Travel Debate: Quantity vs. Duration

Friends of Go Go Go, please weigh in:

Let’s assume you are a busy businessperson. You have meetings to attend. You have deadlines to meet. You’ve got a finite amount of time you can use to travel in any given year, and there are some seasons when you just have to stay put. (Let’s say, for example, that you’re in the education business and so summers are completely ridiculously off-limits for town-leaving.)

Is it better to go on one big, long trip or multiple shorter trips?

Again, just as an example: you can take ten days off in a given year. You could go on one two-week trip to Argentina, or you could do a roadtrip up the California coast for a week and a long weekend in New Orleans and a long weekend in New York. Which is better? One long, elaborate, intense experience or several smaller, easier breaks?

Sometimes there are right answers to questions on Go Go Go. This isn’t one of those times. My personal preference, of course, is BOTH. But my budget line item for travel, at least in years past, is ridiculous. I want an international two weeks plus at least two domestic long weekends away every year. But it’s not always possible. So which do you choose, and why?


2 thoughts on “Travel Debate: Quantity vs. Duration

  1. Multiple shorter trips! Studies have shown (don’t ask me to find them, try google) that people are actually happier while planning their trips than while actually on vacation. So if you take more trips, you have more happy-planning times!

  2. Ohhhh… the people in those studies are not me. I _hate_ the planning and usually don’t until I’m on the plane… My response to the original question is/are: a) yep, both. and b) find a way to travel with/for work. Scout out conferences, meet-ups, volunteer for any going-anywhere thing, and then tag on a day or two there… (sent from a for-work conference in Singapore…)

Comments are closed.