This article was downloaded by: [Ana Coric] On: 09 April 2013, At: 02:15 Publisher: Routledge Informa

Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/whmm20

Quality Tourism Experiences: Reviews, Reflections, Research Agendas

Gayle Jennings , Young-Sook Lee , Amanda Ayling , Brooke Lunny , Carl Cater & Claudia Ollenburg
a b a c a a a

Department of Tourism, Leisure, Hotel and Sport Management, Griffith Business School, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia
b c

Gold Coast City Council, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia

Griffith School of Environment, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia Version of record first published: 04 Mar 2009.

To cite this article: Gayle Jennings , Young-Sook Lee , Amanda Ayling , Brooke Lunny , Carl Cater & Claudia Ollenburg (2009): Quality Tourism Experiences: Reviews, Reflections, Research Agendas, Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 18:2-3, 294-310 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19368620802594169

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 18:294310, 2009 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 1936-8623 print/1936-8631 online DOI: 10.1080/19368620802594169

1936-8631 1936-8623 WHMM Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, Management Vol. 18, No. 2-3, December 2008: pp. 129

Quality Tourism Experiences: Reviews, Reflections, Research Agendas

Quality G. Jennings Tourism et al.Experiences

GAYLE JENNINGS, YOUNG-SOOK LEE, and AMANDA AYLING

Department of Tourism, Leisure, Hotel and Sport Management, Griffith Business School, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia

BROOKE LUNNY
Gold Coast City Council, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia

Downloaded by [Ana Coric] at 02:15 09 April 2013

CARL CATER
Department of Tourism, Leisure, Hotel and Sport Management, Griffith Business School, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia

CLAUDIA OLLENBURG
Griffith School of Environment, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia

Quality tourism experiences, including its singular form, is a well used phrase in tourism industry literature and traveller dialogues. Yet definitions of a quality tourism experience remain elusive. Tourism studies, recreation and marketing literature similarly resonate with numerous applications of the phrase as well as its contributing terms. A social constructivist approach was applied to a literature review, in order to reflect on the status of quality tourism experiences, its meanings, as well as research approaches used and research agendas proffered. From the review emerged multiple interpretations and constructions as well as an emphasis on complexity. Research approaches were predicated to post/positivistic approaches. Research agendas essayed to understand specific dimensions of quality tourism experiences along with more holistic frames. KEYWORDS Quality tourism experiences, quality, experiences, social constructivist, filters, multiple perspectives

Address correspondence to Gayle Jennings, PhD, Department of Tourism, Leisure, Hotel and Sport Management, Griffith Business School, Griffith University, Queensland, 4222 Australia. E-mail: g.jennings@griffith.edu.au 294

Quality Tourism Experiences

295

INTRODUCTION
Quality tourism experiences is a term repeatedly used by destinations and organizations involved in tourism research, planning, policy, management, marketing and delivery. Its meaning is usually implicitly or tacitly assumed rather than defined (Jennings, 2006). Additionally, the assumed taken for granted meaning(s) may be further qualified, as exemplified in the following four industry sector-based texts. The first is from India regarding the hospitality sector, [t]he task on hand for the tourism industry and the government [in Karnataka, India] is to convert its strengths into marketable, easy to access, good quality tourism experiences (Lakshman, 2002, p. 1). The second is from a Canadian government tourism agency, The Ministry of Tourism supports delivery of high quality tourism and recreation experiences to Ontarians and visitors to Ontario (Ministry of Tourism, Canada, 2008). The third is a joint construction between a United States government aid agency and an Armenian private sector association, A simple, clear and concise strategy is required to guide and further develop Armenias tourism sector, aiming at: . . . ensuring Armenia provides unique, high quality, highvalue tourism experiences that are regionally and globally competitive (USAID and CAPS, 2007, p. 4). The fourth example furthers the concept high-value as opposed to quality and although it omits the word tourism it is implied since it is taken from the work Higher value tourism experiences profiling two New Zealand tourism companies. This example notes, . . . it [tourism industry growth] is about developing . . . high-value experiences that people will happily pay more to enjoy (Green, New Zealand Trade and Enterprise, NZTE, in Harding 2006). While such qualifiers distinguish differences in the degree of quality being offered, that is, good quality, high quality, or high-value quality; definitions or criteria are not provided with which to understand what these qualifiers and indeed the phrase quality tourism experiences mean. With regard to the latter, implied in the four examples are service quality and hospitality sector service experiences; notions of excellence; the perceptions of getting value for ones money; the matching of expectations with experiences; as well as links between expectations and satisfactions. Despite wide usage, quality tourism experiences remains a term, which eludes a definitive meaning. That is not to say that researchers, planners, policy-makers, managers, marketers and tourism industry providers have been deterred from using it or trying to understand it. Given the preceding context, the purpose of this article is to review and reflect on related literature as well as research agendas associated with the study of quality tourism experiences. The article does this by adopting a social constructivist approach (Schwandt, 1994, 2000). This approach recognizes multiple viewpoints. The article also draws on the work of Peshkin (2001) regarding the use of lenses to gain multiple perspectives of complex phenomena. A social constructivist approach has been adopted because

Downloaded by [Ana Coric] at 02:15 09 April 2013

296

G. Jennings et al.

Downloaded by [Ana Coric] at 02:15 09 April 2013

quality tourism experiences and the independent terms quality, tourism and experiences have all been described as being complex as well as being open to different interpretations. The following excerpts drawn from tourism literature demonstrate this. For example, Nickerson (2006, p. 229) refers to the complexity of quality tourism experiences. Anderick, Bricker, Kerstetter, and Nickerson (2006, p. 82) acknowledge that [a]n experience is . . . a complex process. While Richardson and Fluker (2004, p. 4) comment that [t]he problem with defining tourism is that it means different things to different people. This complexity is indicated by the number of academic disciplines involved in its study. Similarly, Parasuram, Zeithaml, and Berry (1985) commented with regard to quality that: [f]ew academic researchers have attempted to define and model quality because of the difficulties involved in delimiting and measuring the construct (p. 41). This view is also supported by Rathmell (1966), Crosby (1979), Garvin (1983), Brown and Swartz (1989), Carmen (1990), Cronin and Taylor (1992), and Zeithaml, Parasuraman, and Malhotra (2002). Subsequently, this article recognises that quality tourism experiences are complex in nature and that the term is open to multiple definitions. The specific aims of this article are: To review and reflect on literature in tourism, recreation, leisure and marketing related to quality tourism experiences To review and reflect on that literature related to researching quality tourism experiences The next section will expand further on the methodology, methods and Peshkins angles or lenses as a way of stepping back and developing multiple perspectives in the attempt to unravel complexity (Grbich, 2004, p. 82).

METHODOLOGY
As already noted, this article uses a social constructivist approach. In particular, reflective research was employed, which focuses on careful interpretation and reflection (Alvesson & Skldberg, 2000, p. 5). Additionally to complement reflection, reflexive practice, that is, critical self-reflection (Schwandt, 2001, p. 224) was also incorporated based on Peshkins (2001) work. In this article, we refer to Peshkins angles of vision as filters. Peshkin suggests researchers should be aware of nine filters in studying complex phenomena. The first three assist the process and include patterning filters to identify constant themes; timing filters to determine time influence; and emic filters to ensure ethical interpretation bases. The next five provide checkpoints for researchers and include social situatedness filters to examine how our perspectives may influence our interpretations; and ideological filters to clarify disciplinary and world viewstheir standpoints or hegemonies.

Quality Tourism Experiences

297

Then there are theme-ing filters to illuminate myopic interpretations; filters for ironic constructions to juxtapose and consider alternative interpretations; and silence identification filters to illuminate omissions in phenomena. The last filter reminds researchers to be conscious of metaphoric filters, which can divert attention and mask understanding. Bearing in mind the need to be reflective and reflexive the following literature review was conducted. The interpretation process for the literature review adapted Goffmans (1974, 1986) frame analysis. Frameworks are considered to provide interpretive schemata. Moreover, frames are principles of selection, emphasis and presentation composed of little tacit theories about what exists, what happens, and what matters (Gitlin, 1980, p. 6).

QUALITY TOURISM EXPERIENCES: LITERATURE REVIEW

Downloaded by [Ana Coric] at 02:15 09 April 2013

The term experience is not new to understanding human interactions with people, places, spaces, products, services, organizations, governments and cultures. What is new is the increased emphasis on experience within tourism, hospitality and leisure sectors as well as marketing.

Tourism Related Literature

A snapshot sampling of tourism related literature shows that tourist experiences and tourism experiences have been written about since the 1960s when Clawson (1963) wrote about related recreation experiences and Boorstin (1964) commented on authenticity with regard to tourist experiences. In the 1970s, Cohen applied his phenomenological frames to the term tourist experiences (1972 and 1979) and MacCannell (1973) added to the discourses of tourist experiences and authenticity. In the 1980s, Pearce and Caltabiano (1982) extended traveller and tourist experiences discussions in association with authenticity and incorporated consideration of motivations. Feifer (1985) also contributed to the commentary on tourism experiences and authenticity. Smith (1977, 1989) and Smith and Brents (2001) edited works focussed on host-guest interactions and experiences. In the 1990s and beyond, Ryan (1997, 2002) produced edited works explicitly addressing the tourist experience with a number of linkages to motivation theories. Urry (1990, 2002) contemporaneously commented on authenticity and tourist experiences in addition to interpreting tourism experiences and tourist experiences using gaze as a lens. These gazes were critiqued by Hollinshead (2004, p. 287) with respect to the normalizing effects of various tourist gazes. The gendered nature of tourist experiences was explored in the works of Squire (1994), Jennings (1999), Jennings and Stehlik (2000), Small (1999) and the edited work by Swaine and Momsen (2002). Tourists as embodied beings with varying identities and the impacts of these on

298

G. Jennings et al.

Downloaded by [Ana Coric] at 02:15 09 April 2013

travel experiences pervaded the works of Cater (2002), Waitt and Markwell (2006) and Clift, Luongo and Callister (2002) amongst others. Cultural differences and their influences on tourism experiences were explored in the writings of Hollinshead (1992), Urry (1996), Berno (1996), Lee (2001), Bricker and Kerstetter (2006) and the edited work by Butler and Hinch (1996). The preceding snapshot is not intended to be extensive and allinclusive; rather it is emblematic of the trends in the literature accompanied by a number of texts which demonstrate those trends. In overview, the snapshot shows that the concepts of tourism experiences and tourist experience have been part of tourism studies literature for over fifty years; albeit that, in the main, there has been a stronger emphasis on tourist experiences than tourism experiences. Further, the study of tourism/tourist experiences has been undertaken using a variety of focal lenses or frames associated with authenticity, phenomenological interpretations, motivations, host-guest interactions, gazes, normalization, gender, identity, impacts, embodiment, and cultural differences. More recently, however, since the late 1990s quality tourism experiences has become a defined area of inquiry, see Jennings and Nickerson (2006), wherein varied quality tourism experience research agendas were advanced. These agendas ranged from consideration of theoretical constructions to methodological implications and included combinations of both. In the 2000s, a number of conferences have focussed further attention and dialogue on the experience concepts, such as, Measuring Experiences, Travel and Tourism Research Association (2004); the Extraordinary Experiences Conference (2007); and Tourist Experiences: Meanings, Motivations, Behaviours (2009). And from an industry perspective, as demonstrated by the examples in the opening paragraph of this article, tourism experiences and quality tourism experiences have become an increasingly used term in tourism and hospitality industry sectors.

Marketing Related Literature

With regard to marketing literature, since the late 1990s and into the early stages of the twenty-first century, experience and experiences have burgeoned as a specific focus. In particular, experience marketing has become a niche area in and of itself (see the works of OSullivan & Spangler 1998; Smith & Wheeler, 2002; Marconi, 2005; Gilmore & Pine, 2002; Lenderman, 2005). Additionally, it should be noted that the particular study and use of service quality measures have permeated tourism, hospitality as well as marketing since the 1980s with the work of Parasuraman, Zeithhaml and Berry (1985). The latter three pioneered SERVQUAL (1988), which is predicated on an expectation/performance disconfirmation paradigm derived from gap theory (Parasuraman, Zeithhaml & Berry 1985). SERVQUAL provides criteria

Quality Tourism Experiences

299

Downloaded by [Ana Coric] at 02:15 09 April 2013

to measure service quality related to the dimensions of empathy, responsiveness, reliability, tangibles, and assurance. There has been a significant uptake of SERVQUAL within tourism and hospitality service industries. Variations have also emerged, such as Raajpoots (2004) PAKSERV developed to account for Asian culture. PAKSERV uses dimensions based on Hofstedes (1980, 1984) and Hofstede and Bonds (1988) dimensions; as well as Schwartzs (1992) personal value measures. Despite its uptake, SERVQUAL has not been without its critics. Cronin and Taylor (1992), for example, queried service quality relationships with regard to satisfaction and attitude. Additionally, Jennings and Weiler (2006) critiqued SERVQUAL and other service delivery based studies for being etically (objectively) rather than emically driven. Other discourses to be considered later in this article also reflect on how quality tourism experiences should be studied. Having provided a generic overview of trends with regard to experiences, quality experience, tourism experiences, quality tourism experiences within tourism studies and marketing; the article will now briefly consider the term experiences, tourism and tourist experiences and quality tourism experiences in turn.

Experiences
Within scholarly literature, there are many interpretations of the term experience. Pine and Gilmore (1999, p. 11) define experience from an organizational/business sense. For these writers an experience is created when a company intentionally uses services as the stage and goods as props, to engage individual customers in a way that creates a memorable event. On the other hand, Holbrook and Hirschman (1982, p. 132) indicate experiences reflect an emotional state, consisting of a steady flow of fantasies, feelings and fun. This resonates with similarity to the work of Csikszentmihalyi (1988), Holyfield (1999), and Gobe, Gob, and Zyman (2001). Kotler, Adam, Brown and Armstrong (2001) also suggest that an experience for individuals comprises an emotional or internal condition. And here they cite another definition by Pine and Gilmore (1999, 1998) which indicates that experiences are inherently personal, existing only in the mind of an individual who has been engaged on an emotional, physical, intellectual, or even spiritual level. An alternate definition is provided by La Salle and Britton (2003), who see that an experience which has value is,
A product or service that when combined with its surrounding experiences events goes beyond itself to enhance or bring value to a customers life. This is the ideal to deliver such overall value that a product transcends the ordinary to become extraordinary or even priceless. (p. 38)

300

G. Jennings et al.

This sometimes means moving into the backstages of experience delivery, see MacCannell (1973) who drew on the writings of Goffman (1959, 1974). Perhaps the complexity of the term experiences is best summed by Schmitt (1999) where experiences are:
the result of encountering, undergoing or living through situations. . . . triggered stimulations to the senses, the heart, and the mind. . . . connect the company and the brand to the customers lifestyle and place individual customer actions and the purchase occasion in a broader social context. . . . experiences provide sensory, emotional, cognitive, behavioural and relational values that replace functional values (p. 25)

Downloaded by [Ana Coric] at 02:15 09 April 2013

Reflecting on the themes inherent in these definitions, a number of interpretive frames arise. Again, frames and frameworks are used in the sense that Goffman (1974, p. 21) and Goffman and Berger (1986, p. 21) applied them, as schemata of interpretation. The frames that were identified were those linked to organizational and company perspectives, such as, business interpretative, customer-oriented, marketing, value, and delivery (goods, products, services, experiences and situations) frames. Also, present in the definitions were individualistic perspectives, such as, personal, affective (emotional), embodied, transcendence into extraordinary, and memory frames. Some of the latter relate to psychological perspectives connected for example, to feelings, memory, intellect and behaviour frames. Additionally, there were social perspectives, such as, lifestyle, and social context frames. In summary, the frames identified were connected to perspectives that were described as organizational/company, individualistic, psychological and social in nature. Research conducted into experiences, tended towards post/positivistic and mixed methods approaches (refer to Tashakkori and Teddlie, 2003 for description of mixed methods) along with interpretivist and constructivist approaches (see Schwandt 1994, 2000 for further details on these approaches).

Tourism and Tourist Experiences

Although a range of tourism sources and stakeholders implicitly use the term tourism experience, several authors have attempted to temporally define the inter-related nature of the term tourist experience/s. Others have focussed on temporality, activity, experiences, meanings, benefits and satisfaction frames. These are discussed later in this section. Of the temporalbased interpretations, this article will outline the models developed by Clawson 1963, Killion (1992), Craig-Smith and French (1994), and Jennings (1997). Clawsons (1963) linear recreation experience model includes episodic activity-based phases that start with a planning phase, travel-to phase, on-site activity phase, return travel phase, and ends with a recollection phase. Killion modified Clawsons recreation-based linear model to a tourism-oriented

Quality Tourism Experiences

301

curvilinear representation in order to demonstrate the potential iterative nature of experiences. A further variant to Killions model, suggests that each of the episodic activity-based phases may in turn replicate entire travel experiences in themselves when multi-destinational travel is undertaken by consumers (Jennings, 1997). Craig-Smith and French (1994) also defined tourist and vacation experiences as a linear concept, with previous travel experiences informing future experiences. As such, three phases were proposed an anticipatory phase, an experiential phase and a reflective phase. Essentially, these four models mirror some similarity, yet there are differences in terms of representation and inter-connectivity between the tourist experience phases. The diversity in these models demonstrates the complexity of the temporal and activity-based dimensions of tourism and tourist experiences. Some earlier activity-based frameworks reduced experiences to lists of activities usually linked to reasons and purpose of travel, see for example, McIntosh (1977), Crompton (1979). Anderick, Bricker, Kerstetter and Nickerson (2006) have also considered additional deconstructions of the meaning of a tourism experience by incorporating social and environmental activities as components of the overall experience framework. In their work, Borrie and Birzell (2001) identified four frames to understanding visitor (tourist and tourism) experiences: meanings, benefits, satisfaction, and experience based. Meanings-based models are connected to the work of Botterill and Crompton (1996), while for benefits and satisfaction-based models refer to the writings of Lounsbury and Polik (1992). Experienced-based models are related to the works of, for example, Cohen (1979), Borrie and Roggenbuck (2001), Hull, Stewart and Yi, (1992). An early model offered by Cohen (1979) indicated that tourists encountered a typology of modes of experiences. This was later reconsidered by Lengkeek (2001). Such modes were determined by the individuals quest for a center, or sacred moral values (Uriely, Yonay & Simchai, 2002) within their own everyday societies; and within other cultures during their travels and touristic activities. The modes range from the pursuit of simple recreational pleasures with an emphasis on own society centres; through to the search for significant existential experiences with prominence on the quest for other cultural centres and authenticity. Anderick, Bricker, Kerstetter and Nickerson (2006) noted that benefits and satisfaction frames are predicated on quantitative approaches; while experience and meanings-based frames use qualitative approaches. Other authors have provided other dimensional interpretations of tourist experiences. For instance Beeton, Bowen & Santos (2006) and Jennings and Weiler (2006) utilize Urrys (1990, 2002) tourist gaze, an internal-based consumer concept, to understand the meaning of tourist experience. Urrys notion emphasized that there is not, as such, a singular tourist gaze; gazes vary from society to society, social group to social group and from time and context periods. It is also important to note that experiences may have both

Downloaded by [Ana Coric] at 02:15 09 April 2013

302

G. Jennings et al.

positive and negative consequences, regardless of the intention towards the quality of the tourism experience. Moreover, positive and negative relationships with tourism experiences can be associated with the multiple interpretations of quality, which need to be contextualized within previously mentioned temporal, social, cultural, political and environmental considerations (Andereck, Bricker, Kersetter & Nickerson, 2006; Andereck & Jurowski, 2006; Carmichael, 2006; Jennings & Weiler, 2006).

Quality Tourism Experiences

In tourism literature, quality has been associated with different meanings in a variety of contexts, in particular service delivery and quality; quality assurance, auditing and control; and in product and market differentiation (for example, Warden, Liu, Huang, & Lee, 2003; Lennon & Harris, 2002; Bitner, 1990; Sheldon & Fox, 1988). However, Jennings (2006) advanced that quality tourism experiences covers a greater range of perspectives than just service quality. The term tends to be associated with product quality importance (for example, Onome, 2003; Weber & Roehl, 1999; Vaughan & Russell, 1982), the relationship between quality and satisfaction (for example, Yuksel & Yuksel, 2001; Laws, 1998; Uysal, McDonald, & Martin, 1994) as well as quality and environmental issues across a range of environments from natural to built (for example, Bhat, 2003; Lawson, Manning, Valliere, & Wang, 2003; Ross & Wall, 1999; Laws, 1991; Vaughan & Russell, 1982; Smith, Webster, & Heck, 1976). Furthermore, quality tourism experiences have been linked to reputation (for example, Keane, 1996); sustainability (for example, Boyd, 2002; Font, 2002; Ross & Wall, 1999; Moscardo, 1996); host and guest interactions (for example, Perdue, Long & Yang, 1999; Cooper & Morpheth, 1998; Howell, 1994); quality of life (for example, Neal, Sirgy & Uysal, 1999); profitability (for example, Ayala, 1996; Braithewaite, 1992); experience modes (for example, Ryan, 1997, 2002; Urry, 1990, 2002; Cohen, 1972, 1979; 1988); place and identity (for example, Campbell, 2003; Bricker & Kerstetter, 2002) and motivation (for example, Onome, 2003; MacCannell, 2002). The majority of the studies conducted into quality tourism experiences tended to draw on post/positivist and mixed methods. That being said, various studies could be placed along a continuum of paradigms from positivism to interpretivism and constructivism. The following section reflects further on research approaches and agendas used to study as well as move towards understanding quality tourism experiences.

Downloaded by [Ana Coric] at 02:15 09 April 2013

Reflections and Research Agendas

In attempting to define and/or understand quality tourism experiences, academic researchers may be confounded by the array of theoretical paradigms from which to select in order to research the phrase/phenomena. Tourism researchers and marketers, destination managers or policy makers who have

Quality Tourism Experiences

303

post/positivistic leanings, may want to etically determine universal descriptors, definitions and/or frames for quality tourism experience. Such an approach is associated with the previously mentioned service quality research, specifically, SERVQUAL (Parasuraman, Zeithhaml, & Berry, 1988; Parasuraman, Berry, & Zeithaml, 1991). On the other hand, interpretivists and social constructivists recognise a multiplicity of interpretations and that experiences are constantly being (re)constructed and (re)interpreted (Schwandt, 2000). Those who view the world this way assume that quality tourism experiences has no one meaning but rather multiple meanings and that a better understanding of these meanings is achieved by using emic approaches (see discussions by Arnould & Wallendorf, 1994; Anderick, Bricker, Kerstetter, & Nickerson, 2006; Bricker & Kerstetter, 2006; Jennings & Weiler, 2006; Nickerson, 2006). Furthermore, research agendas need to consider commentary by researchers from both post/ positivistic and social constructivist viewpoints regarding the elusive nature of pinpointing one interpretation that explains quality tourism experiences. Additionally, Urrys (1990, 1996, 2002) critique of twentieth century social research and tourist experiences (gazes) lack of consideration of space, time, and societal as well as cultural differences similarly needs further attention. Penultimately, this article proffers that quality tourism experiences is a term imbued with multiple meanings and interpretations, depending on who is using the term and why, as well as where and when it is being used. Inherent in this proffer is an emphasis on who being singular. This emphasis is deliberate, for as Gilmore and Pine (2000) have already framed, we are dealing with markets of one. The extent to which this applies to collectivist rather than individualistic societies (see Hofestede, 1980, 1984) is questionable and following Urrys lead requires further study. That being said, a working definition and research agenda has been proposed, which acknowledges both the multiplicity of interpretations and the personalised nature of experiences. That definition proffers that quality tourism experience/s is a selfdefined term and that, in order to understand its meanings, researchers need to interact with the person using the term in order to gain an insiders (emic) perspective (Jennings & Weiler, 2006). Further, such understanding is dependent on Urrys advice for quality tourism experiences research to be contextually situated in a specific time, space, and by participants in specific social groups. Having reviewed and reflected variously on quality tourism experiences and its contributing terms, as well as research approaches and agendas, the article turns to final reflections on quality tourism research agendas.

Downloaded by [Ana Coric] at 02:15 09 April 2013

REFLECTIONS AND FURTHER RESEARCH AGENDAS Research Agenda

First and foremost in setting any agenda, as already stated, is the recognition that meanings of quality tourism experience are not fixed in time, space or

304

G. Jennings et al.

Downloaded by [Ana Coric] at 02:15 09 April 2013

cultures. For example, differences between individualistic and collectivist cultures, mean interpretations of quality tourism experiences may not be easily transferable. Just as Urry (1990; 2002) has previously commented with regard to tourist gazes, meanings of quality tourism experiences are constantly being (re)constructed and (re)interpreted. In order to understand experiences, industry and researchers need to interact with the [stakeholders, who are] using the term (Jennings & Weiler, 2006). Further, since the nature of experiences are inherently personal, existing only in the mind of an individual (Pine & Gilmore, 1999, 1998); an emic (insider perspective) based design will serve to achieve personal and multiple meanings associated with quality tourism experiences as provided in the new emotion-based economies of a globalized world (Gobe, Gob & Zyman, 2001) and markets of one (Gilmore & Pine, 2000). Such approaches will complement and extend more etically informed research agendas. In order to keep up to date with the changing nature of and manifold meanings of quality tourism experiences, research agendas need to be longitudinal in design, responsive to change and flexible in methods of empirical material (data) collection and interpretations (analysis). Such research agendas harness pro-activity rather than reactivity. Finally and to reiterate, consideration of gender, social, political and cultural spaces needs to be incorporated in research designs.

REFERENCES
Alvesson, M., & K. Skldberg. (2000). Reflexive methodology, new vistas for qualitative research. London: Sage. Anderick, K., Bricker, K. S., Kerstetter, D., & Nickerson, N. P. (2006). Connecting experiences to quality: Understanding meanings behind visitors experiences. In G. R. Jennings & N. Nickerson (Eds.), Quality tourism experiences (pp. 8198). Burlington, MA: Elsevier. Anderick, K., & Jurowski, C. (2006). Tourism and quality of life. In G. R. Jennings & N. Nickerson (Eds.), Quality tourism experiences (pp. 136154). Burlington, MA: Elsevier. Arnould, E. J., & Wallendorf, M. (1994). Market-oriented ethnography: Interpretation building and marketing strategy formulation. Journal of Marketing Research, 31(4), 484504. Ayala, H. (1996). Resort ecotourism: A paradigm for the 21st century. The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 37(5), 5461. Beeton, S., Bown, H. E., & Santos, C.A. (2006). State of knowledge: Mass media and its relationship to perceptions of quality. In G. R. Jennings & N. Nickerson (Eds.), Quality tourism experiences (pp. 2537). Burlington, MA: Elsevier. Berno, T. (1996). Cross-cultural research methods: Content or context? A Cook Island example. In R. Butler & T. Hinch (Eds.). Tourism and indigenous peoples (pp. 376395). London: International Thomson Business Press.

Quality Tourism Experiences

305

Bhat, M. G. (2003). Application of non-market valuation to the Florida Keys Marine Reserve Management. Journal of Environmental Management, 67, 315325. Bitner, M. J. (1990). Evaluating service encounters: The effects of physical surroundings and employee responses. Journal of Marketing, 54(2), 6982. Boorstin, D. (1964). The image: A guide to pseudo events in America. New York: Harper and Row. Borrie W. T., & Birzell, R. (2001). Approaches to measuring quality of the wilderness experience. In W. A. Freimund & D. N. Cole (Eds.), Visitor use density and wilderness experience, Proceedings; 2001 June 13; Missoula, MT. Proc RMRS-P-20, (pp. 2938). Ogden, UT: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Borrie, B., & Roggenbuck, J. (2001). The dynamic, emergent, and multi-phasic nature of on-site wilderness experiences. Journal of Leisure Research, 33, 202228. Botterill, D., & Crompton, J. (1996). Two case studies: Exploring the nature of the tourists experience. Journal of Leisure Research, 28(1), 5782. Boyd, S. (2002). Cultural and heritage tourism in Canada: Opportunities, principles and challenges. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 3(3), 211233. Braithewaite, R. (1992). Value-chain assessment of the travel experience. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 33(5), 4149. Bricker, K. S., & D. L. Kerstetter. (2002). An interpretation of special place meanings whitewater recreationists attach to the South Fork of the American River. Tourism Geographies, 4, 396425. Bricker, K. S., & Kerstetter, D. (2006). Saravanua ni naua: Exploring sense of place in the rural highlands of Fiji. In G. R. Jennings & N. Nickerson (Eds.), Quality tourism experiences (pp. 99111). Burlington, MA: Elsevier. Brown, S. W., & Swartz, T. A. (1989). A gap analysis of professional service quality. Journal of Marketing, 52(2), 9298. Butler, R., & Hinch, T. (Eds.). (1996). Tourism and indigenous peoples. London: International Thomson Business Press. Campbell, C. (2003). Our dear north country: Regional identity and national meaning in Ontarios Georgian Bay. Journal of Canadian Studies, 37(4), 6891. Carmen, J. M. (1990). Consumer perceptions of service quality: An assessment of the Servqual dimensions. Journal of Retailing, 66(1), 3355. Carmichael, B. A. (2006). Linking quality tourism experiences, residents quality of life, and quality experiences for tourists. In G. R. Jennings & N. Nickerson (Eds.), Quality tourism experiences (pp. 115135). Burlington, MA: Elsevier. Cater, C. (2002). Beyond the gaze: The reflexive tourist and the search for embodied experience. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Bristol, United Kingdom. Clawson, M. (1963). Land and water for recreation: Opportunities, problems and policies. Chicago: Rand McNally. Clift, S., Luongo, M., & Callister, C. (2002). Gay tourism: Culture, identity and sex. London: Continuum. Cohen, E. (1972). Toward a sociology of international tourism. Social Research, 39, 164182. Cohen, E. (1979). A phenomenology of tourist experiences. Sociology, 13, 179201.

Downloaded by [Ana Coric] at 02:15 09 April 2013

306

G. Jennings et al.

Cohen, E. (1988). Traditions in the qualitative sociology of tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 15(1), 2946. Cooper, C., & Morpheth, N. (1998). The impact of tourism on residential experience in Central-eastern Europe: The development of a new legitimation crisis in the Czech Republic. Urban Studies, 35(12), 22532275. Craig-Smith, S., & French, C. (1994). Learning to live with tourism. Melbourne: Pitman. Crompton, J. (1979). Motivations for pleasure vacation. Annals of Tourism Research, 6, 408424. Crosby, P. B. (1979). Quality is free: The art of making quality certain. New York: McGraw-Hill. Cronin, J. J., & Taylor, S. A. (1992). Measuring service quality: A reexamination and extension. Journal of Marketing, 56, 5558. Csikzentmihalyi, M. (1988). The future of flow. In M. Csikzentmihalyi & I. Csikzentmihalyi. (Eds.), Optimal experience: Psychological studies of flow in consciousness (pp. 365383). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Extraordinary Experiences Conference: Managing the consumer experience in hospitality, leisure, sport, tourism, retail and events. (2007, September 34). Bournemouth University, Bournemouth, UK. Feifer, M. (1985). Going places. London: Macmillan. Font, X. (2002). Environmental certification in tourism and hospitality: Progress, process and prospects. Tourism Management, 5(1), 7582. Garvin, D. (1983). Quality on the line. Harvard Business Review, 61, 6475. Gilmore, J. H., & Pine, B. J. (2000). Markets of one: Creating customer-unique value through mass customization. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Gilmore, J. H., & Pine, B. J. (2002). The experience is the marketing: A special report. Louisville, KY: BrownHerron. Gitlin, T. (1980). The whole world is watching: Mass media in the making and unmaking of the new left. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Gobe, M., Gob, M., & Zyman, S. (2001). Emotional branding: The new paradigm for connecting brands to people. New York: Allworth Press. Goffman, E. (1959). Presentation of self in everyday life. Garden City, NY: Doubleday Anchor. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. New York: Harper and Row. Goffman, E., & Berger, B. (1986). Frame analysis. Boston: Northeastern University Press. Grbich, C. (2004). New approaches in social research. London: Sage. Harding, P. (2006, July). Higher value tourism experiences. Bright, 12-14. Hofstede, G. H. (1980). Cultures consequences: International differences in workrelated values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Hofstede, G. H. (1984). Cultures consequences: International differences in workrelated values (Abridged Edition). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Hofstede, G. H., & Bond, M. H. (1988). The Confucian-connection: From cultural roots to economic growth. Organizational Dynamics, 16(4), 421. Holbrook, M. B., & Hirschman, E. C. (1982). The experiential aspects of consumption: Consumer fantasies, feelings and fun. Journal of Consumer Research, 9, 132140.

Downloaded by [Ana Coric] at 02:15 09 April 2013

Quality Tourism Experiences

307

Hollinshead, K. (1992). White gaze, red people-shadow visions: The disidentification of Indians in cultural tourism. Leisure Studies, 11, 4364. Hollinshead, K. (2004). Symbolism in tourism: Lessons from Bali 2002 Lessons from Australias dead heart. Tourism Analysis, 8, 267295. Holyfield, L. (1999). Manufacturing adventure: The buying and selling of emotions. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 28(1), 332. Howell, B. J. (1994). Weighing the risks and rewards of involvement in cultural conservation and heritage tourism. Human Organization, 53, 150159. Hull, R., Stewart, W. & Yi, Y. (1992). Experience patterns: Capturing the dynamic nature of a recreation experience, Journal of Leisure Research, 24, 240252. Jennings, G. R. (1997). The travel experience of cruisers. In M. Oppermann (Ed.), Pacific Rim 2000: Issues, interrelations, inhibitors (pp. 94105). London: CAB International. Jennings, G. R. (1999). Voyages from the centre to the margins: An ethnography of long term ocean cruisers. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Murdoch University, Perth, Australia. Jennings, G. R., & Nickerson, N. (Eds.). (2006). Quality tourism experiences. Burlington, MA: Elsevier. Jennings, G. R. & Stehlik, D. (2000). Agricultural women in Central Queensland and changing modes of production: A preliminary exploration of the issues. Rural Society, 10(1), 6378. Jennings, G. R. (2006). Quality tourism experiences An introduction. In G. R. Jennings & N. Nickerson (Eds.), Quality tourism experiences (pp. 121). Burlington, MA: Elsevier. Jennings, G. R., & Weiler. B. (2006). Mediating meaning: Perspectives on brockering quality tourism experiences. In G. R. Jennings & N. Nickerson (Eds.), Quality tourism experiences (pp. 5778). Burlington, MA: Elsevier. Keane, M. J. (1996). Sustaining quality in tourism destinations: An economic model with an application. Applied Economics, 28(12), 15451553. Killion, G. L. (1992). Understanding tourism: Study guide. Rockhampton, Australia: Central Queensland University. Kotler, P., Adam, S., Brown, L., & Armstrong, G. (2001). Principles of marketing. Frenchs Forest, Australia: PearsonPrentice Hall. Lakshmkan, V. (2002). Hospitality - Karnatakas new favourite. Express Hotelier and Caterer. Mumbai, India: Indian Express Group. Retrieved April 18, 2004, from http://www.expresscomputeronline.com/cgi-bin/ecprint/MasterPFP.cgi?doc LaSalle, D., & Britton, T. (2003). Priceless: Turning ordinary products into extraordinary experiences. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Laws, E. (1991). Tourism marketing: Service and quality management perspectives. Cheltenham, UK: Stanley Thornes. Laws, E. (1998). Conceptualizing visitor satisfaction management in heritage settings: An exploratory blueprinting analysis of Leeds Castle, Kent. Tourism Management, 19, 545554. Lawson, S. R., Manning, R. E., Valliere, W. A., & Wang, B. (2003). Proactive monitoring and adaptive management of social carrying capacity in Arches National Park: An application of computer simulation modelling. Journal of Environmental Management, 68, 305313.

Downloaded by [Ana Coric] at 02:15 09 April 2013

308

G. Jennings et al.

Lee, Y. S. (2001) Tourist gaze: Universal concept? Tourism, Culture and Communication, 3(2), 9399. Lenderman, M. (2005). Experience the message: How experiential marketing is changing the brand world. New York: Carroll and Graf. Lengkeek, J. (2001). Leisure experience and imagination: Rethinking Cohens modes of tourism experience. International Sociology, 16, 173184. Lennon, R., & Harris, J. (2002). Customer service on the web: A crossindustry investigation. Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, 10, 325328. Lounsbury, J., & Polik, J. (1992). Leisure needs and vacation satisfaction. Leisure Sciences, 14, 105119. MacCannell, D. (1973). Staged authenticity: Arrangements of social space in tourist settings. American Journal of Sociology, 79, 589603. MacCannell, D. (2002). The ego factor in tourism. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(1), 146151. McIntosh, R. W. (1977). Tourism: Principles, practices, philosophies. Colombus, OH: Grid. Marconi, J. (2005). Creating the marketing experience: New strategies for building relationships with your target market. Mason, OH: South-Western Educational Publishing. Ministry of Tourism, Canada. (2008). About the Ministry. Retrieved January 23, 2009 from http://www.tourism.gov.on.ca/english/about/about.html Moscardo, G. (1996). Mindful visitorsHeritage and tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 23, 376397. Neal, J., Sirgy, M. J., & Uysal, M. (1999). The role of satisfaction with leisure travel/ tourism services and experience in satisfaction with leisure life and overall life. Journal of Business Research, 44(3), 153163. Nickerson, N. P. (2006). Some reflections on quality tourism experiences. In G. R. Jennings & N. Nickerson (Eds.), Quality tourism experiences (pp. 227235). Burlington, MA: Elsevier. Onome, D. A. (2003). Destination environment quality and tourists spatial behaviour in Nigeria: A case study of third world tropical Africa. The International Journal of Tourism Research, 5(4), 251268. OSullivan, E. L., & Spangler, K. J. (1998). Experience marketing: Strategies for the new millennium. State College, PA: Venture Publishing. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of Marketing, 49, 4150. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A multi-item scale for measuring customer perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1) 1240. Parasuraman, A., Berry, L. L., & Zeithaml, V. A. (1991). Refinement and reassessment of the SERVQUAL scale. Journal of Retailing, 67(1), 3948. Pearce, P., & Caltabiano, M. L. (1982). Inferring travel motivations from travellers experiences. Journal of Tourism Research, 17, 337352. Perdue, R. R., Long, P. T., & Yang, Y. S. (1999). Boomtown tourism and resident quality of lifeA Colorado case study. Journal of Business Research, 44, 165177.

Downloaded by [Ana Coric] at 02:15 09 April 2013

Quality Tourism Experiences

309

Peskin, A. (2001). Angles of vision: Enhancing perception in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 7, 238253. Pine, J., & Gilmore, J. (1998). Welcome to the experience economy. Harvard Business Review, 76(4), 97105. Pine, J., & Gilmore, J. (1999). The experience economy: Work is theatre and every business is a stage. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Raajpoot, N. (2004). Reconceptualizing Service Encounter Quality in Non-Western Context. Journal of Service Research, 7, 181201. Rathmell, J. M. (1966). What is meant by services? Journal of Marketing, October, 3236. Richardson, J. I., & Fluker, M. (2004). Understanding and managing tourism. Frenchs Forest, Australia: Pearson Education Australia. Ross, S., & Wall, G. (1999). Evaluating ecotourism: The case of North Sulawesi, Indonesia The impact of regionalization. Tourism Management, 20, 673682. Ryan, C. (Ed.). (1997). The tourist experience: An introduction. London: Cassell. Ryan, C. (Ed.). (2002). The tourist experience: An introduction (2nd ed.). London: Thomson Learning. Schmitt, B. (1999). Experiential marketing: How to get customers to sense, feel, think, act and relate to your company and brands: New York: The Free Press. Schwandt, T. A. (1994). Constructivist, interpretivist approaches to human inquiry. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 118137). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Schwandt, T. A. (2000). Three epistemological stances for qualitative inquiry: interpretivism, hermeneutics, and social constructionism. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.; pp. 189213).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Schwandt, T. A. (2001). Dictionary of qualitative inquiry (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. Zanna (Ed.). Advances in experimental social psychology (vol. 25; pp. 165). New York: Academic Press. Sheldon, P., & Fox, M. (1988). The role of foodservice in vacation choice and experience: A cross-cultural analysis. Journal of Travel Research, 27(2), 915. Small, J. (1999). Memory-work: A method for researching womens tourist experiences. Tourism Management, 20(1), 2535. Smith, S., & Wheeler. J. (2002). Managing the customer experience: Turning customers into advocates. Upper Saddle River, NJ: FT Press. Smith, V. (Ed.) (1977). Host and guests: The anthropology of tourism. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Smith, V. (Ed.) (1989). Host and guests: The anthropology of tourism (2nd ed.). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Smith, V., & Brent, M. (2001). Hosts and guest revisited: Tourism issues in the 21st century (tourism dynamics). Elmsford, NY: Cognizant Communication. Smith, V. K., Webster, D. B., & Heck, W. A. (1976). The management of wilderness areasA simulation model. Decision Sciences, 7, 524537. Squire, S. J. (1994). Gender and tourist experiences: Assessing womens shared meaning for Beatrix Potter. Leisure Studies, 13, 195209.

Downloaded by [Ana Coric] at 02:15 09 April 2013

310

G. Jennings et al.

Swaine, M. B., & Momsen, J. H. (2002). Gender/Tourism/Fun (tourism dynamics). Elmsford, NY: Cognizant Communication. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (Eds.). (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Tourist Experiences: Meanings, motivations, behaviors. (2009, April 14). University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK. Travel and Tourism Research Association. (2004, June 2123). Measuring Experience. Travel and Tourism Research Association 35th Annual Conference, Montreal, Canada. United States Aid from the American People [USAID], and Competitive Armenian Private Sector Project [CAPS]. (2007). Armenian tourism cluster strategic action plan. Retrieved January 23, 2009 from http://www.caps.am/publications/ Tourism_Cluster_Strategy_2007.pdf Uriely, N., Yonay, Y., & Simchai, D. (2002). Backpacking experiences: A type and form analysis. Annals of Tourism Research, 29, 520538. Urry, J. (1990). The tourist gaze, leisure and travel in contemporary societies. London: Sage. Urry, J. (1996). Sociology of time and space. In B. S. Turner (Ed.), The Blackwell companion to social theory (pp. 369395). Oxford: Blackwell. Urry, J. (2002). The tourist gaze (2nd ed.). London: Sage. Uysal, M., McDonald, C. D., & Martin, B. S. (1994). Australian visitors to US national parks and natural areas. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 6(3), 1824. Vaughan, W. J., & Russell, C. S. (1982). Valuing a fishing day: An application of a systematic varying parameter model. Land Economics, 58(4), 450463. Waitt, G., & Markwell, K. (2006). Gay tourism: Culture and context. Binghamton, NY: Haworth Hospitality Press. Warden, C. A., Liu, T-C., Huang C-T., & Lee, C-H. (2003). Service failures away from home: Benefits in intercultural service encounters. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 14(3/4), 436456. Weber, K., & Roehl, W. S. (1999). Profiling people searching for the purchasing travel products on the World Wide Web. Journal of Travel Research, 37(3), 291298. Yuksel, A., & Yuksel, F. (2001). Comparative performance analysis: Tourists perceptions of Turkey relative to other tourist destinations. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 7, 333355. Zeithaml, V. A., Parasuraman, A., & Malhotra, A. (2002). Service quality delivery through web sites: A critical review of extant knowledge. Academy of Marketing Science, 30, 362375.

Downloaded by [Ana Coric] at 02:15 09 April 2013