TRAINING NEEDS SURVEY ANALYSIS

Saaremaa region

Kuressaare

2010

2

OVERVIEW AND METHODOLOGY The training needs survey was conducted during September-November 2010. The goal of the survey

was to have input for the InFAcTo project trainings from the local tourism entrepreneurs. Survey

questionnaire was commonly compiled by the project work group in Saaremaa.

The questionnaire was web based on the Google Docs platform. The questionnaire consisted of 12

questions. The emails to the respondents were sent via local tourism networks mailing lists.

The period for filling the survey was from 1st to 15th of November. There were 51 respondents. The

enthusiasm of the respondents to participate in the survey can be assessed as very good. There were

four open-answer questions where people usually are not eager to answer on web based surveys.

During this survey there were many long and insightful answers.

RESPONDENTS OVERWIEV From the 51 respondents, 26 were representing different small companies, 14 were private

entrepreneurs, 5 were representatives of NGOs, 4 were citizens interested in tourism and catering.

Chart 1. Respondents of the survey

The respondents were asked what goods and services they offer tourists. Most notably the

respondents were providing accommodation and catering services. A significant number answered

“Other” activities and services, which included a farm-shop and cafe, hunting trips, spiritual camps,

horseback riding, mushroom picking and a travel agency.

The respondents could pick several answers to the questions, so the actual sum of the activities on

the following chart exceeds the number of respondents. There were 33 respondents choosing more

than one activity. This shows that most of the respondents offer a wide range of activities.

3

Chart 2. Goods and Services offered by respondents

NETWORKING The respondents were asked about their participation in tourism-related and other networks. 15

respondents (31%) do not participate in any networks. Out of the 40 companies and private

entrepreneurs surveyed, 14 were not in a network.

Chart 3. Participation in networks

FOOD AND TOURISM EXPERIENCE There were three open-answer questions about culinary and tourism experience and how the

respondents provide these to their guests and clients. For many, the culinary experience means fresh

ingredients, locally made and high quality. 24 respondents described hands-on food activities they

offer for their guests: possibilities to be involved in gathering food ingredients and participating in the

food preparation process. Several respondents answered that they are planning to offer hands-on

food activities.

4

SEASONAL ACTIVITIES There was also a question about what kind of seasonal food tourism activities and products should be

developed. There was a wide range of answers: lamb products, wild berry picking, products from

local ingredients, fishing trips, bread making, Saaremaa local food cooking classes.

TRAINING NEEDS Five questions were directly addressing the training needs of the respondents. The first was about

food-related courses and training.

Chart 4. Food-related courses and training.

The next question addressed the general opinion of the respondents’ need for courses and training. A

wide selection of choices was offered plus a possibility to add other choices. The open answers

about meat and fish processing and learning from other’s experiences, for example from the

experiences in Finland or Southern Estonia.

Chart 5. Training needs.

5

One of the questions addressed the preferred form of the courses. More active forms of learning are

preferred by the respondents. Workshops were preferred over lectures.

Chart 6. Preferred form of learning.

The final questions were about the preferred time and length of courses and training. Both were open

questions. 28 respondents said they prefer wintertime courses, which is logical as there are less

tourists then. The preferred length of the training ranged from one day to three months.

AUTHORS Questionnaire: Marve Koppel, Lii Kirves, Jorma Tapio Ihalainen, Karen Allas, Taavi Tuisk

Results and analysis: Taavi Tuisk

English language editing: Karen Allas