Comparative Analysis of DMO Website Features: A Case Study of Three Asian Tourism Destinations
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30564/jbar.v3i1.1020Abstract
In the digital era, more and more people tend to look for travel-related information on the Internet. Hence, destination marketing organization (DMO) websites can play a decisive role in affecting people’s destination choices. Based on the study of Pai, Xia, and Wang, Macao’s DMO website received the lowest score in the effectiveness when compared to the other four tourism destinations: Japan, Korea, Hong Kong, and Thailand. This paper aimed to carry out a comparative analysis on the functionality among three DMO websites in Asia. Each website was examined in great detail, and the features were categorized according to a well-established conceptual framework pioneered by Li and Wang. Consequently, the results of this study gave useful information and new insights to destination marketing managers in terms of gap analysis and the development of new features for their websites. The results of this research could be used as benchmarking purposes in regards to website functionality. In addition, DMO websites in western countries, such as Canada, were also examined for a better understanding of the comprehensiveness of the available website functionality aimed for prospective visitors. Business and managerial implications were also discussed.
Keywords:
DMO, Destination marketing, Website evaluation, Content analysis, Online communicationReferences
[1] C. K. Pai, M. L. Xia, and T. W. Wang. A Comparison of the Official Tourism Website of Five East Tourism Destinations. [J]. Information Technology & Tourism, 2014, 14(2): 97-117. http://doi.org/10.1007/s40558-014-0007-7
[2] X. Li, Y. Wang. Evaluating the Effectiveness of Destination Marketing Organisations’ Websites: Evidence from China. [J]. International Journal of Tourism Research, 2010, 12(5): 536-549. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.772
[3] D. Buhalis, R. Law. Progress in information technology and tourism management: 20 years on and 10 years after the Internet – The state of eTourism research. [J]. Tourism Management, 2008, 29(4): 609-623.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2008.01.005
[4] D. Lončarić, L. Bašan, and M. G. Marković. Importance of DMO Websites in Tourist Destination Selection. [C]. In 23rd CROMAR Congress: Marketing in a Dynamic Environment–Academic and Practical Insights, Croatia, 2013.https://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/666923.Loncaric_Basan_GligoraMarkovic.pdf
[5] Y. Wang. Destination Marketing and Management: Scope, Definition and Structures. [Book Chapter]. Destination Marketing and Management: Theories and Applications, 2011: 1-20.
[6] S. Pike, S. Page. Destination Marketing Organizations and Destination Marketing: A Narrative Analysis of the Literature. [J]. Tourism Management, 2014, 41: 1-26.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2013.09.009
[7] J. Elbe, L. Hallén, and B. Axelsson. The Destination‐Management Organisation and the Integrative Destination‐Marketing Process. [J]. International Journal of Tourism Research, 2009, 11(3): 283-296. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.695
[8] Y. Wang. Destination marketing and management: scope, definition and structures. [B]. Destination marketing and management: Theories and applications, CABI, 2011.
[9] K. F. Hyde. Information processing and touring planning theory. [J]. Annals of Tourism Research, 2008, 35(3): 712-731.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2008.05.001
[10] M. Gon, H. Pechlaner, F. Marangon. Destination management organizations (DMOs) and Digital Natives: the neglected “informal expertise” in web 2.0 implementation and social media presence. Insights from the Italian Friuli Venezia Giulia DMO. [J]. Information Technology and Tourism, 2016, 16(4): 435-455.https://doi.org/10.1007/s40558-016-0068-x
[11] A. Beerli, J. D. Martin. Factors influencing destination image. [J]. Annals of Tourism Research, 2004, 31(3): 657-681.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2004.01.010
[12] Z. Xiang, U. Gretzel. Role of social media in online travel information search. [J]. Tourism Management, 2010, 31(2): 179-188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2009.02.016
[13] U. Bastida, T. C. Huan. Performance evaluation of tourism websites’ information quality of four global destination brands: Beijing, Hong Kong, Shanghai, and Taipei. [J]. Journal of Business Research, 2014, 67(2): 167-170.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.10.008
[14] C. Ip, R. Law, H. A. Lee. A review of website evaluation studies in the tourism and hospitality fields from 1996 to 2009. [J]. International Journal of Tourism Research, 2011, 13(3): 234-265. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.815
[15] Y. Wang, S. M. Russo. Conceptualizing and evaluating the functions of destination marketing systems. [J]. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 2007, 13(3): 187-203. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356766707077687
[16] Y. A. Park, U. Gretzel. Success factors for destination marketing web sites: A qualitative meta-analysis. [J]. Journal of Travel Research, 2007, 46(1): 46-63.https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287507302381
[17] Argon Design. 5 aspects of a good user interface. [W]. Available:http://www.argondesign.com/news/2014/feb/5/5-aspects-good-user-interface/. [Accessed Jul. 1, 2018]
[18] R. Law, S. Qi, D. Buhalis. Progress in tourism management: A review of website evaluation in tourism research. [J]. Tourism Management, 2010, 31(3): 297-313.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2009.11.007
[19] S. Lei, R. Law. Functionality evaluation of mobile hotel websites in the m-commerce era. [J]. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 2019, 36(6): 665-678.https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2019.1624240
[20] A. Kucheriavy. What Makes a Website User-Friendly? [W]. Available:https://www.intechnic.com/blog/what-makes-a-website-user-friendly/.[Accessed Jun 28, 2018].
[21] D. Peltier. 25 Best Tourism Board Websites in the World in 2017. [W]. Available:
[22] https://skift.com/2017/08/08/25-best-tourism-board-websites-in-the-world-in-2017/. [Accessed Jul 2, 2018].
[23] J. Nielsen. Mobile Site vs. Full Site. [W]. Available:https://www.nngroup.com/articles/mobile-site-vs-full-site/. [Accessed Jun. 10, 2018].
[24] I. Paul. Best Web Browsers of 2017: Chrome, Edge, Firefox, and Opera Go Head-to-Head. [W]. Available:https://www.pcworld.com/article/3213031/computers/best-web-browsers.html. [Accessed Feb. 24, 2018].
[25] K. Krippendorff. Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. [B]. SAGE, 2nd Edition, 2004.
Downloads
Issue
Article Type
License
Copyright and Licensing
The authors shall retain the copyright of their work but allow the Publisher to publish, copy, distribute, and convey the work.
Journal of Business Administration Research publishes accepted manuscripts under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0). Authors who submit their papers for publication by Journal of Business Administration Research agree to have the CC BY-NC 4.0 license applied to their work, and that anyone is allowed to reuse the article or part of it free of charge for non-commercial use. As long as you follow the license terms and original source is properly cited, anyone may copy, redistribute the material in any medium or format, remix, transform, and build upon the material.
License Policy for Reuse of Third-Party Materials
If a manuscript submitted to the journal contains the materials which are held in copyright by a third-party, authors are responsible for obtaining permissions from the copyright holder to reuse or republish any previously published figures, illustrations, charts, tables, photographs, and text excerpts, etc. When submitting a manuscript, official written proof of permission must be provided and clearly stated in the cover letter.
The editorial office of the journal has the right to reject/retract articles that reuse third-party materials without permission.
Journal Policies on Data Sharing
We encourage authors to share articles published in our journal to other data platforms, but only if it is noted that it has been published in this journal.