Comparative Analysis of DMO Website Features: A Case Study of Three Asian Tourism Destinations

Updata:01-01-1970

Source:
By:Harry Hou In Chek, Simon Kong Lei

DOI: https://doi.org/10.30564/jbar.v3i1.1020

Abstract:

In the digital era, more and more people tend to look for travel-related information on the Internet. Hence, destination marketing organization (DMO) websites can play a decisive role in affecting people’s destination choices. Based on the study of Pai, Xia, and Wang, Macao’s DMO website received the lowest score in the effectiveness when compared to the other four tourism destinations: Japan, Korea, Hong Kong, and Thailand. This paper aimed to carry out a comparative analysis on the functionality among three DMO websites in Asia. Each website was examined in great detail, and the features were categorized according to a well-established conceptual framework pioneered by Li and Wang. Consequently, the results of this study gave useful information and new insights to destination marketing managers in terms of gap analysis and the development of new features for their websites. The results of this research could be used as benchmarking purposes in regards to website functionality. In addition, DMO websites in western countries, such as Canada, were also examined for a better understanding of the comprehensiveness of the available website functionality aimed for prospective visitors. Business and managerial implications were also discussed.

References:

[1] C. K. Pai, M. L. Xia, and T. W. Wang. A Comparison of the Official Tourism Website of Five East Tourism Destinations. [J]. Information Technology & Tourism, 2014, 14(2): 97-117. http://doi.org/10.1007/s40558-014-0007-7 [2] X. Li, Y. Wang. Evaluating the Effectiveness of Destination Marketing Organisations’ Websites: Evidence from China. [J]. International Journal of Tourism Research, 2010, 12(5): 536-549. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.772 [3] D. Buhalis, R. Law. Progress in information technology and tourism management: 20 years on and 10 years after the Internet – The state of eTourism research. [J]. Tourism Management, 2008, 29(4): 609-623.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2008.01.005 [4] D. Lončarić, L. Bašan, and M. G. Marković. Importance of DMO Websites in Tourist Destination Selection. [C]. In 23rd CROMAR Congress: Marketing in a Dynamic Environment–Academic and Practical Insights, Croatia, 2013.https://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/666923.Loncaric_Basan_GligoraMarkovic.pdf [5] Y. Wang. Destination Marketing and Management: Scope, Definition and Structures. [Book Chapter]. Destination Marketing and Management: Theories and Applications, 2011: 1-20. [6] S. Pike, S. Page. Destination Marketing Organizations and Destination Marketing: A Narrative Analysis of the Literature. [J]. Tourism Management, 2014, 41: 1-26.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2013.09.009 [7] J. Elbe, L. Hallén, and B. Axelsson. The Destination‐Management Organisation and the Integrative Destination‐Marketing Process. [J]. International Journal of Tourism Research, 2009, 11(3): 283-296. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.695 [8] Y. Wang. Destination marketing and management: scope, definition and structures. [B]. Destination marketing and management: Theories and applications, CABI, 2011. [9] K. F. Hyde. Information processing and touring planning theory. [J]. Annals of Tourism Research, 2008, 35(3): 712-731.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2008.05.001 [10] M. Gon, H. Pechlaner, F. Marangon. Destination management organizations (DMOs) and Digital Natives: the neglected “informal expertise” in web 2.0 implementation and social media presence. Insights from the Italian Friuli Venezia Giulia DMO. [J]. Information Technology and Tourism, 2016, 16(4): 435-455.https://doi.org/10.1007/s40558-016-0068-x [11] A. Beerli, J. D. Martin. Factors influencing destination image. [J]. Annals of Tourism Research, 2004, 31(3): 657-681.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2004.01.010 [12] Z. Xiang, U. Gretzel. Role of social media in online travel information search. [J]. Tourism Management, 2010, 31(2): 179-188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2009.02.016 [13] U. Bastida, T. C. Huan. Performance evaluation of tourism websites’ information quality of four global destination brands: Beijing, Hong Kong, Shanghai, and Taipei. [J]. Journal of Business Research, 2014, 67(2): 167-170.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.10.008 [14] C. Ip, R. Law, H. A. Lee. A review of website evaluation studies in the tourism and hospitality fields from 1996 to 2009. [J]. International Journal of Tourism Research, 2011, 13(3): 234-265. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.815 [15] Y. Wang, S. M. Russo. Conceptualizing and evaluating the functions of destination marketing systems. [J]. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 2007, 13(3): 187-203. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356766707077687 [16] Y. A. Park, U. Gretzel. Success factors for destination marketing web sites: A qualitative meta-analysis. [J]. Journal of Travel Research, 2007, 46(1): 46-63.https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287507302381 [17] Argon Design. 5 aspects of a good user interface. [W]. Available:http://www.argondesign.com/news/2014/feb/5/5-aspects-good-user-interface/. [Accessed Jul. 1, 2018] [18] R. Law, S. Qi, D. Buhalis. Progress in tourism management: A review of website evaluation in tourism research. [J]. Tourism Management, 2010, 31(3): 297-313.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2009.11.007 [19] S. Lei, R. Law. Functionality evaluation of mobile hotel websites in the m-commerce era. [J]. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 2019, 36(6): 665-678.https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2019.1624240 [20] A. Kucheriavy. What Makes a Website User-Friendly? [W]. Available:https://www.intechnic.com/blog/what-makes-a-website-user-friendly/.[Accessed Jun 28, 2018]. [21] D. Peltier. 25 Best Tourism Board Websites in the World in 2017. [W]. Available: https://skift.com/2017/08/08/25-best-tourism-board-websites-in-the-world-in-2017/. [Accessed Jul 2, 2018]. [22] J. Nielsen. Mobile Site vs. Full Site. [W]. Available:https://www.nngroup.com/articles/mobile-site-vs-full-site/. [Accessed Jun. 10, 2018]. [23] I. Paul. Best Web Browsers of 2017: Chrome, Edge, Firefox, and Opera Go Head-to-Head. [W]. Available:https://www.pcworld.com/article/3213031/computers/best-web-browsers.html. [Accessed Feb. 24, 2018]. [24] K. Krippendorff. Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. [B]. SAGE, 2nd Edition, 2004.

Tags: