Journal of Travel Research

http://jtr.sagepub.com/ Effects of DMO Coordination on Destination Brand Identity : A Mixed-Method Study on the City of Edinburgh
Ilenia Bregoli Journal of Travel Research 2013 52: 212 originally published online 15 October 2012 DOI: 10.1177/0047287512461566 The online version of this article can be found at: http://jtr.sagepub.com/content/52/2/212

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Travel and Tourism Research Association

Additional services and information for Journal of Travel Research can be found at: Email Alerts: http://jtr.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://jtr.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: http://jtr.sagepub.com/content/52/2/212.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Feb 12, 2013 OnlineFirst Version of Record - Oct 15, 2012 What is This?

Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at Tumaini Uni-Ingringa University College on June 10, 2013

461566
461566Journal of Travel ResearchBregoli

JTRXXX10.1177/0047287512

Effects of DMO Coordination on Destination Brand Identity: A MixedMethod Study on the City of Edinburgh
Ilenia Bregoli1

Journal ofTravel Research 52(2) 212224 2012 SAGE Publications Reprints and permission: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0047287512461566 http://jtr.sagepub.com

Abstract Academic literature has paid little attention to stakeholder coordination and branding from a supply-side perspective. This article tries to fill this gap by applying the concept of internal brand strength to destination brands and analyzing whether stakeholder coordination has an impact on the destination brand. A mixed-method design involving stakeholders working within Edinburgh, Scotland, revealed that within the city there is mixed commitment to the brand, and some coordination mechanisms appear more useful than others for ensuring that stakeholders are committed to and adopt brand values in their work. This article makes apparent that internal communication and socialization processes are fundamental activities to which destination marketing organization (DMO) managers should pay attention if they want stakeholders to become committed to the destination brand values and adopt them in their work. Keywords destination management, stakeholder coordination, destination branding, internal brand strength, mixed-methods

Introduction
Destinations are considered to be amalgams of tourism products, offering an integrated experience to consumers (Buhalis 2000, p. 97); as a result, in a destination several products and services that are provided to tourists by different stakeholders coexist. Therefore, destinations are characterized by high fragmentation, which is one of the factors that make destinations one of the most difficult entities to manage (Fyall and Garrod 2005; Fyall and Leask 2007). In light of the fragmentation of destinations on one hand and the need to provide tourists with a seamless experience on the other, the coordination of the stakeholders working within the destination is pivotal. This activity affects also the destination brand, which is a topic that has attracted growing interest from scholars and practitioners. Similarly to products and services, destinations also must cope with increased competition from different destinations. As a result, the brand plays a pivotal role since it is the real source of competitive advantage of destinations because it allows destinations to differentiate themselves (Beerli and Martin 2004; Garca, Gmez, and Molina 2012) and to influence tourists choices and their satisfaction (Del Chiappa and Bregoli 2012). The academic literature has acknowledged the link between stakeholder coordination and the destination brand, recognizing that destination brand development is a matter of coordination rather than a managed activity (Prideaux and

Cooper 2002; Hankinson 2004; Ooi 2004; Fyall and Leask 2007). On this point, for instance, Scott, Parfitt, and Laws (2000, p. 202, cited by Fyall and Leask 2007) stressed the relationship between coordination and effective destination branding by arguing that the difficulties of co-ordination and control have the potential to undermine a strategic approach to marketing based on destination branding because campaigns can be undertaken by a variety of tourist businesses with no consultation or co-ordination on the prevailing message or the destination values being promoted. Hence, the stakeholder coordination is one of the necessary factors for developing a successful destination brand, along with drawing stakeholder support (Ooi 2004; Konecnik and Go 2008) and having stakeholders who are committed to the brand because successful branding is likely when there is unity of purpose and commitment by all stakeholders to a common branding strategy (Hankinson 2001, p. 137). Although the relationship between stakeholder coordination and destination branding has been acknowledged in the literature, the topic has so far received little attention. As a consequence, this article tries to fill this gap by studying both
1

The University of Northampton, Northampton, United Kingdom

Corresponding Author: Ilenia Bregoli, Northampton Business School, The University of Northampton, Boughton Green Road, Northampton, NN2 7AL, United Kingdom Email: ilenia.bregoli@northampton.ac.uk

Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at Tumaini Uni-Ingringa University College on June 10, 2013

Bregoli the coordination carried out by the DMO and the destination brand analyzed from a supply-side perspective. With regard to the latter aspect, this paper has applied the concept of internal brand strength that consists of the brand commitment and the brand citizenship behavior dimensions. In order to study these topics, the author has carried out empirical research in Edinburgh, Scotland, to address the following research questions: Research question 1: To what extent are the stakeholders committed to the destination brand values (brand commitment)? Research question 2: Do stakeholders adopt the destination brand values in their work (brand citizenship behavior)? Research question 3: Does the coordination activity have an impact on brand commitment and brand citizenship behavior?

213 consider it synonymous with the concept of cooperation, others view them as two distinct concepts (Payan and Svensson 2007). According to the latter perspective, which this research applies, cooperation is the act of sharing resources in order to take advantage of collective opportunities. On the contrary, coordination is a process through which the actions of different organizations are managed to achieve a common goal (Grandori 1999) and it is necessary in order to cope with the interdependencies that develop between firms (Grandori 1995). Since within destinations there are interdependencies between firms because they provide tourists different products and services, it is easy to understand how coordination is important. On this topic some scholars have pointed out that the DMO acts as a coordinator of both the stakeholders who work in the destination and the marketing activities which the DMO and single businesses carry out (Jamal and Getz 1995; Getz, Anderson, and Sheehan 1998; Buhalis 2000; Prideaux and Cooper 2002; Ritchie and Crouch 2003; Fyall and Garrod 2005; Gretzel et al. 2006; Wang and Fesenmaier 2007). Furthermore, scholars acknowledge how the lack of stakeholder coordination can result in ineffective tourism development (Moscardo 2011). In this research, in order to study coordination, some theories on interorganizational relationships have been analyzed with the aim of identifying a set of coordination mechanisms that DMOs might use. Table 1 shows the considered theories and the coordination mechanisms that were identified. However, from the literature analysis, the author reduced the original list of coordination mechanisms because some were more suitable than others for DMOs. These mechanisms are the following: Social norms, that is, informal rules that organizations share. They are linked to trust and reciprocity that allow the establishment of relationships between the diverse parties involved and peer-based control (Pfeffer and Salancik 1978; Cannon, Achrol, and Gundlach 2000). In the case of community destinations, trust among stakeholders is necessary in order to agree on common decisions (Beritelli, Bieger, and Laesser 2007), to share with other stakeholders own core competencies like a customer database and when stakeholders share a common brand (Palmer 1998; Fyall and Garrod 2005). Communication is the most developed mechanism that exists in all networks. It is necessary if the network participants want to develop a longlasting relationship (Grandori and Soda 1995). Communication is also pivotal within destinations because effective communication is necessary in order to involve stakeholders and ensure that they are satisfied with the DMO (Bornhorst, Ritchie, and Sheehan 2010). Other research has shown that communication is essential in order

Literature Review
In light of the research questions, the literature review will address the two topics of stakeholder coordination and destination branding from a supply-side perspective. However, it must be pointed out that regarding these topics, there is a dearth of literature that is specifically related to tourism. Therefore, the research considers concepts developed for business organizations and applies them to the tourism industry. This choice is consistent with the concept of destination stakeholders that this research adopts and considers organizations that have some role in the tourism destination (Baggio and Cooper 2010, p. 1759). Therefore, this research regards public and private organizations (such as visitor attractions, accommodations, and transport) as stakeholders.

Coordination
According to Hankinson (2007), the coordination of stakeholders working within the destination is one element of destination governance that entails the involvement of different organizations in the decision-making process (Baggio, Scott, and Cooper 2011; Spyriadis, Buhalis, and Fyall 2011). Although a unique definition of destination governance does not exist, scholars have studied topics that fall under it, like tourism networks and their structure (Scott, Cooper, and Baggio 2008) and collaboration among destination stakeholders (Jamal and Getz 1995; Fyall and Garrod 2005; Wang and Xiang 2007; Rodger, Moore, and Newsome 2009; Arnaboldi and Spiller 2011). However, although destination governance is attracting a growing interest from scholars, the topic of stakeholders coordination is an unexplored topic. Although the coordination of organizations has been studied for a long time within the managerial literature, a unique definition of the concept does not exist. While some scholars

Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at Tumaini Uni-Ingringa University College on June 10, 2013

214
Table 1. A Synthesis of the Theories Taken into Account Theory Network theory Transaction cost economics Relational exchange theory Stakeholder theory Strategic management Resource dependence theory Unit of Analysis Network

Journal ofTravel Research 52(2)

Coordination Mechanisms

Communication, decision, and negotiation mechanisms Social coordination and control Integration and linking-pin roles and units Common staff Hierarchy and authority relations Planning and control systems Incentive systems Selection systems Information systems Public support and infrastructure Transactions Price Relationships Relational norms Stakeholders None RBV Firm with reference None to its resources Value chain framework Firm with reference Horizontal strategy to its activities Horizontal systems Firm Mergers Norms Joint ventures Interlocking directorates Trade associations and cartels

to avoid internal conflicts between stakeholders such as with the setup of a Cultural District in Italy (Arnaboldi and Spiller 2011). Interlocking directorates occur when a person affiliated with one organization sits on the board of directors of another organization (Mizruchi 1996, p. 271). Not only are they a source of legitimacy but they also allow firms to gain access to information, resources, and expertise (Hillman, Withers, and Collins 2009). Researchers found that in tourism, destinations in which there were people sitting on different boards were following a successful strategy (Beritelli, Bieger, and Laesser 2007). Planning and control systems are based on the control of results achieved against previously set objectives (Grandori and Soda 1995). These systems allow destination managers to understand what actions deserve retention and development over time and, in case less effective initiatives are identified, to implement corrective actions (Ritchie and Crouch 2003). Selection systems that regulate the access to a network (Grandori and Soda 1995). Reid, Smith, and McCloskey (2008), in their research on the Atlantic Canada Tourism Partnership, stressed the need to carefully plan stakeholder participation. For instance, the marketing committees of this partnership were made up by representatives of firms who had the necessary expertise in marketing.

Information systems (such as reservation systems) allow the coordination of firms in a network, thus simultaneously decreasing communication costs (Grandori and Soda 1995). Within destinations, the use of information technology (IT) and of destination marketing information systems (DMISs), in particular, can facilitate the connection between stakeholders and the dissemination of information across the destination (Ritchie and Ritchie 2002; Fyall 2011). Formal rules represented by the statute and the rules for brand usage. Research on this topic showed that DMOs that used formalized rules aimed at regulating the relationships between members were perceived to be more effective than those that did not have formal rules (Palmer 1998).

Branding
Destination branding has attracted attention from scholars since the end of the 1990s (Cai 2002; Blain, Levy, and Ritchie 2005; Pike 2005; Konecnik and Gartner 2007; Konecnik and Go 2008; Boo, Busser, and Baloglu 2009). The majority of studies have focused on the demand-side perspective of brands, that is, the brand image. However, scholars have recently recognized that adopting just one perspective is not sufficient; a supply-side perspective also should be taken into account and, as a result, the destination

Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at Tumaini Uni-Ingringa University College on June 10, 2013

Bregoli
Table 2. Dimensions of Brand Commitment Dimensions Brand compliance Brand identification Brand internalization Definitionsa Employees willingness to adjust his or her views and behaviours in accordance with the requirements of the brand and/or company The extent to which the employee believes to be a constituent of the brand and the firm The degree to which the employee has incorporated the brand into his or her thinking and behaviour Definitionsb

215

The adoption of certain behaviours that are consistent with the aspired brand identity in order to gain extrinsic rewards or to avoid penalties Acceptance of social influence due to a sense of belonging to the group determining the brand experience, and a perception of being intertwined with the group's fate It delineates the appropriation of core brand values into one's self-concept as guiding principles for one's actions

a. Source: Authors elaboration based on definitions by Burmann, Zeplin, and Riley (2009), p. 266. b. Source: Authors elaboration based on definitions by Burmann and Zeplin (2005), p. 285.

brand identity should be studied as well (Cai 2002; Konecnik and Go 2008; Boo, Busser, and Baloglu 2009). To consider both perspectives, some scholars (Park, Cai, and Lehto 2009; Del Chiappa and Bregoli 2012) have attempted to integrate them into a comprehensive model of destination branding. In addition, Garca, Gmez, and Molina (2012) stressed that both perspectives should be taken into account while assessing the destination brand success and, from their analysis of the Castilla-La Mancha brand, it emerged that the greatest contribution to its success was due to local entrepreneurs. As far as the supply-side perspective is concerned, the brand identity element must be taken into account. It is represents the core values that a business wants to communicate and, on the basis of which, all the other elements of the offer are established (Aaker and Joachimsthaler 2002; de Chernatony 2006; Kapferer 2008). Brand identity is particularly useful for staff members because if they have a clear understanding of the brand values, they can behave in a way that reinforces those values (Burmann and Zeplin 2005). Similarly to organizations, also within destinations, the brand identity can guide stakeholders behavior, but only if they believe in those brand values. It is important that the brand identity is consistent with the values of the destination and of the local community, thus accounting for the sense of place (Wheeler, Frost, and Weiler 2011). Otherwise, the end result is that an incongruent brand identity might develop and the stakeholders do not support the overall brand (Park, Cai, and Lehto 2009). Another aspect that the tourism literature has highlighted is stakeholders roles in destination brand development. For instance, Hankinson (2004), in his relational network brands model, pointed out that if a destination brand wants to succeed, it needs to build relationships with key stakeholders. Allan (2011) also stressed this aspect and argued that by developing the brand in partnership, stakeholders can, on one hand, set a shared strategy, thus broadening their focus, which will not only encompass their own objectives, and on the other hand, coordinate all the messages about the destination. However, since all destination stakeholders might not be supportive of the brand, some scholars suggest that IT

might help in connecting stakeholders through forums, e-mails, websites, and discussion boards (Tasci 2011). The need to gain support from different stakeholders so that the brand is accepted and adopted by them has been also highlighted by Konecnik and Go (2008) and Ooi (2004), who defined the politics of destination branding, that is, the process through which a DMO gains support from stakeholders so that they accept the brand and communicate it through their communication activities and products. Not only is it important to gain support from stakeholders, but it is also fundamental for stakeholders to be committed to the brand. On this point, from a study on 12 English cities, it emerged that the commitment of stakeholders is fundamental to the development of a destination brand; in particular, it was argued that successful branding is likely when there is unity of purpose and commitment by all stakeholders to a common branding strategy (Hankinson 2001, p. 137). Brand commitment is one dimension that make up the internal brand strength. Although scholars have developed this latter concept for product and service brands, the author believes that it could be applied to destination brands considering the features that distinguish them from the former brands. Garca, Gmez, and Molina (2012) also suggested this approach and stressed the usefulness of understanding business organizations branding practices in order to apply them to destination brands. As a result, the internal brand strength for destinations will refer to destination stakeholders rather than to organizations employees. The internal brand strength consists of the following two dimensions: 1. Brand commitment is the extent of psychological attachment of employees to the brand, which influences their willingness to exert extra effort towards reaching the brand goals (Burmann and Zeplin 2005, p. 284) and comprises three elements: brand compliance, brand identification and brand internalization (Table 2); 2. Brand citizenship behavior describes a number of generic employee behaviors that enhance brand identity (Burmann, Zeplin, and Riley 2009, p. 266) and comprises seven dimensions (Table 3).

Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at Tumaini Uni-Ingringa University College on June 10, 2013

216
Table 3. Dimensions of Brand Citizenship Behavior Dimensions Helping behavior Definitions

Journal ofTravel Research 52(2)

Positive attitude, friendliness, helpfulness, and empathy toward internal and external customers, taking responsibility for tasks outside of own area if necessary Brand consideration Adherence to brand-related behaviour guidelines and reflection of brand impact before communicating or taking action in any situation Brand enthusiasm Showing extra initiative while engaging in brand-related behaviours Sportsmanship No complaining, even if engagement for the brand causes inconvenience; willingness to engage for the brand even at high opportunity costs Brand endorsement Recommendation of the brand to others also in non-job-related situations, for example, to friends; passing on the brand identity to newcomers in the organisations Self-development Willingness to continuously enhance brand-related skills Brand advancement Contribution to the adaptation of the brand identity concept to changing market needs or new organisational competencies, for example, through passing on customer feedback or generating innovative ideas

Source: Authors elaboration based on definitions by Burmann and Zeplin (2005, pp. 283-84).

According to Burmann and Zeplin (2005), brand commitment, which is an antecedent of brand citizenship behavior, is created through brand-centered HR activities, brand communication of the identity, and brand leadership. The first two factors lead to the development of brand commitment based on brand internalization, which represents the highest level of brand commitment.

Methodology
The phenomena under investigation were studied by adopting a mixed-method design for the capital city of Scotland, Edinburgh. This choice was made because mixed methods are suitable when the collection of just one type of data is insufficient in order to understand the phenomena under investigation (Creswell and Plano Clark 2010). A convergent parallel design was adopted in which the qualitative and quantitative data were collected and analyzed independently during the same phase of the research project. Results were merged by comparing them and were interpreted and discussed by stating the degree to which they converged, diverged, or related. In order to mix both qualitative and quantitative data, a pragmatist worldview was adopted. Pragmatism is a practical research philosophy that is oriented toward the solution of real problems and in which attention is paid to the consequences of the research (Green and Caracelli 2003; Teddlie and Tashakkori 2003; Creswell and Plano Clark 2010; Feilzer 2010). With regard to the qualitative strand of this research, secondary as well as primary data were collected. The former were represented by documents and reports on the Destination Edinburgh Marketing Alliance (DEMA). These documents were either downloaded from the partnerships website or were received from some of the interviewees. Primary data were collected through 12 face-to-face semi-structured interviews (in total 19 people were contacted) with individuals representing diverse subsectors of the tourism industry. These included, but were not limited to, visitor attractions,

the accommodation sector, a tour operator, the National Tourism Organization (NTO), and tourism promotion. The interviewees were selected by adopting a purposive sampling strategy as it allows the researcher to select individuals and sites for study because they can purposefully inform an understanding of the research problem and central phenomenon in the study (Creswell 2007, p. 125). In particular, a snowball sampling procedure was applied whereby the first participants were asked to suggest other people who might be worth contacting to plan an interview (Flick 2006). All the interviews were tape-recorded and then transcribed; the transcripts were analyzed by coding them. The coding procedure involved two steps: first, a structural coding was applied to the interview transcripts in order to analyze those parts that allowed to answer the research questions (Saldaa 2009); second, a holistic coding followed by an initial coding that allowed to critically analyze data were applied to the overall transcripts (Gibbs 2007; Saldaa 2009). The second step aimed to identify relevant themes that were not directly linked to the research questions but that allowed more indepth understanding of the investigated topics. During the overall process, a coding book was developed and analytic memos were written. The author, as principal researcher, developed the coding book in both rounds of coding. An independent researcher then analyzed the transcripts and developed his own code book. At the end of this process, both researchers met and discussed the developed codes. When disagreements arose, the two researchers discussed them until reaching an agreement. At the end of this process, the author undertook the final coding. The quantitative strand of the research was carried out through an online questionnaire that was administered to a sample of stakeholders working within the destination, particularly business owners and managers of tourism organizations (either small or big businesses). The questionnaire consisted of four parts: (1) general questions about the respondent and his perceptions about the Edinburgh Inspiring Capital brand; (2) a section regarding coordination

Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at Tumaini Uni-Ingringa University College on June 10, 2013

Bregoli
Table 4. Sample Size and Composition Database DEMA Edinburgh Principal Hotel Association Edinburgh Hotel and Guest House Association Total sample size Sample Size 220 54 74 348

217 characterizes tourism management within the city implies that within the destination there are different objectives that coexist and that must be taken into account. Therefore, the role of coordination is fundamental. This study will focus on the Destination Edinburgh Marketing Alliance (DEMA), a publicprivate partnership that is the citys destination marketing organization. Its remit is to promote the city as a place to visit, live, work, invest, and study. DEMA is a publicprivate partnership that was established as a company limited by guarantee with a remit of promoting Edinburgh as a place to visit and in which to invest, live, work, and study. DEMA was set up to deal with fragmentation and a lack of coordination because there were too many organizations that were promoting the city differently and sending divergent messages to the marketplace. Along with promoting the city, DEMA is also responsible for coordinating the city promotion carried out by the diverse organizations and managing the Edinburgh Inspiring Capital brand, which is the destination brand used to promote the city across the five themes. DEMA has a board of directors, on which the majority of seats is given to the private sector, which usually chairs the board itself; furthermore, the board is structured so that all the macro-sectors of DEMAs promotion are represented. With regard to the coordination of the citys stakeholders, DEMA uses all the coordination mechanisms that the literature review described. Communication is carried out through meetings, events, and communication activity carried out by representatives of sectors who report back to their sectors. However, the latter activity is not formalized. In addition, DEMA uses promotional campaigns (such as the This Is My Edinburgh summer campaign or the Edinburgh Sparkles winter campaign) as a mechanism to coordinate participants. Information systems, which are related to general communication, are in place, although DEMA does not have reservation systems. Nevertheless, the website allows information sharing with stakeholders. DEMA also uses newsletters, e-zines, and a customer relationship management (CRM) system established in 2010 to share information among DEMAs partners. Planning and control systems through which the results achieved are controlled against the set objectives and this kind of check is an ongoing process carried out throughout the year. The objectives to be met are clearly stated in the partners strategy, business plan, or resilience plan and the results are measured through, for instance, ad hoc surveys or metrics that, in the case of DEMA, allow it to monitor the number of unique viewers of the website, Twitter account, etc. As far as interlocking directorates are concerned, DEMAs board of directors is made up of people who are affiliated to different organizations and there is a group of people who are involved in more than one organization, such as DEMA; the Edinburgh Tourism Action Group, which is responsible for the citys tourism development; and the Edinburgh Convention Bureau. DEMA is also relying on formal rules, such as a partnership statute and rules for brand

in which the respondents had to indicate, on a list of coordination mechanisms, whether they were used by DEMA and, in a subsequent question, they had to indicate on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = not useful at all; 5 = extremely useful) whether the same coordination mechanisms had been useful to them in adopting the Edinburgh Inspiring Capital brand values; (3) a section on brand commitment; (4) a final section on brand citizenship behavior. Items included in the latter two sections were developed on the basis of the definitions provided by Burmann and Zeplin (2005) and by taking into account the specific characteristics of the destination. All the items were measured on a 5-point Likert-type scale on which the respondents were asked to rate their degree of agreement or disagreement with them (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree). An e-mail containing the link to the questionnaire was sent to a sample of 348 stakeholders (Table 4). A total of 65 completed questionnaires were received with a response rate of 18.68%. The data were checked and questionnaires that were not usable were deleted, resulting in 55 usable questionnaires being retained. An analysis was carried out on the items that had a Cronbach higher than 0.7; as a result one dimension of brand commitment (i.e., brand compliance) and one dimension of brand citizenship behavior (i.e., brand advancement) were deleted. All the data were collected between June and October 2010.

Results Description of the Case

Edinburgh is the capital city of Scotland. In 2010, the total numbers of UK and overseas visitors were 1.9 million and 1.3 million, respectively. It is considered the gateway to Scotland; indeed, within all of Scotland it accounted for 56% of overnight international visitors in 2010 (VisitScotland 2011). In terms of destination marketing and management, the City of Edinburgh is characterized by high complexity because of the several organizations that are involved at various levels in its management and marketing. These include, but are not limited to, VisitScotland, which is the National Tourism Organization; the Edinburgh Convention Bureau; the Edinburgh Tourism Action Group (ETAG), which was the first publicprivate partnership working in the destination set-up in 2001; the City of Edinburgh Council; the Scottish Enterprise Edinburgh & Lothian; and from 2009, the Destination Edinburgh Marketing Alliance. As Fyall and Leask (2007) noted, the complexity that

Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at Tumaini Uni-Ingringa University College on June 10, 2013

218

Journal ofTravel Research 52(2) it helped increase stakeholders awareness of the brand thanks to DEMAs communication efforts to promote the brand and this helped decide the type of message for promoting the city. For instance, one of the interviewees stated:
0 2 4 6 8 Number of respondents 10 12

Degree of commitment

Mixed No Yes

Figure 1. Degree of stakeholders commitment to the destination brand

usage. The latter, in particular, are rules with which all the brand adopters must conform and are set out by DEMA. Finally, with regard to social norms, trust and reciprocity between the organizations develop, but because DEMA was established in 2009, they are not as developed as in other city partnerships working in tourism.

I believe that it [DEMA] will become effective in raising the profile of Edinburgh and making Edinburgh a more successful city because were obviously going to coordinate all the activity of the city promotion through one body with the unified approach, with a collective strategic vision for the city instead of different disparate groups all working in a detached fashion with their own agenda, so one body . . . promoting the city will be effective.

Quantitative Results
The quantitative survey revealed mixed commitment from respondents regarding the Edinburgh Inspiring Capital brand. Indeed, 32.8% of the respondents were not committed or not committed at all to the brand; 38.2% of them were committed or strongly committed; and 29.1% of them declared they were fairly committed. The questionnaire allowed us to investigate the various types of brand commitment and, similar to the results achieved by Burmann, Zeplin, and Riley (2009), brand compliance was not statistically significant (Cronbach < .7); thus, it was not retained for analysis. With reference to brand identification, 78.2% of the respondents agreed that they have a collective responsibility for the reputation of the brand because they conduct business within the city (mean = 3.93; SD = 0.836), whereas 50.9% of the respondents agreed that the Edinburgh Inspiring Capital brand was important to them because they felt they have a collective responsibility toward other stakeholders (mean = 3.51; SD = 0.940). Brand internalization was measured by two items and it emerged that 56.4% (mean = 3.53; SD = 0.900) believed in the brand values and 49.1% (mean = 3.42; SD = 0.917) agreed that there was a similarity between the brand values and their personal values. Brand citizenship behavior was measured by developing items on the basis of the seven dimensions identified by Burmann and Zeplin (2005), but the analysis was focused on six of them because brand advancement had a low Cronbach . With regard to helping behavior, the respondents showed a higher degree of helpfulness toward visitors (90.9% of agreement; mean = 4.35; SD = 0.865) than toward other businesses working within the destination (69.1%; mean = 3.84; SD = 0.834). From brand consideration, it emerged that a high percentage of the respondents (63.6%; mean = 3.64; SD = 0.890) were aware that through their behavior they communicated the destination brand, but just a small percentage of them (23.7%; mean = 2.80; SD = 1.043) took into account, for instance, the impact that their own advertising activity had on the destination brand. For brand enthusiasm, half of the respondents (54.6%; mean = 3.33;

Qualitative Results
From the qualitative strand of research, it emerged that stakeholder commitment in relation to the Edinburgh Inspiring Capital brand is mixed (Figure 1); indeed, the interviewees answers comprised both positive and negative aspects. For instance, two interviewees argued: I think its a mixture. I think there are some people very committed and there are some doubtful people and there are some people who know nothing about it. There are some stakeholders who are very committed and there are some stakeholders who know about the brand value, the branding, dont . . . choose not to use it and there are some stakeholders who dont even know about it. The interviewees were also asked whether they thought the stakeholders were adopting the Edinburgh Inspiring Capital brand values in their job. In this respect, it emerged that not many businesses were adopting the destination brand (according to DEMA, there are 300 brand adopters, not all of which work in the tourism industry); furthermore, they added that more work needed to be undertaken by DEMA in order for the brand to be widely adopted and for stakeholders to behave in a way consistent with the Edinburgh Inspiring Capital brand. For instance, one interviewee argued: Not yet, . . . that needs to be developed for the future; that is not happening yet. The brand, the brand of Edinburgh Inspiring Capital, has not yet been integrated into the business of the whole city. Finally, with regard to the impact that the coordination activity had on the destination brand, interviewees said that

Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at Tumaini Uni-Ingringa University College on June 10, 2013

Bregoli
Table 5. Merged Results Themes Brand commitment Qualitative Results 10 of 12 interviewees believed that there was mixed commitment to the Edinburgh Inspiring Capital brand. Quantitative Results Respondents commitment to the brand:

219

Brand citizenship behavior

More work needs to be carried out so that the brand values are adopted by stakeholders in their job

 38.2% were strongly committed or committed 29.1% were fairly committed 32.8% were not committed or not committed at all High helping behavior toward visitors  63.6% of respondents were aware that, through their behavior, they communicate the destination brand, but just 23.7% of them take into account the effects that their advertising activity has on it  Half of the respondents have discussions with other people on the brand  Few respondents are willing to sacrifice their interests to adopt the destination brand (3.6%)  Not all newcomers to the businesses receive information on the Edinburgh Inspiring Capital brand (18.2%)  Half of the respondents are keeping abreast on the destination brand Most useful mechanisms: Communication (51.1%) Formal rules (49.1%) Interlocking directorates (43.7%) Social norms (43.6%)

Effects of coordination on the brand Increased awareness of the Edinburgh Inspiring Capital brand and the citys promotion strategy

SD = 1.218) declared that they had discussions with colleagues or other business people on the destination brand. Sportsmanship had low positive percentages of agreement; indeed, just 32.7% (mean = 2.91; SD = 1.059) of the respondents declared that they had accepted the brand guidelines without questioning them, but more than half of the respondents (60%) did not agree that they had adopted the brand guidelines even if that implied changing their businesss decisions (mean = 2.36; SD = 0.778). Brand endorsement was measured by asking whether newcomers to businesses received information on the Edinburgh Inspiring Capital brand values; the results showed that just 18.2% of the respondents (mean = 2.45; SD = 0.959) agreed. Finally, with reference to self-development, almost half of the respondents (54.5%; mean = 3.36; SD = 1.060) declared that they were keeping abreast of the development of the destination brand through meetings, newsletters, etc. As far as the impact that the coordination activity had on brand commitment and brand citizenship behavior is concerned, the respondents were asked whether each coordination mechanism identified was useful for understanding and adopting the Edinburgh Inspiring Capital brand values. Among all the mechanisms, communication (51.1%; mean = 3.40; SD = 0.873), formal rules (49.1%; mean = 3.45; SD = 1.033),

interlocking directorates (43.7%; mean = 3.24; SD = 1.018), and social norms (43.6%; mean = 3.33; SD = 1.019) were reported to be the most useful.

Discussion
In this research, the qualitative and quantitative data were merged during interpretation by comparing them side by side through a summary table (Creswell and Plano Clark 2010). The comparison of data is shown in Table 5. The first two research questions referred to the extent to which the stakeholders are committed to and adopt the destination brand values in their work. The concepts of brand commitment and brand citizenship behavior were investigated. With regard to the former, both sets of results show that there is mixed commitment of stakeholders to the Edinburgh Inspiring Capital brand because both positive and negative answers coexisted. Indeed, the great majority of interviewees highlighted that there are stakeholders within the destination who are really committed to the brand, while others are less committed, and there are also people who know nothing about the brand. This view of mixed commitment is supported by the results achieved from the quantitative strand of the research because the percentages for those

Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at Tumaini Uni-Ingringa University College on June 10, 2013

220 who are committed, fairly committed, and not committed are similar. Brand commitment is a construct that consists of three dimensionsbrand compliance, brand identification, and brand internalizationwhich were investigated through the online survey. Similarly to the results achieved by Burmann, Zeplin, and Riley (2009), also in the case of the Edinburgh Inspiring Capital brand, brand compliance was not found to be a significant dimension. Thus, brand commitment is composed of two dimensions: brand identification and brand internalization; the former seems to be more developed than the latter. As far as brand identification is concerned, more than two-thirds of the respondents felt they were part of the overall destination rather than part of the group of stakeholders working within the city. Meanwhile, with reference to brand internalization, the results gained from the questionnaire were lower than those referring to brand identification; for instance, just half of the respondents declared belief in the Edinburgh Inspiring Capital brand values. As far as the brand citizenship behavior is concerned, the interviewees felt that more work needed to be undertaken for the Edinburgh Inspiring Capital brand values to be adopted by the destination stakeholders. Majority (63.6%) of the respondents were aware that they communicate the destination brand through their behavior; nevertheless, few of them took into account how their advertising activity might affect the destination brand itself. In addition, the respondents showed a low level of agreement with a couple of dimensions. For example, 3.6% of the respondents were willing to sacrifice their own interests for the sake of the brand and 18.2% of the respondents agreed that newcomers received information on the Edinburgh Inspiring Capital brand. Thanks to the interviews it was possible to identify some of the possible reasons of both the mixed commitment and the low level of brand citizenship behavior. First, it seems that brand awareness is an antecedent of brand commitment that, in turn, influences brand citizenship behavior. Some of the interviewees explained that the awareness is still low, although thanks to the establishment of DEMA, things have improved. One interviewee argued: I dont think its [the Edinburgh Inspiring Capital brand] widely known as it should be and I think there is more work to be done to raise the awareness of it. And I think [when the] new DEMA comes into existence there will be further work done to encourage all stakeholders in the city to use the city of Edinburghs branding. Furthermore, stakeholders did not perceive the brand as the city brand, but as the Council brand. This was because although DEMA was established as an independent organization, its offices were located within the City Council. For instance, one interviewee stated: Where I think the City Council made an error was that instead of seeing this brand as the citys brand, and it

Journal ofTravel Research 52(2) should be managed externally by a DEMA or another external body or collections of bodies, they kept the brand team in-house. . . . The difficulty then is that most external private sector perceptions are that the brand is a Council brand, is a brand of the local authority and not of the city and, for that reason along with others, lack of investment being one of them, I dont think the brand is mature in a way that it could or should be quickly enough. Similar to this view, another interviewee argued: I think that . . . the stakeholders, some of them still regard it [the Edinburgh Inspiring Capital brand] as a local authority brand rather than a destination brand, so there is certainly much more work to be done in that. Another issue that emerged was the difficult integration between the destination brand and single corporate brands because, in order to integrate them, it is necessary that the values of both brands are congruent. For instance, one interviewee stated: The Edinburgh Inspiring brand is . . . used in the public sector a great deal, not used as extensively in the private sector because of a conflict sometimes between the brand of Inspiring Edinburgh and the brand of the private sectors owner organizations. Sometimes, they dont fit well together, so its left entirely up to the private sector to decide if they wish to use the Edinburgh Inspiring Capital brand. Furthermore, high staff turnover in the tourism industry makes it difficult for business newcomers to become knowledgeable about the destination brand and its values. The high turnover is a big challenge for the destination as the following interview excerpt validates: Because of constant changes of individuals . . ., with new people coming into organizations it is difficult to reaffirm and educate them as to what the brand is actually about and how it came about and trying to get them to become champions and owners of the brand. So its not easy; its a challenge. Finally, it seems that there is a relationship between the degree of engagement toward the brand and the level of involvement with DEMA and other partnerships that are working in the tourism industry, such as the Edinburgh Tourism Action Group. The more involved stakeholders are toward the partnerships, the more engaged they are toward the brand. In this regard, one interviewee stated: It has not been adopted [the Edinburgh Inspiring Capital brand] to the extent that really one would

Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at Tumaini Uni-Ingringa University College on June 10, 2013

Bregoli have wished and those who are adopting it, like ourselves, for example, tend to be those who are working closest and are involved most within DEMA and ETAG. So, if you were to go out onto the street and ask a number of businesses along this area if they know what the brand is and, two, are they using it, then the answer to both of those questions would be I have no idea and No, Im not. The third research question referred to the impact that the coordination activity had on brand commitment and brand citizenship behavior. The interviewees felt the coordination activity was useful for increasing the overall level of brand commitment but, at the same time, they believed it was too early to make a judgment about it because DEMA was set up too recently. Some more pieces of information were gained through the quantitative survey in which respondents were asked whether the coordination mechanisms were useful for becoming committed to the brand values and for adopting them. In this case, it emerged that communication, formal rules, interlocking directorates, and social norms were considered to be the most beneficial by the respondents.

221 2011) in order to have stakeholders knowledgeable and committed to the destination brand are in place. The city of Edinburgh could benefit from improved communication between DEMA board members and the sectors or associations that they are representing. Indeed, the case revealed that this communication activity is not formalized and it is left to individual initiative. As a result, different people report back in different ways. For instance, some of them send e-mails in which they provide basic information such as when a meeting took place and the main discussion points. Others officially report within the partnership board that they are representing. This apparently leads to information exchange imbalances because some stakeholders have more information compared to others and this might affect the overall knowledge about the brand and the brand commitment. Consequently, DMOs should pay attention to the way that stakeholder representatives communicate to the sectors that they are representing. As far as HR activities are concerned, they consist of a wide range of activities such as staff training and socialization, through events aimed at creating brand awareness, and through absorbing the brand values once staff start working within the organization (e.g., by learning and understanding the brand from colleagues) (de Chernatony and Segal-Horn 2001; Burmann and Zeplin 2005; Vallaster and de Chernatony 2005; de Chernatony, Cottam, and Segal-Horn 2006). Although these activities are difficult for a DMO to carry out because people who work in the tourism industry are not DMO employees, it should be taken into account that among the DMOs roles there is human resources development (Ritchie and Crouch 2003). For this reason, it cannot be excluded a priori that a DMO cannot organize training programs or socialization activities that refer to the destination brand. For instance, the DMO might organize events aimed at newcomers to the businesses for making them knowledgeable about the brand. Moreover, the DMO might organize brand training sessions for tourism employees. The aim would be to let them know and understand the brand values and adopt the brand values in their work, for instance by providing them with examples of best practices and behaviors coherent with the destination brand.

Conclusion
To conclude, although the results from this research cannot be generalized because of the limited sample size, they allow us to point out some features to which destination managers should pay attention. First, not only is it essential to assess the destination brands external effectiveness, but it is also crucial that the destination managers assess the internal brand strength. This construct allows to measure stakeholder commitment to the destination brand and the extent to which their behavior reinforces the brand. Since DMOs should ensure that stakeholders are committed and involved in the destination brand strategy (Hankinson 2001; Ooi 2004; Konecnik and Go 2008; Park, Cai, and Lehto 2009; Allan 2011), it is easy to understand the importance of measuring the internal brand strength. Second, it is essential that the DMO put in place activities that allow stakeholders to be knowledgeable about the brand and its values so that they can behave consistently regarding the brand. From the results, it seems that activities such as internal communication and HR activities are essential and the city of Edinburgh must strengthen them. They are necessary in order to develop brand identification that is the highest level of brand commitment, which, in turn, leads to a high level of brand citizenship behavior (Burmann, Zeplin, and Riley 2009). However, in the Edinburgh case, both brand identification and brand citizenship behavior are low, which suggests that the city needs to improve communication and HR activities. With regard to the internal communication, it is carried out through websites, e-mails, forums, and meetings. Thus, all communication activities that the destination branding literature suggests (Park, Cai, and Lehto 2009; Tasci

Limitations and Future Research

Like much research, this study is not free from limitations. In particular, because of the limited quantitative sample size, the results cannot be generalized although they allow to shed some light on a topic that deserves further research. In addition, it was not possible to apply any sophisticated statistical analyses that would have allowed the author to highlight the relationship between coordination mechanisms, brand commitment, and brand citizenship behavior. Furthermore, in light of the sample composition, the quantitative results might have been overestimated. Indeed, the majority of the sample came from the DEMA database, which consists of

Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at Tumaini Uni-Ingringa University College on June 10, 2013

222 people who know the partnership and the Edinburgh Inspiring Capital brand. Since the topic investigated in this research has not been investigated in previous research, further research is needed. For instance, the concepts of brand commitment and brand citizenship behavior should be adapted to the context of destination brands since scholars originally developed them for product and service brands. In addition, the study should be repeated on a bigger sample in order to gain an adequate sample size for applying the structural equation modeling and, in this way, studying the relationship between the various dimensions and their antecedents. Furthermore, attention should be devoted to the study of the role that stakeholder coordination has on the internal brand strength in order to assess whether this activity has a direct impact on it. Despite this studys limitations, its contribution is valuable in that this is the first attempt at studying a destination brands internal strength. This represents a relevant topic not only for increasing scientific knowledge but also for the industry. Indeed, by developing a tool that allows to assess the internal brand strength, destination managers can put in place actions aimed at improving it and, as a result, the overall destination brand. Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Journal ofTravel Research 52(2)

Beritelli, Pietro, Thomas Bieger, and Christian Laesser. (2007). Destination Governance: Using Corporate Governance Theories as a Foundation for Effective Destination Management. Journal of Travel Research, 46 (1): 96-107. Blain, Carmen, Stuart E. Levy, and J. R. Brent Ritchie. (2005). Destination Branding: Insights and Practices from Destination Management Organizations. Journal of Travel Research, 43 (4): 328-38. Boo, Soyoung, James Busser, and Seyhmus Baloglu. (2009). A Model of Customer-Based Brand Equity and Its Application to Multiple Destinations. Tourism Management, 30 (2): 219-31. Bornhorst, Tom, J. R. Brent Ritchie, and Lorn Sheehan. (2010). Determinants of Tourism Success for DMOs & Destinations: An Empirical Examination of Stakeholders Perspectives. Tourism Management, 31 (5): 572-89. Buhalis, Dimitrios. (2000). Marketing the Competitive Destination of the Future. Tourism Management, 21 (1): 97-116. Burmann, Christoph, and Sabrina Zeplin. (2005). Building Brand Commitment: A Behavioural Approach to Internal Brand Management. Journal of Brand Management, 12 (4): 279-300. Burmann, Christoph, Sabrina Zeplin, and Nicola Riley. (2009). Key Determinants of Internal Brand Management Success: An Exploratory Empirical Analysis. Journal of Brand Management, 16 (4): 264-84. Cai, Liping A. (2002). Cooperative Branding for Rural Destinations. Annals of Tourism Research, 29 (3): 720-42. Cannon, Joseph P., Ravi S. Achrol, and Gregory T. Gundlach. (2000). Contracts, Norms, and Plural Forms of Governance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28 (2): 180-94. Creswell, John W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design. Choosing among Five Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Creswell, John W., and Vicki L. Plano Clark. (2010). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. de Chernatony, Leslie. (2006). From Brand Vision to Brand Evaluation. The Strategic Process of Growing and Strengthening Brands. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. de Chernatony, Leslie, Susan Cottam, and Susan Segal-Horn. (2006). Communicating Services Brands Values Internally and Externally. Service Industries Journal, 26 (8): 819-36. de Chernatony, Leslie, and Susan Segal-Horn. (2001). Building on Services Characteristics to Develop Successful Services Brands. Journal of Marketing Management, 17 (7/8): 645-69. Del Chiappa, Giacomo, and Ilenia Bregoli. (2012). Destination Branding Development: Linking Supply-Side and Demand-Side Perspectives. In Strategic Marketing in Tourism Services, edited by Rodoula H. Tsiotsou and Ronald E. Goldsmith. Bingley: Emerald, pp. 51-61. Feilzer, Martina Yvonne. (2010). Doing Mixed Methods Research Pragmatically: Implications for the Rediscovery of Pragmatism as a Research Paradigm. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4 (1): 6-16. Flick, Uwe. (2006). An Introduction to Qualitative Research. London: Sage.

Funding
The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References
Aaker, David A., and Erich Joachimsthaler. (2002). Brand Leadership. London: Simon & Schuster. Allan, Malcolm. (2011). The Leadership Challenge. In Destination Brands: Managing Place Reputation, edited by Nigel Morgan, Annette Pritchard, and Roger Pride. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann, pp. 81-90. Arnaboldi, Michela, and Nicola Spiller. (2011). Actor-Network Theory and Stakeholder Collaboration: The Case of Cultural Districts. Tourism Management, 32 (3): 641-54. Baggio, Rodolfo, and Chris Cooper. (2010). Knowledge Transfer in a Tourism Destination: The Effects of a Network Structure. Service Industries Journal, 30 (10): 1757-71. Baggio, Rodolfo, Noel Scott, and Chris Cooper. (2011). Design of Tourism Governance Networks. In Tourist Destination Governance: Practice, Theory and Issues, edited by Eric Laws, Harold Richins, Jerome Agrusa, and Noel Scott. Wallingford: CABI, pp. 159-71. Beerli, Asuncin, and Josefa D. Martin. (2004). Tourists Characteristics and the Perceived Image of Tourist Destinations: A Quantitative AnalysisA Case Study of Lanzarote, Spain. Tourism Management, 25 (5): 623-36.

Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at Tumaini Uni-Ingringa University College on June 10, 2013

Bregoli
Fyall, Alan. (2011). Destination Management: Challenges and Opportunities. In Destination Marketing and Management: Theories and Applications, edited by Youcheng Wang and Abraham Pizam. Wallingford: CABI, pp. 340-57. Fyall, Alan, and Brian Garrod. (2005). Tourism Marketing: A Collaborative Approach. Clevedon: Channel View. Fyall, Alan, and Anna Leask. (2007). Destination Marketing: Future IssuesStrategic Challenges. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 7 (1): 50-63. Garca, Juan A., Mar Gmez, and Arturo Molina. (2012). A Destination-Branding Model: An Empirical Analysis Based on Stakeholders. Tourism Management, 33 (3): 646-61. Getz, Donald, Don Anderson, and Lorn Sheehan. (1998). Roles, Issues, and Strategies for Convention and Visitors Bureaux in Destination Planning and Product Development: A Survey of Canadian Bureaux. Tourism Management, 19 (4): 331-40. Gibbs, Graham R. (2007). Analyzing Qualitative Data. London: Sage. Grandori, Anna. (1995). Lorganizzazione delle Attivit Economiche. Bologna: il Mulino. Grandori, Anna. (1999). Organizzazione e Comportamento Economico. Bologna: Il Mulino. Grandori, Anna, and Giuseppe Soda. (1995). Inter-firm Networks: Antecedents, Mechanisms and Forms. Organization Studies, 16 (2): 183-214. Green, Jennifer C., and Valerie J. Caracelli. (2003). Making Paradigmatic Sense of Mixed Methods Practice. In Handbook of Mixed Methods Research in Social & Behavioral Research, edited by Abbas Tashakkori and Charles Teddlie. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 91-110. Gretzel, Ulrike, Daniel R. Fesenmaier, Sandro Formica, and Joseph T. OLeary. (2006). Searching for the Future: Challenges Faced by Destination Marketing Organizations. Journal of Travel Research, 45 (2): 116-26. Hankinson, Graham. (2001). Location Branding: A Study of the Branding Practices of 12 English Cities. Journal of Brand Management, 9 (2): 127-42. Hankinson, Graham. (2004). Relational Network Brands: Towards a Conceptual Model of Place Brands. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 10 (2): 109-21. Hankinson, Graham. (2007). The Management of Destination Brands: Five Guiding Principles Based on Recent Developments in Corporate Branding Strategy. Journal of Brand Management, 14 (3): 240-54. Hillman, Amy J., Michael C. Withers, and Brian J. Collins. (2009). Resource Dependence Theory: A Review. Journal of Management, 35 (6): 1404-27. Jamal, Tazim B., and Donald Getz. (1995). Collaboration Theory and Community Tourism Planning. Annals of Tourism Research, 22 (1): 186-204. Kapferer, Jean-Nol. (2008). The New Strategic Brand Management: Creating and Sustaining Brand Equity Long Term. London: Kogan Page. Konecnik, Maja, and William C. Gartner. (2007). Customer-Based Brand Equity for a Destination. Annals of Tourism Research, 34 (2): 400-21.

223
Konecnik, Maja, and Frank Go. (2008). Tourism Destination Brand Identity: The Case of Slovenia. Journal of Brand Management, 15 (3): 177-89. Mizruchi, Mark S. (1996). What Do Interlocks Do? An Analysis, Critique, and Assessment of Research on Interlocking Directorates. Annual Review of Sociology, 22: 271-98. Moscardo, Gianna. (2011). The Role of Knowledge in Good Governance for Tourism. In Tourist Destination Governance: Practice, Theory and Issues, edited by Eric Laws, Harold Richins, Jerome Agrusa, and Noel Scott. Wallingford: CABI, pp. 67-80. Ooi, Can-Seng. (2004). Poetics and Politics of Destination Branding: Denmark. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 4 (2): 107-28. Palmer, Adrian. (1998). Evaluating the Governance Style of Marketing Groups. Annals of Tourism Research, 25 (1): 185-201. Park, Oun Joung, Liping A. Cai, and Xinran Y. Lehto (2009). Collaborative Destination Branding. In Tourism Branding: Communities in Action, edited by Liping A. Cai, William C. Gartner, and Ana Mara Munar. Bingley: Emerald, pp. 75-86. Payan, Janice M., and Gran Svensson. (2007). Co-operation, Coordination, and Specific Assets in Inter-Organizational Relationships. Journal of Marketing Management, 23 (7-8): 797-814. Pfeffer, Jeffrey, and Gerald R. Salancik. (1978). The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. New York: Harper & Row. Pike, Steven. (2005). Tourism Destination Branding Complexity. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 14 (4): 258-59. Prideaux, Bruce, and Chris Cooper. (2002). Marketing and Destination Growth: A Symbiotic Relationship or Simple Coincidence? Journal of Vacation Marketing, 9 (1): 35-51. Reid, Laurel J., Stephen L. J. Smith, and Rob McCloskey. (2008). The Effectiveness of Regional Marketing Alliances: A Case Study of the Atlantic Canada Tourism Partnership 20002006. Tourism Management, 29 (3): 581-93. Ritchie, J. R. Brent, and Geoffrey I. Crouch. (2003). The Competitive Destination. A Sustainable Tourism Perspective. Wallingford: CABI. Ritchie, Robin J. B. and J. R. Brent Ritchie. (2002). A Framework for an Industry Supported Destination Marketing Information System. Tourism Management, 23 (5): 439-54. Rodger, Kate, Susan A. Moore, and David Newsome. (2009). Wildlife Tourism, Science and Actor Network Theory. Annals of Tourism Research, 36 (4): 645-66. Saldaa, Johnny. (2009). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. London: Sage. Scott, Noel, Chris Cooper, and Rodolfo Baggio. (2008). Destination Networks: Four Australian Cases. Annals of Tourism Research, 55 (1): 169-88. Spyriadis, Thanasis, Dimitrios Buhalis, and Alan Fyall. (2011). Dynamics of Destination Governance: Governance and Metagovernance in the Composite Industrial Environment of Destinations. In Tourist Destination Governance: Practice, Theory and Issues, edited by Eric Laws, Harold Richins, Jerome Agrusa, and Noel Scott. Wallingford: CABI, pp. 187-202.

Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at Tumaini Uni-Ingringa University College on June 10, 2013

224
Tasci, Asli D. A. (2011). Destination Branding and Positioning. In Destination Marketing and Management. Theories and Applications, edited by Youcheng Wang and Abraham Pizam. Wallingford: CABI, pp. 113-29. Teddlie, Charles, and Abbas Tashakkori. (2003). Major Issues and Controversies in the Use of Mixed Methods in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. In Handbook of Mixed Methods Research in Social & Behavioral Research, edited by Abbas Tashakkori and Charles Teddlie. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 3-50. Vallaster, Christine, and Leslie de Chernatony. (2005). Internationalisation of Services Brands: The Role of Leadership during the Internal Brand Building Process. Journal of Marketing Management, 21 (1/2): 181-203. VisitScotland. 2011. Edinburgh. Additional Facts and Insights. http://www.visitscotland.org/pdf/Final%20Edinburgh%20 Additional%20Insights_pptx%20%5BRead-Only%5D.pdf (accessed June 25, 2012).

Journal ofTravel Research 52(2)

Wang, Youcheng, and Daniel R. Fesenmaier. (2007). Collaborative Destination Marketing: A Case Study of Elkhart County, Indiana. Tourism Management, 28 (3): 863-75. Wang, Youcheng, and Zheng Xiang. (2007). Toward a Theoretical Framework of Collaborative Destination Marketing. Journal of Travel Research, 46 (1): 75-85. Wheeler, Fiona, Warwick Frost, and Betty Weiler. (2011). Destination Brand Identity, Values, and Community: A Case Study from Rural Victoria, Australia. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 28 (1): 13-26.

Bio
Ilenia Bregoli, PhD, is a Lecturer in Marketing at the University of Northampton, UK. Her research interests are in destination management, destination marketing and experiential marketing.

Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at Tumaini Uni-Ingringa University College on June 10, 2013