The politics of destination marketing

Abstract

Purpose -Destination Management Organisations (DMOs) are very much a part of the Scottish tourism landscape in 2011. Some regional tourism stakeholders have created DMOs to manage their respective regional attractions, but until now, this has not been the case with north-east Scotland. As a prelude to the potential creation of a regional DMO, the purpose of this paper is to empirically evaluate tourism business leaders' attitudes and likely acceptance of the DMO's structure and functions. Design/methodology/approach -The Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode (TKCM) was utilised to provide an evaluative framework, with discussion of the assertiveness versus cooperativeness needs of tourism business stakeholders in the region. The TKCM's measurement instrument was utilised along with a purpose-built questionnaire to gather information about tourism leaders' interaction orientations and their level of support for the formation of a DMO, its structure and functions. Findings -Tourism leaders in north-east Scotland are collaboration-oriented. Initial findings indicate that on balance, tourism businesses (as expressed by their managers/owners) are persuaded by the attractiveness of collaboration at an integrated regional level, but would nevertheless prefer a certain degree of competition. In addition, organisational size and membership of existing destination management networks appear to moderate the interaction choice preference. Research limitations/implications -First, the scale and questionnaire instrument developed to test attitudes toward a DMO formation have not been exhaustively evaluated, nor have the potential moderating factors been comprehensively assessed. A more robust and validated scale should be developed and moderators clearly modelled. Second, current sample size is limited and may not provide an adequate basis for generalisation. In future, a larger sample should be employed. Finally, this research is exploratory in scope, and future research, designed along an evaluative and analytical basis, is encouraged. Practical implications -Collaboration within a new DMO in marketing to new markets and the support for this is not challenged, but some competition among tourism providers will continue. It is likely that the disparity between tourism performance in the city and rural areas will continue in the near future. The role of the DMO will therefore involve enlarging the customer base and raising the tourism profiles of both city and rural locations, in order to create a level playing field. Originality/value -This research is the first to utilise the TKCM and Instrument to assess tourism business leaders' assertiveness versus cooperativeness orientations, prior to the initiation of an alliance in a region. The paper shows that this approach holds viability for future research in this direction, especially the potential of TKCM as a predictive framework for interorganisational interaction and collaboration.

Engaging Destination Stakeholders in the Digital Era: The Best Practice of Italian Regional DMOs

“…The combination of these exploratory insights shows that the best performers with regard to online destination stakeholder engagement (e.g., Puglia) are not necessarily also the best at off-line stakeholder engagement, and vice versa: different regional Italian DMOs are using different advanced applications and tools to reconcile and represent the interests of diverse public and private stakeholders in destination management and marketing (Atorough & Martin, 2012; March & Wilkinson, 2008; Quinlan et al, 2013). In particular, over all four of the eight DMOs are capitalizing on e-democratic destination platforms (Liguria and Puglia) and participatory off-line decision making (Trentino, South Tyrol) to enable destination value cocreation (Cabiddu et al, 2013) and improve competitive advantage (Hays et al, 2013).…”

“…DMOs play a significant role in destination stakeholder engagement by reconciling the interests of, requests from, and benefits to, multiple destination stakeholders. Various networks of regional institutions and public and private stakeholders contribute to set DMO institutional mechanisms and/or (in)formal processes to legitimize political power, share authority and responsibility for destination decision making, and balance interests and possible conflicts (Atorough & Martin, 2012; March & Wilkinson, 2008; Quinlan, Lally, & O’Donovan, 2013).…”

“…Since 2001, Italian tourism management policy has been decided at the regional level. However, few regions have developed DMOs which operate independently from regional government (Atorough & Martin, 2012; March & Wilkinson, 2008; Quinlan et al, 2013). Marketing and promotional activities, including official websites, are still mostly run by regional governments (Mariani et al, 2016); the Italian State Tourist Board markets the country abroad, but has not yet fully exploited social media (Hays et al, 2013).…”

The Impact Of Social Factors On The Sustainable Development Of Rural Tourism

“…(Törn et al, 2009), (De Souza et al, 2008), (Cunha, 2010). According to (Atorough & Martin, 2012), the challenge of a tourism region is to provide economic benefits that will extend to the peripheral communities (rural destinations). This view is shared by (Munar, 2011) that the destination brand and marketing of a tourism destination has to take into consideration diverse groups of stakeholders' interests and peculiar nature of the host destination.…”

The importance of being local: prioritizing knowledge in recruitment for destination development

“…According to the community model of destination organization (Flagestad and Hope, 2001), a destination management organization should be at the centre of the collaboration, mediating and harmonizing relationships so that strategies meet the objectives of the stakeholders. In one sense, conflict is inherent in such collaborations because the actors involved are competing for the same resources and the same customers (Wilson et al, 2001;Svensson et al, 2005;Altorough and Martin, 2012). Therefore, latent conflicts need to be predicted and handled, and management needs the ability to act both diplomatically and efficiently.…”