TTRA Reflections

As we enter the new year, the question on every destination marketer’s mind is when the tourism industry will recover from COVID-19, and what that recovery will look like. 

To help answer that question, we were joined by two digital marketing experts from Simpleview, Aaron Nissen, Director of Digital Strategy, and Paul McLeod, Director of Analytics. Simpleview is a leading provider of integrated marketing solutions in the tourism industry, and Aaron and Paul joined us on a recent webinar to share insights and analytics from Simpleview’s 900+ customers around the world, and to offer their tips for destinations as we look to the year ahead.  

As it stands, there are still several obstacles in the road to a full recovery. Cases are surging across the nation, and while news of a vaccine provides hope, many would-be travelers are still wary of the risks presented by leisure travel at this time. 

Top factors preventing people from taking a trip in 2021:

• 60% concerned about spreading/ or contracting the virus. 
• 46% concerned about travel restrictions in their destinations of interest. 
• 42% are unsure about healthy & safety protocols. 

However, the good news is that 58% of travelers are optimistic about the return of travel after the vaccine is widely distributed in the spring and summer of 2021, giving us good reason to believe that travel numbers will continue to rise in Q3 and Q4 of next year. Additionally, pent up demand for travel could result in a travel boom later next year. 

During the webinar, Aaron and Paul dive deeper into the available insights from U.S. Travel, Destinations International, and more sources, identifying key metrics that marketers should keep their eyes on in the new year. 

For weekly forecasting data and more insights on leisure and meetings travel, check out Simpleview’s Data Insights Hub. 

Submitted by: Jade Porterfield, Simpleview

VISIT WEBSITE

The recent tribute to TTRA’s 50th Anniversary from the Journal of Travel Research (JTR) made 22 selected papers available for free to highlight the collective wisdom and forward progress of destination management and marketing research. After perusing the article titles and abstracts, I counted seven that focused on destination image including many of the earlier articles. Understanding destination image is also a critical part of the market research conducted by our state tourism office so my interest
was piqued.

The Measurement of Destination Image: An Empirical Assessment by Charlotte M. Echtner, J.R. Brent Ritchie (April 1993) establishes a conceptual framework for measuring destination image that holds up nearly 30 years later. Through a review of previously conducted studies they identified different aspect of destination image across a spectrum from functional to psychological characteristics, specific attributes to the gestalt of a place, and common versus unique. The article continues to detail refinements to methodology like developing good attribute lists, asking the right open-ended questions (a relatively new approach at the time), using the correct scale, and analyzing the data all of which made me thankful for the many TTRA partners that are experts in putting this theory into practice!

This article is a great example of adding rigor to evolving research methodologies, which is at the core of TTRA’s mission to improve the travel industry by supporting quality tourism research. There was definite
value to me in thinking through the conceptual framework and applying to current research projects. Thanks to JTR for highlighting the collaborative work done by the TTRA community and making this resource available to all of us!

Sumitted by: Nate Gieryn Travel Texas

Editor Note: The study the author is reflecting upon is available free to the public until September 2021 as a part of the Tribute to TTRA’s 50th anniversary from the Journal of Travel Research.

VISIT WEBSITE
DOWNLOAD PDF

The promotion of destinations at the regional level has a long history, with one of the first tourist boards established in Switzerland in 1864 (Laesser, 2000; Pike, 2007). Until the 1960s, these tourist boards, tourism authorities or Convention and Visitors Bureaux (CVBs) at regional and local levels were predominantly promotion oriented, focusing on booster policies, and often funded to a large extent by the municipality or region. As tourism started to grow exponentially in the second half of that century, these organizations proliferated in every part of the world. However, the demands placed on them also increased, although government funding was reduced or even cut completely as neoliberalist policies took hold.  

Now more generally referred to as Destination Marketing Organizations (DMOs), these bodies were confronted with the need to reinvent themselves numerous times in order to remain competitive in an increasingly mature market where experiential differentiation has become key and markets themselves are dynamic and heterogenous. Although these DMOs usually have no direct control over the products they represent, nor the packaged offerings of intermediaries such as airlines, tour wholesalers, and travel agencies, they are held accountable for the performance of the destination, usually measured in terms of arrivals, revenues and length of stay. The number of stakeholders has also increased ranging from politicians to host community residents, to visitors, diverse local businesses, and travel intermediaries – all of which have different expectations of their DMO. Add to this the rapid evolution in information and communications technology (ICT) and the challenges, especially for smaller, less sophisticated and well funded DMOs, becomes almost overwhelming.  

It is in this context that Gretzel, Fesenmaier, Formica and O’Leary hosted a mixture of focus groups and expert panels with industry experts in 2002, aiming for deep-level collective learning. Searching for the Future: Challenges Faced by Destination Marketing Organizations, published in 2006, identified six major challenges:  

1. Adapting to technological change; 
2. Managing expectations; 
3. From destination marketing to destination management; 
4. Confronting new levels of competition; 
5. Recognizing creative partnering as the new way of life; and  
6. Finding new measures of success.  

Although focused on DMOs in the USA, these findings confirmed earlier work conducted in Europe by members of the Institute for Systemic Management and Public Governance in St. Gallen, Switzerland. The strategies proposed, namely the careful assessment of which technologies to adopt and why, managing knowledge networks and embracing coopetition, and adopting master developer thinking (i.e. the DMO not only helping to shape the destination plan but also being involved in its implementation), are still valid although the specifics have seen fundamental changes over the intervening years.  

As DMOs face very different post-COVID realities, it is time for yet another reset in how they are structured and funded as well as the types of activities they engage in and with whom. 

Submitted by:  Marion Joppe  University of Guelph

Sources:

Beritelli, P., Reuter, E. & Bazzi, D. (2012). Innotour Projekt Nr.401 Schlussbericht “Destinationsstrukturen der 3. Generation – Der Anschluss zum Markt”, Institute for Systemic Management and Public Governance, St. Gallen, CH. 

Laesser, C. (2000). Implementing destination structures: Experiences with Swiss cases. In M. Manete & M. Cerato (eds), From Destination to Destination Marketing and Management (pp. 111–126). Venice: CISET. 

Pike, S. (2007). Destination Marketing Organisations. Routledge. 

VISIT WEBSITE
DOWNLOAD PDF

When Youcheng Wang and Zheng Xiang published Toward a Theoretical Framework of Collaborative Destination Marketing in 2007 the tourism industry faced twin challenges of a segmented industry and increased global competition. With many different voices fighting to capture the attention of potential visitors a solution was needed to maximize the impact and effectiveness of tourism destination marketing. Collaboration among industry stakeholders was a such a solution and Wang and Xiang’s Propose Framework for Destination Marketing Alliance Formation provided a roadmap to plan for and implement successful collaborations. 

Wang and Xiang recognized there were many theories that predict successful collaboration – yet none fully addressed the complexity of the tourism industry and the challenge of destination marketing. So, they developed the Proposed Framework for Destination Marketing Alliance Formation to accommodate the tourism industry’s unique needs such as engaging a diverse network of stakeholders and implementing dynamic strategies to market destinations.   

The framework outlines preconditions and motivations for collaboration in the tourism industry along with the stages of the collaboration process. The framework also includes three crucial elements which facilitate the process, communication, trust, and commitment. Additionally, Wang and Xiang identify the outcomes of collaboration which include: strategy realization, organization learning, and social capital building. 

These three outcomes are what stood out to me in reading this article as they not only address the destination marketing challenges the industry had to address in 2007– segmentation, increasing competition – but the destination management challenges the industry contends with today. As we navigate uncharted territory to determine how best to ensure the well-being of our destination residents, tourism employees, industry partners, and visitors there is never a more important time to create successful collaborations that will help our industry thrive through these current challenges and be more resilient to those in the future. 

Submitted by:  Whitney Knollenberg   Parks, Recreation & Tourism Management North Carolina State University

Editor Note: The study the author is reflecting upon is available free to the public until September 2021 as a part of the Tribute to TTRA’s 50th anniversary from the Journal of Travel Research.

VISIT WEBSITE
DOWNLOAD PDF

At the start of 2020, those in the tourism industry felt invincible. Worldwide travel had shown growth for the past 10 years and was expected to increase another 4 percent in 2020. There seemed to be enough tourist for everyone, and destinations worried little about maintaining a competitive advantage. However, the global pandemic shut the tap to the endless flow of visitors. Here in Hawai‘i, as with many destinations we now wait for interest in travel to return. However, we also have been given a bit of time to take stock and reset. 

We know that as tourism recovers, over the next few years, there will be high competition by destinations for the limited number of travelers. We also are now aware that destinations need to address competitive advantages that could weather future shocks. So before stimulating demand to get out of this crisis, destinations must work to strengthen and develop a range of destination attributes. 

I am currently working with the Hawai‘i Tourism Authority and other local organizations in a community lead process to rebuild and enhance the destination to be competitive once the travel situation improves. With limits to resources, not only do will we need to listen to communities and their desires but also pay attention to attributes that would have the greatest impact. 

I found this paper, Destination Competitiveness: An Analysis of Determinant Attributes, Geoffrey I. Crouch, to be an excellent resource to take stock of critical destination attributes while conducting our planning process. The author makes us aware of 10 determinate attributes that were identified in the study. He makes us think beyond the naturally endowed components of climate and geography and our reliance on branding and positioning activities to capture the interests of visitors.  

We have the time now to address the more difficult areas to improve such as world class infrastructure and accessibility. Success will also be dependent on how well Hawai‘i “creates and deploys resources such as culture and history, the quality of its tourism superstructure, the creation and hosting of special events, a thriving entertainment sector, and the development of a broad mix of recreation and tourism activities.” 

Submitted by:  Daniel Nahoopii   SMS Research 

Editor Note: The study the author is reflecting upon is available free to the public until September 2021 as a part of the Tribute to TTRA’s 50th anniversary from the Journal of Travel Research.

VISIT WEBSITE
DOWNLOAD PDF

Often in tourism we are very distracted by the shiny and the new.  So as part of TTRA’s 50th anniversary, it has been not only enormous fun to go back over articles from the Journal of Travel Research over that time but an important reminder that the past still has a great deal to teach us. 

It was a hard choice on which paper to review. But I chose to look at Ekinci and Hosany’s 2006 consideration of how valid it is to apply brand personality to tourism destinations and whether using the lens of brand personality does provide a useful way to drive behaviours.  It’s particularly interesting to do that in the age of Byron Sharp’s How Brands Grow with a focus on distinctiveness via assets as a key driving factor for brands. 

This wide-ranging paper provides a great general introduction to the concept of brand personality and its role in destination marketing including considering: 

• The different ratings scales for measuring brand personality including a useful summary of the published measures in the academic literature. In evaluating further, using David Aaker’s Brand Personality Scale is well chosen because of both its thoroughness and its wide recognition. This also provides a useful point of context against broader consumer goods where these scales are more widely used.  It also considers which attributes are most effective within this and finds that there are 3 core attributes: sincerity, excitement, and conviviality.  These are particularly valid for the type of beach holidays it measures (and is honest that this might need to be reconsidered for other types of experiences. It also provides some tantalising glimpses of cross-cultural relevance of measures in the literature review.  The paper seems to indicate that whilst some variation exists, there are generally a core of measures that can be used across different cultures which would be useful ‘enough’ for those of us in more applied research.  
• Whether there are useful distinctions between brand personality and brand image.  Its conclusions support the importance of considering brand personality as a distinct element within brand image and will thus be useful for any tourism researcher who has faced this question 
• Whether affective or cognitive image is a more effective measure for brand personality.  Both are seen to be valid, although affective seems to have a stronger impact in terms of the measured outcomes. 
• The impact of brand personality on willingness to advocate for a destination.  This for me was the crux of the paper and the paper showed evidence that a stronger brand personality does increase the likelihood of advocacy.   

Initially I was disappointed by the focus on advocacy over choice and on short haul ‘sun’ holidays, this actually proved to be a strength of the paper for me.   

Advocacy remains a key driver of destination choice and it one where the decision to advocate is a far simpler one than that of destination choice making it easier to understand the effects.  

Similarly, short haul sun destinations are often ones where there is a high degree of substitutability. This makes the value of identifying a role for brand personality greater. 

So revisiting this paper really provided some useful validation of my own practice – and passion for the role of brand personality. 

It also fueled my interest to explore further the archives of Journal of Travel Research. Often I tend to focus on more recent papers, so a reminder to self to check older documents was a valuable reminder. 

Submitted by:  Carolyn Childs    MyTravelResearch.com

Editor Note: The study the author is reflecting upon is available free to the public until September 2021 as a part of the Tribute to TTRA’s 50th anniversary from the Journal of Travel Research.

VISIT WEBSITE
DOWNLOAD PDF