Presentations
Presentations prepared by all the teams participating in 24HOURS competition are presented below. In this presentations, the teams considered and depicted strategy for MICE tourism development in Lodz Metropolitan Area. This presentations were assessed and judged by the jury of the 24HOURS competition.
- Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences, tutor: Marta Szkaradkiewicz
- Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences, tutor: Jan Kazak
- Warsaw School of Tourism and Hospitality Management, tutor: Agnieszka Ciesielska
- Poznan University of Economics, tutor: Dawid Szutowski
- Lodz University of Technology, tutor: Wiktor Wroblewski
- University of Lodz, tutor: Marzena Makowska-Iskierka
- Lillehammer University College, tutor: Jonas Karlsen Astrom
Winners
Results of assessment of all the teams participating in the 24HOURS contest is shown in the table. Congratulations to the winning team representing Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences with Marta Szkaradkiewicz as a tutor. Congratulations to all the teams participating in the 24HOURS competition. Great job! It must be underlined that two teams representing Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences gained two first prizes. This is a great success of the university. Team representing Poznan University of Economics prepared most valuable solution in substantive way. However, completeness of the solution prepared by the winning team was outstanding. Team representing Warsaw School of Tourism and Hospitality Management made a best show. In fact, the winning team made the presentation most clear and understandable.
Results of assessment of teams participating 24HOURS contest
| Team's affiliation | Team's tutor | Total points (100 max) | Substantive value of the solution (60 max) | Completeness of the solution (20 max) | Overall impression (20 max) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences | Marta Szkaradkiewicz | 66.7 | 35.4 | 16.9 | 14.4 |
| Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences | Jan Kazak | 60.4 | 35.9 | 13.1 | 11.4 |
| Warsaw School of Tourism and Hospitality Management | Agnieszka Ciesielska | 58.4 | 31.0 | 13.1 | 14.3 |
| Poznan University of Economics | Dawid Szutowski | 58.3 | 36.4 | 11.3 | 10.6 |
| Lodz University of Technology | Wiktor Wroblewski | 56.7 | 32.0 | 13.6 | 11.1 |
| University of Lodz | Marzena Makowska-Iskierka | 42.7 | 23.1 | 11.1 | 8.4 |
| Lillehammer University College | Jonas Karlsen Astrom | 41.3 | 17.6 | 11.3 | 12.4 |
Opinion about contest
Results of evaluation questionnaire are shown below. We believe that your assessment and comments allow us to improve next editions of 24HOURS. We expected that chance to visit Norway is better than any other prize. However, you also found both the idea of long constant work and opportunity to networking as very incentive. Moreover, some of you recognized the topic of the contest (MICE tourism) as very inviting. In fact, you suggested to make the competition task less analytic and more creative.
Table 1. Main reason to join the 24HOURS contest
| Characteristic | Number of respondees |
|---|---|
| Prize of the contest (study tour to Lillehammer) | 14 |
| Idea of 24 hours of constant work | 9 |
| Networking | 4 |
| Subject of the contest (MICE tourism) | 3 |
| Lack of answer | 0 |
| Respondents were not be able to select one answer | 5 |
We did our best to inform academics about the 24HOURS. We decided to employ push strategy: we sent information to researchers and PhD candidates and used them to inform students. To contact with academics we used word mouth marketing and various social media: Facebook, LinkedIn, TriNet and Twitter. However, the results were insufficient. If we organize next editions of 24HOURS, we will improve promotion-mix to make the contest more popular and more international as suggested.
Table 2. First source of an information about the 24HOURS contest
| Characteristic | Number of respondees |
|---|---|
| Word of mouth marketing | 28 |
| 4 | |
| Other | 2 |
| Lack of answer | 0 |
| Respondents were not be able to select one answer | 1 |
We know that not everything was perfect. We can only apologize for that. Some problems about the venue and especially ITC facilities were recognized before the contest. You only confirmed our negative opinions. We hope that your comments will support our efforts to make some changes at the faculty. As 100% vegetarian organizing committee we can only apologize for no-meat menu. Thank you for all suggestions, especially: 1) to make bigger intervals between tutors’ presentations, 2) to start the contest in the early morning. If we organize next editions of 24HOURS, we will improve the quality of the service.
Table 3. Rates of the 24HOURS contest
| Characteristic | Average rate (max 7.0) | 7 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of respondees | ||||||||
| Overall impression | 5.5 | 1 | 18 | 15 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Safety | 6.2 | 15 | 13 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Organizers | 6.0 | 10 | 13 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Volunteers (teams' attendants) | 6.1 | 15 | 13 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Volunteers (InfoPoint) | 6.0 | 14 | 11 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Catering | 3.9 | 0 | 4 | 6 | 11 | 12 | 1 | 1 |
| City tour | 5.5 | 5 | 15 | 10 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| ITC facilities | 3.9 | 3 | 4 | 8 | 7 | 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Uniqueness | 5.5 | 3 | 16 | 15 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Thank you for the challenge, for the atmosphere, for the fun, for the 24HOURS spent together!