افزایش سهم بازار دولت از طریق یک موقعیت منطقه ای
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|13785||2000||8 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Tourism Management, Volume 21, Issue 1, February 2000, Pages 89–96
State tourism officials need to know more about the nature of in-state and out-of-state visitor characteristics and how actual and potential visitors perceive local destinations. The main objective of this study was to understand Virginia's image as a travel destination versus competitive states in the Mid-Atlantic region of the USA. The regional competitiveness of Virginia as a tourism destination was evaluated by creating a “perceptual map” which reveals the similarities and differences in how 10 states were rated on the 48 destination attributes included in the survey. Results showed that Virginia stands out in the quality of its natural and historical landscape; features shared by many of the surrounding competitive states. Virginia competes with Pennsylvania, North Carolina, West Virginia on natural features and competes with Pennsylvania, Maryland, South Carolina, and Georgia on historic and cultural heritage. Virginia's amenities are well known, but lack emotional impact. Possible marketing strategies would be to give Virginia a stronger emotional image, while building on its strong reputation for quality natural and cultural attractions. It is also important that destination promotional activities focus on differentiating features of places in a regional context so that complementary tourism products within the region can also be developed.
One of the main objectives of destination promotion and competitiveness is to create a new image or reinforce an existing positive image of a place in the minds of travelers. Because of the organic nature of image, some places may need to augment supply resources to match demand and meet traveler expectations, and thus, create an enhanced image of the existing destination resources. Promoting places has never been an easy task for state tourism offices and public agencies. Several destination marketing organizations (DMOs), including convention and visitor bureaus, national and state tourism offices, and local and regional organizations, are all involved in marketing their respective places. Tourism as an experience takes place in destinations and tourists travel to destinations to see attractions, to participate in leisure activities, and to experience new cultures. Places, whether it is a city, state, country or region within a given country, may have the desire and marketing goal to become a recognized destination, remain competitive, and increase visitation market share. Several tourism entities throughout the world have been conducting or funding on a regular basis travel projects that are designed to provide baseline information about travelers and to develop appropriate marketing strategies and management actions. Visitor profile studies, including market assessment of, and demand for tourism destinations are most commonly conducted forms of travel studies, followed by tourism impact and conversion studies. Image and perception studies are sporadic in nature and are usually conducted once every three or five years to evaluate changes in the perception of travelers about destinations. The reason for this is that there is a general belief that images and perceptions of places may not change substantially in the short-run, and changing an existing image or creating a new one takes time. In case of major events such as Olympic games or natural disasters or wars, images of places will easily be reformed and changed quickly. The longitudinal treatments of image and perception studies are also reported (Mihalik & Simonetta, 1999) for monitoring purposes over time (Gartner & Hunt, 1987; Ritchie, 1984; Ritchie & Aitken, 1984; Ritchie & Lyons, 1987). To become a recognized destination presents a difficult marketing challenge. To maintain a positive image in the minds of visitors may be even more difficult since alternative and competing destinations are always pushing the limits of market competition to maintain or capture a significant portion of the visitor market. Indeed, state tourism officials need to know more about the nature of in-state and out-of-state visitor characteristics and how actual and potential visitors perceive local destinations. This type of information is primarily utilized in positioning or repositioning a given place in the tourism market place (Crompton, Fakeye & Lue, 1992; Gartner, 1989; Milman & Pizam, 1995). In addition, such information allows destination marketers and managers to better position themselves so that increased demand for visitation may be generated to their respective destinations. Several studies examining images and perceptions of places as tourism destinations have been conducted (Gartner, 1993; Dann, 1996). Most, however, have studied one place at a time or a few at best to assess image or perception (Ahmed, 1994; Crompton, 1979; Gartner & Hunt, 1987; Fakeye & Crompton, 1991; Bignon, Hammitt & Norman, 1998; Illiewich, 1998). Some even used travel intermediaries as a proxy for visitors in order to shed light on the way potential travelers may perceive a given destination (Roehl, 1990; Gartner & Bachri, 1994; Dimanche & Moody, 1998). In addition, there have been a few studies of image that have focused on image changes of product offerings at different points in time (Gartner & Hunt, 1989) and images of different tourism resources at one point in time in a given place (Gartner & Shen, 1992). Recently, researchers also have focused on meaning and measurement of destination image (Echtner & Ritchie, 1991 and Echtner & Ritchie, 1993), the image formation process (Baloglu & Brinberg, 1997), regional images (Baloglu, 1996), and sub-regional images within a given destination (Wang, 1998). Although previous image studies have made notable contributions to the body of literature in the area of tourism management, there has been limited research examining competitive market positioning in a regional context (Pearce, 1997). One of the few studies conducted in a regional context was reported by Ashworth (1990) who examined several selected Mediterranean countries, including Cyprus, Greece, Egypt, Tunisia, Turkey, Malta and Spain. The study focused on common and differentiating features of destinations and how these countries project themselves as destinations using different image agents ranging from a travel agent to destination and resort brochures. Ashworth (1990) points out that the correspondence between the projected and received place image and the product being developed and the consumption of that product is critical. The projected image based on similar features may show variations from place to place, and the extent to which it is received may also show variations (Baloglu, 1996; Ashworth & Voogd, 1988 and Ashworth & Voogd, 1990). Therefore, it is of great importance to destination promoters to asses their relative regional positioning in the minds of potential travelers. The primary objective of this study was to understand Virginia's image as a travel destination versus competitive states to determine the following: (1) Virginia's relative strengths and weaknesses, (2) unique and differentiating characteristics of Virginia, and (3) areas of opportunity which would enable Virginia to win a share from competitive areas.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
The challenge of destination marketing is that it is made up of many suppliers and service providers. Mar- keting a tourism region involves complex and coor- dinated action among the central attractions (both public and private) that draw tourists to a region, the transpor-tation network to connect visitors to a variety of attrac- tions, the hospitality services to " ll basic needs while away from home, and information to help tourists meet needs and " nd their way in a new environment. Success- ful tourism marketing requires all the components to work together, but it is most easily built from a strong base of varied, authentic, and compelling attractions. The study reveals that Virginia stands out in the qual- ity of its natural and historical landscape; features shared by many of the surrounding competitive states. Virginia competes with Pennsylvania, North Carolina, West Virginia on natural features and competes with Pennsyl- vania, Maryland, South Carolina, and Georgia on his- toric and cultural heritage. Virginia ' s amenities are well known, but lack emotional impact. Virginia is not seen as an exciting, resort-oriented destination for indulging self and family. Nor does it have the reputation as an oppor- tunity to escape and renew. Virginia gets mixed reviews on variety. On the one hand there is a lot to see, but onthe other hand not much exciting to do. Virginia may lack Florida sunshine, but it is blessed with natural resources and historical heritage, and has a favorable, romantic image and reputation as a clean, attractive state with high quality services and well-maintained facilities. Possible marketing strategies would be to give Virginia a stronger emotional image, while building on its good reputation for quality natural and cultural attractions. One direction might be to emphasize what there is to do along with what there is to see. It is also important that destination promotional activities focus on di ! erenti- ating features of places in a regional context so that complementary tourism products within the region can also be developed. Such an e ! ort may necessitate the use of cross-marketing of tourism products in a given desti- nation and establishment of management and marketing alliances that would encourage regional destination marketing.