We at Zephyr Adventures are very into feedback. We have been sending an evaluation form to everyone who has traveled with us since 1997, using the same five-point scale to evaluate everything from restaurants to hotels, from guides to the overall trip.
It’s a rough business because a) it is hard to please everyone and b) we have very high standards for ourselves. It is not pleasant when you get a low rating as a guide or we get a low rating on a trip. But if you are into feedback, you have to be prepared for the bad as well as the good and to make corrections when necessary.
This past week we were disappointed to get one “two” rating (Fair) and two “three” ratings (Good) in the results on our recently-completed South Africa Hike, Wine, and Safari Adventure. Granted, the other ratings were all Very Good or Outstanding but our goal for each trip is to have no one rate the trip lower than Very Good. We failed on this trip.
The primary reason was trip size. We had 25 people on this trip. Although this is the maximum as per our stated policy, we heard from a number of participants the group size was too large.
The interesting thing is we have done the number crunching and we can’t tie group size to participant satisfaction on past tours. It’s just not correlated. And there are real reasons why a large group can actually be more fun, primarily because it means you have more potential new friends to meet and hang out with on your vacation. We have seen this work over and over.
We decided to do more research and conducted one of our High Roller Surveys, short two-minute surveys of our most-traveled alumni. We asked what the optimum group size would be (12, 16, 20, or 24 participants) and the results were 20-24 for Biking Adventures, 16 for Hiking Adventures, 20-24 for Skating Adventures, and 24 for Wine, Food, & Beer Adventures.
So there is no real desire among our alumni for smaller trips. One of our alumni, Marian Melish, put it this way: “I do not feel that the group size needs limits – we have had our most wonderful experiences with a small group ( Burgundy) and a large group (Switzerland). “
We also asked about participant to guide ratios, which we current have set at a maximum of 8:1. (In other words, we have two guides on trips up to 16 people and add a third guide at 17.) 2/3 of the respondents told us decreasing this ratio (having more guides) was not important and only 8% told us this would be “very important”.
So we are going to lower our maximum to 24 participants on most tours and keep our maximum participant to guide ratio of 8:1. This is the maximum – many trips have smaller trip numbers and higher guide ratios.
However, based on the poor South Africa tour results and the desire of our alumni to have a lower maximum on hiking adventures, we will institute a new maximum of 16 participants on our Yellowstone, Glacier National Park, Tibet, Peru, Kilimanjaro, Hadrian’s Wall, South Africa, and Chile & Argentina tours.
Our goal is to constantly provide outstanding vacations for our travelers and we hope this helps. We appreciate the feedback!
I think the activity affects the optimal group size. The less variation in skill or ability levels, the more the group sticks together and the smaller the optimal group size will be. As you start to get into activities like cycling and skating where the fastest and slowest people can have a significantly different level of speed and skill, groups split up and more people are required to ensure each sub-group has enough participants.
I actually prefer 8 people on a hiking trip and 25 people on a skating trip.
I was on the South Africa trip and feel the need to respond! I am generally not much of a group traveler (and have taken advantage of Zephyr’s private trips in the past). The difficulty with group travel is trying to be all things to all people, which is just not possible (no matter how awesome Kris is!). In any group there will be people you really like and those you don’t like as much. A larger group inevitably has those divisions, both in personality and ability. Pretend you are on a trip with only 5 people, but 3 of them are your least favorite people from your last group trip….does group size really matter at that point? (Yes, because you’re probably wishing for a bigger group in this scenario.) We are all grown ups and have the ability within the group to decide what things we do or do not want to participate in. No one is making you do anything!
Not sure what the specific issues were with the people who complained about group size. There was some grumbling by a few people about the 2 hotels at Thornybush, necessitated by the group size. But the isues were that some of the luxury tent people wanted to be in the hotel rooms. This is ironic, since if the group was smaller, everyone would have been in the luxury tents (which were awesome!) and no one would have been in the hotel!
Zephyr does an awesome job putting together great adventures. Part of having an adventure involves a little “go with the flow” attitude. And from someone that “hates” group travel…the South Africa trip was wonderful in all regards! Keep up the great work!
Well, there is something to be said about a group size of 2 with 3 guides – 1 formal guide, a 2nd in the form of the new company owner, and a 3rd in the form of the 2nd’s girlfriend.
Yes, but those days, Rick, are long gone. As in, that was 1997 and our first year! But we are glad you are still traveling with us 15 years later. 🙂
I was on the South Africa trip and thought that that group size was no problemo – or however it is said in Afrikaans! I believe that group size is not the determinant of whether people rate a tour highly or not. I have been on tours with large numbers of participants and smaller numbers of particpants. I believe that it’s the individuals and resulting group dynamics that determine how people rate a tour. On the South Africa tour there were a number of people who knew each other from previous Zephyr trips and were couples, and also a number of people who were “new” to that group, and single as well. I think that it’s can be awkward when singles and couples mix together – the singles can feel excluded from the couples, the couples don’t reach out to the singles because they really don’t have to – they have an automatic “someone” to be with. It can be awkward when people who are “new” to the mix try to break into the established friendships as well. I can only speak for myself when I say that I tried to talk to people I didn’t know and met with great success with some, and no success with others. But it’s a two-way street, and not my responsibility to reach out to everyone else. I found that some people on the tour didn’t make any effort to talk to me or get to know me at all, and I think that’s weird. Why go on a group tour and stick to yourself? I really hope to see many of the “new” singles I met on this trip on future trips because they are nice, fun, and outgoing!
By the way, I do not think that you should describe the South Africa tour results as “poor!” Not when only 1 respondent rated it as fair. And I’ll bet I know who it was – I think that person’s rating would have been “fair” no matter what – you could just tell by their attitude – not engaged with others at all, determined from the start not to like this trip. Throw that score out!