SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.15 número1Analysis of the intent to purchase travel on the webAferir a qualidade do marketing de destinos: perceções dos stakeholders públicos locais em Portugal índice de autoresíndice de assuntosPesquisa de artigos
Home Pagelista alfabética de periódicos  

Serviços Personalizados

Journal

Artigo

Indicadores

Links relacionados

  • Não possue artigos similaresSimilares em SciELO

Compartilhar


Tourism & Management Studies

versão impressa ISSN 2182-8458versão On-line ISSN 2182-8466

TMStudies vol.15 no.1 Faro mar. 2019

https://doi.org/10.18089/tms.2019.150103 

TOURISM: SCIENTIFIC PAPERS

The challenge of linking destination online reputation with competitiveness

El reto de vincular reputación online de destinos turísticos con competitividad

Patricia P. Iglesias-Sánchez1, Marisol B. Correia2, Carmen Jambrino-Maldonado3

1University of Malaga-Andalucía Tech, Faculty of Economics and Business Studies, Department of Economics and Business Organisation, Spain, patricia.iglesias@uma.es

2University of Algarve, ESGHT, Centre for Tourism Research, Development and Innovation (CiTUR), CEG-IST, Portugal, mcorreia@ualg.pt

3University of Málaga-Andalucía Tech, Faculty of Economics and Business Studies, Department of Economics and Business Organisation, Spain, mcjambrino@uma.es


 

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study is to evidence how 2.0 conversations in social media impact the reputation of destinations. Additionally, the influence of co-creation practices is analysed. The five most competitive destinations worldwide have been chosen for the research. This paper demonstrates that monitoring social media is a challenge in tourism and is a strategic tool to support process decision making and for destination brand building in a sustainable way. Currently, there are several monitoring and analytic tools, but there is a lack of models to systematise and harness it for the Destination Management Organization (DMOs). In conclusion, how tourists play the main role in the competitiveness of Destinations with their experiences and opinions are considered, along with some keys for successful management of social media are given in the view of the results.

Keywords: Reputation, Destination Management Organizations (DMOs), open innovation, social media.


 

RESUMEN

El objetivo de este estudio es mostrar cómo las conversaciones 2.0 que se desarrollan en las redes sociales tienen un impacto en la reputación de los destinos turísticos. Adicionalmente, se analiza si las practices de co-creación tienen alguna indicencia. Los 5 destinos más competitivos del mundo conforman la muestra. Este trabajo demuestra que la monitorización de las redes social es un reto en turismo, así como una herramienta estratégica para apoyar el proceso de toma de decisiones y para generar la marca de los destinos de una forma sostenible. Actualmente, existen numerosas herramientas analíticas, pero no hay una carencia clara de modelos que sistematicen estos aspectos para los gestores de destinos turísticos. En conclusion, los turistas juegan un papel claro en la competitividad de los destinos con sus experiencias y opiniones. Los resultados permiten ofrecer algunas claves de éxito para la gestión de las redes sociales como implicaciones practices.

Palabras clave: Reputación, organizaciones de gestión de destinos, innovación abierta, redes sociales.


 

1. Introduction

Tourism has now become the leading leisure activity, and its positive economic impact is undeniable (United Nations World Tourism Organization - UNWTO, 2017). However, destinations should take new factors into account to gain competitive ground. In this age of technology, the international tourism industry is rapidly adopting a third "T" - "Travel, Tourism and Technology" - and social media has also begun to play the main role in this scenario. Virtual and collaborative environments have revolutionised the way to travel and to do business, which is the reason why finding links between 2.0 conversations and competitiveness is a fundamental issue in the tourism industry.

“Tourism destinations, in general, compete in attracting visitors, residents, and businesses” (Komaić & Dorčić, 2016, p. 145). A positive reputation helps destinations in their objectives. Consequently, the continuous monitoring of opinions, feelings and experiences lived and, moreover, shared are key to their daily management. Looking to build or maintain positive reputations is today a challenge and an imperative as well. Morgan, Pritchard & Pride (2013) highlight authenticity, brand narratives, leadership and authorship, performativity, story-telling, and aesthetics like relevant issues for achieving strong destination brands.

Considerable research has been undertaken to investigate how to use social media to engage tourists and obtain support for better competitive positioning (Buhalis, 2000; Buonincontri & Micera, 2016). Consequently, reputation monitoring tools have proliferated recently in the tourism industry. These kinds of instruments are really useful to identify, control and manage customer-generated information. In a certain way, the online content provides insights on the position of the destination as well as the strengths and weakness in which to work. The measurement of the destination web reputation includes, on the one hand, “the analysis of the opinions (positive or negative) expressed by users in various web sources (communities, blogs, social networks), and, on the other hand, the measurement of virality (sharing rates) generated by those comments and posts” (Micera & Crispino, 2017, p. 406). The complexity of this issue implies the use of social media analysis techniques that are able to find generated conversations on online platforms and, what is more, detect and exploit qualitative and quantitative aspects. Currently, technology, especially business intelligence, makes it possible. As a result, there are numerous Social Media Analytic tools available for researchers and practitioners. However, “it is not easy to exploit the great potential of these smart instruments, and rigorous methodologies are needed to capitalise the value of feedback gathered” (Micera & Crispino, 2017, p. 406).

The purpose of this paper is to analyse online reputation in the most competitive destinations, with regard to the ranking of World Economic Forum (2017). Additionally, this research paper focuses on determining how countries build a competitive identity and how tourist conversations on social media affect their reputations.

This paper is organised into five sections. After the introduction, it starts with defining reputation and reviews the literature on tourism destination. The hypotheses are proposed based on the theoretical framework. The methodology is then explained, including the substantiation of the sample and social media analytic tools used. The fourth section sets out the empirical results. All the Adobe information concludes that achieving a better competitive position requires a strategy to manage their social media in each destination, but it is necessary to watch and listen to their market. The main conclusion is that e- reputation plays a key role in attracting tourists and, in the end, in better performance by destinations. By the way, critical analysis and discussion are laid out as well in this last section. Some practical implications for the tourism industry are explained, highlighting that destinations should focus their energy on knowing what their current reputation through social media and then set up a global one. Finally, directions for future research are provided.

2. Literature review

2.1 Role of reputation in tourism destination competitiveness

Tourism is nowadays a complex and multidimensional phenomenon, and rivalry between destinations is therefore growing. In this scenario, the strategies lead to value-added products being created to attract more tourists and simultaneously to maintain market position are the main issue in current Destination Management Organizations (DMOs). Moreover, other dimensions have been taken into account in recent years: destination profitability, tourist experience, resource sustainability and resident well-being. Several rankings and research papers have focused on Destination competitiveness, and they have become benchmarks for analysing this topic (Hassan, 2000; Ritchie & Crouch, 2003; World Economic Forum, 2017). However, few studies pay attention to the tourist perspective (Komsic & Dorcic, 2016), much less in 2.0 channels. If destinations want to achieve holistic management of their competitiveness, the challenge is then to implement strategies towards customer experience management, experiential marketing and emotional marketing (Weiermair, 2006).

Reputation has become a crucial tool in the tourism sector because it confers a competitive advantage (Freire, 2011). This question is gaining in importance due to ICTs and e, social media. Internet is simultaneously a source of information on destinations and an opportunity to share experiences, generate content, offer suggestions or make recommendations to strengthen or weaken a destination. Additionally, the vast pool of information on the Internet builds trust in tourists (De Ascaniss & Gretzel, 2013). Despite the fact that the reputation concept still gives rise to a degree of discussion, there is some consensus on two questions: the relation between reputation as the opinion shared among a group of stakeholders and, on the other hand, the impact of reputation on success. In particular, online reputation stems from the aggregation of the entire range of online conversations (Inversini, Marchiori, Dedekind & Cantoni, 2010). As a result, “online reputation depends on both the positive and negative opinions exchanged on the web through social media and on the virality of these comments and then shared” (Micera & Crispino, 2017, p. 407). Destination managers could use that information to support the decision-making process (Coca-Stefaniak, 2014). In this sense, online reputation is useful for scoreboards, strategic planning and tourism destination governance. For all these reasons, the models for measuring reputation and online reputation in the tourism sector have raised the interest in field research at this time. This previous theory allows us to formulate the following hypotheses:

H1. There is a link between competitiveness and online reputation in tourism destinations.

2.2 Social Media destination management

News media are important for building and influencing reputation (Huang-Horowitz, 2016). Specifically, social media plays a main role in this scenario nowadays. Collaborative and interactive platforms provides people with an accessible medium where they have the power to express their opinions and proposals regarding any matter (Shankar, Cherrier & Canniford, 2006) and, moreover, they have the chance to become co-creators (Chan, 2007; Karlsson, 2010; Iglesias- Sánchez, Correia & Jambrino Maldonado, 2017). Currently, social media are a value intelligence system for DMOs because they are both a source of quality information on tourists and a channel which encourages tourists’ experiences and comments to be shared and proposals to improve the destinations to be made. However, the concern lies in creating appropriate incentives to motivate customers to participate and in establishing the adequate systems to collect, evaluate, implement and provide feedback (Fuller, Muhlbacher, Matzler & Jawecki, 2009). Consequently, destinations should take an active role and invest time and resources in reputation management (Ledesma, Navarro & Pérez-Rodríguez, 2005). Nowadays, this reputation has been through social media, which should, therefore, be taken into account. Reputation serves as a strategic tool for destinations, so a proactive action is necessary as well (Buffaa, Beritellib & Martinia, 2018).

Accordingly, DMOs should lead engagement with tourists through their social media. Regarding this idea, the following hypotheses can be proposed:

H2. The effort invested in managing destinations’ social media has a positive impact on:

H2.1. Volume of conversations out of their own channels.

H2.2. Positive sentiment in conversations.

H2.3. Engagement with the destinations.

2.3 Open Innovation as a source of competitiveness

Today Open Innovation (OI) stands out as a new innovation paradigm. Any kind of organisation can take advantage of the outgoing knowledge and collaboration with their different stakeholders. Taking the external ideas and involvement of stakeholders into account, especially customers, means speeding up their innovation processes, improving their skills and ensuring the success of new products in the market (Chesbrough, 2003; Huizingh, 2011). Destinations have the opportunity to obtain useful information from tourists to rethink their strategies, innovate through products, processes and promotion and improve facilities and infrastructure. Moreover, social media are portrayed as a potent tool for customer involvement in new experiences and product development for organisations with competences in tourism policy (Iglesias-Sánchez, Correia, Jambrino-Maldonado & Luque-Rojas, 2017). Chiaroni, Chiesa & Frattini (2011) insist on it being essential to establish channels to access new information, but destinations cannot forget that the key is to turn the ideas into a marketable result. Although customer involvement has been a topic under study for a long time, even now, there are several questions in which to delve further (Fuller et al., 2009). The establishment of co-creation spaces with different stakeholders becomes a challenge to ensure the success of Open Innovation in destination management. Co- creation allows tourist participation in every stage of the service development process and, most importantly, it makes connecting in customer experience possible in order to remain competitive. As a result, co-creation practices are a way to implement OI and are vitally important for tourism settings (Roeffen & Scholl-Grissemann, 2016).

In the previous section, the potential of social media has been touched on, but they are now analysed from the perspective of their contribution to Open Innovation. Fuller et al. (2009) claim that due to cost-efficient and multimedia-rich interaction opportunities offered by the Internet and the existence of online communities, virtual co-creation has become a suitable means of creating value and improving the overall success of new products. In this way, social media check all the relevant criteria to support the Open Innovation paradigm (Abbate & Coppolino,2013). Destinations managers can invite tourists to actively participate in the creation of experiences, products, evaluation new products or evaluate and discuss possible proposals as well. Additionally, Open Innovation practices through co-creation could be considered an antecedent of trust. The direct effect between empowerment and trust has been shown in the literature (Fuller et al., 2009; Moorman, Zaltman & Desphande, 1992; Morgan et al., 2013; Micera & Crispino, 2017)

Having regard to the above, the research point of view expects to find some Open Innovation practices in the social media of destinations. Therefore, the proposal hypotheses are:

H3. Open Innovation practices, through co-creation spaces, have a positive impact on:

H3.1. Higher rate of influence

H3.2. Higher rate of participation

3. Methodology

The main objective of this paper is to investigate the importance of online reputation in the tourism field applied to tourism destinations and to find links between that and destination competitiveness. To this end, the first five destinations that appear in the Travel & Tourism competitiveness report developed by the World Economic Forum (2017) are the sample. Spain, France, Germany, UK and USA (Japan is excluded because it does not manage Twitter) are the chosen destinations for the analysis (Table 1). This ranking is widely and internationally recognised due to more than 90 indicators. The competitive index framework is shown in Figure 1.

 

 

 

Two Social Media Analytic tools were used: Social Mention and Mention. Both monitors detect the online conversation in different 2.0 platforms: blogs, social media, forums, content sharing site, etc. are automatically analysed regarding, the chosen keywords, languages and the established research period. The Twitter account, Facebook account, Instagram account and name of the target countries in TripAdvisor are included in the alerts to optimise the web results. Additionally, keywords like tourism, visit, travel, journey and trip were incorporated independently and combined with the name of each country. The alerts were set to analyse online conversations in English, Spanish, German and France. In total, 108,504 online conversations had been identified by the chosen Social Media Analytic tools.

The empirical research was from May 2017 to March 2018, meaning tourist high seasons were covered. However, that was not possible with Social Mention in which only the conversations held in the last month were analysed. In any event, Mention and Social Mention are powerful instruments, and they can be combined to ensure the maximum possible monitory completeness.

The design of the research sought to identify sources, online presence, sentiment, engagement, topics (keywords and hashtags) and influence for each destination. Even though Social Media Analytic tools had been the main source in this research paper, a holistic vision is offered taken into account engagement and influence of Destinations’ social media: Twitter, Facebook and Instagram (Table 2). This paper wants to introduce the original contribution of the link between the Open Innovation paradigm and destination management. In this sense, interactions that each destination developed to enhance the tourism involvement and participation had to be analysed A technical sheet is used to categorise how OI is implemented and the results provided as well. On this issue, Instagram is excluded because tourist reactions are focused on pictures. In this way, the Facebook and Twitter accounts of the chosen five destinations are the source of information. First, the quantity of OI content in comparison with total generated content and the impact of this kind of action in tourists were measured. Hereafter, a Likert scale was used for 10 items linked to 4 indicators (Experience Empowerment, Engagement, Task involvement and Customer involvement in New Product Development-NPD). The values attributed to each item (Experience Empowerment, Engagement, Task involvement and Customer Involvement in NPD) are the result of the comparative observation in social media. The value <1> is associated when tourists do not interact or react to the action and if the number of comments and shared is high, with <7> being indicated.

 

 

Additionally, each post is evaluated according to their meaning to identify the different questions listed in the table. For example, is there a call to action to share with others? Does the post-offer extra and attractive information about the destination? The variables to measure Open Innovation were derived from the instrument developed by Fuller et al. (2009). In this case, the analysis has been restricted to the last week of March coinciding with Easter.

On the other hand, a non-automated qualitative analysis was carried out. In order to achieve this aim, a topic structure first needed to be established, in other words, a data sheet. The six “A’s” proposed by Buhalis (2000) was the base for its elaboration: Attractions (natural, man-made, artificial, purpose-built, heritage, special events); Accessibility (entire transportation system comprising of routes, terminals and vehicles); Amenities (accommodation and catering facilities, retail, other tourist services); Available packages (pre-arranged packages by intermediaries and principals); Activities (all activities available at the destination and what consumers will do during their visit); Ancillary services (services used by tourists such as banks, telecommunications, post offices, newsagents’, hospitals, etc). In this case, the generated content was only analysed in English and Spanish.

4. Results

First, a comparative analysis between destinations is conducted, and a detailed vision focusing on each destination is then shown.

The established order of the ranking of destination competitiveness matches the volume of conversation generated in each destination (Figure 2). All destinations maintain their position. However, the volume does not always correspond to sentiment, influence and engagement. Regarding sentiments, which are activated in each destination, neutral comments can be seen to be prevailing. Nevertheless, the positive comments are more numerous in all destinations (Figure 3).

 

 

 

As shown in Figure 4, the order is reversed in the case of influence (Figure 4). France achieves greater influence, immediately followed by Germany and Britain showing a significant level of influence. In contrast, Spain loses its leadership.

 

 

Finally, engagement is measured by combining four parameters: strength (the discussion on the destination), sentiment (ratio of positive comments against negative comments), passion (frequency of been mentioned) and reach (number of unique authors with regard to the total of mentions) following Social Mention. In Table 3, the comparison between destinations shows that Spain and the UK stand out in strength and reach, but their sentiment and passion rates are lower. Regarding these parameters, France led the ranking in sentiment and passion as well. Curiously, other destinations, such as Germany, show conflicting values in these two questions. Furthermore, Spain has the lowest ratio of sentiment, but it has remarkable results in passion.

 

 

Generally speaking, Twitter is the social media with the highest volume of conversations followed by Instagram because pictures are the kind content preferred by tourists. Additionally, blogs, news and forum stand out in terms of impact (Figure 5).

 

 

In view of the results, social media with more engagement has been analysed. In this case, taking their social media as the benchmark, Instagram is generally making its mark in detriment of the others.

The analysis of the content in the conversations shows that activities, attractions and amenities are the most mentioned questions. This trend takes the same line in all destinations. In fact, the importance of pictures must be stressed for two main reasons: they concentrate a wide part of the content, and the pictures generally reveal positive experiences lived in the destination, but currently Social Media Analytic tools cannot classify them according to positive or negative sentiment. Therefore, available packages are not the main topic for tourists in their social media. However, an important effort is made to propose packages and special offers in destination social media. In any event, destinations closely target their objectives when they introduce attractions and activities, especially when these are lesser-known natural spaces, buildings or events. When negative comments are considered, amenities are the main actors. Additionally, accessibility and, to a lesser extent, the ancillary services are topics of discussion.

At this point, Open Innovation is the core of the analysis. The role of co-creation with tourists to improve and to gain engagement is shown in Table 4. At present, few Open Innovation actions have been found in destination social media. Two kinds of co-creation calls have been identified: questions about tourist plans or preferences and requests for cooperation in sharing pictures. In any event, the most active destination is Spain due to a large number of generated content and the level of participation proposals. It should also be noted that certain destinations, such as France, offer a low level of content. But the co-creation achieved is remarkable. Other destinations, such as Germany and the USA, provide little content in their social media, and any OI-liked action is detected. Finally, the UK stands out as it is the only destination that includes specific incentives to promote tourist participation (award).

 

 

5. Conclusion

This study sought to examine how social media affects destination online reputation. Own content and tourist conversations online are taken into account for this research. Additionally, co-creation practices on social media are identified to check if tourist involvement contributes to destination reputation and competitiveness. The study shows that competitiveness linked to destinations is correlated with their reputation. In this way, Hypothesis 1 can be verified due to the coincidence between competitiveness ranking and online reputation. However, online conversations do not always reflect the destination effort in 2.0 environments. Generally speaking, destinations that are more active in social media get a high conservation level on their channels and out of them. This point supports Hypothesis 2.1. In contrast with a good social media management strategy, a proportional sentiment and engagement are not achieved. Therefore, Hypothesis 2.2 and 2.3 cannot be determined because the results do not confirm an identical behaviour pattern. Curiously, destination social media, which generate more content, show good ratios of followers and likes, but the capacity to increase sharing content or participation by tourists show a non-cause-and- effect association.

The findings are similar to those encountered in previous literature. The importance of monitoring conversations in social media given their influence on reputation is widely recognised (Chen & Chen, 2009; Inversini et al., 2010; Komsic & Dorcic 2016; Micera & Crispino, 2017). Additionally, the awareness of the destination brand is a logical outcome, identified in this field as well (Boo, Busser & Baloglu, 2009). However, the comparison between destinations is not a common choice, and this paper could, therefore, be innovative in this sense.

The results from the Open Innovation analysis proved to be inconclusive. The co-creation practices on destination social media are limited, and the comparison is not possible between all destinations. Additionally, this kind of co-creation proposals lead to tourists being involved in content generation, but less so in searching for participation in product development (Buffaa, Beritellib & Martinia, 2018). The mechanism to encourage participation and to provide feedback are not clearly defined even in isolated cases of involvement in product development. For all these reasons, the assumptions linked to Hypothesis 3 do not hold with the obtained data. In any event, Open Innovation must be seen by DMOs as a chance and an imminent challenge to ensure their destinations remain competitive. Despite this, Open Innovation has been at the centre of the attention of academia and or the private sector, but there are few research papers with conclusive results, and much less linking Open Innovation and online reputation (Fuller et al., 2009; Iglesias-Sánchez et al., 2017). Precisely, this question is the main contribution in this paper and, at the same time, an invitation to go further into the topic due to the evidence provided.

On the basis of the results obtained, the main conclusions are:

(1) online conversations play a crucial role in reputation building, (2) a strategy for social media management needs to be defined and for there to be active participation; however, generating content is not enough, as knowing the feelings and preferences of tourists is key to achieving the desirable engagement with stakeholders. (3) Open Innovation paradigm and, specifically, co-creation practices need to extend beyond social media. The literature review insists on emphasising the positive impact on competitiveness, but in practice, destination managers have been insufficiently attentive to this challenge.

This research paper may have important practical implications for destination management. First, DMOs should consider a holistic approach to reputation and should include social media in their strategy. The effort should be twofold: in their own 2.0 channels and monitor online conversations about destinations. It is more important to focus on what content is more valuable and attractive for tourists than to create a high volume of information. Additionally, this paper raises marketing implications. It is shown that DMOs could take into account the valuable own and external information and tools to better create and manage a destination image. Therefore, the content gathered by tourists is highly influential on image and reputation of destinations. In this way, it is not only the result of induced image but also organic image nowadays, as blogs, social media… etc. play a leading role in brand building, even for tourism destinations.

On the other hand, further progress is needed in the analysis of the open innovation phenomenon and its effects on competitiveness, both from the point of view of research and of tourist companies. The study found that it is key to develop a very solid strategy to ensure the expected success in both in terms of reputation and innovation management. Finally, this research paper concurs with recent ones (Micera & Crispino, 2017) that sophisticated technological tools to analyse online reputation are necessary for researchers and for DMOs. The innovative social listening method can help to process destination decision-making and be a strategic tool to support the destination-building process in a sustainable way.

This research paper has sought to be a significant step forward but is not without limitations. In any case, it is an exploratory rather a definitive study and some aspects need to be examined, in greater detail. Additionally, a cross-sectional study should be considered to check the evolution and the changes produced over time. On the other hand, quantitative techniques should be combined to complete the monitoring of conversations, and the conclusions reached.

Future research will emphasise the development of a measurement model of online reputation on tourism destinations competitiveness. Additionally, a tool to analyse co- creation practices should be implemented to make generalisations and to identify the positive effects derived from tourist involvement in new product/experience development.

 

REFERENCES

Abbate, T., & Coppolino, R. (2013). Open Innovation and online intermediaries: A review theory and its implications for tourism. International Conference Marketing from Information to Decision, Department of Marketing (pp. 9-22), Faculty of Economics and Business, Babes-Bolyai University, Cluj Napoca.         [ Links ]

Boo, S., Busser, J., & Baloglu, S. (2009). A model of customer-based brand equity and its application to multiple destinations. Tourism Management, 30(2), 219-231.         [ Links ]

Buhalis, D. (2000). Marketing the competitive destination of the future. Tourism Management, 21(1), 97-116.         [ Links ]

Buffaa, F., Beritellib, P.,& Martinia, U. (2018). Project networks and the reputation network in a community destination: Proof of the missing link. Journal of Destination Marketing and Management. (in press).         [ Links ]

Buonincontri, P., & Micera, R. (2016). The co-creation experience in smart tourism destinations: a multiple case analysis of European destinations. Information Technology & Tourism, 16(3), 285-315.         [ Links ]

Chan, H. (2007). Linkage community-based innovation and speed to market: then mediating role of new product development process. International Journal of Organizational Innovation, 2(4), 49-60.         [ Links ]

Chen, J. K., & Chen, I. S. (2009). Fuzzy integral and fuzzy measure methods for the reputation performance of the leisure service industry. Business Renaissance Quarterly, 4(2), 85-105.         [ Links ]

Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open Innovation. The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.         [ Links ]

Chiaroni, D., Chiesa, V., & Frattini, F. (2011). The Open Innovation Journey: How firms dynamically implement the emerging innovation management paradigm. Technovation, 31(1), 34-43.         [ Links ]

Coca-Stefaniak, A. (2014). Place branding and city centre management: Exploring international parallels in research and practice. Journal of Urban Regeneration & Renewal, 7(4), 363-369.         [ Links ]

De Ascaniis, S., & Gretzel, U. (2013). Communicative functions of Online Travel Review titles: a pragmatic and linguistic investigation of destination and attraction OTR titles. Studies in Communication Sciences, 13(2), 156-165.         [ Links ]

Freire, J. R. (2011). Destination brands: Managing place reputation (3rd edition). Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 7(4), 316-320.         [ Links ]

Hassan, S. (2000). Determinants of market competitiveness in an environmentally sustainable tourism industry. Journal of Travel Research, 38(3), 239-245.         [ Links ]

Huang-Horowitz, N. C. (2016). The Media Reputation of Small Firms: Exploring the Applicability of Existing Reputation Measures. Corporate Reputation Review, 19(2), 127-139.         [ Links ]

Huizingh, E. (2011). Open innovation: State of the art and future perspectives. Technovation, 1(31), 2-9        [ Links ]

Iglesias-Sánchez, P. P., Correia, M. B., Jambrino-Maldonado, C., & Luque- Rojas, D. (2017). Retos en la gestión de destinos turísticos a partir de la innovación abierta. Estudios y Perspectivas en Turismo, 26(3), 531-548.         [ Links ]

Inversini, A., Marchiori, E., Dedekind, C., & Cantoni, L. (2010). Applying a conceptual framework to analyse online reputation of tourism destinations. Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism, 20, 321-332.         [ Links ]

Karlsson, M. (2010). Collaborative idea management: Using the creativity of crowds to drive innovation. Innovation Management, 1, 3-27.         [ Links ]

Komsic, J., & Dorcic, J. (2016). Tourism destination competitiveness and online reputation: conceptualization and literature framework analysis. Faculty of Tourism and Hospitality Management in Opatija. Biennial International Congress. Tourism & Hospitality Industry, 144-157.

Ledesma, F. J., Navarro, M., & Perez-Rodriguez, J. (2005). Return to tourist destination. Is it reputation, after all? Applied Economics, 37(18), 2055-2065.         [ Links ]

Micera, R., & Crispino, R., (2017). Destination web reputation as "smart tool" for image building: The case analysis of Naples city- destination. International Journal of Tourism Cities, 3(4), 406-423.         [ Links ]

Moorman, C., Zaltman, G., & Desphande, R. (1992). Relationship between providers and users of market research: The dynamics of trust within and between organizations. Journal of Marketing Research, 29(3), 314-328.         [ Links ]

Morgan, N., Pritchard, A., & Pride, R. (2013). Destination Brands Managing Place Reputation. Amsterdam: Elsevier.         [ Links ]

Ritchie, J.R.B., & Crouch, G.I. (2003). The Competitive Destination: A Sustainable Tourism Prospective, CABI Publishing.

Roeffen, D., & Scholl-Grissemann, U. (2016). The importance of customer co-creation of value for the tourism and hospitality industry. In Egger R., Gula I., Walcher D. (eds), Open Tourism. Tourism on the Verge (pp. 35-46). Berlin-Heidelberg: Springer.         [ Links ]

Shankar, A., Cherrier, H., & Canniford, R. (2006). Consumer empowerment: A Foucauldian interpretation. European Journal of Marketing, 4(9-10), 1013-1030.         [ Links ]

Weiermair, K. (2006). Product improvement or innovation: what is the key to success in tourism? In OECD, Innovation and growth in tourism (pp. 53-69), Paris.         [ Links ]

World Economic Forum. (2017). The Travel & Tourism Competitiveness Report 2017. Retrieved March 23, 2018, from https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-travel-tourism-competitiveness-report-2017         [ Links ]

UNWTO (2017) Tourism Highlights: 2017 Edition. Retrieved March 23, 2018, from http://mkt.unwto.org/publication/unwto-tourism-highlights.         [ Links ]

 

Received: 12.06.2018

Revisions required: 20.11.2018

Accepted: 18. 12.2018

Creative Commons License Todo o conteúdo deste periódico, exceto onde está identificado, está licenciado sob uma Licença Creative Commons