Research
www.parkworld-online.com
Nobody likes to wait! M
Researchers using science to improve queues
illions of people are travelling to their vacations and many those will be going to theme parks. Places like Disney World will be packed with
visitors, causing long lines that are unavoidable. Researchers Wenbo Wu and Mark Leung in The University of Texas at San Antonio (UTSA) Department of Management Science and Statistics and undergraduate Dayanira Mendoza studied theme park queue lines and different approaches to reduce standard waiting times. “This research demonstrates the value and importance of
Wenbo Wu, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Management Science and Statistics
data analytics as a powerful tool in improving tourists experience in theme parks,” said Wu. “The data mining and visualisation help to catch insightful patterns in waiting times for Disney attractions and after cleaning and transforming massive raw data, the analytical models will allow Disney to formulate effective strategies from the perspective of operations management.” Amusement parks have introduced different approaches to
reduce standard waiting times. Some are at no extra cost to guests while others require a price premium. These approaches usually feature a variety of strategies allowing guests to bypass the standard waiting line or enter an express lane featuring a minimal wait. Using multiple regression analysis and a data set from 2012 to 2018, the researchers developed a statistical model that allowed them to predict the expected average daily waiting times at Disney’s Orlando theme parks. They also identified factors that affect waiting times for the
Mark Leung, Ph.D., Department Chair and Associate Professor of Management Science and Statistics
parks’ most popular attractions. Overall, the researchers studied a sample of 13 rides (attractions) over 17 seasons to build their models. The research provided statistical guidance on seasonal differences in waiting times while allowing the researchers to predict the average waiting time for any given attraction depending on the season. The research suggested that popularity is dependent upon the season of the year. December is the peak season. September the low season. In March, June, July and August, waiting times are longer during the weekdays than on the weekends. In the other months, the opposite is true.
68 SEPTEMBER 2019 The UTSA study also showed that the most popular
attractions at the Magic Kingdom, Animal Kingdom, Epcot and Hollywood Studios are, respectively, Seven Dwarfs Mine Train, Avatar Flight of Passage, Soarin’ Around the World and Slinky Dog Dash. “Theme park operators such as Disney can use the
outcomes from predictive analytics to innovate new or enhance existing operations” said Leung. “The results also provide guidance on more effective waiting system design, capacity planning, manpower and ride scheduling as well as revenue management. As a consequence, better service operations will lead to higher customer satisfaction.” In addition to providing actionable data, the research
project has given Mendoza, a Mathematics major, the opportunity to study data analysis in a practical environment. "Having the opportunity to do this research has
broadened my experience in time management, since I already have a full work schedule as a secondary math teacher,” she said. “I also learned new techniques and incorporated knowledge that I acquired my coursework to gain a full understanding of how data analysis works.” Those who would like to obtain a copy of the research
may use this link:
https://business.utsa.edu/wp- content/uploads/2019/07/20190708-Predicting-the- Expected-Waiting-Time-of-Popular-Attractions-in-Walt-Disney- World-Final.pdf.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104
