An image worth a thousand words? Expressions of stakeholder identity perspectives in place image descriptions

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to explore how place identity can be expressed in residents’ place image descriptions, addressing differences and similarities in place identity expressions between residents’ descriptions of the image of their place and the image of the place as described to others. Design/methodology/approach In-depth interviews were conducted with residents of a Swedish city. Place image descriptions were analyzed through thematic analysis. Findings Different types of identity perspectives manifest in the place image descriptions of residents. Respondents’ associations reflect place, person and social group identity perspectives, including their own perspective as residents, but also as visitors, or a combination of both. Priming is needed when gathering place image perceptions, to establish which underlying identity perspective is expressed. Research limitations/implications This study offers a Nordic perspective on the organic communication of place image. The scope and qualitative nature of this study is a limitation to its generalizability but also suggests a rich ground for future cross-cultural studies on the topic. Practical implications Results point to the importance of accurately formulating questions to catch stakeholders’ place image. Insights are offered into how stakeholders communicate Nordic place image perceptions when engaging in communication about a place and into the effects of identity on organic place brand communication. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is among the first to explore how key stakeholders’ lenses to interpret a place brand are activated in the communication of place image, and how this influences their descriptions of the place.

Let's stay together – The mediating role of self-congruity and place attachment on residents' likelihood to stay

“…First, the study confirms the importance of understanding the complex place image of residents to capture positive and negative place attributes, to identify strong selling points and actions needed to retain residents (Ragusa, 2022;Strandberg & Ek Styvén, 2021;Stylidis, Belhassen, & Shani, 2015). Failure to take into account the perspective of residents leads to a practitioner-stakeholder perception gap (Peighambari, Sattari, Foster, & Wallström, 2016), image communication incongruent with residents' perceptions (Palmer et al, 2013), and serious negative implications for sustainable place development (Stylidis et al, 2015).…”

“…This could explain why previous research found a link between identifying as a resident of a city and place commitment (Tournois & Rollero, 2019), while the current study shows no direct effect of self-congruity on likelihood to stay. This finding emphasizes the difference between personal and social identification with a place (Strandberg & Ek Styvén, 2021) and highlights the importance of careful consideration of which construct to apply when operationalizing identification with a place. The current findings suggest that different facets of self-congruity are not interchangeable, that focusing on only a specific facet of congruity may bias the results, and that self-congruity with both the place image/itself (Droseltis & Vignoles, 2010), its brand personality (Wassler & Hung, 2015), and its users (Sirgy & Su, 2000) may well be antecedents of an overall place self-congruity construct.…”

“…Capturing negative perceptions and unmet place needs provides a basis for relevant investment priorities and corrective actions, which can reduce negative perceptions, enable residents to feel heard, and enhance the place image (Braun et al, 2013;Hereźniak & Anders-Morawska, 2021). Actively collecting data on residents' place image perceptions, for example digitally though crowdsourcing (Hereźniak, 2017), can better capture their place image perceptions (Strandberg & Ek Styvén, 2021). Thereby, place managers can achieve better targeting, content, and wording of communication campaigns (Rozhkov & Skriabina, 2015) and enhance the positive place image when designing communication campaigns aimed towards resident retention (Hankinson, 2004;Nene et al, 2009).…”

“…The place image reflects the recipient, or outcome, perspective of the place branding; the set of beliefs, ideas, and impressions that people have of the place, stemming from lived experiences and place branding activities (Kavaratzis & Ashworth, 2005). To design successful place branding it is vital to properly capture and reflect residents' perceived place image in place brand communication (Strandberg & Ek Styvén, 2021). A positive place image among residents is considered key to a range of place-related behavioral outcomes, such as satisfaction, commitment, and attachment to a place (Schroeder, 1996;Tournois & Rollero, 2019).…”