on the favorable technology perception and resulting customer experience. Thus, the customer experience was not solely impacted and reshaped by the technologies, but rather co-created by an interplay of technologies, employees, and safety measurements at the airport.

(3)

ii

Acknowledgments

First and foremost, we would like to thank our supervisor Brian McCauley for his valuable and detailed advice and guidance throughout the stages of this thesis. Your constructive comments and encouragement pushed us to sharpen our thinking and brought our thesis to a “safe altitude”. Further, we would like to express our gratitude to everyone who dedicated their time to support our research and shared their experiences with us. You provided us with interesting insights and extensive knowledge.

Finally, we want to thank ourselves for the continuous motivation and discipline throughout the last months. Not only did we get even more passionate about aviation but also learned that teamwork can make a dream work.

Cleared for take-off Sidney and Laura

(4)

iii

List of Tables

TABLE 1 - AGE DISTRIBUTION SURVEY PARTICIPANTS ... 28

TABLE 2 - EXPLANATION SURVEY DESIGN ... 31

TABLE 3 - INTERVIEW INFORMATION ... 33

TABLE 4 - TECHNOLOGY USAGE SURVEY PARTICIPANTS ... 52

List of Figures

FIGURE 1- RESEARCH DESIGN AND STRATEGY ... 26

FIGURE 2 - OVERALL SERVICESCAPE-SPECIFIC ATTRIBUTES ... 39

FIGURE 3 - TECHNOLOGY-SPECIFIC ATTRIBUTES ... 42

FIGURE 4 - PASSENGER-SPECIFIC ATTRIBUTES... 48

FIGURE 5 - THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ... 51

List of Abbreviations

Frankfurt Airport FRA

Service Dominant Logic SDL

Self-Service Technologies SST

Augmented Reality AR

Virtual Reality VR

Mixed Reality MR

(6)

1

1. Introduction

The purpose of the first chapter is to introduce the context of the thesis by providing some background information about the tourism and aviation industry and the impact of Covid-19. Further, the problem of this research is defined, out of which the research purpose is developed. The chapter continues with the establishment of two research questions, which deal as a guideline for the thesis. Lastly, the boundaries set for this study are outlined.

1.1 Background Information and Problem Description

The tourism industry is widely considered as one of the determining components of the global economy (OECD, 2020). The past decade has witnessed a remarkable rise in international tourist numbers, climbing from 0,95 billion in 2010 to an impressive number of 1,46 billion in 2019 (UNWTO, 2020a). Next to the increased tourist numbers, the tourism industry accounts for 10,3% of the global GDP and is responsible for one out of ten jobs worldwide. This makes the industry one of the most crucial partners for governments to create employment (World Travel & Tourism Council, n.d.). The future of the tourism industry was set in stone: flourishing and economically secure. It was destined that by 2030, international arrivals would have surmounted 1,8 billion (UN News, 2017). In late 2019, however, the emergence of Covid-19 affected all dimensions of life worldwide. The number of infections spread quickly across the world, forcing the World Health Organization to declare the virus as a worldwide pandemic on the 11th_of

March 2020 (Liu et al., 2020). This declaration has led to immediate border closures and travel restrictions to minimize the spread of the virus (Kenwick & Simmons, 2020). In addition to that, various countries have imposed lockdowns, leading to a drastically hit service sector. Therefore, Covid-19 challenges service providers to reconceptualize service operations, putting safety and trust in the foreground (Berry et al., 2020).

Aviation is a vital component of the tourism industry as 59% of all international tourists choose air travel as a mode of transport (UNWTO, 2020b). However, as almost all countries worldwide enforced travel restrictions due to Covid-19, causing the near standstill of traveling (UNWTO, 2020c), the aviation industry suffered a dramatic decline in passenger numbers (IATA, 2020).

(7)

2

As airports are closely linked to the aviation industry by offering services to airlines, they were likewise affected by Covid-19 (Berry et al., 2020). Having a high contact nature, airport managers, therefore, need to take changing customer needs and perceptions into consideration (e.g., to limit crowding and implement hygiene measures) (Berry et al., 2020). An opportunity to flatten the risk and simultaneously enhance the customer experience at airports is to use preventive measures (ACI, 2020). For the past three decades, customer experience has been considered as a relatively new but significant marketing concept, aiming to generate exclusive and pleasurable experiences (Jain et al., 2017). It can be characterized as a strategic procedure, intending to create value, attain differentiation, and sustain a competitive advantage (Gentile et al., 2007; Pine & Gilmore, 1998; Verhoef et al., 2009). However, although many researchers focused on the phenomenon of customer experience, there is still a lack of conceptual clarity (Kranzbühler et al., 2018; Mahr et al., 2019). Preventive measures became a critical issue in improving the customer experience at airports. One of these preventative measures is to put a greater focus on new and existing technologies at airports, which are seen as an integral component of seamless travel (ACI, 2020). The combination of customer experience and recent technologies has received increasing empirical attention (Berry et al., 2020; Hao et al., 2020; Hoyer et al., 2020; Lim et al., 2018). Despite this interest, there are still shortcomings in researching how these technologies modify and influence the customer experience (Hao et al., 2020; Hoyer et al., 2020). In the light of recent events, the impact of Covid-19 on the servicescape has not been dealt with in-depth before and is thus an appropriate avenue for future research (Berry et al., 2020; Sigala, 2020).

A shift from a traditional servicescape towards a dynamic and interactive servicescape occurs, as technological advancements will be unavoidable in the future (McLeay et al., 2021). A servicescape can be defined as a service environment, shaping how customers perceive and experience service in the physical and social environment, first coined by Booms and Bitner in 1990. The sub-concepts service experience, service quality, and brand image of the umbrella concept servicescape have been explored in many different contexts (Dong & Siu, 2013; Durna et al., 2015; Siu et al., 2012). A neglected area in the field of servicescapes however is the airport industry (Park & Park, 2018). Frankfurt Airport (hereinafter referred to as FRA) is a modern hub that emphasizes new and already existing technologies to enhance the customer experience in these uncertain times

(8)

3

(Airport Business, 2020; Fraport AG, n.d.). Therefore, by making use of these technologies, FRA is a proper context for a dynamic and interactive servicescape, aiming to improve the customer experience.

1.2 Research Purpose and Questions

To date, there is only limited research on the impact of technologies on customer experience (Hao et al., 2020; Hoyer et al., 2020; van Doorn et al., 2016) and airport servicescape (Park & Park, 2018). Beyond that, little is known about how Covid-19 influences the servicescape and technology usage in the tourism sector (Sigala, 2020). Consequently, to fill this lack of research, the purpose is to generate an understanding of how technologies in the airport servicescape impact and reshape the customer experience during the pandemic age. Thereby, this research contributes to the knowledge development of airport servicescape theory and technology influence on customer experience. Further, the research can assist marketers in understanding customer perceptions of technology usage and importance in times of a crisis. It is aimed that the outcome provides valuable and basic data that can be used to guide strategies and to develop and improve the seamless customer experience in the future. Besides, this research intends to provide beneficial insights for airport operators, airlines, other companies operating in the aviation industry, and other industries that seek to implement technologies to enrich the customer experience. To fulfill the purpose and make the research efforts tangible, the following two research questions have been developed.

R1: How do passengers perceive the airport servicescape and the influence of technologies during the pandemic age?

R2: What attributes of technologies in the airport servicescape impact and reshape the customer experience during the pandemic age?

To answer these questions, an exploratory sequential mixed methods design is conducted based on a single case study of FRA, which is similar to leading journals in the area of customer experience (Ren et al., 2016) and servicescape (Dong & Siu, 2013). By adopting a single case study, the research aims to shed new light on the technology influence on customer experience during the pandemic age as a contemporary phenomenon, using the airport servicescape FRA as a real-life context. While the first research question relates

(9)

4

to the qualitative phase, the second research question is connected to the subsequent quantitative phase. Therefore, the first research question aims to explore how passengers perceive the airport servicescape and the influence of technologies in times of a crisis based on stakeholder interviews. This allows a more precise understanding of the phenomenon and aids in creating a theoretical framework. This theoretical framework assists in establishing the instrument for the quantitative phase. Thus, the second research question aims to investigate if and which specific attributes of technologies, which are derived from the qualitative findings and existing literature, impact and reshape the customer experience at FRA in the pandemic age.

1.3 Delimitations

Finally, the research may have two limitations. The first is that the study will solely focus on Germany’s biggest airport, namely FRA, and is thus not considering other airports. Secondly, only passengers who have flown via FRA between March 2020 and March 2021 will be included in the study. This is because the passenger numbers abruptly dropped due to the ongoing worldwide travel restrictions and lockdowns. This specific period is chosen to investigate how customers experience technologies during a crisis when face-to-face service encounters are too risky.

(10)

5

2. Literature Review

In this chapter, relevant and existing literature and theories are reviewed, which build the necessary foundation for the thesis. Thus, an overview of the theoretical background for this research, starting off with the phenomenon of the airport servicescape will be given. Further, a description of service in the pandemic age will be considered, followed by the phenomenon of customer experience. The chapter is concluded by outlining current and emerging technologies.

Regarding the frame of reference, four main topics are focused on to give a structure to the overall thesis. First, coined by Booms and Bitner (1990), the phenomenon of the servicescape and its support from the Service-Dominant Logic (hereinafter referred to as

SDL), introduced by Vargo and Lush (2004) as a perspective for airports, will be analyzed. This phenomenon also deals as one of the key concepts for the research, as not much attention on the airport context has been given so far and thus, further investigation is needed (Park & Park, 2018). Next, the potential changed service operation during the pandemic age is discussed, taking into consideration the influence of Covid-19 on the service landscape in general and focusing on the impact on the aviation industry specifically. Thirdly, the phenomenon of customer experience is investigated, as the concept is one of the central parts of the research purpose. Lastly, emerging technologies are seen as an integral part of the servicescape and influence the customer experience nowadays (Hoyer et al., 2020; Kumar et al., 2021).

All four core topics are seen as valuable to better understand the extent technologies influence the customer experience in the airport context and to identify which areas concerning this phenomenon have been neglected so far.

(11)

6

2.1 The servicescape as a perspective for airports

First coined by Booms and Bitner (1990), servicescape is described as the service environment, shaping how customers perceive and experience service in the physical and social environment. Accordingly, “servicescape is the contextual landscape for service” (Ballantyne & Nilsson, 2017, p. 226), where buyers and sellers interact with each other (Booms & Bitner, 1990). This adds to Akaka and Vargo (2015), who argue that servicescape refers to environments where, based on interactions and actions, value of the service experience is created. Thus, servicescape can impact a customer’s emotional response, service quality perception, level of satisfaction, and intention to use a service again (Nguyen, 2006). As it is a place of simultaneous service production and consumption, Nilsson and Ballantyne (2014) describe servicescape as “a place of service co-production”, either in the form of a tangible or intangible environment (p. 374). Having said that, a poor servicescape will automatically negatively influence customer expectations, while a positive servicescape design can improve customer satisfaction (Bitner, 1992). Thus, customers’ emotions towards a servicescape can result in avoidance or approach. While avoidance is often linked to crowding, approach is usually generated from design, layout, or music (Batat, 2019). Beyond that, researchers argue that there are no universal servicescape elements that can be applied across all industries and are thus depending on the nature of service (Jeon & Kim, 2012; Nguyen, 2006; Park & Park, 2018).

Servicescape has been investigated in various contexts, including e-sports (Chen et al., 2020), hospitals (Loureiro, 2017), restaurants (Hanks & Line, 2018), and retail (Demoulin & Willems, 2019). Little attention has been given to the airport context so far (Park & Park, 2018). However, the servicescape of an airport has a significant influence on passengers’ overall perception of service quality and attitude (Bitner, 1992; Park & Park, 2018) and enhances the navigation in the terminals (Wattanacharoensil et al., 2016). Thus, more and more airports are continuously focusing on improving their servicescape (Fodness & Murray, 2007). While Park and Park (2018) considered convenience, cleanliness, attractiveness, amusement, functionality, and pleasantness as the main servicescape determinants for transfer amenities at airports, Jeon and Kim (2012) used the ambient, functional, aesthetic, social, and especially the safety factor, as a unique feature, in the airport servicescape context. Considering the emotional

(12)

7

response, Park and Park (2018) measured a range of emotions towards the servicescape, whereas Jeon and Kim (2012) only measured whether the affective reaction is positive or negative.

The servicescape within marketing practices is supported by the SDL, introduced by Vargo and Lusch (2004). According to the SDL, service can be seen as the underlying foundation of exchange where customers create and co-create value. By taking advantage of resources, firms can encourage customer interaction and, thus, co-create value (Vargo & Lusch, 2016). Taken together, value co-creation can be defined as “joint collaborative activities by parties involved in direct interactions, aiming to contribute to the value that emerges for one or both parties” (Grönroos, 2012, p. 1523). Therefore, one key component of SDL is the thinking of “doing things with the customer instead of for or to the customer” (Nilsson & Ballantyne, 2014, p. 376), where customers are a vital factor of resource integration, independent of a tangible or intangible setting. Opposed to Goods Dominant Logic, where the product is the highest priority and marketed to customers, SDL markets with customers and other parties involved to co-create value (Vargo & Lusch, 2004). Therefore, the exchange between a customer, company and other stakeholders is the central feature of the SDL, as customer experience is either directly or indirectly created by all parties (Vargo & Lusch, 2008).

Beyond that, the emergence of SDL has resulted in the development of service ecosystems, which can be defined as “a relatively self-contained, self-adjusting system of resource-integrating actors connected by shared institutional arrangements and mutual value creation through service exchange” (Vargo & Lusch, 2016, p. 10). This shows the increasing relevance regarding how value and innovation are co-created between a set of stakeholders (Akaka & Vargo, 2015). For example, at airports, value co-creation influences the customer experience as passengers fulfill the “role of the creator of value” as soon as they engage in a service interaction (Evardsson et al., 2005; Vargo & Lusch, 2008, p. 2). In their study, Wattanacharoensil et al. (2016) outline that co-creation activities at airports can be divided into four main categories: Self-Service Technologies (hereinafter referred to as SST), social networking forums, social media sites, and leisure activities in the airport terminals. Looking closer at SSTs, which allow customers to engage in service without the direct involvement of employees (Fernandes

(13)

8

& Pedroso, 2016), it can be said that by implementing such technology, customers get the possibility to co-create value (Dong et al., 2008). Besides, passengers co-create their airport experience by using forums and social media channels to exchange their experiences with other users, such as picture sharing, delays, and general impressions of the airport (Wattanacharoensil et al., 2016).

SDL proposes that innovation appears when superior choices for resource integration and value co-creation occur (Lusch & Nambisan, 2015). Hence, the reconfiguration of actors and stakeholders in an ecosystem may contribute to new possibilities of value co-creation through resource integration (Koskela-Huotari et al., 2016). Thus, the service ecosystem can be reconfigured by taking in different actors, reformulating actors’ roles, and re-examining resources in the service ecosystem. As innovation can be seen as the process of exchanging and integrating resources in new and different ways (Koskela-Huotari et al., 2016), innovation can only be stimulated and co-create value if all actors and stakeholders in the ecosystem have the same fundamental values in common (Aal et al., 2016).

Overall, mandatory processes at airports, such as check-in and security procedures, typically result in frustration and are perceived as non-value activities due to long waiting times or queues (Wattanacharoensil et al., 2016). Thus, the implementation of new and existing technologies gives passengers the advantage of controlling their activities, saving time, and improving self-efficacy (Meuter et al., 2003). They play a huge role in establishing efficient and fast service interactions, leading to an enhanced customer experience. Therefore, incorporating technologies significantly affects value co-creation since values such as self-control, fast service, and self-efficacy are transmitted to passengers (Wattanacharoensil et al., 2016). For example, Hongkong Airport and Cathay Pacific facilitate the customer journey by jointly promoting the technology implementation and usage. Thus, value is co-created between the airport and passengers as well as between the airline, the airport, and the passengers (Wattanacharoensil et al., 2016). Based on Aal et al. (2016), this means that since all actors share the same values, value can be co-created more efficiently and contributes to stimulating innovation. However, it should be noted that passengers must have the ability to cope with such technologies to gain and co-create value. Therefore,

(14)

9

passengers’ demographics and technological efficacy affect the value creation and experience as well (Halpern et al., 2021; Wattanacharoensil et al., 2016).

Taking the aspects mentioned above into consideration, airports are considered service facilitators, providing service resources to customers to engage in value co-creation (Wattanacharoensil et al., 2016) and assess the ultimate value following the co-creation of their actions (Grönroos, 2008). Therefore, it can be concluded that no matter how an airport ecosystem looks like, a set of stakeholders, such as passengers and airlines, need to be involved in the experience process (Tuchen et al., 2020).

2.2 Service in the pandemic age

At the beginning of 2020, the emergence of Covid-19 changed the world dramatically. The Covid-19 pandemic is frightening as people from the immediate environment, as friends or co-workers, can be infected, spreading the disease via breathing or touching, without showing any symptoms (Berry et al., 2020). The term pandemic is generally understood to mean “a widespread epidemic of contagious disease throughout the whole of a country or one or more continents at the same time” (Honigsbaum, 2009, Introduction section, para. 2).

The pandemic outbreak has changed how people live and affected the service landscape of organizations. The traditional service approach is characterized by means of by people

for people, however Covid-19 is seen as a determinant for a lasting change of how

services are executed in the future (Berry et al., 2020). As the close interaction between customers and service providers contains a mutual hazard of getting infected, Covid-19 puts the importance of service safety in the foreground (Berry et al., 2020). This adds to Tao and Di (2020), who state that the touch-free service, born during the Covid-19 outbreak, is in demand more than ever. Further, trust has always been one of the critical factors that service organizations had to consider when dealing with customers and employees and now stands in focus more than ever. Although Covid-19 is not the first calamity that caused distress to the service sector (e.g., terror attack 9/11) (see Ito & Lee, 2005), the pandemic still has a more significant impact on the worldwide service performance as not only the travel industry is affected (Berry et al., 2020). Trust not only shapes customers’ readiness to purchase but also employees’ eagerness to work

(15)

10

efficiently. Hence, service safety and service trust become a crucial interplay in times of Covid-19 (Berry et al., 2020). Overall, according to Berry and Stuart (2021), companies need to redefine marketing activities and service operations as well as adopting innovative technologies to assist and protect both customers and employees during the pandemic age.

Berry et al. (2020) introduced two terms: service adaptation and service transformation, focusing on enhancing the overall service experience during and after Covid-19. While service adaptation refers to measurements taken by the service provider to boost safety (e.g., face masks, social distancing, and disinfection products), service transformation aims to improve safety and implement innovative and attractive ways, to go beyond traditional service approaches. Innovatively transforming the service environment is crucial for everyone engaging in the service experience to stay emotionally, physically, and financially safe (Berry et al., 2020). These innovations should make people feel more secure during the pandemic and enhance service experience in the long run, whether or not a crisis is in progress. Reinterpreting the servicescape and boosting managerial trust shows how Covid-19 opens new avenues for service research (Berry et al., 2020).

To minimize the spread of Covid-19, worldwide measures have been taken, consisting of border closures and quarantines. Thus, in April 2020, around 90 percent of the worldwide population faced extreme entry restrictions for non-citizens, which had a tremendous effect on travel behavior (Connor, 2020). Due to the travel bans caused by the virus, the aviation industry has been brought to its knees (Tuchen et al., 2020). Therefore, airport managers are forced to make airports safer, incorporating different safety measures to minimize face-to-face service encounters. To enhance a seamless and hygienic travel experience, airports started to put a greater focus on contactless innovations such as biometrics, SSTs, or cleaning and service robots (Berti, n.d.). This adds to Serrano and Kazda (2020), who stress that airport managers are urged to re-assess their regular business and operational procedures. Despite it is difficult for airports to continue investing in emerging technologies and modernization processes, it is argued that SST and seamless technologies might help airports minimize operational costs and enhance customer experience. This could simultaneously reduce the risk of getting infected with Covid-19. It should be aimed that these contactless technologies are incorporated at every touchpoint to lessen the contact between passengers and employees (Serrano & Kazda,

(16)

11

2020). It is confirmed by Halpern et al. (2021) that especially biometrics and other interactive technologies provide contactless solutions and are thus crucial during and post Covid-19. Yet, the traditional approach of interacting with employees instead of technologies is still vital to create a valuable customer experience for some passenger segments (e.g., leisure travelers and travelers aged 65 or more) (Halpern et al., 2021).

Feeling physically and emotionally safe at airports will result in more customers resuming to travel (Berry et al., 2020). Thus, focusing on passenger needs became more meaningful than ever before (Coll, 2020). Airports should view Covid-19 as a catalysator to improve long-existing bottlenecks resulting from poor queue management at security checks, inconvenient terminal infrastructure, or inadequate slot allocations (Tuchen et al., 2020). Although statistics show that passengers are satisfied at these critical touchpoints due to less queuing resulting from fewer people flying, this needs to be ensured post-Covid-19 as well (St-James, 2021). However, during the ongoing crisis, airport managers often have a more profound concern about financial security of the airport operations because they still have high fixed and obligatory costs. Thus, many airports have to close parts of the airport infrastructure, such as entire terminals, to keep the costs as low as possible (Serrano & Kazda, 2020).

As the future of the heavily impacted aviation industry is still uncertain, all organizations involved need to re-evaluate possible scenarios to guarantee that airport operations are performed sustainably and securely (Serrano & Kazda, 2020). Further, all airport stakeholders are urged to deliver a safe and hygienic customer experience (Coll, 2021).

2.3 Customer experience

Customer experience, a memorable interaction between a company and a customer (Pine & Gilmore, 1998), is an increasingly relevant marketing phenomenon in business and academia as there is a shift “from a product-centric logic to an experiential logic” (Batat, 2019, p. 51). Customers are no longer convinced by functional aspects but are seeking an experience in which they can be involved. Thus, to sustain a competitive advantage, companies need to realize that customers are not only rational decision-makers but also emotional market players (Batat, 2019). To develop insights about the phenomenon of customer experience, it is imperative to start with a general understanding of the concepts “customer” and “experience”. According to Bloomenthal (2020), “customers are the

(17)

12

individuals and businesses that purchase goods and services from another business. Customers are important because they drive revenues, as without them, businesses cannot continue to exist” (para. 1). Further, there are various research avenues that discuss the term experience in different fields. In general, the Miriam-Webster (n.d.) dictionary specifies the term as “the fact or state of having been affected by or gained knowledge through direct observation or participation” (Definition 1).

An early attempt to define customer experience has been made by Holbrook and Hirschman (1982), who suggested that it cannot be generalized that customers are rational problem-solvers. As only a small portion of customers cognitively consider value and price, they revised the existing information-processing theory. They combined it with an experiential perspective, highlighting sub-consciousness and emotions. The extended theory points out that customer experience is a comprehensive interplay between cognitive, hedonic, and symbolic components (Holbrook & Hirschmann, 1982). Therefore, customer experience can be defined as a phenomenon affected by personal feelings, opinions, and emotions (Kranzbühler et al., 2018). This adds to Meyer and Schwager (2007), who define customer experience as personal and subjective consumer reactions when encountering companies’ touchpoints. The customer journey is influenced by different touchpoints where companies can anticipate the customer’s emotional and functional needs to create and manage their experience. Therefore, the interactions at different physical or digital touchpoints can affect the quality of the overall customer experience (Batat, 2019). Overall, customer experience can be seen as a vital component of contemporary marketing as it generates a distinctive experience that occupies a customer’s mind (Jain et al., 2017).

Taking a look at influencing factors, Holbrook and Hirschman (1982) emphasize that not only external factors as firms’ efforts but also the internal factors of customers as financial resources, time restraints, or psychographic characteristics influence the experience. Kranzbühler et al. (2018) add that other customers affect the perceived customer experience. For instance, if a customer makes a positive experience but observes another customer’s poor service and reparation experience, it automatically downgrades their positive attitude towards the firm. Further, it has been pointed out that values and preferences shaping a positive customer experience vary between generations. Thus, the

(18)

13

same environmental stimuli create different customer experiences depending on the age structure (Deshwal, 2016; Garg et al., 2014). For instance, Generation Y customers focus on emotional values, whereas Generation X customers are more likely to seek functional attributes (Pekovic & Rolland, 2020).

Although it has been recognized that a positive customer experience is beneficial for distinct marketing issues as customer satisfaction and word-of-mouth (Mascarenhas et al., 2006; Pullman & Gross, 2004), there is still no conceptual clarity as the phenomenon is elucidated by a variety of theories and developed upon empirical evidence that is diverging from each other (Kranzbühler et al., 2018). This is supported by Mahr et al. (2019), underlining that customer experience is considered necessary for companies to think about to increase satisfaction.

Customer experience dimensions

Different experience dimensions have been discussed in the literature, varying in quantity and content. Schmitt (1999) has put forward five dimensions, namely sense, think, act, feel and relate, to get a better understanding of the customer experience. Another contribution in customer experience dimensions has been made by Gentile et al. (2007), who differentiated between six experiential elements: cognitive, emotional, relational, sensorial, lifestyle, and pragmatic. Kranzbühler et al. (2018) affirm this by stating that customers can assess their experience through cognition, affection, and sensation. Additionally, in recent years there has been growing interest in incorporating a technological dimension in the customer experience measurement as technologies could wholly influence the experience (Piotrowicz & Cuthbertson, 2014).

Considering that the affection dimension is recurrently mentioned as a vital component in understanding how consumers experience interactions with a company (Kranzbühler et al., 2018; Shaw & Ivens, 2005), the dimension will be outlined in more detail. Further, given that there is a notable increase of service providers incorporating recent technological developments in their physical servicescapes, which are deemed to change the customer experience and perception of brands (Hoyer et al., 2020), the technology dimension will also be elaborated further in the following.

(19)

14

1) Affection

According to Kranzbühler et al. (2018), most research examines the affect component in regard to customer experiences. The reason for this is that many academics think that the traditional disconfirmation theory is not adequate in explaining the phenomenon (Alford & Sherrell, 1996). Moreover, it is acknowledged that it is not sufficient to only measure positive and negative affect to assess consumer perception of a brand (Kranzbühler et al., 2018). A range of emotions needs to be measured as happiness, surprise, love, or satisfaction contribute to shaping a customer experience (Kranzbühler et al., 2018; Richins, 1997; Westbrook & Oliver, 1991). This is supported by Brakus et al. (2009), who claim that the affect-component influence emotional perceptions, and ultimately the customer experience. Employees can as well trigger the customers’ affective reaction. For instance, even if a customer cannot be satisfied during a touchpoint with a company (e.g., the desired product is out of stock), the observed friendliness of an employee can lead to a positive perception and thus experience (Lemmink & Mattsson, 1998). Further, it is mentioned that the notion that positive emotions lead to a positive outcome (e.g., increase repurchase willingness) and negative emotions lead to a negative result (e.g., avoid product/service/brand in the future) should be viewed critically. A customer can have a negative emotion during one touchpoint along the customer journey but still holds overall positive feelings towards the experience as a whole (Jones & Suh, 2000). Emotions can be as well influenced by other customers and are, thus, a factor that the firm cannot wholly control. Other customers’ behavior which is seen as brazen, can influence one’s emotions, leading to a negative customer experience (Manthiou et al., 2020).

2) Technological

New technologies allow customers to evaluate products or services through various channels while simultaneously designing their own customized journey (Barwitz & Maas, 2018; Hu & Tracogna, 2020; Verhoef et al., 2015). Technologies are a critical element when evaluating how customers engage with a product or brand (Pekovic & Rolland, 2020). This adds to Stein and Ramaseshan (2016), who argue that technologies essentially affect customer-retailer encounters. However, only a few studies have been published on the influence of technologies on the customer experience, or at best, discuss one kind of technology to be found during in-store touchpoints (as ATMs) or online encounters (Pekovic & Rolland, 2020; Rose et al., 2012).

(20)

15

Customer experience in the airport context

In 1990, the deregulation of airports, as well as the increasing commercialization and privatization of those, led to the growing importance of passengers and urged the airport industry to embrace business management beliefs and guiding principles (Graham, 2014). Since the 2000s, the concept of airport experience turned up as an idea for the airport management to assist in enhancing customer satisfaction (Wattanacharoensil, 2019). Further, creating a positive airport experience is seen as a significant element to generate revenues from airlines and passengers. If considering the competition, a positive airport experience can pull citizens and airlines to a distinct airport when various airports exist (Wattanacharoensil, 2019). The term airport experience has come to be used to refer to all passengers’ undertakings and interactions at an airport. They can be distinguished between necessary activities (e.g., mandatory processes as passport controls) and arbitrary actions (any activity that is not mandatory, e.g., shopping) (Kraal et al., 2009). Further, the term experience economy was introduced by Pine and Gilmore in 1998, implying that companies must focus on creating unique and memorable encounters so that these occupy the customers’ minds and become an experience. It can be said that airports belong to the experience economy as they have to shift from only providing services to providing experiences (Tuchen et al., 2020). Airports need to recognize that experience is connected to emotions as a positive emotional response indicates that expectations and needs are satisfied, resulting in an effortless journey (Coll, 2021). Hence, “experiences must be built around emotions by prioritizing key moments in the passenger journey” (Coll, 2021, para. 11).

An increase in research placing airports into context was noted in the last two decades. Key areas that were researched include Bitner’s servicescape model (Jeon & Kim, 2012), service quality (Bogicevic et al., 2013; Fodness & Murray, 2007), airport user experience (Tuchen et al., 2020), and the nature of airport experience (Wattanacharoensil et al., 2017). In recent years there has been a considerable amount of research focusing on only one activity, including biometric security technology (Sasse, 2007), self-service check-in (Castillo-Manzano & Lopez-Valpuesta, 2013), mobile technologies at airports (Rossi et al., 2018), and the security screening process (Gkritza et al., 2006). However, according to Wattanacharoensil et al. (2017), one of the significant drawbacks of this phenomenon

(21)

16

is that there is still limited research explaining how customers perceive the airport experience, especially when multiple activities occur.

2.4 Emerging technologies

Technology is an integral feature of today’s society (Zhong, 2020). To a greater extent, customers become more tech-savvy, resulting in an increasing demand for seamless, digital experiences and immediate satisfaction of needs (Kumar et al., 2021). In response, companies are adapting the way they do business by implementing, amongst others, new technologies. Such increasing investment in technologies offers greater efficiency, reduced costs, and a higher capability to meet customer and stakeholder expectations (Kumar et al., 2021). Thus, over the last decades, technological advancements have rapidly changed how people live, work and consume goods and services (Schmitt, 2019), resulting in a new and modified customer experience (Hoyer et al., 2020). The integration of digital and human touchpoints is increasingly pervasive for creating a remarkable customer experience (Thomas, 2017). Hence, there is a notable increase of service providers incorporating recent technological developments in their physical servicescapes, as they will drastically change the customer experience and perception of brands. (Hoyer et al., 2020). Adding to that, new technologies will also impact customers’ search behavior and consumption of brands (Libai et al., 2019), as well as develop new value, resulting from a customer-centric relationship between companies and the customer (Rangaswamy et al., 2020).

To understand technology acceptance and consumption, different theoretical concepts have been applied in the last decades. Built upon the Theory of Reasoned Action of Ajzen and Fishbein, Davis (1989) introduced the Technology Acceptance Model. The Technology Acceptance Model expects that if a particular type of technology is perceived as easy to use and practical, users will likely use it (Davis, 1989). Due to some criticism towards the Technology Acceptance Model, Venkatesh et al. (2003) introduced an adapted version, namely the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology, which was adapted by Venkatesh et al. in 2012 again due to its over-simplicity and narrowness (Shachack et al., 2019). Yet, this model has also been criticized for its limited understanding in context-driven situations. Therefore, additional, or different elements and constructs to explain technology adoption and usage have been investigated. While

(22)

17

Lim et al. (2020) extended the Technology Acceptance Model with underpinnings such as perceived seamlessness, perceived risk, and perceived security, other authors made use of ease of use (Lee et al., 2013, Huang et al., 2019), reliability (Fernandes & Pedroso, 2017), technology optimism (Kowalczuk, 2018), enjoyment (Legris et al., 2003), perceived stress (Ninaus et al., 2015), perceived trust (Singh & Sinha, 2020) and waiting time (Djelassi et al., 2018) as indicators for the usage of technologies. Although the models mentioned above have widely been used for technology adoption, they are not suitable for the research context. They do not consider external influences as the Covid-19 outbreak. Thus, using these models would not contribute precisely to addressing the research purpose.

Modern digital innovations as e-commerce, the worldwide web, social media, and mobile platforms already have advanced sales, communications, transactions, and networking (Hoyer et al., 2020). Subsequently, digital technology continues to be incorporated within products and physical environments (Hoyer et al., 2020; Schmitt, 2019). Hoyer et al. (2020) distinguish between three technology groups, namely the Internet of Things (hereinafter referred to as IoT), Augmented Reality (hereinafter referred to as AR), Virtual Reality (hereinafter referred to as VR), and Mixed Reality (hereinafter referred to as MR), as well as virtual assistants, robots, and chatbots. These technologies will significantly impact the customer experience and perception of products, services, and brands in the future (Hoyer et al., 2020).

IoT can be described as a form of smart technology, using, amongst others, real-time data and wireless or keyless solutions to empower connectivity (Wise & Heidari, 2019). Thus, it connects computing devices installed in everyday objects to the internet, generating extensive data of consumers, and can be used for B2B purposes, for example, in the domains of healthcare (Darshan & Anandakumar, 2015), tourism (Wise & Heidari, 2019), and banking (Ammirato, 2019).

Further, AR, VR and MR add digital elements and real-life or imagined environments to existing real-world experiences (Hoyer et al., 2020). While AR is often smartphone app based (Flavián et al., 2019) and is defined as “the superposition of virtual objects on the real environment of the user” (Faust et al., 2012, p. 1164), VR creates an immersive

(23)

18

experience, blocking out the physical world (Flavián et al., 2019). Hence, VR refers to a computer-generated or creative atmosphere, utilizing a wearable device where a user experiences a real-life electronic simulation, often implemented as a 3-D world (Flavián et al., 2019; Guttentag, 2010). VR plays an increasingly crucial role for various industries, such as tourism (Guttentag, 2010), retail (Bonetti et al., 2017), healthcare (Freeman et al., 2017), or entertainment (Lin et al., 2017). Finally, MR can be defined as one of the latest implementations, integrating digital elements with the real world and thus can be seen as a combination of both AR and VR (Flavián et al., 2019; Hoyer et al., 2020). AR, VR and MR are expected to significantly impact product trials and the imagination of products, clothes, or destinations, resulting in a revolutionized consumption experience.

Virtual assistants, robots, and chatbots are often powered by Artificial Intelligence (hereinafter referred to as AI) technology. AI can be defined as improving the intelligence of a service, product, or solution (Shankar, 2018) and thus uses human cognitive thinking such as learning, decision-making, and problem-solving (Hoyer et al., 2020). There is increasing adoption of such algorithms in today’s world, assisting in the healthcare, tourism, and hospitality or automobile industry (Samala et al., 2020). Having that in mind, AI possesses the great potential to reshape marketing practices in many areas and industries in the future (Shankar, 2018). While virtual assistants can be defined as any device which is run by a software agent, providing daily tasks like technical or social assistance (Yang & Lee, 2019), chatbots are seen as a part of virtual assistants, mainly used for human conversations in customer service in industries like banking (Trivedi, 2019) or tourism (Samala et al., 2020). Hence chatbots use audio or textual methods to converse with people (Samala et al., 2020) and are pre-programmed to respond to standard questions of customers (Oh et al., 2017). Finally, robots can be characterized as “intelligent, physically embodied AI machines” that can perform human tasks autonomously (Hoyer et al., 2020, p. 60). Especially service providers (e.g., hotels, restaurants, and airports) use service robots to enhance front-line encounters and the service experience (McLeay et al., 2021). However, although robots will positively influence several industries, research from McLeay et al. (2021) reveals that the replacement of employees is ethically questionable and still perceived as a negative aspect.

(24)

19

Adding on to the proposed three main technology groups of Hoyer et al. (2020), biometrics and SST belong to supplementary new technological advancements that are increasingly integrated by many industries (Obaidat et al., 2019; Sharma et al., 2021). The adoption of biometric identification systems and sensors is a huge growing trend in sectors like healthcare, education, transportation, or government sectors (Obaidat et al., 2019). Additionally, service providers and retailers increasingly adopt biometric systems to enhance convenience issues and ease access-restricted facilities (Lancelot Miltgren et al., 2013). More recently, the adoption of biometric sensors in smartphones or online banking has brought biometric technologies to the next level (Obaidat et al., 2019). Biometrics identifies and recognizes people based on unique biological or physical characteristics. The most common forms of biometric identification include fingerprints, face and iris recognition, hand geometry, or voice recognition. Yet, despite the beneficial outlook and upcoming trends of biometric technologies, there are still challenges regarding physical and cybersecurity which need further monitoring (Lancelot Miltgren, 2013; Obaidat et al., 2019).

Finally, SSTs are unstoppable integrations in everyday life (Djelassi et al., 2018; Lowe et al., 2019; Sharma et al., 2021; Shin & Perdue, 2019). SSTs can be characterized as technological interfaces that allow customers to engage in service without the direct involvement of employees (Fernandes & Pedroso, 2016). Such technical interfaces often replace traditional service encounters, especially the retailing, grocery and hospitality, and tourism sectors, by adopting self-scanning services or self-checkouts (Fernandes & Pedroso, 2017; Sharma et al., 2021; Shin & Perdue, 2019). While Djelassi et al. (2018) argue that SST can have a great impact on the waiting time of customers, Sharma et al. (2021) found that such technologies enhance service quality and customer satisfaction, as well as they reduce operational costs, and increase the efficiency of firms (Fernandes & Pedroso, 2017). This adds to Tan and Netessine (2020), who argue that the promotion of SSTs is beneficial to generate revenue while not increasing labor costs. Lastly, from a passenger’s perspective, important factors of SSTs (e.g., kiosk) were found to be speed (Gures et al., 2018), ease of use, convenience (Meuter et al., 2003) and self-control (Chang & Yang, 2008).

(25)

20

3. Method and empirical context

The chapter begins with a short overview of the research context, which is FRA. After that, the methodology, in terms of the research philosophy, research approach and research design and strategy will be explained. Beyond that, the methods for the sampling strategy, and interview and survey design are outlined, followed by a description of the data collection and analysis. Lastly, the reliability and validity of the research, as well as research ethics are presented.

3.1 Research context – Frankfurt Airport

FRA is operated by Fraport AG with its headquarters in the Airport City and is by far the busiest hub airport in Germany. The airport ranks fourth in Europe and served a total number of 70,5 million passengers in 2019, which resulted in a new all-time record in terms of passenger numbers (Fraport AG, n.d.). However, as aviation is one of the industries that was hit hardest by the pandemic, FRA recorded a total passenger loss of 73,4% in 2020 compared to the previous year (Fraport AG, n.d.). Due to the strict travel bans and worldwide border closures, especially between March 2020 and June 2020, the airport underwent an immediate dramatic decline that the airport had never experienced before. While the summer months showed a slight recovery from the previous months, FRA was abruptly brought back to its knees when the second lockdown in September 2020 started. Thus, the total passenger numbers in 2020 dropped to 18,8 million, which was lastly reported in 1984 (Fraport AG, 2021). All these major setbacks resulted in a hiring freeze, short-time work, a temporary closure of terminal 2, and a stopped operation of two of four runways to keep the costs to the minimum (Airport Business, 2020).

By having the mission of “Gute Reise! [Safe journey] We make it happen.”, the airport puts the customer in focus to ensure a safe trip (Fraport AG, 2020). Further, the company aims towards five main goals, underlying their mission of being Europe’s best airport operator;

1. Growth in Frankfurt and internationally 2. Service-oriented airport operator

(26)

21 4. Learning organization and digitalization

5. Fairness and recognition for partners and neighbors (Fraport AG, 2020).

As FRA aims to be a successful service-oriented airport operator, the company places the individual customer at the center to provide the best service and high quality. Especially during the pandemic age, the company implemented hygiene measures to ensure a safe and worry-less journey, following the vision “SafeAtFRA” (Frankfurt Airport, n.d.). Secondly, FRA describes itself as a learning organization promoting innovations and new business ideas and operates in a digital world, where innovative technologies for value-adding services and products are incorporated. “We are introducing new technologies to meet diverse customer requirements,” as stated by Anke Giesen, the Executive Director Retail and Real Estate, underlines the company’s digitalization goal (Fraport AG, 2020, p. 5). The pandemic has fastened the digital transition to a seamless journey, as the airport uses technologies to guarantee a nearly touchless travel experience and minimize the spread of the virus. These technologies refer, for example, to biometric facial recognition to get contactless access to security controls and boarding gates, IoT, baggage drop-off, self check-in kiosk, self-boarding, wayfinding app, information kiosk, and automated border controls (AOE, n.d.; Daws, 2021; Frankfurt Airport, n.d.; Fraport AG, 2020).

Moreover, the airport must work closely with its partners and stakeholders to make travelers resume to travel (Airport Business, 2020). For example, there is an essential collaboration between FRA, Munich Airport, the Star Alliance, and the Lufthansa group, who implemented a biometric facial recognition in November 2020 to contribute to a seamless customer experience. Dr. Pierre Dominik Prümm, the Executive Director Aviation, and Infrastructure at Fraport AG, states that “Star Alliance Biometrics now creates a more efficient and - especially important in today's times - touchless passenger journey, which offers greater security as well as more comfort and less waiting time” (Fraport AG, 2021, para. 12). Thus, by optimizing the travel processes at the airport, customers can enjoy touchless advantages. As customers will expect a more contactless and hygienically safer travel experience, current and new technologies will significantly impact the future airport experience (Fraport AG, 2020). Lastly, although FRA is hit hard by the pandemic, the airport can take advantage of the current small passenger numbers, as renovation and innovative projects (e.g., biometric system) can more easily and faster be incorporated into the airport environment (Airport Business, 2020).

(27)

22

As previously mentioned, FRA highlights that incorporating technological advancements is an essential step for reshaping the customer experience at an airport in the pandemic age. Thus, FRA is deemed suitable as the case study for this research.

3.2 Methodology

3.2.1 Research philosophy

To explore how technologies influence and reshape the customer experience in the pandemic age, a social constructionism epistemology and a relativistic ontology are considered most suitable as research philosophy. Research philosophy can be defined as “the development of knowledge and the nature of that knowledge” (Saunders et al., 2009, p. 107). Overall, research philosophy can be divided into two main concepts: ontology and epistemology (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018).

Ontology can be defined as the core layer of the research process and deals with the view a researcher holds towards the nature of reality. It is considered that the relativistic worldview is most suitable for this research as it is argued that no single truth exists but is somewhat subjectively formed by individuals’ viewpoints (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). As a heterogeneous group of individuals is dealt with, all having different perceptions and opinions about technology adoption at airports during Covid-19, multiple realities exist. Thus, although passengers use the same technology at an airport, their airport experience is still perceived differently depending on the skills and opinions of the individual passenger.

Epistemology is the second layer of the research process and can be characterized as the researcher’s assumption concerning how adequate knowledge is created and acquired (Saunders et al., 2009). While epistemology comprises two oppositional stances over knowledge creation, namely positivism and social constructionism, this thesis adopts social constructionism as the most appropriate epistemology (Saunders et al., 2009). Therefore, by collecting various individuals’ perspectives and experiences through qualitative and quantitative research methods, it aims to enhance the general understanding of the underlying phenomenon (Saunders et al., 2009). Thus, the airport experience is not objective but is rather socially constructed by passenger interaction. Further, pragmatism is applied, which falls under engaged constructionism as this

(28)

23

philosophical position reveals that “knowledge and understanding should be derived from direct experience” (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018, p. 82). Passengers are responsible for shaping their airport experience through their actions, knowledge, and own interpretation of the world.

3.2.2 Research approach

This research follows an abductive approach, which according to Dubois and Gadde (2002) is particularly applicable for case studies. They advocate for systematic combining as an abductive approach to cased research as suitable, as a theoretical model, empirical evidence, and case investigation evolve simultaneously. Additionally, “the abductive approach enables the researcher’s engagement in a back-and-forth movement between theory and data in a bid to develop new or modify existing theory” (Awuzie & McDermott, 2017, p. 357). An abductive approach allows to establish and change the theoretical model before, after, and during the research, which is dissimilar to a deductive or inductive approach (Timmermans & Tavory, 2012).

This research is considered abductive, as the following non-linear process took place: Defining a theoretical background, conducting and analyzing interviews, moving back to theory, developing a theoretical framework based on interviews and theory, designing an online survey based on the theoretical framework, analyzing survey findings, interpreting qualitative and quantitative findings combined with theory. Further, the abductive approach is most suitable because, based on Dubois and Gadde (2002), the objective is to explore unknown and existing variables of technologies that influence the customer experience at FRA during Covid-19. Moreover, the theoretical framework was inspired by existing literature but was constantly refined by empirical observations. Lastly, this research approach is in line with the study’s pragmatic philosophical position, as it combines statistical and cognitive reasoning, resulting in the “best answer” (Mitchell, 2018, p. 115).

3.2.3 Research design and strategy

By considering the research purpose, which aims to understand how technologies in the airport servicescape impact and reshape the customer experience in the pandemic age, a sequential exploratory mixed methods design was chosen for this study. A mixed methods

(29)

24

design was used as, according to Johnson et al. (2007), it “combines elements of qualitative and quantitative research approaches for the broad purposes of breadth and depth of understanding and corroboration” (p. 11). Only using qualitative methods would not have granted the researchers to obtain numerical data to assess distinct factors of how technologies in the airport servicescape impact and reshape the customer experience in the pandemic age, nor would it have allowed making generalized statements about the population. On the other side, only using quantitative data would not have provided sufficient information and a general understanding of the phenomenon. Thus, it was decided that a mixed methods design is the most suitable avenue for this research. The decision is also in line with the pragmatic philosophical position as a mixed method is seen as an appropriate approach for this paradigm, combining the strengths from both qualitative and quantitative methods (Morgan, 2017).

There are different ways how a mixed methods research can be realized. A sequential exploratory way was chosen, meaning that the study is divided into two phases (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011). Thus, the qualitative and quantitative findings were presented individually and integrated in the interpretation section. An exploratory approach was chosen as it aids in obtaining information and knowledge about a phenomenon that has not received adequate empirical attention yet and link previous understanding with this study’s discoveries (Stebbins, 2008). Given that research regarding technology influence on the customer experience in the airport servicescape context during Covid-19 is limited, the research attempted to develop measurement constructs and items through literature review and interviews with FRA stakeholders. The method follows a similar nature of leading journal articles of Ren et al. (2016), Dong and Siu (2013), and Shi et al. (2019) in the areas of customer experience, servicescape and customer experience based on a case study, and lodging experience.

The first research phase was characterized by qualitative data collection and analysis, whereas the second phase was characterized by quantitative data collection and analysis. It was aimed to understand the phenomenon during the first phase in order to develop a theoretical framework that assists in creating an online survey. Ultimately quantitative data was used to determine which technology-specific attributes impact and reshape the customer experience during Covid-19.

(30)

25

The qualitative phase started with 13 stakeholder semi-structured interviews, which were held online. Having perspectives from different stakeholders could contain crucial information that can be compared in the findings section (Carter et al., 2014). Thus, for the first research question, it was decided to explore different perspectives of how the airport servicescape and technology influence is perceived and whether the different perspectives match. Semi-structured interviews were chosen as it is considered the most appropriate qualitative strategy, helping discover insights and thoughts about airport technologies while simultaneously keeping distance from the participants due to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic. Specific areas of interest and questions were identified, but participants were given room to talk about other information they might think is valuable (Longhurst, 2009). The second phase continued with an online survey. This instrument was used to collect a substantial number of responses efficiently and cost-effectively within a comparatively short period (Lefever et al., 2007). Therefore, the survey was distributed via various Facebook groups relating to aviation and tourism (see appendix 1) and the online research platform SurveyCircle, resulting in 385 completed responses.

Further, a case study method ties in with the research problem and purpose. According to Easterby-Smith et al. (2018), a case study method is “a research design that focuses on one, or a small number of, organizations, events or individuals, generally over time” (p. 116). Yin (2006) points out that a case study helps shed new light on a distinct real-life phenomenon and better understand it. Moreover, the number of cases used in a research is linked with the epistemological stance. A social constructionist epistemology usually advocates the use of a single case study (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). Thus, adopting a single case study is in line with the social constructionist epistemology and exploratory nature of the research (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). Hence, FRA as a single case study was chosen to generate an understanding of how technologies in the airport servicescape influence the customer experience in the pandemic age. The figure below visually represents the overall research design and strategy.

(31)

26

Figure 1

Research design and strategy

3.3 Methods

3.3.1 Sampling strategy

A population can be defined as a group of subjects who are given attention to in a specific research project (Veal, 2011). Thus, passengers who flew via FRA between March 2020 and March 2021 can be considered as the population for this research, referring to a total number of 18,8 million passengers (Fraport AG, 2020). As the population is not of manageable size due to time and budget constraints, a sample is taken from the population.

3.3.1.1 Qualitative

For the first phase of the research, a non-probability sampling technique was used, which does not rely on equal, random chances of participants to be selected but instead on the personal reasoning of the researcher (Malhotra et al., 2017). Therefore, participants were selected based on their experience and professional roles. For non-probability sampling, a sample size is not fixed but rather depends on the purpose and research questions (Saunders et al., 2016). Hence, a sample size of thirteen participants was seen as appropriate to explore how passengers perceive the airport servicescape and the influence of technologies during the pandemic age and understand the critical concepts for the quantitative phase. This is supported by Guest et al. (2006), who argue that data saturation occurs after analyzing twelve interviews.