英國dissertation網專業提供英國留學生旅游管理dissertation定制。RIrEelSanEdAR’Cs HImage as a Tourism Destination in France: Attribute Importance and Performance
Ireland’s Image as a Tourism Destination in France: Attribute Importance and Performance
SINÉAD O’LEARY AND JIM DEEGAN
Ireland is highly dependent on tourism as an employmentand revenue generator. Recent trends, however, suggest thatvisitors from France, one of Ireland’s key source markets,may have peaked. Tourism images are critical to the successof any destination, particularly because of how they affectthe level of satisfaction with the tourist experience. Ireland isfrequently acknowledged as a successfully branded and marketedtourism destination. Nonetheless, few image studies todate have focused specifically on Ireland, and none has analyzedthe image of Ireland as a tourism destination in
The aim of this study, therefore, was to redress thisknowledge deficit. A questionnaire was used to examine theimportance of certain destination attributes for French touristsand to determine how French visitors rate Ireland’s performancewith respect to these attributes pre- and postvisitation.
This information was subsequently incorporatedinto an importance-performance analysis grid.

Keywords: destination image; Ireland; France; importance-performance analysis

The impressive performance of Irish tourism has beenwell documented in recent years (Deegan and D. A. Dineen1997, 2000; Deegan and D. J. Dineen 2003). The success ofIrish tourism is dictated by four major source markets: Britain,
the United States, Germany, and France. To fulfill theambitious policy targets assigned to it, the tourism industryin Ireland must maintain a competitive position in the globalenvironment, but current trends suggest that visitors from
France, one of Ireland’s key source markets, may havepeaked. Following rapid expansion up to 1990, the growth
pattern of French visitor arrivals to Ireland has been relativelysporadic in recent years. Visitor numbers fell from262,000 to 250,000 between 1995 and 1996, and eventhough the number of arrivals has increased since then (to
298,000 in 2002), there have been decreases in the number ofFrench visitors coming to Ireland purely to take a holiday
(from 50% of the total market in 1996 to 38% in 2002) andparticipating in either sporting or cultural activities (BordFáilte 2000a, 2003).
The importance of destination image is widely acknowledgedin tourism literature. Goodall (1992) suggested thatwhen prices are comparable, image is the decisive factor inholiday choice. Increasing product parity and substitutabilityof tourism destinations have underscored the need for destinationsto create a unique identity to differentiate themselvesfrom competitors (Morgan and Pritchard 2002; Morgan,Pritchard, and Piggott 2002). In this regard, branding isthought to be one of the most effective tools available tomarketers, and Ireland is widely acknowledged in brandingliterature as having successfully developed an appealing destinationimage (Gilmore 2002; Morgan and Pritchard 2002;Morgan, Pritchard, and Piggott 2002; Olins 2002). Increasedinternational competition, changing consumer profiles,incompatibility between the image portrayed and the realityat the destination, as well as the stagnation of the French market,#p#分頁標題#e#
however, underscore the need for image assessment andpossible modification. Image change efforts are essentiallywasted if baseline data establishing the present image positionare not known (Gartner 1993), and even though tourismimage is critical to the success of any destination, few imagestudies to date have focused specifically on Ireland, and nonehas analyzed Ireland’s image as a tourism destination inFrance. The purpose of this study, therefore, is to examine
the importance of certain destination attributes for Frenchtourists and determine how French visitors rate Ireland’s performancewith respect to these attributes pre- andpostvisitation. The article begins with a brief overview ofdestination image and refers to the issues involved in imagemeasurement. This is followed by a description of the surveymethodology. In the next section, the findings are presentedon an importance-performance grid and discussed. Last,conclusions and implications are outlined.
DESTINATION IMAGE
英國dissertation網專業提供英國留學生旅游管理dissertation定制。Motivations, arising from a combination of needs anddesires, affect the propensity to travel in a general sense.They do not, however, influence the decision to choose aSinéad O’Leary is a research fellow at the National Centre for
Tourism Policy Studies (NCTPS), Limerick, Ireland. A public affairsgraduate from the University of Limerick, she completed herPh.D. within the NCTPS in 2001. Her thesis was entitled “Ireland’sImage as a Tourism Destination in France” and involved a pre- andpostvisitation survey of French visitors to Ireland. She is involved inacademic and consultancy research projects within the NCTPS. Jim
Deegan is the director of the National Centre for Tourism PolicyStudies and is senior lecturer of tourism policy at the University ofLimerick, Ireland. An economist by training, he has publishedwidely in many areas of tourism economics and policy, and has presented
papers at many national and international conferences. Heis the coauthor of Tourism Policy and Performance: The Irish Experience,which is widely recognized as the first authoritative studyof the role of tourism policy in the economic development of a country.Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 43, February 2005, 247-256
DOI: 10.1177/0047287504272025
© 2005 Sage Publicationsspecific destination; images form the basis of the evaluation
or selection process and thus provide the link between motivations
and destination selection (Goodall 1992). Tourism
images are important because of the role they play in thepotential tourist’s decision-making process. They are alsosignificant because of how they affect the level of satisfactionwith the tourist experience, which is critical in terms ofencouraging positive word-of-mouth recommendations andreturn visits to the destination.#p#分頁標題#e#
Gunn (1972) was one of the first to identify the differentways in which cognitive images are formed. Severalresearchers investigating the processes of image formationand measurement have used Gunn’s 7-stage theory as a basisfor their conceptual framework. Gunn’s theory involves aconstant building and modification of images that are conceivedat a number of levels, namely, organic, induced andmodified-induced. Organic images are those that arise fromsupposedly unbiased sources such as books, school, televisiondocumentaries, and the experiences of friends and family.Induced images are those that emanate from the destinationarea itself and are derived from marketing and
promotional material. The key difference between organicand induced images is the control that the destination areahas over what is presented. Although little can be done toinfluence organic images, marketers can induce an image by
investment in promotion. Modified-induced images are theresult of personal experience of the destination. The more thetravel experience or previsit image has been confirmed, themore confident the user is of potential satisfaction when heor she considers repeating the experience. In fact, an image isgenerally very resistant to change if it is pleasant or meetsexpectations (Gunn 1988a). For tourism development, it isimportant that the actual participation at a destination equalor surpass the preimage perception of the destination for theexperience to be satisfying. Direct experience and personalrecommendations are viewed as the most credible sources ofdestination information (Sussmann and Unel 1999), emphasizingthe need to ensure satisfaction with the travel experienceand the reality at the destination. Because images areslow to change, regular monitoring of traveler imagesbecomes important (Gunn 1988b).
Several studies bear testament to the key role played byfamily and friends in forming touristic images and choosing
a destination (Baloglu and McCleary 1999; Jackson,Schmierer, and Nicol 1997; Jenkins 1978; McClellan andFouschee 1983; Mill and Morrison 1992; Van Raaij andFrancken 1984; Vogt, Stewart, and Fesenmaier 1998). In
Bord Fáilte’s (1999) Visitor Attitudes Survey (VAS), 49% ofvisitors mentioned advice from a friend, relative, or business
associate as an important influence in choosing Ireland (BordFáilte 2000b). The importance of word-of-mouth recommendations
for Ireland is highlighted in past surveys also
(1983, 1988, 1993, 1995, 1997). Furthermore, marketing
wisdom indicates that it is less expensive to reattract previouscustomers than to acquire new ones. Haywood (1989,cited in Oppermann 1996) suggested that it is five timesmore expensive to obtain a new customer than it is to retain a
current customer.Chon (1990) adopted a cognitive consumer behavior theoryknown as evaluative congruity to create an integratedmodel of destination image and traveler buying behavior.
The central postulate of the model is that a traveler’s buyingbehavior can be explained through a framework of imagery#p#分頁標題#e#
change during the entire travel experience. He found that apositive image and positive travel experience will result in a
moderately positive evaluation of a destination (positivecongruity), whereas a negative image and a positive experience
will result in a highly positive evaluation of a destination(positive incongruity). This could, however, imply thatthe destination’s strengths had not been marketed to the fullesteffect. The most negative evaluation will result from apositive image and negative experience (negative incongruity).
This underscores the important role that the tourismindustry must play in ensuring the compatibility of imageand experience. According to Sussmann and Unel (1999),the conclusion of the evaluation process will greatly reinforce
or modify the destination image. The modifiedpostvisitation image “will determine whether the same destination
may be considered for a future purchase, and forrecommendation to friends and family” (Sussmann and Unel1999, p. 212).Ireland’s international appeal as a tourism destination hasbeen based on its scenery and people since Victorian times(Horgan 2002). Heritage and culture, along with the fact thatIreland is seen as a world apart from modern society, also
form an important part of Ireland’s attraction (Kneafsey1994; Morgan and Pritchard 1998; O’Connor 1993; Prenticeand Andersen 2000; Quinn 1989; Stocks 1996). Morgan andPritchard (2002) accurately noted that “Ireland has been runningthe same basic proposition in its various campaigns fordecades, and while marketing directors and executives
change, the message remains constant.” The media, however,have recently focused attention on a number of challengesfacing the Irish tourism product. During the 1990s andin particular the latter half of that decade, the Irish economyexperienced phenomenal growth. Ireland was transformed
from a relatively poor, inward-looking, agricultural societyincapable of sustaining its population to a prosperous industrialsociety fully integrated into the international economyand attracting immigrants to meet its labor demands (Nolan,
O’Connell, and Whelan 2000). This dramatic transformation
led to Ireland being widely acknowledged as the “Celtic
tiger” economy in European and U.S. journalism. The image
of Ireland as a “tiger” economy seems incongruous with the
habitual presentation of a rather backward green island
(Dunne 1999; O’Sullivan 1998). Pressures on the environmentexerted by the fast-paced economy, tourism development,and the burgeoning litter problem are becomingincreasingly obvious (Hogan 1999; McDonald 1998). Furthermore,
the industry is challenged by labor shortages as
well as the dilution of its famed fáilte or welcome (Khan
2000; O’Loughlin 2000). A match between expectations andreality is clearly linked to visitor satisfaction. This
underscores the need to assess Ireland’s image as a tourismdestination in the French market.#p#分頁標題#e#
DESTINATION IMAGE MEASUREMENT
The definition of destination image is problematic, and avariety of different interpretations have been advanced
(Calatone, Bennetto, and Bojanic 1989; Crompton 1979;Gartner 1989; Gartner and Hunt 1987; Gunn 1972; Hunt
1975; Lawson and Baud-Bovy 1977; Pearce 1988; Phelps
1986; Reilly 1990; Richardson and Crompton 1988; Woodsideand Lyonski 1989). One of the most comprehensive
248 FEBRUARY 2005definitions is that put forward by Echtner and Ritchie (1991).
They concluded that destination image comprises attribute,holistic, functional, psychological, common, and uniquecomponents. Inevitably, the way in which destination imageis defined and conceptualized holds implications for themeasurement of that image.Brewer and Hunt (1989, p. 28) concluded that “solutionsbased upon the multimethod findings are likely to be betterfindings—that is to have a firmer empirical basis and greatertheoretical scope because they are grounded in differentways of observing social reality.” The debate surroundingmultimethod research strategies is particularly relevant intourism given that criticism has often been leveled atresearchers of this discipline for depending solely on onemethod or another. Quantitative or structured techniques(positivist approach) have tended to predominate in the fieldof tourism research generally and image research specifically.
As a result, the majority of destination image studieshave tended to focus on the common, attribute-based aspectsof destination image. Qualitative methodologies are moreconducive to measuring the holistic components of destinationimage and capturing unique features and auras (Echtnerand Ritchie 1991, 1993).
Riley and Love (2000) highlighted the preference forquantitative methodologies. They conducted a review oftourism research using feature articles from four journals:Annals of Tourism Research, Journal of Tourism Research,Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, and TourismManagement. Based on the number of quantitative versusqualitative articles in the four journals, they concluded thatpositivism is the dominant paradigm in tourism research.Similarly, Pike (2002) conducted a review of 142 papers inthe destination image literature from the period 1973-2000:the majority of papers (114) used structured techniques tooperationalize the destination image construct. The most populardata analysis technique was factor analysis (41 papers),followed by t-tests (21), perceptual mapping/multidimensionalscaling (21), analysis of means (20), cluster analysis (14),importance-performance analysis (9), repertory grid (8),mapping techniques (3), constant sum (2) and conjoint analysis
(1).
Echtner and Ritchie (1991, p. 9) pointed out that “unlessconsiderable effort is expended in the design stages, attributelists may be incomplete by failing to incorporate all of the
relevant functional and psychological characteristics of thedestination image.” Jenkins (1997) has also highlighted theimportance of a preliminary phase of qualitative research todistill the constructs or attributes used by the study populationin their cognition of destination image, followed by aquantitative phase of research to measure tourism destinationimage according to the relevant constructs. Measurementcould involve asking tourists to rate a destination accordingto the constructs distilled in the first phase. According toJenkins (1997), there are two aspects of the rating process:first, the respondent can rate the personal importance of aparticular construct (“construct preference”); and second, therespondent can evaluate a destination according to a particularconstruct (“evaluative perception”). The combination ofthe two scales means that the image components that are perceivedas important by the respondents can be highlightedand given more weight in the findings.Accordingly,Sussmann and Unel’s (1999) study, designed to monitor theimage change that the actual experience of Turkey creates in#p#分頁標題#e#
British travelers, also sought to determine the importance ofthe attributes. This was considered fundamental tounderstanding the meaning of either positive or negativeresponses to attributes.Importance-Performance Analysis
Destination brand loyalty “refers to the ability of a destinationto provide visitors with an experience that correspondsto their needs and matches the image that they hold ofthe destination itself” (Joppe, Martin, and Waalen 2001, p.252). In recognition of the fact that consumer satisfaction is afunction of both expectations related to certain importantattributes and judgments of attribute performance, Martillaand James (1977) introduced importance-performance analysis(IPA) as a technique for evaluating the elements of a
marketing program. Even though marketers strive to determinethe correct image positioning, however, they rarelyquery whether the attributes captured by the marketing messages
are actually important to visitors. This is highlightedby the dearth of literature related to importance-performanceesting with respect to destinations or on the relationships
between choice behaviors and loyalty to a destination (Chenet al. 1998, cited in Joppe et al. 2001). More recently, Zhangand Chow (2004) and Chu and Choi (2000) have used IPA toassess aspects of Hong Kong as a destination.IPA uses a three-step process either to develop a new
marketing strategy or to evaluate an existing strategy. First, aset of product attributes or features is identified through techniquessuch as literature review, focus group interviews, andso on. Second, consumers are asked two questions abouteach attribute: How important is it? and How well did theproduct or service perform? Third, importance and performancescores for each attribute are calculated. These valuesprovide x and y coordinates that are then placed on a twodimensionalplot called an IPA grid. The importance and performancescores are plotted on the vertical and horizontalaxes respectively. By plotting the numerical results in thisway, the components are effectively sorted into a 4-celltypology. This typology categorizes importance and performance
on a scale of high or low, so four combinations arepossible (see Figure 1).
Quadrant 1 will comprise variables that are held high inimportance but on which the respondents rate the performanceas low (concentrate here).
Quadrant 2 will comprise variables that are held high inmportance and on which the respondents rate thedestination’s performance as high (keep up the goodwork).
Quadrant 3 will comprise variables characterized by therespondents as being of low importance and whoseperformance is also rated low (low priority).Quadrant 4 will comprise variables that are held in low
importance but on which the destination’s performanceis perceived by the respondents to be high(possible overkill).
METHODOLOGY AND RESEARCH DESIGNConsiderable effort was expended in the design stage of
this research study, using unstructured techniques to elicit#p#分頁標題#e#
JOURNAL OF TRAVEL RESEARCH 249the relevant destination image attributes and dimensions,then using these in a structured way to investigate images.
First, a review of the relevant destination image literaturewas conducted to develop a master list of attributes that theoreticallymeasure destination image. All of the studies conceptualize
destination image as comprising such features asattractions, climate, culture, host populations, recreation, andscenery (Jenkins 1997). Content analysis of written information,
such as guidebooks, or visual information, includingimages in travel brochures, can provide a great deal of informationabout the images projected from a tourism destination.
For example, Dilley (1986) conducted a survey of theimages used by different national tourist organizations inprojecting their destination to the North American market.
Brochures from 21 countries were analyzed, and theirimages were categorized according to the type of information
conveyed. An examination of any Bord Fáilte brochureswill highlight the clear dominance of scenery and the Irishpeople. Bord Fáilte brochures for the French market, Bord
Fáilte’s VAS (1997, 1999), and Quinn’s study (1989) werethe principal sources used for content analysis in this study.Second, a preliminary phase of qualitative research wasundertaken to distill the constructs or attributes most appropriateto the population being studied (Jenkins 1997). Freeelicitation, a form of word association, has been widely used
in the field of market research. Reilly (1990, 22), in an investigationof the image of Montana as a destination, asked
respondents, “What three words best describe the state ofMontana as a destination for vacation or pleasure travel?”The responses were coded into similar categories, and frequencies
of the various types of responses recorded.Responses generated by at least 5% of the entire sample arecommon enough to be considered (Reilly 1990). A similartechnique was used for this research. A questionnaire wasdistributed to a random sample of 80 French visitors in thedeparture lounge of Dublin airport in October 1997. Respondents
were asked to list the first three words or expressionsthat came to mind when they thought of Ireland. Theresponses were analyzed and divided into the following categories:
scenery/nature/locations, Irish people, pubs/beer,green, tradition/culture, type of destination , weather,activities, and others. This technique allowed the respondents
to describe the destination without any of the predeterminedconstructs of the researcher. The elicitation of these
attributes from the target population was an attempt to gain atruly accurate representation of the French tourist’s image ofIreland. Figure 2 contains the final list of attributes that were
used in the questionnaire.
Pre- and Postvisit Questionnaire
There is a strong argument for using pre- andpostvisitation studies in that postvisitation questionnaires#p#分頁標題#e#
can only capture an individual’s hindsight: they cannotreverse the study to accurately measure previsit expectations(Crompton and Love 1995). Bord Fáilte’s VAS, which aimsto assess holidaymakers’ reactions regarding a range of differentaspects of their visit to Ireland, is carried out solely ona postvisitation basis. The Scottish Tourist Board’s Tourism
Attitudes Survey is conducted on a pre- and postvisitationbasis that allows for comparison between previsit expectations
and actual experience. Visitors are, however, surveyedduring their holiday as a proxy for previsitation. A
250 FEBRUARY 2005
Quadrant 1
Concentrate here
High importance
Low performance
Quadrant 2
Keep up the good work
High importance
High performance
High importance
Low performance High performance
Quadrant 3
Low priority
Low importance
Low performance
Quadrant 4
Possible overkill
Low importance
High performance
Low importance
FIGURE 1
IMPORTANCE-PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS GRID
Functional (physical, measurable)
Beautiful scenery
Pretty towns
Activities/sports available
Culture/history
Litter free
Environment
Nightlife/entertainment (pubs, music)
Services available (restaurants, shopping)
Access (cost, means)
Price/quality ratio
Pleasant climate
Economic development/urbanization
Meet family/friends
Welcome/friendly people
Calm/tranquility
Relaxed pace of life
Discover something new
Other (please specify)
Psychological (abstract)
FIGURE 2
LIST OF ATTRIBUTES DEVELOPED
FOR FRENCH TOURISTSdestination must be able to assess the image held by visitorsprior to visitation so that efforts can be made to match expectationswith reality. This implies that a previsitation questionnaireis an essential component of the image appraisalprocess. It was decided, therefore, to develop a 2-part questionnairethat would measure Ireland’s destination imageprevisitation and postvisitation, the results of which couldsubsequently be entered into an IPA grid.In Part 1 of the questionnaire, respondents were asked torate the relative importance of the attributes, for example,“How important is scenic beauty in your personal travel decision-making on a scale of one to five (where 1 = not at allimportant and 5 = very important)?” In the second instance,respondents were asked to evaluate Ireland’s performance asa tourism destination according to the attributes, for example,“How do you expect Ireland to perform in terms of scenicbeauty on a scale of one to five (where 1 = very poor performanceand 5 = very good performance)?” Part 2 of thequestionnaire also included the attribute question from Part 1so that pre- and postvisitation scores could be compared. Inthe questionnaire design stage, specific attention was paid tothe focus, phraseology, and sequencing of the questionsposed. The problems of misunderstanding and misinterpretationwere minimized through pilot testing and consulting anative French speaker regarding the translation of the#p#分頁標題#e#
questionnaire.
Research FrameworkThe research process involved was composed of threephases. In the first phase, a list of image attributes for the
French tourism market to Ireland was developed. In the secondphase, French visitors to Ireland were asked to rate the
mportance of each of these attributes and Ireland’s performancewith respect to these attributes pre- and postvisitation.
Last, the mean ratings for importance and pre- and postvisitperformance were entered into a series of IPA grids. Figure 3illustrates the methodology used in this study.Survey Sample and Data Collection
The questionnaire was administered by me to a randomsample of French visitors to Ireland during the month of
August 1998. The three national airports (Cork, Dublin, andShannon) and the ferry port in Cork (Ringaskiddy) were chosenas the points of distribution. This meant that people couldbe met and given the questionnaire on their arrival into thecountry. In the arrivals hall at Cork, Dublin, and ShannonAirports, tourists were approached and given a pack containingParts 1 and 2 of the questionnaire, a cover letter explaininghow the questionnaires should be completed, and twoprepaid envelopes (national and international) in which thequestionnaire could be returned to me. I had thought initiallythat it would be possible to distribute Part 1 of the questionnaire(i.e., previsit) in the arrivals hall of the airport as passengerswere waiting for their luggage. This proved impossible,however, because people were distracted by the need tocollect their bags (in many cases, the luggage was already onthe carousel by the time people entered the arrivals hall) and“follow the crowd.” The researcher, therefore, attempted todetain people who were willing to participate only for as longas was necessary to explain the aim of the survey and to givethem a questionnaire pack with all the relevant instructions.
This meant that it was not possible to conduct a nonresponsebias test. People were approached on a “next to arrive” basisin the interest of achieving as random a sample as possible.
The majority of people agreed to participate in the survey,and the refusal rate was fewer than 5% of those approachedin any of the airports. In Cork Port (Ringaskiddy), questionnairepacks were distributed to as many French-registeredcars as possible as they drove away from the port. This wasdecided to be the optimal approach in terms of targeting themaximum number of people after discussions with ferrystaff, who stated that the majority of people leave the portimmediately and only about 5% of tourists actually enter theterminal building after disembarking. A total of 569 questionnaireswere distributed during August 1998, and 281respondents (49%) completed and returned both pre- andpostvisitation sections of the questionnaire in the prepaidenvelopes provided.
Data Analysis
Mean scores of importance and pre- and postvisit performancewere calculated for each attribute. These scores werethen used to create two IPA grids: one representing importanceand previsit performance results, and the other demonstrating#p#分頁標題#e#
importance and postvisit performance scores. Theplacement of each attribute on the action grid was determinedby using the means of importance and performance asthe coordinates. The importance-performance grid positionsthe grand means for performance and importance that determinesthe placement of the axes on the grid.The same rating scale was used in both the pre- and
英國dissertation網專業提供英國留學生旅游管理dissertation定制。postvisitation questionnaire, and their scores thus allowed adirect comparison of the arrival and departure images. Pairedt-tests were carried out to investigate if there was a statisticallysignificant difference between the two sets of scores.
JOURNAL OF TRAVEL RESEARCH 251
FIGURE 3
METHODOLOGY FOR DESTINATION
IMAGE RESEARCH
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In the previsitation (arrival) questionnaire, respondentswere asked to rate each of 18 attributes on a Likert-type scaleof 1 to 5 (in which 1 = not at all important and 5 = very
important) according to the importance they attached to theattribute when choosing a holiday destination. They werethen asked to rate each of these attributes on a scale of 1 to 5(in which 1 = very poor performance and 5 = very good performance)according to how they thought Ireland would perform.Previsitation or expected performance ratings in themselvesdo not provide a truly accurate portrayal of Ireland’simage among French travelers. A comparison between theimportance attached to certain attributes when choosing aholiday and Ireland’s previsitation performance with respect
to these attributes will provide a more detailed analysis (seeTable 1). The results are presented according to the rankingof the mean scores.Importance of Destination Attributes
Table 1 reveals that respondents give most consideration
to the beauty of the scenery, the welcome of the people, the
potential for discovery, and environmental and tranquility
factors when choosing a holiday destination. This differs
slightly from the priorities outlined in French tourism surveys,
namely, rest and relaxation, discovery/change of scenery,
a pleasant climate/sun, and family (Observatoire
National du Tourisme 1996). It must be acknowledged,
therefore, that the respondents’ opinions may be somewhat
colored by virtue of the fact that they have already chosen
Ireland and are in the country when completing the questionnaire.
This is seen, for example, by the relative lack of importance
attached to climate and family as factors in selecting a
destination. For this information to be truly accurate, the
previsitation questionnaire would need to have been completed
and returned before the respondents had even chosen
to visit Ireland. This would have been impractical, however,
in terms of accessing a sample. Thus, it is perhaps more accurate#p#分頁標題#e#
to say that the factors outlined above are relevant specifically
in terms of choosing a “nonsun and/or nonfamily” holiday
destination and do not represent a significant flaw in the
sampling process. Additional factors deemed important in
selecting a nonsun and/or nonfamily location (with a mean
rating greater than 4) are culture/history, price-quality ratio,
and being litter free. An other category (attribute 18) was
included to allow for factors not considered by the author.
Among the respondents who identified a further factor, however,
there was little consensus. For this reason, responses to
the other category are not included for analysis.
Previsit Performance of Destination Attributes
Table 1 also shows that respondents felt Ireland would
perform best as regards beautiful scenery, calm and tranquility,
the welcome of the people, the potential for discovery,
nightlife and entertainment, a relaxed pace of life, the environment,
and culture and history (all these attributes
obtained expected mean ratings greater than 4). The core elements
of Ireland’s appeal as a tourism destination, which
have formed the basis of Bord Fáilte’s promotional approach
for more than 40 years, were summarized as being “people,
pace and place.” Clearly, therefore, Ireland’s expected or
previsitation performance corresponds with the images projected
by Bord Fáilte, which implies that the image of Ireland
as a tourism destination receives widespread acceptance in
the French market. The most notable discrepancies between
the importance and previsitation performance ratings are
concerned with the price-quality ratio, litter, and access. This
suggests that visitors perceived Ireland as being expensive or
difficult to get to, relatively expensive as a holiday destination,
and not particularly clean. The divergence between both
series of scores is worrying insofar as it may have deterred
other French travelers from even choosing to visit Ireland.
Importance and Previsit Performance Analysis
The importance and previsit scores were subsequently
plotted on an IPA grid. The placement of each attribute on
the IPA grid was determined by using the means of importance
and performance as the coordinates. The importanceperformance
action grid positions the grand means for performance
and importance that determines the placement of
the axes on the grid (see Figure 4).
Price-quality ratio, litter free, and access (cost/means)
are located in the upper left-hand quadrant. These attributes
are viewed as important, but performance levels are relatively
low. This indicates that there is a need for destination
managers to concentrate on improving these areas. Beautiful
scenery, welcome, discovery, calm/tranquility, culture/history,#p#分頁標題#e#
a relaxed pace of life, nightlife/entertainment, and environment
are positioned in the upper right-hand quadrant. Attributes
here are also considered to be important, and performance
levels are quite high. Clearly, this implies that efforts
252 FEBRUARY 2005
TABLE 1
IMPORTANCE AND PREVISITATION
PERFORMANCE RATINGS FOR DESTINATION
ATTRIBUTES COMPARED
French Difference
Importance Tourists’ between
Rating of Expected Importance
Attributes Performance and
for French Rating of Expected
Tourists Attributes in Mean
Attribute (Mean) Ireland (Mean) Ratings (+/–)
Beautiful scenery 4.65 4.70 .05
Welcome 4.44 4.34 –.10
Discovery 4.38 4.34 –.04
Environment 4.19 4.09 –.10
Calm/tranquility 4.18 4.38 .20
Culture/history 4.02 4.02 .00
Price-quality ratio 4.00 3.13 –.87
Litter free 4.07 3.43 –.64
Relaxed pace of life 3.93 4.18 .25
Nightlife/entertainment 3.83 4.25 .42
Access (cost/means) 3.86 2.99 –.87
Pretty towns 3.53 3.48 –.05
Services 3.56 3.49 –.07
Climate 3.31 2.98 –.33
Family/friends 2.48 2.81 .33
Activities/sports 2.57 3.11 .54
Economic
development/
urbanization 2.36 2.99 .63
must be made to keep up the good work in these key areas.
Services (restaurants and shops), pretty towns, climate, family
and friends, activities/sports, and economic development/
urbanization are located in the lower left-hand quadrant.
These attributes are not considered to be as important as others
and are not performing particularly well. Although there
is clearly room for improvement here, these are not immediate
priorities. No attributes are found in the lower right-hand
or possible overkill quadrant (low importance, high
performance).
Postvisitation Performance of
Destination Attributes
In the postvisitation (departure) questionnaire, respondents
were asked to rate the attributes on a Likert-type scale
of 1 to 5 according to how they thought Ireland had performed
(in which 1 = very poor performance and 5 = very
good performance). The previsitation (expected) and postvisitation
(actual) performance ratings for each of the 17 attributes,
as well as the difference between both means, are listed
in Table 2. The importance mean scores are also supplied in
this table to facilitate comparison. The greater the importance
attached to an attribute in the destination-selection process
by French tourists, the more consequential a poor performance
score, whether pre- or postvisitation.
Respondents reported that Ireland had performed best as
regards beautiful scenery, calm and tranquility, nightlife and
entertainment, the welcome of the people, a relaxed pace of
life, and the potential afforded by the destination for discovery#p#分頁標題#e#
(i.e., each of these attributes received a performance
mean rating greater than 4). Paired t-tests were carried out to
investigate if there were any statistically significant differences
between the pre- and postvisitation scores. For seven
of these attributes—services, climate, economic development/
urbanization, welcome, discovery, litter, and culture/history—
image change was found to be statistically significant
(p value < 0.05). It is worth noting that attributes with the
highest importance rating are those with the most negative
postperformance means (welcome, discovery, litter, and culture/
history), and those with the most positive performance
means are located toward the end of the importance ranking
(services, climate, and economic development/
urbanization).
Importance and Postvisit
Performance Analysis
The importance and postvisit performance scores were
also entered into an IPA grid (see Figure 5).
The importance and postvisit performance analysis illustrated
here is directly comparable with the importance and
previsit performance analysis (Figure 4) with respect to the
placement of attributes within the four quadrants. Pricequality
ratio, litter free, and access (cost/means) are situated
in the concentrate here quadrant. Beautiful scenery, welcome,
discovery, calm/tranquility, culture/history, relaxed
pace of life, nightlife/entertainment, and environment are
located in the keep up the good work section. Services (restaurants
and shops), pretty towns, climate, family/friends,
activities/sports, and economic development/urbanization
are sited in the low priority area, and no attributes are found
in the lower right-hand or possible overkill quadrant.
The pivotal role played by tourism images regarding the
level of satisfaction with the tourist experience and, consequently,
word-of-mouth recommendations and repeat visits
has been frequently acknowledged. The location of attributes
within the keep up the good work quadrant of both figures
indicates that, on the whole, the experience of Ireland corresponds
with the key elements of Ireland’s projected tourism
image, namely, people, pace, and place. As noted earlier,
however, there are definite warning signals that these aspects
of the destination are increasingly under threat. Clearly, significant
efforts must be made to protect these nine attributes
in particular. Moreover, the fact that litter features in the concentrate
here quadrant of both diagrams highlights the vulnerability
of the scenery and environment in particular.
The location of price-quality ratio and access (cost/
means) in the concentrate here quadrant of both diagrams
demonstrates that even though French travelers had relatively
modest expectations regarding Ireland’s performance#p#分頁標題#e#
on these attributes, the reality was worse than anticipated.
Ireland is not generally seen as a low-cost and easy-access
destination. Nonetheless, it is worrying that neither of these
attributes scored well. Furthermore, recent evidence regarding
the cost-competitiveness of Ireland as a tourism destination
indicates that the situation has worsened in the intervening
period since this study was conducted. The price
transparency afforded by the Euro has revealed Ireland to be
the second most expensive country in the Euro Zone, after
Finland. Strong dollar and sterling exchange rates have
undoubtedly helped to moderate the potential negative
impact on revenue from overseas visitors, but this is unlikely
to continue in the long term.
JOURNAL OF TRAVEL RESEARCH 253
FIGURE 4
IMPORTANCE AND PREVISIT
PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
CONCLUSION
This study identified 17 attributes that are important to
French tourists when choosing a holiday destination and
compared Ireland’s performance with respect to these attributes
pre- and postvisitation. The comparison of importance
with pre- and postvisit performance scores shows that Ireland’s
destination image is largely confirmed by the
experience of French visitors. This can be regarded as positive
in that attributes such as beautiful scenery and friendly
people were located in the keep up the good work quadrant of
both IPA grids. The most notable discrepancies between the
importance/previsit performance ratings and importance/
postvisit performance ratings are concerned with the pricequality
ratio, litter, and access. This suggests that visitors
perceived Ireland as being expensive, difficult to get to, relatively
expensive as a holiday destination, and not particularly
clean. The divergence between both series of scores is worrying
insofar as it may have deterred other French travelers
from even choosing to visit Ireland.
The fact that “an image, whether positive or negative may
continue long after the factors that molded it have changed”
(Fayeke and Crompton 1991, p. 10) emphasizes the need for
tourism destinations to develop and maintain a positive yet
accurate image. Ireland has changed dramatically in the past
10 years, with the result that the traditional images of Ireland
consistently portrayed are no longer completely accurate.
Ironically, in many cases, it is those attributes that policy
makers can influence that are performing poorly, for example,
litter and the price-quality ratio, whereas those outside of
government or industry control such as scenery are performing
well. This is encouraging in that it implies that the situation
is not beyond redress, but there is an urgent need to deal
with these challenges to ensure the continued success of the#p#分頁標題#e#
tourism industry in Ireland. Moreover, it should not be
assumed that the natural environment is impervious to
destruction, and despite the fact that it has performed well
until now, the negative appraisal of Ireland with respect to
litter could have serious implications on it in the future. The
sporadic growth pattern in the French visitor market to Ireland,
which is mirrored in Germany, is a clear indication of
the problems facing Irish tourism. The evidence from this
study as well as recent reports regarding prices in Ireland
suggest that the destination is losing competitive advantage
254 FEBRUARY 2005
FIGURE 5
IMPORTANCE AND POSTVISIT
PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
TABLE 2
PRE- AND POSTVISITATION PERFORMANCE RATINGS FOR DESTINATION ATTRIBUTES COMPARED
Previsit Postvisit Difference between
Importance Performance Performance Pre and Postmeans
Attribute Mean Mean Mean (+/–)
Beautiful scenery 4.65 4.70 4.71 .01
Welcome 4.44 4.34 4.21 –.13
Discovery 4.38 4.34 4.15 –.19
Environment 4.19 4.09 3.98 –.11
Calm/tranquility 4.18 4.38 4.32 –.06
Litter free 4.07 3.43 3.18 –.25
Culture/history 4.02 4.02 3.94 –.08
Price-quality ratio 4.00 3.13 3.08 –.05
Relaxed pace of life 3.93 4.18 4.16 –.02
Access (cost/means) 3.86 2.99 2.89 –.10
Nightlife/entertainment 3.83 4.25 4.19 –.06
Services 3.56 3.49 3.69 .20
Pretty towns 3.53 3.48 3.52 .04
Climate 3.31 2.98 3.18 .20
Activities/sports 2.57 3.11 3.17 .06
Family/friends 2.48 2.81 3.16 .35
Economic development/urbanization 2.36 2.99 3.12 .13
Note: Attributes for which image change was found to be statistically significant are highlighted in bold text.
and have implications for all potential source markets for
Irish tourism, emphasizing the need for policy and marketing
reform.
According to Joppe, Martin, and Waalen (2001, p. 258):
By linking the drivers of satisfaction with the image
of the destination that is portrayed, it is possible to focus
on the key attributes that will ensure that the destination
can meet or exceed the visitor’s expectations
and therefore ensure his or her return
and/or positive word-of-mouth recommendations. For Ireland,
this would mean continuing to focus on the people,
pace, and place imagery. This would, however, necessitate
definite measures to guard against the erosion of these elements
as well as constant monitoring to ensure that this is still
an accurate portrayal of contemporary Ireland. There appears
to be a tacit reluctance among those involved in destination
image management to address the reality of Ireland’s
changing socioeconomic circumstances in promotional material.
Perhaps there is a fear that if Ireland is no longer portrayed#p#分頁標題#e#
as a premodern, friendly, green destination, tourists
will not come. This is undoubtedly a legitimate concern. The
consequences of false or inaccurate advertising may, however,
be even more serious in terms of repeat visits and vital
word-of-mouth recommendations. Although a complete reversal
of Ireland’s current destination positioning would undoubtedly
have a detrimental effect on visitor numbers, a
careful appraisal of what Ireland as a destination has to offer
potential tourists could facilitate a gradual reorientation of
marketing focus to reflect the changing realities of Irish life.
REFERENCES
Baloglu, S., and K. W. McCleary (1999). “A Model of Destination Image
Formation.“ Annals of Tourism Research, 26 (1): 868-97.
Bord Fáilte (1983). Visitor Attitudes Survey. Dublin: Bord Fáilte.
——— (1988). Visitor Attitudes Survey. Dublin: Bord Fáilte.
——— (1993). Visitor Attitudes Survey. Dublin: Bord Fáilte.
——— (1995). Visitor Attitudes Survey. Dublin: Bord Fáilte.
——— (1997). Visitor Attitudes Survey. Dublin: Bord Fáilte.
——— (1999). Visitor Attitudes Survey. Dublin: Bord Fáilte.
——— (2000a). Tourism Facts. Dublin: Bord Fáilte.
——— (2000b). Visitor Attitudes Survey. Dublin: Bord Fáilte.
——— (2003). Tourism Facts. Dublin: Bord Fáilte.
Brewer, J., and A. Hunt (1989). Multi-Method Research: A Synthesis of
Styles. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Library of Social Research.
Calatone, R. J., C. A. Bennetto, and D. C. Bojanic (1989). “Multinational
Tourism Positioning Using Correspondence Analysis.” Journal of
Travel Research, 28 (2): 25-32.
Chen, J. S., C. H. Hsu, Y. Yoon, and Y. J. Hoon (1998). “Choice Factors and
Destination Loyalty: A Study of Korean Travellers.” Paper presented
at the 20th annual conference of the Travel and Tourism Research Association,
June 7-10, Fort Worth, Texas.
Chon, K. S. (1990). “The Role of Destination Image in Tourism: A Review
and Discussion.” Tourist Review, 45 (2): 2-9.
Chu, R. K. S., and T. Choi (2000). “An Importance-Performance Analysis of
Hotel Selection Factors in the Hong Kong Hotel Industry: A Comparison
of Business and Leisure Travellers.” Tourism Management, 21 (4):
363-77.
Crompton, J. L. (1979). “Motivation for Pleasure Vacation.” Annals of Tourism
Research, 6: 408-24.
Crompton, J. L., and L. L. Love (1995). “The Predictive Validity of Alternative
Approaches to Evaluating Quality of a Festival.” Journal of Travel
Research, (Summer): 11-24.
Deegan, J., and D. A. Dineen (1997). Tourism Policy and Performance: The#p#分頁標題#e#
Irish Experience. London: International Thomson Business.
———(2000). “Developments in Irish Tourism, 1980-1996.” International
Journal of Tourism Research, 2 (May/June): 163-70.
Deegan, J., and D. J. Dineen (2003). “The Changing Contribution of Tourism
in a Dynamic Economy: The Case of Ireland.” Tourism Economics,
9 (2): 147-64.
Dilley, R. S. (1986). “Tourist Brochures and Tourist Images.” Canadian Geographer,
30 (1): 59-65.
Dunne, J. (1999). “Bord Fáilte Prepares New Corporate Plan.” Irish Times,
June 4.
Echtner, C. M., and J. R. B. Ritchie (1991). “The Meaning and Measurement
of Destination Image.” Journal of Tourism Studies, 2 (2): 2-12.
———(1993). “The Measurement of Destination Image: An Empirical Assessment.”
Journal of Travel Research, 31 (4): 3-13.
Fayeke, P. C., and J. L. Crompton (1991). “Image Difference between Prospective,
First-Time and Repeat Visitors to the Lower Rio Grande Valley.”
Journal of Travel Research, 30 (2): 10-16.
Gartner, W. C. (1989). “Tourism Image: Attribute Measurement of State
Tourism Products Using Multi-Dimensional Scaling Techniques.”
Journal of Travel Research, 28 (2): 16-20.
———(1993). “Image Formation Process.” Journal of Travel and Tourism
Marketing, 2 (3): 191-215.
Gartner, W. C., and J. D. Hunt (1987). “An Analysis of State Image Change
over a Twelve-Year Period.” Journal of Travel Research, 16 (2): 15-
19.
Gilmore, F. (2002). “Branding for Success.” In Destination Branding: Creating
the Unique Destination Proposition, edited by N. Morgan, A.
Pritchard, and R. Pride. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann, pp. 57-65.
Goodall, B. (1992). “How Tourists Choose Their Holidays: An Analytical
Framework.” In Marketing in the Tourism Industry: The Promotion of
Destination Regions, edited by B. Goodall and G. Ashworth. London:
Routledge, pp. 1-17.
Gunn, C. A. (1972). Vacationscape: Designing Tourist Regions. Austin:
University of Texas.
——— (1988a). Vacationscape: Designing Tourist Regions. 2nd ed. New
York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
——— (1988b). Tourism Planning. 2nd ed. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Haywood, K. M. (1989). “Managing Word-of-Mouth Communications.”
Journal of Services Marketing, 3 (2): 55-67.
Hogan, T. (1999). “Environment in Growing Peril as Economy Booms.”
Irish Independent, July 15.
Horgan, D. (2002). The Victorian Visitor in Ireland: Irish Tourism 1840-
1910. Dublin: Imagimedia.
Hunt, J. D. (1975). “Image as a Factor in Tourism Development.” Journal of
Travel Research, 13: 1-7.
Jackson, M. S., C. L. Schmierer, and M. Nicol (1997). “Influences on Tourist#p#分頁標題#e#
Decision Making.” In Tourism Research: Building a Better Industry:
Proceedings of the Australian Tourism and Hospitality Research Conference,
edited by R. Bushell, Sydney, July 6-9. Canberra: Bureau of
Tourism Research, pp. 288-300.
Jenkins, O. (1997). “Understanding and Measuring Tourists’ Destination
Images.” In Tourism Research: Building a Better Industry: Proceedings
of the Australian Tourism and Hospitality Research Conference,
edited by R. Bushell, Sydney, July 6-9. Canberra: Bureau of Tourism
Research, pp. 1-18.
Jenkins, R. L. (1978). “Family Vacation Decision Making.” Journal of
Travel Research, 16 (4): 2-7.
Joppe, M., D. W. Martin, and J. Waalen (2001). “Toronto’s Image as a Destination:
A Comparative Importance-Satisfaction Analysis by Origin of
Visitor.” Journal of Travel Research, 39 (3): 252-60.
Khan, F. (2000). “The Myth of Céad Míle Fáilte and All That Blarney.” Irish
Independent, April 17.
Kneafsey, M. (1994). “The Cultural Tourist: Patron Saint of Ireland?” In
Culture, Tourism and Development: The Case of Ireland, edited by U.
Kockel. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, pp. 103-16.
Lawson, F., and M. Baud-Bovy (1977). Tourism and Recreational Development.
London: Architectural Press.
Martilla, J. A., and J. C. James (1977). “Importance-Performance Analysis.”
Journal of Marketing, 41: 77-79.
McClellan, R. C., and K. D. Fouschee (1983). “Negative Images of the
United States as Expressed by Tour Operators from Other Countries.”
Journal of Travel Research, 22 (1): 2-5.
McDonald, F. (1998). “Tourism May Be a Problem in Itself.” Irish Times,
August 19.
Mill, R. C., and A. M. Morrison (1992). The Tourism System: An Introductory
Text. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Morgan, N., and A. Pritchard (1998). Tourism Promotion and Power: Creating
Images, Creating Identities. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
——— (2002). “Contextualizing Destination Branding.” In Destination
Branding: Creating the Unique Destination Proposition, edited by N.
Morgan, A. Pritchard, and R. Pride. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann,
pp. 11-41.
Morgan, N., A. Pritchard, and R. Piggott (2002). “New Zealand, 100% Pure:
The Creation of a Powerful Niche Destination Brand.” Journal of
Brand Management, 9 (4/5): 335-54.
Nolan, B., P. J. O’Connell, and C. T. Whelan, eds. (2000). Bust to Boom?
The Irish Experience of Growth and Inequality. Dublin: Institute of
Public Administration.
Observatoire National du Tourisme (1996). Analyses et perspectives du
tourisme (No. 47): Les vacances des Français—leur fidelité aux
principaux types de séjour. Paris: Observatoire National du Tourisme.#p#分頁標題#e#
O’Connor, B. (1993). “Myths and Mirrors: Tourist Images and National
Identity.” In Tourism in Ireland: A Critical Analysis, edited by B.
JOURNAL OF TRAVEL RESEARCH 255
O’Connor and M. Cronin. Cork, Ireland: Cork University Press, pp.
68-85.
Olins, W. (2002). “Branding the nation: The historical context.” Journal of
Brand Management, 9 (4/5): 241-48.
O’Loughlin, A. (2000). “Tourism and Hotels Hiring Foreign Staff to Ease
Jobs Crisis.” Irish Independent, January 27.
Oppermann, M. (1996). “Visitation of Tourism Attractions and Tourist Expenditure
Patterns: Repeat versus First-Time Visitors.” Asia Pacific
Journal of Tourism Research, 1 (1): 61-68.
O’Sullivan, K. (1998). “100m Deal for Tourism Fund May Involve Levy.”
Irish Times, December 16.
Pearce, P. L. (1988). The Ulysses Factor: Evaluating Visitors in Tourist Settings.
New York: Springer-Verlag.
Phelps, A. (1986). “Holiday Destination Image: The Problem of Assessment.”
Tourism Management, 7 (3): 168-80.
Pike, S. (2002). “Destination Image Analysis: A Review of 142 Papers from
1973 to 2000.” Tourism Management, 23 (5): 541-49.
Prentice, R., and V. Andersen (2000). “Evoking Ireland: Modelling Tourist
Propensity.” Annals of Tourism Research, 27 (2): 490-516.
Quinn, B. (1989). “Imagery in Tourism Promotion: A Case Study of Ireland
as a Tourist Destination in Continental Europe.” Master’s thesis, St.
Patrick’s College, Maynooth, Ireland.
Reilly, M. D. (1990). “Free Elicitation of Descriptive Adjectives for Tourism
Image Assessment.” Journal of Travel Research, 28 (4): 69-76.
Richardson, S. L., and J. L. Crompton (1988). “Cultural Variations in Perceptions
of Vacation Attributes.” Tourism Management, (June): 128-
36.
Riley, R. W., and L. L. Love (2000). “The State of Qualitative Tourism Research.”
Annals of Tourism Research, 27 (1): 164-87.
Stocks, J. (1996). “Heritage and Tourism in the Irish Republic: Towards a
Giant Theme Park?” In Tourism and Culture: Image, Identity and
Marketing, edited by M. Robinson et al. Sunderland, UK: Centre for
Travel and Tourism in association with Business Education Publishers
Ltd, pp. 251-60.
英國dissertation網專業提供英國留學生旅游管理dissertation定制。Sussmann, S., and A. Unel (1999). “Destination Image and Its Modification
after Travel: An Empirical Study on Turkey.” In Consumer Behavior
in Travel and Tourism, edited by A. Pizam and Y. Mansfeld. New
York: Haworth Hospitality, pp. 207-26.
Van Raaij, W. F., and D. A. Francken (1984). “Vacation Decisions, Activities#p#分頁標題#e#
and Satisfaction.” Annals of Tourism Research, 11: 101-12.
Vogt, C. A., S. I. Stewart, and D. R. Fesenmaier (1998). “Communication
http://www.400190.com/dissertation_writing/Tourism/Strategies to Reach First-Time Visitors.” Journal of Travel and Tourism
Marketing, 7 (2): 69-89.
Woodside, A. G., and S. Lyonski (1989). “AGeneral Model of Traveler Destination
Choice.” Journal of Travel Research, 17 (4): 8-14.
Zhang, H. Q., and I. Chow (2004). “Application of Importance-Performance
Model in Tour Guides’ Performance: Evidence from Mainland Chinese
Outbound Visitors in Hong Kong.” Tourism Management, 25 (1):
81-91.
256 FEBRUARY 2005