Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................1
2.0 Literature Review .................................................................................................................................................................4
2.1 Destination Competitiveness ......................................................................................................................................4
2.2 Research Analysis ...........................................................................................................................................................8
3.0 Methodology .......................................................................................................................................................................10
3.1 Questionnaire Development ....................................................................................................................................10
3.2 Sampling ..........................................................................................................................................................................10
3.3 Data Analysis .................................................................................................................................................................12
4.0 Discussion of Data and Results ...................................................................................................................................16
4.1 Demographic Profile...................................................................................................................................................16
4.2 Factor Analysis: Factor Extraction and Factor Loadings ............................................................................16
4.3 Interpretation of Factor Structure ..........................................................................................................................18
4.4 Discussion of Regression Results .........................................................................................................................19
4.5 Comparison of Regression Results within Two Subgroups .......................................................................21
(i) Attendees with more than 10 years experience of visiting exhibitions versus Attendees with
10 or less years experience of visiting exhibitions ...........................................................................................21
(ii)
Attendees who visit more than 5 exhibitions per year versus Attendees who visit 5 or less
exhibitions per year ....................................................................................................................................................... 22
(iii) Singaporean attendees versus Non-Singaporean attendees ................................................................23
(iv) Attendees from age group 18 to 25 years old versus Attendees from age group above 25
years old .............................................................................................................................................................................24
4.6 Overall Implications of Results ..............................................................................................................................25
5.0 Conclusion ...........................................................................................................................................................................26
6.0 Limitations of the Analysis ...........................................................................................................................................28
7.0 References ............................................................................................................................................................................29
Appendix ......................................................................................................................................................................................32

1.0 Introduction
The meetings, incentives, conferences, and exhibitions (MICE) industry is rising rapidly and
create remarkable amount of profits worldwide in tourism sector. The MICE industry plays
an important role in Singapores tourism industry and contributes significantly to the
economy. The sector has been reported to continue flourishing with 2.5 million business
visitors who contributed 25% of the countrys total tourism receipts in the first three quarter
of 2012.
Being recognized with many awards and accolades over the years for its first-class MICE
infrastructure and environment, Singapore is one of the most renowned business events
destinations in Asia. In accordance with global rankings by the Congress and Convention
Association (ICCA), the country upheld its position as Asias Top Convention City for 11
consecutive years. Besides that, Singapore maintained the spot as the only Asian city in the
Top Five Convention Cities in the world, along with Vienna, Barcelona, Paris and Berlin,
since 2006. Furthermore, Singapore was granted the Second Best City for Business Events at
the CEI Asia Industry Awards 2012.
Strategically located at one of the crossroads of the world, Singapore provides convenience
for movement of merchandise as well as people. With the country being ranked as the No. 1
Logistics Hub amongst 155 countries globally in the 2012 Logistics Performance Index, this
indicates that there is efficient distribution of exhibits and materials within and outside
Singapore. Furthermore, it is also a regional business hub with over 160 banks and numerous
operational and regional headquarters and purchasing offices being located. Along with a
large hinterland market, these conveniences present exhibitors with a huge potential pool of
buyers and efficient transaction processing. In addition, Singapore is often used as a
springboard to get through to the other Southeast Asian markets.
1

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Another plus point that attracts many exhibitors is stability of Singapore. In accordance with
IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook 2010 rankings, Singapore is the most politically
stable country in Asia and has the lowest crime rates worldwide. Moreover, the country is
placed second in terms of economic freedom for 2011 according to the Economic Freedom of
the World Report 2013. It secured second for freedom to trade internationally and top in
freedom of exchange in credit. Eradication of monetary restrictions will certainly facilitate all
sales and purchases transactions arise from exhibitions.
Although Singapore possesses various qualities that make it an exhibition destination, rising
competition from its neighbouring countries should not be taken lightly. Indonesia has seen
an increase of 5.79% growth in incoming tourists as a result of increasing MICE activities in
the country and it has intended to develop this industry rigorously to tap on this lucrative
business (Osman, 2013). The Malaysia Convention and Exhibition Bureau (MyCEB), on the
other hand, has introduced branding campaign to showcase Malaysia as Asias Business
Events Hub. Through this event, Malaysia aims to attract around 100,000 attendees to its
future international business events by 2015, a drastic increase from 59,000 attendees in 2009
(Jarakiraman, 2012). Thus, by understanding attendees perception on what attributes make
Singapore an ideal exhibition hub will help Singapore to better devise marketing strategies to
continue sustain its image as the top exhibition destination in Asia.
This study is, therefore, motivated by the increasing need to sustain Singapores top position
in the exhibition industry. With Singapore expanding its number of events and participants in
the upcoming years, this study will identify the factors that determine attendees impressions
of an ideal exhibition destination and the results may be helpful in branding Singapore and
enhancing service level in the industry. Together with Singapores proven track record of
successful exhibitions, wide choice of convention and exhibition venues, advanced

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

telecommunication network and aggressive support from the public sector, Singapore looks
set to fulfil its role as an international exhibition city.
This paper focuses on attendees who attended trade shows in Singapore and evaluates
attributes that affect their choice for attending exhibitions in Singapore over other countries.
It is organized as follows: in the next section, we provide a review of studies looking at the
destination factors that influence the competitiveness of an exhibition destination. We then
discuss methodology and analyses of results. Lastly, we conclude with implications and
limitations of the study.

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

2.0 Literature Review
Singapores successes in tourism are based on a combination of geographical factors,
first class amenities and comprehensive services. With rising competitions from
neighbouring countries like Indonesia (Osman, 2013) and Malaysia (Jarakiraman, 2012),
it become crucial for Singapore to understand the influencing factors that entice
business travellers to the country for exhibitions so as to remain its competitiveness in
the industry. Despite many researchers have studied the selection criteria of exhibition
sites from the organisers point of view (Chacko & Fenich, 2000; Go & Govers, 1999;
Kang, Suh, & Jo, 2005; Qu et al., 2000; Weber & Ladkin, 2003), a lack of opinions
from the attendees point of views has resulted in an incomplete information of
destination competitiveness. Therefore, this research aims to identify the key attributes,
in view of the attendees, that shape an exhibition hub. The findings will potentially be
beneficial to Singapores initiatives to expand business tourism further.

2.1 Destination Competitiveness

Destination Competitiveness (DC) is the countrys ability to bring about superior
services to the lives of its resident (Dwyer, Forsyth & Rao, 2000; Enright $ Newton,
2004). To measure DC of a country, Chon and Mayer (1995) had modified Porters
generic industrial competitiveness and developed a tourism competitiveness model
based on five dimensions: appeal, management, organization, information, and
efficiency. However, the model did not provide key variables associated with
sustainable tourism.
As the competition among exhibition destinations escalates (Weber & Ladkin, 2004)
understanding key success factors to customers satisfactions (Go & Govers, 1999) has
become crucial to a destinations competitiveness and sustainability.

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Prior research had shown that accessibility is often a key attributes for renowned
exhibitions and conventions destinations (Nelson and Rys, 2000; Russell, 2011). In the
study by Lee, Choi and Breiter (2013), accessibility of a country as an exhibition
destination depends on whether the country hosts more international conventions or
more regional tradeshows. The former requires good flight services which conveniently
connect the world to the exhibition sites; the latter depends largely on established
highway systems. Singapore is position as an international hub for the Meetings,
Incentives, Conventions and Exhibitions (MICE) industry. It is therefore essential to
find out whether the availability of airlines services and ease of traveling to Singapore
contribute significantly to attendees perception on Singapore as an exhibition.
On the other hand, accessibility within a country also denotes its competitiveness as an
exhibition destination. In this study, accessibility within a country refers to how easy
and convenient it is to access to facilities and infrastructures in the country. All
information can be obtained in English in Singapore and almost all public amenities
have instructions in English, Chinese, Malay and Tamil language. In addition, most
Singaporeans are proficient in English language, this ease of communication makes
basic amenities extremely easy and convenient to access.
The second factor is the facilities catered for exhibition events and the basic facilities
for residence stay. These include accommodations as well as food providers such as
business hotel and restaurants respectively. Well-established accommodation along with
quality room services is found to associate with increasing destination competitiveness
(Chacko and Fenich, 2000), and thus it is worth discussing in this research. It was also
shown in Kangs study (2005) that the top three destinations for MICE purposes - Hong
Kong, Singapore and Tokyo performed very well for their facilities attribute in the
Importance-Performance Analysis. Other facilities telecommunication as well as
5

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

wireless signals are essential factors in this study analysis as well. Every year,
numerous attendees come over to Singapore to attend the various international
exhibitions hosted; emails and online communication tools, thus, become an important
mode of communications for them. It is, therefore, essential to offer the business
travelers stable service which could provide them secure communication with their
overseas clients and colleagues. With Singapore increasing its free public wireless
services to four times of current by 2016, this project will enhance Singapores
competitiveness as an exhibition hub and offer cost-effective communications services
and convenience to the international attendees (Infocomm Development Authority of
Singapore, 2014).
Another factor that entices business travelers to a country for exhibition purposes is its
service level and the brand image of the country. This refers to the reputation of the
event organiser and the exhibitors, the service level which the attendees experienced
during the event and within the event destination, as well as the information available
on the events website, email invitations or the events brochures. While the reputation
of the event organiser and exhibitors are the basic determinants that entice attendees to
visit the exhibition, the quality of the overall services received by attendees during and
outside the event plays a large role in their return to the country for future events (Kim,
2010). In addition, an informative website that delivers accurate and complete details of
the exhibition to potential attendees will increase the destinations credibility and
increase the possibility of attendees to visit Singapore for the event. As such, these
features will be taken into account in this study for analysis.
Besides, entertainment features such as shopping, nightlife, entertainment, and multiracial culture in Singapore offer an extraordinary experience to the attendees. Such
features may encourage the return of attendees for future business travel in the country.
6

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Also, Singapore is generally free from natural disasters and has very low crime rate,
these allow business travelers to travel with a peace of mind. From the study conducted
by Lee, Choi and Breiter (2013), attendees placed importance on the availability of
safety, security, facilities and environment. As observed by the Lee and his team
(2013), safety and security were placed with such especially high importance after
September 11 and SARS events. During the SARS period in 2003, Singapore suffered a
decline in GDP (0.47 %) and its tourism was negatively impacted (Lee and McKibbin,
2004). Given that Singapore is vulnerable to such global crises, it is necessary to
understand how attendees perspective of Singapore in this aspect.
The last factor is affordability which evaluates the cost of amenities and services such
as accommodations and service personnel with respect to their efficiency and quality.
Lee, Choi and Breiter (2013) revealed high cost in top-tier destinations such as Orlando
will render such as locations to lose its competitive edge in the long run as the
infrastructures in second and third tier destinations developed Fenich (2008) also
revealed that most attendees are price sensitive and that even second-tier destinations
are subjected to criticism of high prices. As Singapore becomes the most expensive city
in the world (Chen, 2014), it is noteworthy to investigate if affordability is an important
variable to exhibition tourism sustainability in Singapore.

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

2.2 Research Analysis
One of the most common models used to analyse destination competitiveness is the
competitiveness-sustainability (C/S) model developed by Crouch and Ritchie (1999).
Although, the model has been consistently revised by the authors, its niche focus on the
relationships between tourism and societal prosperity as well as its complicated features
make empirically analysis difficult to do (Lee, Choi and Breiter, 2013).
The ability to quantify the various factors is, therefore, most preferable for analysis of
destination competitiveness. However, Kim and Dwyer (2003) pointed out that it is very
hard to define or uniformly calculate factors which are associated with destination
competitiveness. Gooroochurn and Sugiyarto (2005) also noted that given its qualitative
nature, it is often difficult to measure individual factors accurately.
However, in order to test destination competitiveness empirically, Gooroochurn and
Sugiyarto (2005) yielded eight main indicators, namely price, openness, technology,
infrastructure, human tourism, social environment, natural environment, and human
resources of over 200 countries using factor analysis. The weights for each indicator
were used to compute the Composite Tourism Competitiveness Index. The research
team also used cluster analysis to categorise the countries based on their performance as
tourist destinations. However it is to note that as Gooroochurn and Sugiyarto (2005)
only used data from published secondary sources to derive the indicators, the results do
not provide an overall view of destination competitiveness as not all relevant factors
were taken into analysis.
Given the unquantifiable nature of the issue, the team has designed an open-ended
questionnaire to captures all the relevant and common aspects that set Singapore as an
exhibition hub. Surveys were done when the six exhibitions as listed in Table 6 were

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

held and factor analysis was then used to reduce the survey results into the respective
factors for analysis. ANOVA was then conducted to identify any statistical significant
differences between the factors obtained from factor analysis and the surveyees
demographic data.
Unlike customers in normal selling situations, exhibitions attendees are exposed to an
enormous amount of information within a short time (Levinson, Smith and Wilson,
1997). Understanding the factors that influence the quality of the destinations, therefore,
becomes crucial to promote sustainability in the exhibition industry in Singapore. As
this study has taken reference from various journal sources to identify the aspects that
would influence the destination competitiveness of Singapore, the indicators measured
will be more related to the exhibition industry in Singapore and may be helpful in
maximizing the overall performance of Singapore as an exhibition hub in the future.

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

3.0 Methodology
3.1 Questionnaire Development
A questionnaire with three sections was designed. Based on the 7As of Convention Destination
Competitiveness from Lee, Choi & Breiter (2013) as shown in Figure 3.1, 20 relevant

attributes were chosen from a thorough review of the attributes affecting exhibition
attendees perception of exhibition destination competitiveness found from previous studies
shown in Figure 3.2. Section I comprises respondents ratings of these 20 attributes relating
to the performance of Singapore as an exhibition destination. The 7-point Likert scale ranges
from Very Poor to Excellent. Section II consists of their rating of the overall perceived relative

competitiveness of Singapore as a regional exhibition destination. The 7-point Likert scale

ranges from Not Competitive At All to Very Competitive. Section III captures demographics

information of respondents, including information on their history of attending exhibition.

3.2 Sampling
As this study aims to examine Singapores competitiveness as trade exhibition destination
from exhibition attendees perceptive, the target population of this study was the individuals,
both local and foreign, who attended trade exhibitions held in Singapore.
After the teams considerable efforts to find exhibitions from which to conduct survey, five
exhibitions, that serve the different industries and hosted at different exhibition centers in
Singapore, were selected for on-site data collection. The exhibitions include MEDLAB Asia
Pacific, BeautyAsia/SpaAsia/HealthAsia/NaturalAsia, World Low Cost Airlines World
Asia Pacific, MAISON&OBJET ASIA, International Furniture Fair Singapore/ASEAN
Furniture Show (IFFS/AFS). As clearly suggested by the names of the exhibitions, all of
them are regional trade shows targeting Asia or Asia Pacific markets. The exhibitions were
held at three different venues in Singapore, namely The Sands Expo and Convention Center,
Suntec Singapore Convention & Exhibition Center, Singapore EXPO, reducing the
10

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

possibility of venue-specific biases in the data. To enhance the diversity of the samples for
the analysis reliability and validity, the team also conducted the questionnaire in the Central
Business District of Singapore.
The technique employed for data collection was systematic random sampling. A verbal
assessment was carried out to confirm that the respondent had attended trade exhibitions in
Singapore before the questionnaire form was provided to him/her. Team members could
speak both English and Chinese and so language difficulties were reduced to a minimum. The
questionnaires were conducted in the morning, afternoon, and evening for each source to
minimize selection biases. A field editing was conducted at the data collection venue to check
for the completeness of the questionnaires, unusable questionnaires were discarded. A total of
259 complete questionnaires were obtained from the six different sources, which respective
percentages are shown in Table 3.1.

11

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

3.3 Data Analysis
The demographic profile of the respondents was first analyzed to obtain some characteristics
of the sample, including Gender, Age, Region of Residence, Highest Educational
Qualification, Industry of Current Employment, Years of Attending Exhibitions and Number
of Exhibitions Attended Per Year.
A 20-item instrument was used to evaluate the respondents perception of Singapores
competiveness as an exhibition destination. Factor analysis was used to reduce these 20
attributes to a smaller set by assembling common variables into descriptive categories
(Rummel, 1970). Principal Components analysis is used to extract maximum variance from
the data set with each component (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007). Varimax rotation was
performed to attain an optimal simple structure for unamibiguous interpretation, which
attempts to have each variable load on as few factors as possible, but maximizes the number
of variables with high loadings on each factor (Rummel, 1970).
Factors can be initially identified by the largest loadings, but it is important to examine the
smaller yet significant loadings to confirm the identification of the factors (Gorsuch, 1983).
There should be few item crossloadings (i.e., when an item loads significantly on two or
more factors) so that each factor defines a distinct cluster of interrelated variables (Costello &
Osborne, 2005). For a sample size of at least 300, Comrey and Lee (1992) suggest that
loadings in excess of 0.71 (50% overlapping variance) are considered excellent, 0.63 (40%
overlapping variance) very good, 0.55 (30% overlapping variance) good, 0.45 (20%
overlapping variance) fair, and 0.32 (10% overlapping variance) poor which is also least
rotated factor loading to be considered statistically meaningful (% overlapping variance =
(Factor loading)2). For the smaller sample size of 259, a larger loading of 0.55 is believed to
be a suitable cut-off for statistically meaningful interpretation of the rotated factor loadings.

12

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

The Kaisers eigenvalues criterion, scree test (i.e., scree plot) and conceptual analysis of the
meanings of the factors extracted are considered when determining how many factors to
retain. The Kaisers criterion suggests retaining all factors that are above the eigenvalue of 1
(Kaiser, 1960). The scree test suggests the number of factors to be retained is the data points
that are above the break (i.e., point of inflexion) in the scree plot (Cattell, 1978). With
conceptual analysis, the number of expected factors should be based upon a sound theoretical
framework of the structural model under investigation. To determine the number of factors to
retain, researchers evaluate each method and choose the solution that provides the most
desirable rotated factor structure (Yong & Pearce, 2013).
After appropriate interpretation of factors based on rotated factor loadings and retainment of
desirable number of rotated factors, the mutually uncorrelated factor scores were produced
using the regression method for further analysis. All computations of factor analysis were
done using the SPSS package.
The backward stepwise multiple regression analysis was then used to study which extracted
factors had more significant impact on the respondents overall perception of Singapores
competitiveness as an exhibition destination. P-value of 0.05 was used to determine the
significance of a particular factor. To test for the validity of the regression model,
analysis was performed on residual plots against the fitted values to determine the
fitness of model as well as the Normal Probability plot to test normality of data.
Three kinds of tests were also carried out to test for multicollinearity, autocorrelation
and heteroskedascity. These tests are important because any violation to these tests will
result in an inappropriate model. The test for multicollinearity is the use of Variance
Inflation Factor. According to the rule of thumb for Variance Inflation Factor (VIF), if
the VIF for the independent variable is below 10, there is no significant
13

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

multicollinearity (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1995). The test for Autocorrelation
is BreuschGodfrey test that checks whether there is serial correlation between the
residuals of the independent variables which determines whether the dependent variable
is independent (Powell, n.d.). It checks whether there is presence of higher-order serial
correlation as compared to Durbin Watson test which only tests for first-order serial
correlation. If there is significant autocorrelation, the estimated standard error will be
smaller than the actual standard error, resulting in an ineffective model. In the BreuschGodfrey test, if the p-value of the chi-squared is more than 0.05, it indicates that the
null hypothesis should not be rejected, justifying absence of serial correlation. To check
for heteroskedascity, the test for it is Breusch-Pagan Test. It checks whether variance of
the residuals of the independent variables are constant. In the case of heteroskedascity,
the standard errors, test statistics and confidence intervals will be biased. In the
Breusch-Pagan Test, if p-value of the chi-squared is more than 0.05, it indicates that the
null hypothesis should not be rejected, justifying constant residuals variances
(Heteroscedascity, n.d.).
Univariate ANOVA was conducted to identify the presence of statistically significant
differences in the four factors identified Accessibility, Appropriate Services &
Appealing Images, Agreeable Environment & Attraction and Availbility of Exhibition
Facilities between the demographic responses of the surveyees. These demographic
responses include gender, age and region of residence. The regrouped subsample size
was at least 30 or more to meet the statistical assumption of normality on the samples
distribution (Bhattacharyya and Johnson, 1997).
Finally, the multiple regression model was applied to two different subgroups across selected
demographic dimensions to gain further insights, i.e. whether the relative importance of the

14

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

factors that affect the perception of Singapores competitiveness as an exhibition hub
will differ from the overall results within each subgroup. Firstly, it would be based on
the number of years they have been attending trade exhibitions, i.e. one group with less
than or equal to 10 years of experience and one with more than 10 years of experience.
Secondly, it would be based on the number of times per year the respondents attend
trade exhibitions, i.e. one group with more 5 times of visiting and the other group who
visits 5 or less exhibitions per year. Thirdly, we would also like to find out whether
region of residence would make a difference in terms of expectations for an exhibition
hub. Hence we would do that by analyzing the responses made by Singaporean
surveyees separate from Non-Singaporean attendees. Lastly, we would investigate on
how age groups affect ones view of importance of factors that affect Singapores
competitiveness as an Exhibition Hub by conducting an analysis based on the age group
18 to 25 years old with the age group of 25 years and above. All computations on
regression were done using Stata.

15

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

4.0 Discussion of Data and Results
4.1 Demographic Profile
As shown in Table 4.1, the respondent profile is relatively balanced in gender and reasonably
spread across different age groups. Most of the respondents received higher education, with
50.58% attained Bachelors Degree, while 35.52% attained Postgraduate Degree. Also
majority of the respondents, 85.78%, are from either Singapore or other Asian countries,
while only 14.22% are from non-Asia region. Due to the limitations of sampling sources,
there are four dominating industries accounting for 76.83% of the data, namely Banking &
Financial Services (17.37%), F&B, Retail and Hospitality (23.55%), Healthcare &
Pharmaceuticals (21.62%), Raw Materials and Manufacturing (14.29%). Most of the
respondents have 5 years or less of experience of attending exhibitions, with 2 to 5
exhibitions attended per year.

4.2 Factor Analysis: Factor Extraction and Factor Loadings

In order to achieve the optimal results for factor analysis, the appropriate rotated factor
structure has to be determined, through a iterative process of factor extraction and
interpretation of factor loadings.
Initially, with Kaisers criterion for factor extraction, only factors with eigenvalue more than
1 were retained and altogether four factors were extracted, accounting for 65.40% of the
variation in the data as shown in Figure 4.1. Figure 4.2 shows the rotated factor loadings of
the four components with the highest loadings of each variable highlighted and colour-coded
according to the 7As of Lee, Choi & Breiter (2013), namely Accesibility(Red),
Appropriate Service(Orange), Appealing Image(Yellow), Agreeable
Environment(Green), Attractions(Turquoise), Affordability(Blue), Availability of
Exhibition Facilities(Purple). As seen, based on four factors, the attributes are not
cleassified meaningfully: attributes for Appropriate Service, Appealing Image and

16

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Agreeable Environment are split across two different factors. With a cut-off of 0.55,
despite the lack of crossloadings, all the attributes for Appropriate Service are deemed
as insignificant. Thus, the rotated factor structure derived from Kaisers extraction
criterion of eigenvalue more than 1 does not seem to desirable.
For alternative factor extraction, the scree test is performed. As shown in Figure 4.7, the scree
plot is relatively hard to interpret, with only one major point of inflexion at Factor 2. After
careful scrutiny, a minor break can be seen at Factor 7, where the gradient changes slightly
and the eigenvalues start to level off. With that, analysis was rerun with manual extraction of
six factors. As seen in Figure 4.3, Factor 5 and 6 has eigenvalue of 0.853 and 0.765
respectively, and altogether the six factors account for 73.49% of the variation in the data.
Similarly, with the highest loadings highlighted and colour-coded, Figure 4.4 shows a much
better clasification of the attributes while all the highlighed loadings above the cut-off of 0.55
and no crossloadings. However, now that attributes from Appropriate Service & Appealing
Image, Agreeable Environment and Attractions are clustered together into Factor 1 and 2
respectively, attributes for Accesibility are still split across Factor 4 and 6.
After careful consideration of the homogeneity of the attributes within each factor and the
consitency with prior factor categories to ensure sensible interpretation, the final analysis is
run with five factors manually extracted, accounting for near 70% (69.67%) of the variation
in the data as shown in Figure 4.5. The rotated component loadings, with highlights and
colour-codings, are shown in Figure 4.6, and none of the 7As are split across different factors.
With the same cut-off of 0.55, there is all of the highlighted loadings are significant and there
is no crossloadings. Thus, the rotated factor structure derived with five factors is deem as
desirable and used to compute factor scores for regression.

17

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

4.3 Interpretation of Factor Structure
The results of factor analysis performed on the 20 attributes are given in Table 4.2. The five
factors obtained can be considered as the factors that influence the exhibition attendees
perception of Singapores competiveness as an exhibition destination. Altogether, the five
factors can account for about 70% (i.e. 69.67%) of the variation in the data.
Factor 1, labeled as Accessibility, consists of variables that reflect the desirability of
international location of Singapore and exhibition venue, convenience of air transport and
local transport, and ease of communication. Factor 2, Appropriate Service & Appealing
Image, consists of five variables that reflects the perceived quality of the exhibition in terms
of the relevance of exhibitor, service quality provided at exhibition venue, quality of other
related services, and perceived image of exhibition in terms of quality of online information
and reputation. Agreeable Environment & Attractions form the third factor and it relate to
the general safety, cleanliness, social and political stability of Singapore, as well as the
variety of leisure activities, entertainment and tourist attractions of Singapore. The
reasonableness of prices of hotel accommodation, transportation, food and commodities,
forms the next factor Affordability, whereas the last factor Availability of Exhibition
Facilities consists of variables related to availability of restaurants and shops at exhibition
venue; the convenience of exhibition/conference facilities; and the quality of
telecommunication/wireless services at the exhibition venue.

18

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

4.4 Discussion of Regression Results
Based on the stepwise regression results as shown in Figure 4.8, Accessibility,
Appropriate Service & Appealing Image, Availability of Exhibition Facilities as well as
Agreeable Environment & Attractions are the significant factors that determine
Singapores competitiveness as an Exhibition Hub and all portray a positive relationship
in affecting Singapores competitiveness as an Exhibition Hub. However, the R-square
of this model is at 0.3, which shows that only 30% of variability in the overall
competitiveness of Singapore as an Exhibition Hub can be explained by the differences
of the significant independent variables that are included in this model. A normality plot
was also plotted as shown in Figure 4.9. Though the normality pattern is not obvious,
we can safely assume normality given that n is large (Normal Distribution, n.d.).
According to the Augmented Dickey Fuller test for Unit Root which tests whether the
data is stationary, a p-value smaller than 0.05 indicates the null hypothesis of a presence
of unit root can be rejected (Dfuller - Augmented Dickey-Fuller unit-root test, n.d).
Based on the observations in Figure 4.10, the dependent variable exhibits stationary due
to absence of a unit root. Hence a R-squared of 0.3 is considered respectable given that
the dependent variable is a properly stationarised series (Whats a good value for a Rsquared?, n.d.). Besides the R-square, standard error is at 0.80248 which is 11.4% of
our 7-point scale. This shows that the overall forecast of the competitive index is likely
to deviate the actual perception of competitiveness by 11.4%. In addition, with the
large F-statistic of 28.36> 2.40718240 with numerator degrees of freedom at 4 and
denominator degrees of freedom at 258, it clearly shows our model fits the data well.
This can be substantiated based on the residuals versus the fitted values which show no
linear pattern as shown in Figure 4.11 and normal distribution of residuals as shown in
Figure 4.12. To measure the validity of our test results, the three tests mentioned

19

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

previously was also conducted. Based on our findings in Figure 4.13, there is no
presence of multicollinearity, autocorrelation of residuals as well as heteroskedascity.
From our results, it can be interpreted based on the coefficients of the independent
variables that Accessibility is the most important factor in determining the
competitiveness of Singapore as an exhibition hub. Appropriate Service & Appealing
Image, Availability of Exhibition Facilities and lastly, Agreeable Environment &
Attractions follow the importance accordingly. In order to draw the link between our
independent variables and the attendees perception of Singapores competitiveness as
an Exhibition Hub, we will analyse the results based on their perception of performance
rated for each category with the final overall competitiveness perception scoring. In this
case, Affordability is not significant here as compared to past literature study by Lee,
Choi & Breiter (2013) which has the most impact of visitors perception of a countrys
exhibition destination competitiveness. Being a developed country, Singapore is a top
tier destination for holding of exhibitions. Thus our result can be explained by Nelson
and Ryss (2000) findings whereby costs may be an advantage for second-tier
exhibition locations as compared to top-tier destinations. It means that it is relevant to
say that affordability may not be important in determining Singapores competitiveness
given that we are a top-tier exhibition destination. In terms of the ranking of importance
of the other factors, the order of importance also differs from the literature studys
results by Lee, Choi & Breiter (2013). This can be explained by the different types of
people being surveyed. Since the study by Lee, Choi & Breiter (2013) is conducted in
the United States of America, the targeted surveyees may come from a different cultural
background as compared to the targeted surveyees for our survey conducted in
Singapore whereby 42% of our respondents are Singaporeans. According to Acar, Taura,
Yamamoto & Yusof (2011), culture does play a part in perception of objects due to the
20

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

different visual inference habits people have, living in different environments since they
were born.
Our ANOVA results show that that there are no significant differences between the
demographic responses gender, age and region of residence, in all the factors except
Agreeable Environment & Attraction. Similar to the ANOVA results revealed by Hui
and Wan (2003), there are no significant statistical differences in the perception of
different gender group in all four factors. The only demographic variables that present
significant differences among different subgroups in the Agreeable Environment &
Attraction factor are age (Figure 4.23) and surveyees region of residence (Figure 4.24).

4.5 Comparison of Regression Results within Two Subgroups

(i)
Attendees with more than 10 years experience of visiting exhibitions versus Attendees
with 10 or less years experience of visiting exhibitions
Based on our observations of both results, perception of importance does change with
increasing number of years of experience of visiting exhibitions. For attendees who
have been attending exhibitions for 10 or less years, they view Accessibility as the most
important factor, followed by Appropriate Service & Appealing Image, Availbility of
Exhibition facilities and Agreeable Environment & Attarction, shown in Figure 4.14.
This result is similar to that of our overall result. This can be explained from the fact
that 81% of respondents fall into this group and hence their perception will tend to
coincide with the overall results. However, for attendees who have more than 10 years
of visiting exhibitions, this perception changes as Appropriate Service & Appealing
Image becomes the most important factor followed by Availbility of Exhibition
Facilities, Accessibility and finally Agreeable Environment & Attractions, shown in
Figure 4.15. This shows that when people have more experience of visiting exhibitions,
they focus more on the experience itself since they have already attended various
21

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

exhibitions previously. Thus for this group of people, what they get out of visiting these
exhibitions for them are more important. With respect to image, because having more
experience than the rest, they may be more selective in terms of visiting exhibitions and
hence to them, the reputation of the country as well as the organisers will play an
important role in determining their choice of attendance. In addition, particularly, in
this model, the adjusted R-square at 0.5, the smaller standard error at 0.668 despite the
smaller number of observations and the F-statistic at 12.79> 2.58366743 with numerator
degrees of freedom and denominator degrees of freedom at 4 and 44 respectively, shows
a better fitted model for this group of attendees. For both models, it is tested there is
absence of multicollinearity as well as autocorrelation of residuals, shown in Figure
4.16 and Figure 4.17.
(ii)
Attendees who visit more than 5 exhibitions per year versus Attendees who visit 5 or
less exhibitions per year
Within these two sub groups, clear differences can be highlighted. For attendees who
visit 5 or less exhibitions per year, the results are similar to the overall results, which
can be explained by 91% of respondents being in this group as shown in Figure 4.18. In
contrast, for attendees who visit more than 5 exhibitions per year, affordability seems to
be only factor that affects their perception of a countrys competitiveness as an
Exhibition Hub and exhibits a negative relationship with dependent variable, shown in
Figure 4.19. This is reasonable since as people purchase more, they will tend to be more
concerned with the price assuming that the other aspects are kept constant. This concept
is similar to the concept of frequency bias in inflation perceptions whereby people are
more focused on price increases on items which they purchase more frequently when
forming inflation perceptions of the economy (Georganas, Healy & Li, 2014). However,
it is important to note that for this model, due to the small number of observations, the

22

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

results may not be representative of the entire population though there is absence of
autocorrelation among residuals and constant variance of residuals as shown in Figure
4.20.
(iii) Singaporean attendees versus Non-Singaporean attendees
Between Singaporean and Non-Singaporean attendees, there is also a slight difference
of perception in the importance of factors that affect their final perception of
Singapores competitiveness as an Exhibition Hub. For Non-Singaporeans,Appropriate
Service & Appealing Image, Accessibility and Exhibition Facilities are the important
factors in determining their perception in order of importance while for Singaporeans,
Accessibility, Appropriate Service & Appealing Image, Availbility of Exhibition
Facilities and Agreeable Environment & Attractions are significant factors in order of
importance. For Non-Singaporeans, the greater emphasis inAppropriate Service &
Appealing Image could be justified due to the fact of having more experience visiting
exhibitions held overseas and hence would have greater tendencies to compare their
experience with that in Singapores. Both results can be seen in Figure 4.21 and Figure
4.22 respectively. The Non-Singaporean model shows very small R-squared and
relatively high standard error despite the large F-statistics at 9.85>2.66700561 when
numerator degrees of freedom and denominator degrees of freedom is 3 and 145
respectively. The significance of the results in which Non-Singaporeans do not place as
much emphasis on Agreeable Environment as compared to Singaporeans is further
supported by the ANOVA analysis. The P-value of 0.00001 and F-statistic of 20.45
indicate significant differences in the perceptions Singaporeans and other Nationalities
towards the factor on Agreeable Environment. Like mentioned before, it can be
explained due to the cultural differences that could affect their perception in evaluating
objects.
23

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

(iv) Attendees from age group 18 to 25 years old versus Attendees from age group above 25
years old
ANOVA results reveal a significant difference among attendees from different age
groups in the Agreeable Environment factor. The factor is then split into its individual
component which includes Safety, Cleanliness, Social and Political Stability and
Leisure, Entertainment and Tourist Attaration and ANOVA was conducted on these
components against different age groups. It was found that all components present
significant differences between attendees aged between 18 to 25 years old and attendees
who are older than 25 years old. Likert scores given by attendees aged between 18 to
25 years old are more impartial, with average score of 5.97 for safety, 5.73 for
cleanliness and 5.24 for shopping and nightlife while average scores given from
attendees aged above 25 are shown in Table 4.3, which demonstrated higher rating for
the respective components.
These can be explained by the fact that majority of the attendees aged 25 and below are
students and are inexperienced in attending exhibitions. They may lack the experience
to compare Singapore and other exhibition destinations and result in more neutral
responses collected from them. Another possibility for the significant difference in
responses towards Leisure, Entertainment and Tourist Attaration in Singapore was
explained by Hui and Wan (2003), who mentioned that different shopping capacity due
to differing purchasing power between respondents of different age groups may lead to
different perceptions towards Singapore as a Shopping destination.

24

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

4.6 Overall Implications of Results
Based on our findings, exhibition organisers can understand the needs of their clients
and look for suitable destinations for holding of exhibitions either in Singapore or
worldwide according to their targeted group of attendees. Since Accessibility has been
deemed as an extremely important factor in terms of overall results and in various
subgroups, it is important that exhibition organisers take note of this to consider their
future location of exhibition halls. The Singapore Exhibition & Convention Bureau can
also consider more on the accessibility of location in their future planning of
constructing new exhibition halls in Singapore. Affordability is not seen as a significant
factor in the overall results as well as in most of the subgroups. This shows that despite
Singapore being the most expensive city in the world (Singapore named the world's
most expensive city, 2014), it may play a small role in affecting ones perception of
Singapore being competitive as an Exhibition Hub.

25

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

5.0 Conclusion
This paper provides an in-depth study of the exhibition industry in Singapore. We provide a
detailed discussion of factors affecting the competitiveness of Singapore as exhibition
destination from the viewpoint of attendees and the impact of these factors on Singapore
competitiveness. It can be concluded that Accessibility, Appropriate Service & Appealing
Image, Availbility of Exhibition Facilities as well as Agreeable Environment & Attarctions
are the four main factors, in order of importance, that have impact on Singapores
competitiveness as an exhibition hub. Furthermore, all the four factors have a positive
influence on the countrys competitiveness. In contrast to past literature study by Lee, Choi &
Breiter (2013), our study finds that Affordability is not a significant factor affecting attendees
perception of a countrys competitiveness as an exhibition centre.
We have discussed the ratings provided by the attendees based on four categories number
of years attended exhibitions, frequency of attending exhibitions annually, nationality and age
group. Firstly, attendees who have been attending exhibitions for 10 or less years,
Accessibility is the most important factor whereas those who attended more than 10 years
view Appropriate Service & Appealing Image as the most important competitive factor. The
latter focuses more on the experience provided by exhibitors throughout the entire visiting
journey. Next, we also deduce that people who attend exhibitions more than five years
annually perceive Affordability as the only factor that affect a countrys competitiveness as
an exhibition hub. Moreover, this factor has an inverse relationship with the countrys
competitiveness. On the other hand, attendees attending exhibitions five or less times per
annum deem Accessibility as the most important factor. Then, locals view Accessibility as
the most significant factor while foreigners consider Appropriate Service & Appealing Image
the most important factor in influencing the competitiveness of a country as an exhibition
destination. The different viewpoints could be due to cultural differences. Lastly, attendees

26

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

who are above 25 years old provided higher rating for the individual components for
Agreeable Environment & Attarctions as compared to those who are 25 years old and below.

27

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

6.0 Limitations of the Analysis
In our study, there is a concentration of surveyees in a few industries, namely the Food
and Beverages, Retail and Hospitality industry, Raw materials and Manufacturing
Industry, Banking and Financial Services Industry as well as the Healthcare and
Pharmaceutical Industry. Thus it may not be a completely good representation of the
perception of exhibition attendees in general. In addition, within each subgroup, the
number of surveyees are also not proportionate with more attendees concentrated at
attendees who visit 5 or less exhibition per year and have less than 10 years of
experience and thus, the comparison between the two subgroups may not be justified
enough but it still does give a rough idea on difference in perceptions since clear
differences could be highlighted.

28

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

7.0 References
Acar, A.,Taura, T., Yamamoto, E. & Yusof, N. F. M. (2011). Object vs. Relation:
Understanding the Link between Culture and Cognition with the Help of WordNet.
International Journal on Asian Language Processing 21 (4): 199-208. Retrieved from
http://www.colips.org/journal/volume21/21.4.3-objectvsrelationsinal.pdf
Bhattacharyya GK & Johnson R. (1997). Statistical Comcepts and Methods. New York:
Wiley
Cattell, R.B. (1978). The scientific use of factor analysis in behavioral and life sciences. New
York, NY: Plenum Press.
Chacko, H. E., & Fenich, G. G. (2000). Determining the importance of US convention
destination attributes. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 6(3), 211220.
Chen, S. (2014, March 4). Singapore overtakes tokyo as worlds costliest city. Bloomberg.
Retrieved from http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-04/singapore-overtakestokyo-as-world-s-costliest-city-eiu-says.html
Costello, A.B., & Osborne, J.W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four
recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment,
Research and Evaluation, 10(7), 1-9.
Crouch, G. I., & Ritchie, J. R. B. (1999). Tourism, competitiveness and societal prosperity.
Journal of Business Research, 44, 137152.
Dfuller - Augmented Dickey-Fuller unit-root test. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.stata.com/manuals13/tsdfuller.pdf
Dwyer, L., Forsyth, P., & Rao, P. (2000). The price competitiveness of travel and tourism: A
comparison of 19 destinations, Tourism Management, 21(1), 922.
Dwyer, L., & Kim, C. (2003). Destination competitiveness: Determinants and indicators.
Current Issues in Tourism, 6(5), 369414.
Enright, M. J., & Newton, J. (2004). Tourism destination competitiveness: A quantitative
approach. Tourism Management, 25(6), 777788.
Georganas, S., Healy, P. J. & Li, N. (2014, February 5). Frequency bias in consumers'
perceptions of inflation: An experimental study. European Economic Review, 67
(2014): 144 - 158
Go, F., & Govers, R. (1999). The Asian perspectivewhich international conference in Asia
are the most competitive? Journal of Convention and Exhibition Management, 1(4),
3750.

29

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Gooroochurn, N., & Sugiyarto, G. (2005). Competitiveness indicators in the travel and
tourism industry. Tourism Economics, 11(1), 2543.
Gorsuch, R.L. (1983). Factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hair J. F. Jr., Anderson R. E., Tatham R. L., & Black W. C. (1995). Multivariate data
analysis (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Macmillan.
Heteroscedasticity. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www3.nd.edu/~rwilliam/stats2/l25.pdfbreu
Hui, T. K., & Wan, T. W. D. (2003). Singapore's image as tourist destination. The
International Journal of Tourism, Retrieved from
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jtr.437/abstract
Infocomm Development Authority of Singapore, (2014).Wireless@sg to offer seamless wi-fi
connectivity, more hotspots. Retrieved from website: https://www.ida.gov.sg/AboutUs/Newsroom/Media-Releases/2014/WirelessSG-to-Offer-Seamless-Wi-FiConnectivity-More-Hotspots
Jarakiraman, S. (2012, March 16). Growth and importance of the mice industry. Asia-Pacific
Business and Technology Report. Retrieved from
http://www.biztechreport.com/story/1830-growth-and-importance-mice-industry
Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational
and Psychological Measurement, 20, 141-151. doi: 10.1177/001316446002000116
Kang, M., Suh, S., & Jo, D. (2005). The competitiveness of international meeting
destinations in Asia: Meeting planners versus buying centers perceptions. Journal of
Convention & Event Tourism, 7(2), 5785.
Lee, J., Choi, Y. & Breiter, D. (2013, December 23). An Exploratory Study of Convention
Destination Competitivenes from the Attendees' Perspective: Importance-Performance
Analysis and Repeated Measures of Manova. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism
Research. doi:10.1177/1096348013515913. Retreived from
http://jht.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/12/22/1096348013515913
Levinson, J. C., Smith, M. S. A., & Wilson, O. R. (1997). Guerrilla tradeshow selling: New
unconventional weapons and tactics to meet more people, get more leads, and close
more sales. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Nelson, R., & Rys, S. (2000). Convention site selection criteria relevant to secondary
convention destinations. Journal of Convention & Exhibition Management, 2(2), 7182.
Normal Distribution. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www3.nd.edu/~rwilliam/stats1/x21.pdf
Powell, J. L. (n.d.). Models, Testing and Correction of Serial Correlation. Retrieved
from http://emlab.berkeley.edu/users/powell/e240b_sp06/sernotes.pdf

30

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Osman, N. (2013, July 02). Indonesias mice events attracts foreign tourists . The Jarkata
Post. Retrieved from http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2013/07/02/indonesia-smice-events-attracts-foreign-tourists.html
Qu, H., Li, L., & Chu, G. K. (2000). The comparative analysis of Hong Kong as an
international conference destination in Southeast Asia. Tourism Management, 21(6),
643648.
Rummel, R.J. (1970). Applied factor analysis. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
Singapore named the world's most expensive city. (2014, March 3). Retrieved from
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-26412821 Weber, K., & Ladkin, A. (2004). Trends
affecting the convention industry in the 21st century. Journal of Convention & Event
Tourism, 6(4), 4763.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Boston, MA:
Allyn & Bacon.
What's a good value for R-squared? (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://people.duke.edu/~rnau/rsquared.htm
Yong, A. G., & Pearce, S. (2013). A Beginners Guide to Factor Analysis: Focusing on
Exploratory Factor Analysis. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 9(2),
79-94.

31

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Appendix

Figure 3.1: Seven As for Convention Destination Competitiveness

Source

Percentage

MEDLAB Asia Pacific The Sands Expo Laboratory, Medicine

and
Convention
Center

57

22.01%

BeautyAsia / SpaAsia /
HealthAsia
/
NaturalAsia

Suntuc Singapore Cosmetics, Perfumery, Hairdressing,

Convention
& Health, Whole Food
Exhibition Center

11

4.25%

World
Low
Cost
Airlines World Asia
Pacific

Suntuc Singapore Aviation, Hospitality, Tourism, Food

Convention
& and Beverages
Exhibition Center

23

8.88%

MAISON&OBJET
ASIA

Marina Bay Sands

Glassware,
China,
Ceramics,
Household, Interior Decoration,
Tableware, Textiles, Fabrics, Home
Textiles

22

8.49%

The Sands Expo Furniture, Interior Decoration, Hotel,

and
Convention Restaurant
Center

63

24.32%

Central
District

83

32.05%

IFFS/AFS / The Dcor

Show / Hospitality 360

Street Survey

Venue

Business Sector

Business

Banking, Finance, Business

Table 3.1: Distribution of Data from Different Sources

32

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Characteristics

Percentage

Male

131

50.58%

Female

128

49.42%

18 - 25

33

12.74%

26 35

80

30.89%

36 50

97

37.45%

51 and above

49

18.92%

Singapore

110

42.47%

Asia (Excluding Singapore)

112

43.31%

Non-Asia

37

14.22%

Diploma/Technical

36

13.90%

Bachelors Degree

131

50.58%

Postgraduate (Masters, PhD)

92

35.52%

Banking & Financial Services industry

45

17.37%

F&B, Retail and Hospitality

61

23.55%

Healthcare & Pharmaceutical industry

56

21.62%

Raw Materials and Manufacturing industry

37

14.29%

Others

60

23.17%

Gender

Age

Region of Residence

Highest Educational Qualification

Industry of Current Employment

33

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Years of Attending Exhibition
5 years or less

148

57.14%

6 - 10 years

62

23.94%

More than 10 years

49

18.92%

Once

99

38.22%

2 - 5 times

138

53.28%

More than 5 times

22

8.50%

Number of Exhibitions Attended per Year

Table 4.1: Demographic Profile of Respondents

Figure 4.1: PCA Extraction (Eigenvalue>=1)

34

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Figure 4.2: Rotated Factor Loadings (Eigenvalue>=1)

Figure 4.3: PCA Extraction (6 Components)

35

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Figure 4.4: Rotated Factor Loadings (6 Components)

Figure 4.5: PCA Extraction (5 Components)

36

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Figure 4.6: Rotated Factor Loadings (5 Components)

37

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Figure 4.7: Scree Plot

38

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Measures and Factors

Variance
Explained (%)

Factor
Loading

Mean

Factor 1: Accessibility

16.909

Ease of Air Transportation Access

0.648

6.17

Proximity to Regional Markets

0.618

6.09

Location of Exhibition Venue

0.692

5.68

Convenience of Local Transportation

0.746

5.70

Ease of Communication

0.588

6.05

Relevance of Exhibitors/Participants

0.669

5.37

Service Quality at Exhibition Venue

0.729

5.39

Service Quality of Hotels, Restaurants etc

0.618

5.62

Quality of Information Online

0.630

5.57

Organizer/Exhibition Reputation

0.635

5.47

Safety and Security

0.629

6.32

Cleanliness

0.708

6.08

Social and Political Stability

0.766

6.20

Leisure, Entertainment, Tourist Attractions

0.671

5.73

Hotel Accommodation Rates

0.738

4.49

Transportation Cost

0.768

5.18

General Cost of Food and Commodities

0.780

4.47

Factor 2: Appropriate Service & Appealing Image

Factor 3: Agreeable Environment & Attraction

Factor 4: Affordability

14.634

13.645

12.408

39

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Factor 5: Availbility of Exhibition Facilities

12.066

Availability of Restaurants and Shops

0.661

5.60

Convenience of Exhibition/Conference Facilities

0.705

5.63

Quality of Telecommunication/Wireless Services

0.805

5.44

Table 4.2: Factor Analysis Results

40

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Figure 4.8: Stepwise regression results of survey

Competitiveness

Normal Probability Plot

8
6
4
2
0
0

20

40

60
Sample Percentile

80

100

120

Figure 4.9: Competitiveness Indexs Normal Probability Plot

Figure 4.10: Dickey-Fuller test for unit root of Competitiveness Index

41

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Figure 4.11: Residuals vs fitted values plot

42

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Figure 4.12: Normal Probability plot for Residuals

Figure 4.13: Test Results for Overall Competitiveness

43

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Figure 4.14: Stepwise Regression Results for attendees who have 10 or less years experience
of attending exhibitions

Figure 4.15: Stepwise Regression Results for attendees who have more than 10 years
experience of attending exhibitions

44

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Figure 4.16: Test results for Competitiveness perceived by attendees with 10 or less years of
experience of attending exhibitions

45

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Figure 4.17: Test results for Competitiveness perceived by attendees with more than 10 years
of experience of attending exhibitions

Figure 4.18: Stepwise Regression Results for Competitiveness perceived by attendees who
visit 5 or less exhibitions per year

46

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Figure 4.19: Stepwise Regression Results for Competitiveness perceived by attendees who
visit more than 5 exhibitions per year

Figure 4.20: Test Results for Competitiveness perceived by attendees who attend more than 5
exhibitions per year

47

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Figure 4.21: Stepwise Regression Results for Competitiveness perceived by Singaporean

attendees

Figure 4.22: Stepwise Regression Results for Competitiveness perceived by NonSingaporean attendees

48

Singapore as an Exhibition Hub

Figure 4.23 ANOVA results for different age group in Agreeable Environment

Figure 4.24 ANOVA results for different age group in Agreeable Environment
Age Groups
26 to 35

36 to 50

>
50

Safety

6.35

6.36

6.41

Cleanliness

6.20

6.05

6.18

Political Stability

6.24

6.24

6.31

Shopping and Nightlife

5.99

5.65

5.78

Table 4.3: Likert scores for attendees based on Age Groups

49