Destination networks and induced tourism
image
Raquel Camprubı́, Jaume Guia and Jordi Comas
Raquel Camprubı́, Jaume
Guia and Jordi Comas are
all based in the Business,
Management & Product
Design Department
(OGEDP) at the Faculty of
Tourism, University of
Girona, Girona, Spain.
DOI 10.1108/16605370810883941
Abstract
Purpose – The aim of the paper is to develop a conceptual model of the process by means of which the
induced tourism image of a destination is created. The model focuses on the role tourism agents’
relational networks play in this process and particularly on the effects of the links with external actors –
i.e. tour-operators – on the destination’s induced image.
Design/methodology/approach – Based on Gartner’s definition of image formation agents, it is
assumed that there are tourism agents that use the tourism image as a pull factor to influence the buying
behaviour of potential visitors. Basically, these agents are: internal actors, located within a particular
tourism destination, and external agents – i.e. tour-operators – which are not normally associated with
any particular destination, but have stakes in the travel decision process of potential visitors. In parallel,
it is assumed that the tourism destination is a web of relational networks where the agents are connected
by means of collaborative links that facilitate the supply of a tourist product or experience to the visitors.
Findings – In this paper two potential gaps in the induced tourism destination image formation process
are found, and that the position of relevant actors in the network and the structure of the network are two
determinant factors of the emergence – or inhibition – of these gaps. It is also suggested that these
gaps and the lack of collaborative links among internal and external actors would affect the coherence of
the supplied tourist products and the satisfaction with the tourist experience.
Originality/value – The relevance of the paper lies in a new approach to the induced tourism image
formation process focusing on the destination’s relational network and, in particular, the network of
relations with external agents (i.e. tour-operators).
Keywords Tourism management, International relations, Knowledge management,
Competitive strategy
Paper type Conceptual paper
Introduction
During the last 30 years, the analysis of the tourism destination image has increasingly
gained relevance in the academic literature. The perspectives with which the tourism image
is analysed are diverse and multidisciplinary. One of the elements that has been paid more
attention is the study of the capacity of the tourism image to influence the destination
selection process. Authors such as Baloglu and McCleary (1999), Echtner and Ritchie
(1991), Jenkins (1999) and Yüksel and Akgül (2007) have taken this particular perspective.
The tourism destination image can be defined as the sum of beliefs, ideas, and impressions
that a person has of a place (Crompton, 1979; Kotler et al., 1994). These images are based
on the knowledge of a place and a series of perceptions of emotional and affective nature
(Galı́ and Donaire, 2005). In fact, we can state that a tourism destination image is a kind of
knowledge. This issue is highlighted in the definitions made of this term by authors such as
Markin (1974), who establishes that a tourism image is ‘‘our own personalized, internalized
and conceptualizing understanding of what we know’’. This tacit knowledge has necessarily
passed through a process, where it has been first acquired, then assimilated, later
transformed and finally exploited.
VOL. 63 NO. 2 2008, pp. 47-58, Q Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1660-5373 j TOURISM REVIEW j PAGE 47
 The academic literature fundamentally distinguishes between emitted images and
perceived images. On the one hand, emitted images ‘‘reproduce signs with meaning that
has been socially constructed and disseminated’’ (Galı́ and Donaire, 2005). According to
Miossec (1977) there are three types of emitted images. First, universal images are those
images that are evolved along history, and are usually modelled by hard archetypes that
have been accepted in the collective imagery. Second, ephemeral images are the result of a
reinterpretation of reality by the media, literature, art, music, cinema, etc. which are
commonly forgotten, but some times are included in the collective imagery. Finally, the
induced images are those that are promoted though marketing actions and are created in a
conscientious way with the aim of influencing the decision-making process of tourists. On
the other hand, perceived images are images that are created in the mind of the individual,
therefore, having a subjective component. In any case, the results of the evaluation of
perceived images a priori and perceived images in situ or a posteriori is a conditioning factor
for tourist’s satisfaction.
The relevance attributed to tourism image management and their consideration as a factor
that conditions the competitiveness of a tourism destination is increasingly being recognised
(Govers and Go, 2004; Hsu et al., 2004; Konecnik, 2002). According to Govers and Go
(2004), the identity of a tourism destination must be reflected in the emitted tourism image in
order to sustain its competitive advantage. In the case that a tourism image does not
transmit the ‘‘real identity of a place’’, then the tourist experience can be unsatisfactory. In
this sense, we understand that having a solid tourism image, reflecting the real
characteristics of a tourism destination, is a factor that contributes positively to the
destination’s competitiveness.
Tourism destination management and their implications on competitiveness have been
extensively analysed. For a large number of authors, the tourism destination is seen as a
complex system in which the various agents (accommodation, restaurants, transport, etc.)
must be coordinated to create a satisfactory tourist product (Butler, 1980; Gunn, 1972; Laws,
1995; Pearce, 1989).

In this context, we consider the destination as a network of relations, links, ties or contacts
between multiple and diverse actors that, together, create the tourist product (Comas and
Guia, 2005; Novelli et al., 2006; Wang and Fesenmaier, 2007). This approach is reflected in
social network theory (Burt, 1992; Scott, 1991), in which a social network is defined as ‘‘a
specific type of relation linking a set of persons, objects or events’’ (Knoke and Kuklinski,
1993). We should take into account that the quality of the relational links as well as the
structure of the relational network will have implications on the global competitiveness of the
network. Therefore, high connectivity among the various tourism agents of the destination
will help them access relevant information and new knowledge. This situation will, then,
improve the innovation capacity of tourism agents and make the creation of tourist products
more satisfactory.

However, the need to have external contacts or contacts outside the destination to gain
access to newer knowledge is well known, and also that without them it is more likely to reach
a situation of stagnation (Lazerson and Lorenzoni, 1999). In this context, Gartner (1993)
identifies eight types of agents that intervene in the process of formation of a tourism
destination, stressing that four of them are considered induced agents. The induced agents
are those that create and communicate a destination’s tourism image in a conscientious way.
Within the category of induced agents this author distinguishes between ‘‘Overt Induced I’’
which are destination’s internal agents such as promoters of the destination and other
tourism agents within the destination; and ‘‘Overt Induced II’’ which are destination’s external
agents such as tour operators and wholesalers from outside the destination; both of them are
particularly interested in intervening in the travel decision process. It is within this context
where it is indispensable that the tourism agents of the destination have strong contacts with
tour operators and wholesalers from their emitting markets in order to exchange information
related to demand and destination identity. Otherwise, the lack of close contact among
insiders and outsiders of the destination relational network could have serious implications in

j j
PAGE 48 TOURISM REVIEW VOL. 63 NO. 2 2008
the induced tourism image formation process, such as the generation of two (or more)
completely different images, having consequences on the satisfaction of tourists.
Taking into consideration this context, the aim of this paper is to propose a conceptual model
showing how the tourism image is formed by the relational network within the tourism
destination, in order to explain how the network of external links affect the formation of
induced tourism images. This is a new approach, because although the academic literature
analyses relational networks in a supra-systemic way, it has never before analysed how they
work on the induced tourism image formation process.
This paper is structured in three sections. In the first we explain how knowledge is generated
in relational networks, using the concepts of social capital and absorptive capacity. Then,
assuming that a tourism image is some kind of knowledge, we present a theoretical
approach that depicts the induced tourism image formation process and the effects of the
external tourism agent’s network in this process. Finally, we present the conclusions with a
discussion on the limitations of the present approach and the main lines for future research.

Knowledge creation by relational networks

In order to explain how the creation of new knowledge proceeds in a relational network we
need to consider two relevant concepts: on one hand, social capital, which affects access to
information and new knowledge; and, on the other hand, absorptive capacity, as a useful
concept to describe the process of knowledge creation.

Social capital
In order to better understand the implications of social networks for the competitive
advantage of organizations, the concept of social capital has been introduced and
analysed. The most seminal contributions to this field were made by Bordieu (1986), Burt
(1992), Coleman (1988) and Putnam (1995).
Different forms of capital can be identified, such as financial, physical, human institutional
and social capital. All of these types of capital can bring advantages to the actors that have it
(Hardin, 1998). The social capital of an actor can be defined as the body of resources
embedded in his social network along with all the resources made accessible through it
(Nahapiet and Goshal, 1998), so that, the actors better connected in their relational network
will have the largest benefits. In other words, they will obtain competitive advantage to reach
their goals (Burt, 2000).
Bridging social capital and bonding social capital are two types of social capital that have
been identified in the academic literature. First, bridging social capital is related to the
position that actors occupy in the relational network. This type of social capital is exclusive to
each actor, and it is indicative of their capacity to access information and opportunities, and
consequently their potential capacity to maintain and improve his/her competitive position
(Burt, 1992; Freeman, 1979). Second, bonding social capital is associated to network
structure. In this sense, the more cohesive the network of contacts, the more actors will
develop common norms and values shared by the members of the network, as well as an
internal richer flow of information, and thus, facilitating the combination of knowledge by the
actors that form part of the network (Coleman, 1988; Granovetter, 1985).
In social network analysis it is as relevant to examine the position of actors, as is the cohesion
of the network. Sometimes, bridging and bonding social capital are presented as
independent dimensions.

Absorptive capacity
In order to explain the process of knowledge creation in an organization in relation to its
innovative capacity, Cohen and Levinthal (1990) introduced the concept of absorptive
capacity and a number of researchers contributed to their development (Guia, 2000; Kim,
1998; Mowery and Oxley, 1995; Zahra and George, 2002).

j j
VOL. 63 NO. 2 2008 TOURISM REVIEW PAGE 49
 Cohen and Levinthal (1990) viewing absorptive capacity as the firm’s abilities to recognize
the value of, assimilate, and apply new knowledge is the most widely cited definition of this
term.
However, Guia (2000) and Zahra and George (2002) re-conceptualized absorptive capacity
with the aim of capturing the richness of the concept and its multidimensionality.
Guia (2000) and Zahra and George (2002), from the theoretical approach made by Cohen
and Levinthal (1990), Kim (1998) and Mowery and Oxley (1995), identify four
micro-capacities (acquisition, assimilation, transformation and exploitation) and define
absorptive capacity as a set of dynamic organizational capacities by means of which firms
acquire, assimilate, transform and exploit knowledge. The four capacities should be
understood as four dimensions of absorptive capacity, which play different roles but are
complementary at explaining how absorptive capacity can influence a firm’s results (Zahra
and George, 2002).
According to Zahra and George (2002), the acquisition capacity refers to the organization’s
ability to identify and acquire knowledge, which has been generated externally and is critical
to its operations. Second, the assimilation capacity consist of routines and processes that
allow the firm to analyse, process, interpret and understand the information and knowledge
that has been obtained from external sources. Third, the transformation capacity is related to
the firm’s ability to develop and redefine routines that facilitate the combination of existing
knowledge with new knowledge that has been acquired and assimilated. Finally, the
exploitation capacity consists of having the competences to use the newly generated
knowledge to gain profits in terms of market share, social capital or any other type of capital.
At the same time, these authors differentiate between potential and realized absorptive
capacity, and mention that acquisition and assimilation capacities make up the potential
absorptive capacity while the transformation and exploitation capacities are components of
the realized absorptive capacity. In this context, the competitive advantage that absorptive
capacity brings in will only become effective if the organization has simultaneously got
potential and realized absorptive capacity. In other words, an organization will not gain and
sustain competitive advantage, if it is not capable of transforming and exploiting the
knowledge that it has acquired and assimilated.

Relational networks: social capital and absorptive capacity in knowledge creation

Intuitively, we can see interdependence between the social capital of actors in a relational
network and their absorptive capacity. In general terms, the creation of knowledge by an
organization will be affected by its access to information, and their capacity of integrating it
with its own knowledge base. In this context, collaboration among organizations could bring
informative benefits to all their participants in the form of access to varied, timely and
exclusive knowledge; knowledge integration and cost reduction regarding the combination
and exploitation of complementary knowledge; and also in the form of mitigating potential
opportunist behaviours from independent actors during this process (Guia, 2000).
Guia (2000) proposes a conceptual model (Figure 1) that synthesises the relationship
between concepts of social capital and absorptive capacity. In this model we can observe
that actors who have a better position in the network of contacts, that is, bridging social
capital, will benefit from advantages in quantity and variety of acquired and integrated
knowledge, get this knowledge more timely and/or have certain exclusivity in the distribution
of knowledge in the network. In other words, actors will have the possibility to exploit their
potential absorptive capacity through acquisition and assimilation capacities.
In addition, actors who are placed in a relational network with high levels of cohesion, that is,
bonding social capital, will have the lowest transaction costs regarding the coordination of
tasks and the control of potential opportunist behaviours by other interdependent actors.
Simultaneously, these actors will be able to use their realized absorptive capacity through
their transformation and exploitation of knowledge capacities that stem from the structure of
their networks.

j j
PAGE 50 TOURISM REVIEW VOL. 63 NO. 2 2008
Figure 1 Relational networks in innovation and knowledge creation

Actors, who would have potential and realized absorptive capacity, could gain complete
absorptive capacity that will bring them the opportunity to sustain competitive advantage in
knowledge (Guia, 2000; Zahra and George, 2002), being innovation and new knowledge a
key factor for their competitive advantage.
However, in the case that actors occupy an inadequate position in the structure of the
network of contacts, they will have problems to develop the capacity to acquire and
assimilate new knowledge; and this situation will obstruct the possibility to transform and
exploit knowledge. In the same way, actors who are embedded in a network with little
cohesion will have lest advantage regarding the control of opportunist behaviours and
coordination and, therefore, their transformation and exploitation capacities will diminish.

The induced tourism image formation process: a conceptual model

The role of destination networks in the induced tourism image formation process
The tourism image formation process has been systematized by several academics
(Baloglu and McCleary, 1999; Echtner and Ritchie, 1991; Govers and Go, 2004; Gunn, 1972)
in order to determine the components that condition its formation, and the factors that
influence tourism destination selection. These models frequently take the perception of
tourism images as their approach but, however, in no case the relational network of the
tourism destination is considered.
As has been stated above, Gartner (1993) determines the existence of different types of
agents that intervene in the process of creation and communication of a tourism image, and
differentiates among eight classes of agents, which are called ‘‘image formation agents’’.
Among these eight types of agents:
1. ‘‘Overt Induced I’’ are local or internal agents located and operating in a particular a
tourism destination, and comprise destination marketing organizations (DMO) and other
local promoters of the destination, as well as tourism businesses in the hospitality and
tourism attractions sectors.
2. ‘‘Overt Induced II’’ are external agents, which are not only located or operating in one
particular tourism destination, but have strong stakes in the travel decision process of

j j
VOL. 63 NO. 2 2008 TOURISM REVIEW PAGE 51
 potential visitors of the destination. In this category we find the tour operators and
wholesalers.
The relationship among destination’s promoters or DMOs (Overt Induced I) and tour
operators (Overt Induced II) is essential in order to create a tourism image, which ‘‘fits’’ the
‘‘reality’’ of the destination. Gartner (1993) mentions that the destination’s promoters have to
purposively design an image formation strategy, but he does not consider or even mention
the kind of relationships among internal and external agents and network structures that are
needed to effectively formulate it and implement it.
In the model presented (Figure 2) in this paper, it is assumed that tourism destinations
consist of networks of actors, as mentioned above, where the various tourism agents that are
components of the destination interact. The continuous flow of information and knowledge
through these networks will certainly affect the induced tourism image formation of the place,
which will later be used to market the destination.
In this context, induced agents that possess a better position in the network of contacts will
benefit from advantages in variety and quantity of knowledge, and in timeliness and
exclusivity regarding the distribution of the knowledge flowing through the network at any
moment. However, their position will only be effective for their potential absorptive capacity
(Comas and Guia, 2005; Guia et al., 2006), that is, acquisition and assimilation capacities.

Consistent with what was mentioned above, the acquisition capacity of induced agents is
concerned with the collection of information and the identification of resources and other
elements that characterize a tourism destination, existing tourist products, tourists’
characteristics and motivations, and analysis of the perceived tourism image. In addition,
induced agents, in order to complete their potential absorptive capacity, must have the
capacity to assimilate the collected knowledge, that is, they must analyse, process, interpret
and understand all the information related to the tourism destination and the perceived
tourism image they have found.

Figure 2 Induced tourism image formation process

j j
PAGE 52 TOURISM REVIEW VOL. 63 NO. 2 2008
In parallel, high levels of cohesion in the relational network favour the reduction of transaction
costs by means of the emerged norms and values that will reduce the possibility of
opportunist behaviours, and the existence of a high degree of social coordination among the
induced agents. This coordination will help to maintain the coherence between the tourist
product and the induced tourism image, it being essential to tourist’s satisfaction.
In this context, the induced agents must have the capacity to transform the acquired and
assimilated knowledge in the previous stage, trough the combination of existing and new
knowledge. It is precisely in this moment when induced agents, according to the true
destination identity, should establish the basic elements that characterize the tourism image
that ought to be communicated. However, it will also be necessary that the induced agents
have the capacity to exploit this knowledge, so that, the diffusion of the induced tourism
image generated in this process of tourism image creation is effectively implemented. It
should be taken into account that the diffusion of the induced tourism image needs to be
done through the appropriate communication channels in order to arrive to the targeted
market segments.
Complete absorptive capacity will allow induced agents of the relational network of the
tourism destination to gain competitive advantage in knowledge (Guia, 2000; Zahra and
George, 2002). This competitive advantage will stem from the emerged coherent induced
tourism image in relation with ‘‘the real identity’’ of the destination and the tourist product.
Nevertheless, it is always possible to find two gaps in induced tourism images that could
reduce its coherence. These gaps are inspired by Govers and Go’s (2004) ‘‘three-gap
tourism destination image model’’, but differ in that it explains the existing gaps in perceived
tourism image terms, while here the focus lies in discussing the dysfunctions of the formation
of an induced tourism image.

On the one hand, when there is a lack of coherence between the induced tourism image and
the supplied tourist product, it means that the induced tourism image does not reflect the
‘‘reality’’ of the destination and the ‘‘supplied tourist product gap’’ (gap 1) comes up. On the
other hand, when induced agents act independently, regarding the formation and
communication of the tourism destination image, several induced tourism images might
simultaneously emerge with substantial differences among them. Here, we can say that a
‘‘multi-image gap’’ is present (gap 2).

These gaps can easily be explained by the structure of the relational network of the tourism
destination, taking into consideration the position of the actors in the network of contacts and
the cohesion of the whole network. On one hand, actors with a central position in the network
will be able to obtain relevant information to create a ‘‘unique’’ and common induced tourism
image, and will be able to contribute to create an induced tourism image coherent with the
actual tourist product. They can help to prevent the emergence of the ‘‘supplied tourist
product gap’’ (gap 1), and also to prevent the creation of several tourism images of the
destination and, therefore, the ‘‘multi-image gap’’ (gap 2).
On the other hand, for the induced tourism image to be the most coherent with the actual
product supplied in the destination, that is, for the existence of a ‘‘unique’’ induced tourism
image, high levels of network cohesion are necessary. Low levels of network cohesion would
produce divergences between the promoted induced tourism image and the actual
destination tourist product, so that, the ‘‘supplied tourist product gap’’ (gap 1) would
become manifest. Also, low cohesion of the network configuration could contribute to
generate more than one tourism image of the same place with significant differences and,
thus, would bring out the ‘‘multi-image gap’’ (gap 2).
If all the induced agents in the destination have a favourable stock of bridging and bonding
social capital and, therefore, have high potential and realized absorptive capacity, then the
tourism destination would benefit in terms of competitive advantage on the basis of its
coherent induced tourism image. The right performance of a process of formation of an
induced tourism image will be determined by the minimization of these two gaps in the
induced tourism image. The image so created will be determining to influence tourists in

j j
VOL. 63 NO. 2 2008 TOURISM REVIEW PAGE 53
 their destination decision-making process and, therefore, will act as a ‘‘pull’’ factor (Gartner,
1993), and reinforce the competitiveness of the tourism destination (Govers and Go, 2004).
And, conversely, when the levels of bridging and social capital are not good enough to
maintain the induced tourism image free of the two gaps, then the induced tourism image
might become incoherent with regard to the tourist product supplied, or diffuse if there exists
more than one induced image, having thus consequences on the tourists’ selection process
and/or the tourists’ satisfaction. Ultimate and consequently, the competitive position of the
tourism destination might be negatively affected.

Effects of external agents on the induced tourism image formation process

In the conceptual model that we presented above, we have stressed the influence that the
destination’s relational network exercises in the formation of the induced tourism image in a
general way. In this last section, with the purpose of accomplishing the aim of the paper, we
focus on the effects of the external network of links outside the tourism destination on the
induced tourism image formation process.
As mentioned above, besides the destination’s tourism agents (Overt Induced I) that have a
great interest in creating and emitting an induced tourism image of the destination, with the
intention of influencing tourists’ decision making, relevant tourism agents external to the
network in the destination (Overt Induced II) can also be found, such as tour operators and
wholesalers that also are interested in influencing the destination selection process.
Now, in order to analyse the possible gaps that can appear as a result of the process of
formation of the induced tourism image, the relationships between internal and external
tourism agents are considered.
In the literature on territorial clusters, the relevance of the links of the members of the clusters
with external agents to reinforce the acquisition of new information and knowledge is
emphasized (Lazerson and Lorenzoni, 1999). Otherwise, a closed structure would limit the
acquisition of new knowledge.
In the case of a tourism destination, the existence of collaborative links among internal and
external tourism agents will propitiate that internal tourism agents pass information about the
resources and attractions of the tourism destination, as well as the actually supplied tourism
products, on to external tourism agents. These reciprocal flows of information will favour the
emission of a similar and common induced tourism image of the place, preventing thus the
appearance of the two gaps identified in the conceptual model above.
The lack of collaborative links between Overt Induced I and Overt Induced II agents may
imply that the external tourism agents interpret the tourism destination according to the
information and knowledge that they get by their own means. This ‘‘indirect’’ or
disembedded interpretation made of the reality of a place could produce a ‘‘wrong’’
understanding of the resources and attractions of the tourism destination as well as the
tourist products supplied. In these circumstances, the external agents will emit an induced
tourism image with very little coherence with the supplied tourist product in the destination,
therefore, appearing the ‘‘supplied tourist product gap’’ (gap 1). Also, there will be a chance
of at least two induced tourism images emerging (one from external tourism agents and
another one form internal tourism agents) with substantial differences between them, thus,
generating the ‘‘multi-image gap’’ (gap 2).
P1. The existence of collaborative links between internal actors of the relational network
(Overt Induced I) and external actors (Overt Induced II), will favour the transfer of
knowledge of the tourism destination between them, and, as a consequence, the
external actors will project an induced tourism image more coherent with the supplied
tourist products of the destination (referred to as gap 1) and/or emit an ‘‘unique’’
tourism image (referred to as gap 2), thus, minimizing the chance of appearing the two
gaps of the induced tourism image.

The existence of central actors within the destination network will propitiate a higher level of
bridging social capital, which will support the emission of an induced tourism image

j j
PAGE 54 TOURISM REVIEW VOL. 63 NO. 2 2008
coherent with the supplied tourist product of the destination. At the same time, if these
central actors have collaborative links among them, the emission of a ‘‘unique’’ induced
tourism image will be guaranteed. In any case, the role that the central actors play in the
relational network involves a reduction of the gaps of the induced tourism image.
Taking into consideration this situation, we contend that if these central actors in the
relational network of the destination (Overt induced I), who have a high amount of bridging
social capital, have collaborative links with external tourism agents (Overt Induced II), and
therefore, effectively supply them with the knowledge about the resources and attractions of
the tourism destination, the targeted market, the supplied tourists products, etc. – i.e.
through meetings, workshops or familiarization tours-, the chance of preventing the induced
tourism image gaps will be higher.
A lack of collaborative links among central actors in the relational network and external
tourism agents will not prevent the emergence of the mentioned gaps. The external tourism
agents will, then, emit an induced tourism image with relevant differences with the supplied
tourism product (gap 1), as well as an induced tourism image with substantial differences
with the tourism image induced by the internal tourism agents.
P2. When central actors (Overt Induced I) in the relational network have collaborative links
with external actors (Overt Induced II), the external actors will have a better and more
accurate knowledge of the tourism destination and, as a consequence, they will emit
an induced tourism image coherent with the supplied tourist product of the destination
(referred to gap 1) and/or there will have an ‘‘unique’’ tourism image (referred to gap
2), so that, these collaborative links will help to prevent the emergence of the two gaps
of the induced tourism image.

Taking into consideration this context, we can be discuss which of the internal tourism
agents is more appropriate to become the central actor of the destination and to have the
collaborative links with the relevant external actors. The number of tourism destinations with
a DMO that aims to promote tourism is growing (Pike, 2004). When the DMO is the central
actor then their advantageous position grants it control over the knowledge flowing within the
destination relational network, and specifically the induced tourism image. In addition, if the
DMO, as a central actor, maintains collaborative links with tour operators and wholesalers
(external agents), the presence of the two gaps of the induced tourism image will be
prevented or minimized by means of exchanging the appropriate knowledge of the tourism
destination, as it was mentioned above. The process of knowledge transmission between
the DMO and the external agents can be easily done by organising workshops, seminars
and familiarization tours where the closely related external agents intensify their involvement
reinforce the ties and receive accurate information about targeted marked segments,
tourism resources, tourism destination services, resources and attractions, as well as
information about the popular culture and identity of the destination. At the same time, these
tools facilitate a ‘‘push’’ strategy in order to promote the tourism destination (Cohen, 1989)
and to create awareness to tour operators and wholesalers.

Conclusions
The analysis of the tourism image of destinations has acquired special relevance in the last
few years considering, in particular, its capacity to influence the tourists’ decision-making
process. However, the induced tourism image has been much less analysed than the
images perceived by the tourists, residents or retailers. Moreover, there is evidence that
there are different agents interested in creating an induced tourism image of a destination
with the purpose of selling it to the potential markets, i.e. DMOs and promoters as internal
tourism agents, and tour operators and wholesalers as external agents of the destination.
Taking into consideration the relevance of the tourism image as a determinant of the
competitiveness of tourism destinations, and the relevance of the external tourism agents
(i.e. tour operators) in the tourism image formation process, we have developed a
conceptual model, in which assume that the tourism destination consists of a relational
network, and show the effects of the destination external tourism agents on the formation of

j j
VOL. 63 NO. 2 2008 TOURISM REVIEW PAGE 55
 the induced tourism image. This is a new approach to better understand how an induced
tourism image is formed and, also, what consequences can result from the particular
patterns of interaction between the internal and external tourism agents of a destination.
In this sense, the main effects of a lack of, or a very low level of collaborative interaction
between internal and external tourism agents in a tourism destination relational network, are
the two gaps of the induced tourism image defined above – ‘‘supplied tourist product gap’’
and ‘‘multi-image gap’’ – which, if found, will decrease the coherence of the induced tourism
image with the actual products and, consequently, have negative implications for the
tourist’s satisfaction and the competitiveness of tourism destination.
Specifically, a tourism destination aware of the relevance of the relational network among the
DMO or tourism destination promoters (internal agents) and the tour operators (external
agents), and relationally structured in an appropriate way, will have an advantage in terms of
marketing and branding strategic actions carried out in the destination, as well as actions
carried out by tour operators who sell it. On one hand, it grants control of induced tourism
image projected by external agents, preventing the possibility that ‘‘tour operators present
unrealistic portrayals of places and it results in destination image not supported or desired
by the destination’s host society’’ (Santos, 1997) and tourism agents. On the other hand, this
is relevant for destination managers and marketers as they can use network management
techniques in order to get a more effective configuration of the network of internal and
external agents from which marketing strategies will emerge that will address the right
targets and provide a satisfactory product where the gaps of the induced tourism image
have a very low chance to emerge.
In any case, advantages in marketing and branding strategic actions should be framed
within a clear image strategy, including the appropriate image formation mix (Gartner, 1993);
we need to know how tourism images are formed in order to develop appropriate images for
selected target markets (Gartner, 1993).
In order to further the understanding of the induced tourism image formation process, more
discussion is needed. In the same way, future research should validate the theoretical
propositions by means of case studies and improve the conceptual model from the findings.
In the future, there is also a need to analyse with more depth the effects of the induced
tourism image gaps on the perception of this image by tourists and on the success of the
destination.

References
Baloglu, S. and McCleary, K.W. (1999), ‘‘A model of destination image formation’’, Annals of Tourism
Research, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 808-89.
Bordieu, P. (1986), ‘‘The forms of capital’’, in Richardson, J.G. (Ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research
for the Sociology of Education, Greenwood, New York, NY, pp. 241-58.
Burt, R.S. (1992), Structural Holes, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Burt, R.S. (2000), ‘‘The network structure of social capital’’, in Sutton, R.I. and Staw, B.M. (Eds),
Research in Organizational Behavior, JAI Press, Greenwich, pp. 2-92.

Butler, R.W. (1980), ‘‘The concept of a tourist area cycle of evolution: implications for management of
resources’’, Canadian Geographer, Vol. 24, pp. 5-12.
Cohen, J. (1989), ‘‘Tourism promotion mix’’, in Witt, S.F. and Moutinho, L. (Eds), Tourism Marketing and
Management Handbook, Prentice-Hall, London, pp. 545-7.

Cohen, W.M. and Levinthal, D.A. (1990), ‘‘Absortive capacity: a new perspective on learning and
innovation’’, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 35, pp. 128-52.
Coleman, J.S. (1988), ‘‘Social capital in the creation of human capital’’, American Journal of Sociology,
Vol. 94, pp. S95-S120.
Comas, J. and Guia, J. (2005), ‘‘Managing seasonality through innovation in tourism firms: the role of
positioning in relational networks’’, in Swarbrooke, J., Smith, M. and Onderwater, L. (Eds), Networking
and Partnership in Destinations and Development Management, ATLAS, Arnhem, pp. 57-68.

j j
PAGE 56 TOURISM REVIEW VOL. 63 NO. 2 2008
Crompton, J.L. (1979), ‘‘An assessment of the image of Mexico as a vacation destination and the
influence of geographical location upon the image’’, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 18-23.

Echtner, C.M. and Ritchie, J.R.B. (1991), ‘‘The meaning and measurement of destination image’’,
The Journal of Tourism Studies, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 3-13.

Freeman, L.C. (1979), ‘‘Centrality in social networks: conceptual clarification’’, Social Networks, Vol. 1,
pp. 215-39.

Galı́, N. and Donaire, J.A. (2005), ‘‘The social construction of the image of Girona: a methodological
approach’’, Tourism Management, Vol. 26, pp. 777-85.

Gartner, W.C. (1993), ‘‘Image formation process’’, Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, Vol. 2 No. 2,
pp. 191-215.

Govers, R. and Go, F.M. (2004), ‘‘Cultural identities constructed, imagined and experienced: a
three-gap tourism destination image model’’, Tourism, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 165-82.

Granovetter, M.S. (1985), ‘‘Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness’’,
American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 91, pp. 481-510.

Guia, J. (2000), ‘‘Social capital, networks and the competitive advantage of economic actors’’,
2nd Workshop on Institutionalism Economics, Copenhagen.

Guia, J., Prats, L. and Comas, J. (2006), ‘‘The destination as a local system of innovation: the role of
relational networks’’, in Lazzeretti, L. and Petrillo, C. (Eds), Tourism Local System and Networking,
Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 133-40.

Gunn, C.A. (1972), Vacationscape. Designing Tourist Regions, Taylor and Francis/University of Texas,
Washington, DC.

Hardin, R. (1998), ‘‘Social capital, social networks and social capital conference proceedings’’, Duke
University, Durham, NC.

Hsu, C., Wolfe, K. and Kang, S. (2004), ‘‘Image assessment for a destination with limited comparative
advantages’’, Tourism Management, Vol. 25, pp. 121-6.

Jenkins, O.H. (1999), ‘‘Understanding and measuring tourist destination images’’, International Journal
of Tourism Research, Vol. 1, pp. 1-15.

Kim, L. (1998), ‘‘Crisis construction and organizational learning: capability building in catching-up at
Hyundai Motor’’, Organization Science, Vol. 9, pp. 506-21.

Knoke, D. and Kuklinski, J. (1993), Network Analysis, Sage, Los Angeles, CA.

Konecnik, M. (2002), ‘‘The image as a possible source of competitive advantage of the destination – the
case of Slovenia’’, Tourist Review, Vol. 58 Nos 1,2, pp. 6-12.

Kotler, P., Haider, D.H. and Rein, I. (1994), Mercadotecnia de Localidades, Diana, Mexico.

Laws, E. (1995), Tourism Destination Management: Issues, Analysis and Policies, Routledge, London.

Lazerson, M. and Lorenzoni, G. (1999), ‘‘The firms that feed industrial districts: a return to the Italian
source’’, Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 235-66.

Markin, J.R. (1974), Consumer Behavior: Cognitive Orientation, Macmillan Publishing Co, New York, NY.

Miossec, J.M. (1977), ‘‘L’image touristique comme introduccion à la géographie du tourisme’’, Annales
de Géographie, pp. 55-70.

Mowery, D.C. and Oxley, J.E. (1995), ‘‘Inward technology transfer and competitiveness: the role of
national innovation systems’’, Cambridge Journal of Economics, Vol. 19, pp. 67-93.

Nahapiet, J. and Goshal, S. (1998), ‘‘Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational
advantage’’, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 23, pp. 242-66.

Novelli, M., Schmitz, B. and Spencer, T. (2006), ‘‘Networks, clusters and innovation in tourism: a UK
experience’’, Tourism Management, Vol. 27 No. 6, pp. 1141-52.

Pearce, D. (1989), Tourist Development, Longman, New York, NY.

Pike, S. (2004), Destination Marketing Organisations, Elsevier, Oxford.

j j
VOL. 63 NO. 2 2008 TOURISM REVIEW PAGE 57
 Putnam, R.D. (1995), ‘‘Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital’’, Journal of Democracy, Vol. 6,
pp. 65-78.

Santos, J. (1997), ‘‘The role of tour operators’ promotional material in the formation of destination image
and consumer expectations: the case of the People’s Republic of China’’, Journal of Vacation Marketing,
Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 282-97.

Scott, J. (1991), Social Network Analysis: A Handbook, Sage, London.

Wang, Y. and Fesenmaier, D.R. (2007), ‘‘Collaborative destination marketing: a case study of Elkhart
county, Indiana’’, Tourism Management, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 863-75.

Yüksel, A. and Akgül, O. (2007), ‘‘Postcards as affective image makers: an idle agent in destination
marketing’’, Tourism Management, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 714-25.

Zahra, S.A. and George, G. (2002), ‘‘Absorptive capacity: a review, reconceptualization, and
extension’’, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 27, pp. 185-203.

Corresponding author
Raquel Camprubı́ can be contacted at: raquel.camprubi@udg.edu

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

j j
PAGE 58 TOURISM REVIEW VOL. 63 NO. 2 2008