Proposal

AN INVESTIGATION OF PROBLEMS IN ENGLISH

ORAL COMMUNICATION AMONG STAFF AT
CHAMPANAKHONE TOUR COMPANY

Written by: Miss Siphai DUANGBOUBPHA

Batch: I

A Research Final Project Proposal Submitted in Partial

Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of Bachelor of
Education

Department of English
Faculty of Education

Champasak University
February, 2026
 AN INVESTIGATION OF PROBLEMS IN ENGLISH
ORAL COMMUNICATION AMONG STAFF AT
CHAMPANAKHONE TOUR COMPANY

Written by: Miss Siphai DUANGBOUBPHA

………………………………

A Research Project Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements of the Degree of Bachelor of Education

Supervisor: Ms. Thiphachanh NOUTHAPHONE

…………………………
Assistance advisor: Ms. Phonethip THONGXAYASY

………………………...

Department of English
Faculty of Education

Champasak University
February, 2026
 1

Chapter 1
Introduction

1.1 Background of the Study

English has become the dominant global language in international communication,
particularly in sectors such as business, education, science, and tourism (Crystal, 2003).
With over 1.5 billion speakers worldwide, English serves as a bridge connecting people
from diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds (Graddol, 2006). In an increasingly
interconnected world, the ability to communicate effectively in English is no longer a
luxury but a necessity, especially in industries that rely heavily on cross-cultural
interaction.
Among these industries, tourism stands out as one of the most language-dependent
sectors. The World Tourism Organization (UNWTO, 2019) reports that international
tourist arrivals have grown consistently over the past decades, reaching over 1.4 billion
annually before the COVID-19 pandemic. As tourism rebounds globally, the demand for
English proficiency among tourism professionals has intensified. English functions as
the primary lingua franca in the tourism industry, enabling communication between
tourists and service providers from different countries (Jenkins, 2015). Tour guides,
hotel staff, and customer service representatives must be able to communicate clearly
and confidently to ensure tourist satisfaction and safety.
In Southeast Asia, tourism is a major economic driver. Countries such as Thailand,
Vietnam, and Laos have witnessed remarkable growth in international arrivals, with
English serving as the main language of interaction in tourist destinations (ASEAN
Tourism Strategic Plan, 2016–2025). For Laos, tourism contributes significantly to the
national GDP and employment, particularly in provinces rich in cultural and natural
heritage, such as Luang Prabang, Vientiane, and Champasak (Ministry of Information,
Culture and Tourism, Lao PDR, 2020). Champasak Province, home to the UNESCO
World Heritage Site of Wat Phou and the scenic Bolaven Plateau, has become an
increasingly popular destination for international tourists. Tour companies in this region,
including Champanakhone, play a crucial role in shaping tourists’ experiences and
perceptions of Lao culture and hospitality.
 2

However, despite the growing importance of English in tourism, many tour company
staff in Laos face significant challenges in oral communication. Oral communication—
defined as the real-time, spoken exchange of information—is fundamental to the
tourism profession (Hargie, 2011). Unlike written communication, oral interaction
requires immediate responses, active listening, cultural sensitivity, and the ability to
handle unpredictable situations (Brown, 2019). Tour guides and front-line staff must not
only provide factual information about tourist sites but also engage in spontaneous
conversations, answer diverse questions, manage complaints, and build rapport with
visitors from different cultural backgrounds (Hsu & Lin, 2020).
Research shows that many tourism professionals struggle with various aspects of
English oral communication. Common problems include difficulties with pronunciation,
limited vocabulary (especially tourism-specific terminology), grammatical inaccuracies,
slow processing speed, and psychological barriers such as language anxiety and lack of
confidence (Horwitz, 2017; Wang, 2022). These difficulties can lead to communication
breakdowns, misunderstandings, and a decline in service quality, which may result in
negative reviews, reduced tourist satisfaction, and damage to the company’s reputation
(Li et al., 2018; Zhang & Chen, 2021).
Several factors contribute to these oral communication challenges. Educational
background plays a significant role; many tourism workers in Laos have limited access
to quality English education or specialized training in English for Specific Purposes
(ESP) in tourism (Phommalangsy, 2019). Additionally, the lack of opportunities for real-
world practice, insufficient workplace training programs, and the influence of the native
language (Lao) on English pronunciation and grammar further compound the problem
(Xayavong & Savada, 2020). Psychological factors, such as fear of making mistakes
and low self-confidence, also hinder effective communication, even among those with
adequate linguistic knowledge (Keomany, 2018; Kim & Lee, 2020).
While previous studies have explored English proficiency challenges among tour
guides and hospitality staff in major Lao cities such as Vientiane and Luang Prabang,
there remains a significant gap in research focusing on tour company staff in other
regions, particularly in Champasak Province. Moreover, most existing studies have
focused on general language proficiency rather than the specific oral communication
problems encountered in real-world tourism contexts. There is also limited research that
integrates both linguistic and psychological factors affecting communication
 3

performance or that proposes actionable, context-specific solutions tailored to the needs

of local tour companies.
This study seeks to address these gaps by investigating the English oral
communication problems among staff at Champanakhone, a tour company in
Champasak Province. By identifying the specific challenges these staff members face,
examining the factors that contribute to these difficulties, and proposing practical
solutions, this research aims to contribute to the improvement of English
communication skills in the Lao tourism sector. Ultimately, enhancing the oral
communication abilities of tourism staff will lead to better service quality, increased
tourist satisfaction, and sustainable growth for the tourism industry in Champasak and
beyond.
1.2 Problem Statement
As international tourism continues to expand globally, the demand for Fluent English-
speaking staff in the tourism industry has increased Significantly. English serves as the
primary lingua franca in tourism, enabling communication between service providers
and international visitors from diverse linguistic backgrounds (Jenkins, 2015). In
Champasak Province Laos, tourism plays a vital role in the local economy, with
destinations Such as Wat Phou UNESCO World Heritage Site and the Bolaven Plateau
attracting thousands of international tourists annually (Ministry of Information, culture
and tourism, Lao PDR, 2020). Tour companies like Champanakhone are at the forefront
of delivering tourism services and shaping visitors’ experiences of Lao culture and
hospitality.
However, a significant gap exists between the required English language Skills and
the actual oral communication performance of tour company Employees. Many staff
members struggle with multiple aspects of English Oral communication, including
fluency, pronunciation, vocabulary range, Grammatical accuracy, and the ability to
respond spontaneously to tourist Inquiries (Zhang & Chen, 2021). These difficulties
manifest in concrete Ways during daily work interactions:
First, pronunciation problems create barriers to mutual understanding. Research in
similar contexts shows that tour guides in Southeast Asia frequently experience
difficulties with English phonemes that do not exist in their native languages, leading to
miscommunication even when the Intended message is grammatically correct
(Phommalangsy, 2019). When Tourists cannot understand staff members’ spoken
 4

English, they may become Frustrated, seek assistance elsewhere, or form negative
impressions of the service quality.
Second, limited vocabulary—particularly tourism-specific terminology Related to
cultural heritage, geography, cuisine, and local customs—Restricts staff members’
ability to provide comprehensive and engaging Information. Brown & Richards (2020)
found that 65% of tourism workers In Thailand struggled with technical vocabulary,
forcing them to rely on oversimplified explanations or avoid certain topics altogether.
This Limitation reduces the educational and cultural value of tours and diminishes the
overall tourist experience.
Third, many staff members face challenges in processing and responding to
spontaneous questions from tourists. Unlike scripted presentations, real-world tourist
interactions require quick thinking, active listening, and the ability to handle unexpected
inquiries on diverse topics ranging from historical facts to practical travel advice
(Nguyen & Tran, 2019). When staff members lack the linguistic confidence or
processing speed to engage in such exchanges, communication breakdowns occur,
leading to Incomplete information, tourist confusion, or missed opportunities for
meaningful cultural exchange.
Fourth, psychological barriers such as language anxiety, fear of making mistakes, and
lack of self-confidence significantly hinder oral communication performance, even
among staff members who possess adequate grammatical knowledge (Abdullah &
Hassan, 2018; Xayavong & Savada, 2020). Research indicates that over 60% of
hospitality staff in Vientiane experienced high language anxiety when handling
international tourist complaints or complex conversations. This anxiety can lead to
avoidance behaviors, reluctance to initiate conversations, or excessively formal and
unnatural speech patterns that create social distance with tourists.
The consequences of these oral communication difficulties are far-reaching and
multifaceted. At the organizational level, poor communication affects the company’s
reputation and competitiveness. Tourists who experience communication problems are
more likely to leave negative reviews on platforms such as TripAdvisor, Google
Reviews, or social media, which can deter future customers and reduce bookings (Li et
al., 2018). Communication breakdowns may also lead to misunderstandings about tour
schedules, safety instructions, or cultural etiquette, potentially resulting in service
failures or safety risks.
 5

At the individual level, ongoing communication struggles contribute to work-related

stress, diminished job satisfaction, and limited career advancement opportunities for
staff members (Kim & Lee, 2020). Employees who feel unable to communicate
effectively may experience decreased motivation, reduced professional self-esteem, and
reluctance to take on customer-facing responsibilities that could enhance their career
development.
Despite the critical importance of English oral communication in tourism, there is
limited understanding of the specific problems faced by tour company staff in
Champasak Province. While previous studies have examined English proficiency
challenges among tourism workers in Luang Prabang and Vientiane (Phommalangsy,
2019; Xayavong & Savada, 2020), no systematic research has been conducted on tour
company staff in this region. Furthermore, existing studies often focus on general
language proficiency rather than the Furthermore oral communication difficulties
encountered in real-world tourism contexts.
Additionally, there is insufficient evidence regarding the factors that contribute to
these communication challenges in the local context. Without identifying whether the
root causes lie in inadequate formal education, insufficient workplace training, lack of
practical speaking opportunities, psychological barriers, or a combination of these
factors, it is difficult to develop targeted and effective interventions. Generic language
training programs that do not address the specific needs and constraints of tour company
staff are unlikely to produce meaningful improvements in communication performance.
This study therefore addresses a critical gap by systematically investigating the
English oral communication problems among staff at Champanakhone Tour Company.
By identifying the specific types and severity of communication difficulties, examining
the contributing factors, and proposing practical, context-appropriate solutions, this
research aims to provide an empirical foundation for improving staff performance,
enhancing service quality, and supporting the sustainable development of tourism in
Champasak Province.
1.3 Objectives of the Study
1. To identify the English oral communication problems among staff at
Champanakhone.
2. To examine the factors contributing to these communication difficulties.
 6

3. To recommend effective solutions to improve English oral communication of the

staff.
1.4 Research Questions
1. What are the specific English oral communication problems faced by staff at
Champanakhone?
2. What factors contribute to these communication difficulties?
3. What practical solutions can be recommended to improve their English oral
communication skills?
1.5 Significance of the Study
 For Staff at Champanakhone:
This study provides staff members with greater awareness of their specific oral
communication challenges. By identifying the most common problems they face—such
as pronunciation difficulties, limited vocabulary, or language anxiety—staff can gain
insights into areas that need improvement. The findings will also offer practical,
evidence-based recommendations that staff can apply to enhance their English-speaking
skills, boosting their confidence and effectiveness when interacting with international
tourists. Improved communication skills can lead to better job performance, increased
job satisfaction, and greater opportunities for career advancement within the tourism
industry.
 For Managers at Champanakhone:
The study offers managers data-driven insights into the specific English oral
communication gaps among their staff. With clear evidence of the most prevalent
problems and contributing factors, managers can design targeted, in-house training
programs that address real needs rather than relying on generic language courses. This
can lead to more efficient use of training resources, improved staff performance,
enhanced service quality, and ultimately, higher tourist satisfaction and better company
reputation.
 For Educators and Curriculum Developers:
The findings contribute to the development of more relevant and practical English for
Specific Purposes (ESP) curricula tailored to the needs of tourism professionals in Laos.
Educators can use the results to design courses that emphasize oral communication
skills, tourism-specific vocabulary, and real-world conversational practice, thereby
better preparing future tourism workers for the demands of the industry.
 7

 For the Tourism Industry in Champasak and Lao PDR:

By improving the English oral communication skills of tour company staff, this study
supports the broader goal of enhancing service quality in the tourism sector. Better
communication leads to more positive tourist experiences, improved online reviews,
and a stronger destination image. This, in turn, can attract more international visitors,
generate greater economic benefits for local communities, and contribute to the
sustainable development of tourism in Champasak Province and throughout Laos.

Chapter 2
Literature Review

2.1 Previous Research Studies

2.1.1 International Context
Zhang & Chen (2021) conducted a study on oral communication barriers among tour
guides in China. The research identified pronunciation as the most severe barrier, with
78% of participants reporting it as a major issue. This finding justifies the use of
percentage-based analysis (P =(F/N)100) to rank the severity of communication
problems in tourism settings.
Brown & Richards (2020) examined English proficiency challenges among hotel staff
in Thailand. Their study found that 65% of participants struggled with technical
vocabulary related to tourist attractions and local culture. The researchers recommended
incorporating English for Specific Purposes (ESP) training modules to address these
gaps, emphasizing the need for context-specific language education in the tourism
sector.
Nguyen & Tran (2019) investigated communication difficulties among tour guides in
Vietnam. The study reported that 72% of participants experienced difficulty in handling
unexpected questions from tourists due to limited vocabulary range and slow processing
time in English. The researchers emphasized the importance of real-time conversation
practice and the development of strategic competence to manage unpredictable
interactions.
Abdullah & Hassan (2018) explored communication barriers among Malaysian
tourism workers. The study found that 58% of respondents cited lack of confidence as
 8

the primary obstacle, even among those with formal English education. This finding
highlights the critical role of psychological factors—such as language anxiety and self-
esteem—in oral communication performance, suggesting that effective training
programs must address both linguistic and affective dimensions.

2.1.2 Lao PDR Context

Phommalangsy (2019) conducted a study on English communication challenges
among tour guides in Luang Prabang. The research found that 68% of participants
struggled significantly with L1-influenced pronunciation (Lao accent interference) and
specialized English terms related to Buddhism and history. This high percentage
underscores the need for targeted linguistic support that addresses phonological transfer
issues and the development of field-specific vocabulary for cultural and historical
tourism.
Xayavong & Savada (2020) investigated language anxiety and communication
difficulties among hospitality staff in Vientiane. The study reported that over 60% of
staff experienced “high language anxiety” when handling international tourist
complaints or engaging in complex conversations. Using frequency distribution
analysis, the researchers demonstrated that psychological factors are a major barrier to
fluency, even when staff possess adequate grammatical knowledge. The study
recommended integrating anxiety-reduction techniques and confidence-building
activities into training programs.
Keomany (2018) identified a significant “education-job gap” among tourism
graduates in Laos. The research found that 75% of surveyed tourism graduates felt that
their formal education did not provide enough practical oral English training. While
university programs often emphasize reading and grammar, they tend to neglect
speaking and listening skills, which are essential for real-world tourism work. This
quantitative gap suggests that tour company staff require more focus on communicative
competence and hands-on language practice rather than traditional, grammar-centered
instruction.
2.2 Factors Affecting English Oral Communication
The literature suggests that communication proficiency is influenced by individual
factors and organizational factors.
2.2.1 Individual Factors
 Educational Background:
 9

Zhang & Chen (2021) in “Oral Communication Barriers Among Tour Guides in
China” found pronunciation problems linked to limited phonetics training. Brown &
Richards (2020) in “English Proficiency Challenges Among Hotel Staff in Thailand”
showed ESP training gaps led to vocabulary struggles.
 Work Experience:
Nguyen & Tran (2019) in “Communication Difficulties Among Tour Guides in
Vietnam” found less experienced guides had slower processing speeds.
 Psychological Factors:
Abdullah & Hassan (2018) in “Communication Barriers Among Malaysian
Tourism Workers” reported 58% cited lack of confidence as the primary barrier.
2.2.2 Organizational Factors
 Training and Exposure:
Brown & Richards (2020) found regular ESP training improved performance.
Nguyen & Tran (2019) noted frequent tourist interaction enhanced fluency.
Anderson (2021) in “Workplace Language Learning in the Tourism Industry”
emphasized supportive workplace environments foster language development.
 10

Chapter 3
Research Methodology

3.1 Research setting

This study uses a descriptive quantitative design. This approach is selected to
systematically describe the English oral communication problems by quantifying the
frequency of occurrence among tour company staff. The data will be analyzed to show
the prevalence of specific barriers in terms of percentages.
3.2 Research Participants
3.2.1 Population
All staff members at Champanakhone Tour Company in Pakse City, Champasak
Province, who have job responsibilities involving direct interaction with international
tourists.
3.2.2 Participants
Approximately 15-20 participants will be selected using purposive Sampling based
on the following inclusion criteria:
Inclusion Criteria:
 Full-time or regular part-time staff members at Champanakhone Tour Company
 Job responsibilities require direct interaction with international Tourists
 Have worked at the company for at least three months
 Voluntarily agree to participate in the study
The sample will be purposefully selected to ensure representation across different
job positions, including tour guides, customer service representatives, and
supervisors/coordinators. The exact sample size will be determined after initial
consultation with company management to identify all eligible staff members.
 Justification for Sampling Method:
Purposive sampling is appropriate for this study because it allows the researcher to
deliberately select information-rich participants who have substantial experience with
English oral commexperience challenges in their daily work. This method ensures that
the sample includes staff members who are most directly affected by the research
problem and can provide meaningful data to answer the research questions (Etikan et
al., 2016).
 11

 Justification for Sample Size:

A sample size of 15-20 participants is sufficient for a descriptive quantitative study
focusing on a single organization. According to Creswell & Creswell (2018), purposive
sampling in organizational studies typically includes 15-30 participants when the goal is
to describe and understand specific phenomena within a bounded context.
3.3 Research Instruments
The primary instrument is a structured questionnaire, divided into three parts:
Part 1: Demographic Information (age, gender, educational background, years of
experience in tourism)
Part 2: Frequency of English oral communication problems. This part consists of 15-20
items covering four key linguistic areas:
 Pronunciation
 Fluency
 Vocabulary and Grammar
 Listening comprehension.
The items are presented in a 5-point Likert scale (5-point Likert scale: 1 = Never, 2 =
Rarely, 3 = Sometimes, 4 = Often, 5 = Always)
Part 3: Factors affecting communication and suggested solutions (checklist format)
3.4 Data Collection Procedures
The researcher designed method to appropriate for data collection, which is
subsequently reviewed by advisor to receive appropriate feedback and enhance the
quality of the questionnaire. Following this, researcher seeks a permission letter from
Champasack University, which is then forwarded to Champanakhone tour company.
The questionnaire is distributed to the intended participants, who are given a period of
one week to complete it. After this timeframe, the researcher compiles and summarizes
the responses. The gathered information is analyzed, organized into
tables, and prepared for further reporting in the findings and
discussion chapters.
3.5 Data Analysis
To process the data collected from the sample of 15 to 20 participants (N= 15-20), the
researcher will employ descriptive statistics for the analysis. The data will be processed
using the following statistical methods:
3.5.1 Percentage
 12

The percentage formula is used to analyze the demographic information of the

participants and the frequency of specific communication problems.

F
P= 100
N
 P = Percentage
 F = Frequency of participants
 N = The number of participants
3.5.2 Mean x
The mean score is used to determine the average level of frequency
for each oral communication problem based on the 5-point Likert scale.
Formula:
Σx
x=
N
x̄ = Mean (average score)
Σx = Sum of all scores
N = Total number of participants
3.5.3 Interpretation of Mean Scores
The mean scores obtained from the Likert scale will be interpreted using the
following criteria to determine the severity and frequency of the communication
problems:
Mean Range Interpretation
4.51 – 5.00 Very High frequency / Strongly Agree
3.51 – 4.50 High frequency / Agree
2.51 – 3.50 Moderate frequency / Neutral
1.51 – 2.50 Low frequency / Disagree
1.00 – 1.50 Very Low frequency / Strongly Disagree

 Source of Interpretation Criteria:

This interpretation scale is adapted from Best & Kahn (2006) in their work Research
in Education (10th ed.), which provides standardized guidelines for interpreting mean
scores from Likert-scale questionnaires in educational and social science research. The
scale is widely used in descriptive quantitative studies to categorize the intensity or
frequency of responses based on calculated mean values
 13

References

Abdullah, M. Y., & Hassan, F. (2018). Communication barriers among Malaysian

tourism workers: The role of confidence and formal education. Journal of
Hospitality and Tourism Management, 35, 72-81.
Anderson, J. (2021). Workplace language learning in the tourism industry. Routledge.
ASEAN Tourism Strategic Plan 2016–2025. (2016). ASEAN cooperation on tourism.
ASEAN Secretariat.
Best, J. W., & Kahn, J. V. (2006). Research in education (10 th ed.). Pearson Education,
Inc.
Brown, H. D. (2019). Principles of language learning and teaching (7 th ed.). Pearson
Education.
Brown, L., & Richards, S. (2020). English proficiency challenges among hotel staff in
Thailand: The need for ESP training. Asia-Pacific Journal of Tourism Research,
25(4), 401-415.
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to
second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1-47.
Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Dudley-Evans, T., & St John, M. J. (1998). Developments in English for specific
purposes. Cambridge University Press.
Graddol, D. (2006). English next: Why global English may mean the end of ‘English as
a Foreign Language’. British Council.
Hargie, O. (2011). Skilled interpersonal communication: Research, theory and practice
(5th ed.). Routledge.
Horwitz, E. K. (1986). Preliminary evidence for the reliability and validity of a foreign
language anxiety scale. TESOL Quarterly, 20(3), 559-562.
Horwitz, E. K. (2017). On the misreading of Horwitz, Horwitz, and Cope (1986) and
the need to balance anxiety research and the experiences of anxious language
learners. In C. Gkonou, M. Daubney, & J.-M. Dewaele (Eds.), New insights
into language anxiety: Theory, research and educational implications (pp. 31-
47). Multilingual Matters.
 14

Hsu, C. H., & Lin, Y. H. (2020). Service quality and tourist satisfaction in the hospitality
industry: The mediating role of communication competence. Tourism
Management Perspectives, 35, 100-112.
Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.),
Sociolinguistics (pp. 269-293). Penguin Books.
Jenkins, J. (2015). Global Englishes: A resource book for students (3rd ed.). Routledge.
Keomany, S. (2018). The education-job gap in tourism English training in Lao PDR.
Journal of Lao Studies, 5(1), 45-62.
Kim, H., & Lee, S. (2020). Language barriers and career development in the tourism
industry: Evidence from Southeast Asia. International Journal of Hospitality
Management, 89, 102-115.
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon
Press.
Leslie, D., & Russell, H. (2006). The importance of foreign language skills in the
tourism sector: A comparative study of student perceptions in the UK and
continental Europe. Tourism Management, 27(6), 1397-1407.
Li, M., Zhang, H., & Cai, L. A. (2018). Service quality perception and tourist
satisfaction: The role of language proficiency. Journal of Travel Research,
57(3), 342-356.
Ministry of Information, Culture and Tourism, Lao PDR. (2020). Tourism statistics
report 2020. Government of Lao PDR.
Nation, I. S. P., & Macalister, J. (2020). Language curriculum design (2 nd ed.).
Routledge.
Nguyen, T. H., & Tran, Q. B. (2019). Communication difficulties among tour guides in
Vietnam: Vocabulary limitations and processing speed. ASEAN Journal of
Hospitality and Tourism, 17(2), 88-102.
Phommalangsy, V. (2019). English pronunciation challenges among tour guides in
Luang Prabang: The impact of L1 interference. Lao Journal of Language and
Culture, 3(2), 34-51.
Tarone, E. (1980). Communication strategies, foreigner talk, and repair in interlanguage.
Language Learning, 30(2), 417-428.
UNWTO. (2019). International tourism highlights, 2019 edition. United Nations World
Tourism Organization.
 15

Wang, Y. (2022). Language anxiety and communication performance among tourism

professionals: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research, 26(5), 812-835.
Xayavong, K., & Savada, P. (2020). Language anxiety among hospitality staff in
Vientiane: Implications for training programs. Journal of Southeast Asian
Education, 12(1), 67-84.
Yule, G. (2020). The study of language (7th ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Zhang, L., & Chen, W. (2021). Pronunciation barriers in English oral communication
among Chinese tour guides. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 21(3), 289-304.