Despite growing global interest in customer experience management, limited research has systematically integrated both quantitative and qualitative approaches to identify service performance gaps and formulate strategic responses in airport settings. This study addresses this gap by examining how Bangkok Suvarnabhumi Airport can enhance its passenger experience through empirical analysis and international benchmarking. The research investigates the alignment between international passengers’ expectations and their actual experiences across seven key airport touchpoints: check-in, security, immigration, boarding, accessibility, facilities, and retail areas. A structured survey of 474 outbound international passengers was conducted between June and July 2024 using purposive sampling. Quantitative data were analyzed using Importance–Performance Analysis (IPA) to evaluate six experience components: affective, cognitive, sensory, conative, physical, and social identity. The IPA results revealed notable service gaps, particularly in conative engagement, physical comfort, and social identity, which were subsequently prioritized for strategic improvement. To validate and enrich strategy formulation, qualitative benchmarking was conducted through semi-structured interviews with ten executives at Hong Kong International Airport, a global leader in passenger experience management. The resulting strategic framework, termed the SCOPE strategy, integrates passenger insights with expert perspectives to guide the design of seamless, personalized, and empathy-driven airport experiences. Theoretically, this study contributes a validated six-component passenger experience model and demonstrates the utility of IPA in service design for complex transport hubs. Practically, it offers airport authorities a replicable, data-informed roadmap for enhancing emotional engagement, service consistency, and cross-stakeholder collaboration in similarly scaled international airports.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wattanakamolchai et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: