Análisis jurídico del error de comprensión culturalmente

Having discussed some of the global forces and trends shaping today’s tourism and hospitality industry in the preceding chapter, we now turn to the industry – or perhaps more correctly, the tourism system – itself, to see how destination competitiveness is affected by the way in which the tourism system functions. We introduced some of the principal elements of the competitive (micro) environment in Chapter 3, but it is now time to take a closer look at how these elements are structured in the context of a tourism destination.

Normally, when the competitive (micro) environment is considered, the perspective taken is that of an individual enterprise or orga-nization. Under these conditions (i.e. when the unit of analysis is a company), the competitive (micro)environment is usually depicted as illus-trated in Fig. 5.1 (see for example Kotler et al., 1996, pp. 102–105). In this situation, the main groups of players are the company itself (i.e. its internal environment), its competitors, suppli-ers, customers and publics, and the marketing intermediaries and facilitators that help connect the company to its customers.

©CAB International 2003.The Competitive Destination: a Sustainable Tourism Perspective

(J.R. Brent Ritchie and Geoffrey I. Crouch) 95

Destination competitiveness and sustainability

Qualifying and amplifying determinants

Destination policy, planning and development

Destination management

Core resources and attractors

Supporting factors and resources

Competitive (micro)environment Global (macro)environment

Comparative advantages

(resource endowments)

Competitive advantages

(resource deployment)

However, the subject of this book is the destination, not the individual tourism enter-prise. Although it is possible to define or delin-eate a destination, this does not exist as an entity, at least in the way that a company is an entity. A company is well defined by law. Its actions, policies, control of resources and orga-nizational structure are manifest. A destination, on the other hand, is a geographical rather than a legal or business entity. Although a desti-nation management organization (DMO) may have been constituted to spearhead or facilitate tourism development and management, its ability to do so for the destination as a whole does not compare to the power of a company to

govern its own internal environment. Whereas a company governs, directs and controls, a DMO merely influences, facilitates and coordinates. The DMO is not the destination.

Figure 5.2 is an adaptation of Fig. 5.1 that reflects the relationship between one desti-nation, the principal elements of the tourism system and other tourism destinations. The competitive (micro)environment for the destina-tion in quesdestina-tion includes both local and foreign enterprises and organizations. Local tourism and hospitality enterprises provide a destination with the goods and services that constitute the tourism experience provided by the destina-tion. A destination’s suppliers and supporting

Fig. 5.1. A company's competitive (micro)environment (adapted from Kotleret al., 1996).

Fig. 5.2. A destination's competitive (micro)environment

industries, marketing intermediaries and facili-tators, publics and customers may be both local and foreign. The situation is similar for alternative destinations.

Figure 5.2 illustrates an intersection between destinations. This intersecting region identifies players within each element of the competitive environment that are connected with more than one destination. For example, many of a destination’s customers are also likely to be potential or existing customers of other destinations. The majority of marketing inter-mediaries and facilitators (e.g. travel agents, tour packagers, financial institutions) serve the tourism and hospitality industries in numerous destinations. Suppliers too, such as souvenir manufacturers, food and beverage suppliers and the oil industry, often serve multiple desti-nations, but many small suppliers may only provide for the needs of the local destination and tourism industry. Similarly, small local tourism and hospitality enterprises, such as hotels, restaurants and attractions, may only serve their local destination, but increasingly, as the globalization of the tourism industry pro-gresses, multinational tourism enterprises (such as airlines, hotel chains, restaurants and theme parks) operate in many different destinations.

The destination, then, is really a loose col-lection of enterprises, organizations and groups which work together in a semi-organized, partly cooperative fashion, but which are ultimately driven largely by their own self-interest. These organizations may perceive that a large part of their own self-interest rests with the interests of the destination itself. In these situations, one would expect to see a great deal of interaction, communication and cooperation, as well as a shared sense of vision about where the destina-tion is trying to go. A DMO, if one exists, is likely to play a focal role in these instances. The opposite situation – that is, disorganization, alienation and dysfunction – is also a possibility where tourism organizations perceive that the costs of cooperating as a destination outweigh the benefits.

The opposing forces of competition and cooperation among organizations centred around the destination shape the actions, styles and modus operandi of the destination as a whole. Both of these forces are vital to a com-petitive destination. Cooperation strengthens

the destination because it increases the extent to which relevant organizations are trying to move towards the same goal. Competition, on the other hand, creates an environment in the destination that encourages innovation, quality, efficiency and effectiveness. While both compe-tition and cooperation can enhance the com-petitiveness of the destination, some forms of both can be destructive when they are incongruent with the overall direction and goal of the destination.

In this chapter we look at the individual ele-ments of the competitive (micro)environment in greater detail. We begin by examining the basic elements of the microenvironment in turn:

suppliers and supporting industries, tourism and hospitality enterprises, marketing inter-mediaries and facilitators, customers, and the DMO and other publics. We finish the chapter with three further sections that integrate the impacts of these elements in terms of their overall effect on the destination in question, the effect of competing destinations, and the tourism system as a whole.

Suppliers

The first component of the competitive (micro)environment that shapes the determi-nants and structure of destination competitive-ness is suppliers. The USA is a strong tourist destination in part because of the low cost of energy and the low cost and high quality of food production. Labour productivity rates are also comparatively high in the USA. Natural, cultural and historical resource endowments are also important factors in tourism produc-tion. Although not consumed by the tourism industry in the same way as energy, food or construction materials, these resources are also a form of supply or factor inputs.

Competitive advantages in home-based sup-plier industries such as these confer potential advantages on a destination, particularly when they produce inputs that are important for overall industry innovation and performance.

For the purposes of this discussion we define suppliers as those firms or organizations that supply the tourism industry with basic fac-tor inputs, such as labour, materials, equipment

and facilities. Related or supporting industries, on the other hand, although playing a some-what similar role to that of suppliers, are those which share activities in common with tourism but whose demand is not principally derived from travellers or tourists. For example, cultural industries provide products and services that are complementary to those of the tourism indus-try, but tourists usually represent a minor share of the market for these products. In contrast, airlines and hotels, for example, derive the great majority of their demand from the travel and tourism industry, so we classify these as tourism and hospitality enterprises in Fig. 5.2 rather than as related or supporting industries. We discuss the role of related and supporting indus-tries later in this chapter. (For a discussion of the impact of related and supporting industries on national advantage in a particular industry, see also Porter, 1990, pp. 100–107.) The services of financial institutions, advertising agencies and marketing research consultants, etc. facili-tate tourism marketing and are also discussed separately later in this chapter (in the section Marketing Intermediaries and Facilitators:

the Industry’s Lubricants).

Suppliers that provide the inputs to the

‘downstream’ tourism industry are many and varied because tourism consumption is a close microcosm of consumption in general (studies have found that changes in the cost of tourism goods and services follow approximately changes in the general consumer price index).

Some of the more important supplies and sup-pliers, however, include the following: labour (including education and training), energy, con-struction equipment and materials, land/real estate, primary produce and its wholesalers, recreational vehicle producers (such as manu-facturers of automobiles, mobile camping homes, snowmobiles and water craft), manufacturers of entertainment and recreational equipment and technology (e.g. theme park rides and attrac-tions, camping goods and fishing and hunting suppliers) and aircraft manufacturers. Many of the resources used in the tourism industry are

‘free’, such as beaches, scenery and national parks.

How important are the suppliers of these resources to the competitiveness of tourism destinations? In Chapter 2 we emphasized the importance of both resource endowments

(comparative advantages) and the ability of a destination to deploy its resources appropri-ately (competitive advantages). Clearly then, supplies (endowments) and suppliers (deploy-ment) are a cornerstone of competitive tourism development. Interestingly, in the case of tour-ism, many of the most important resources (e.g.

national parks, other public lands, public facili-ties, infrastructure) are in public hands and are thus controlled by governments, who are there-fore a type of supplier to the tourism industry.

However, a government’s role in this regard, unlike that of most other suppliers, should and must take the form of stewardship rather than commercial exploitation, to maximize benefits to society as a whole over the long term. The tourism industry must compete against other industries for the opportunity for access to a share of these resources.

Suppliers are also important because their productivity determines the cost of inputs, and cost is a major determinant of competitive advantage. In addition, supplies may be an important source of innovation, new tech-nology, new materials and new ideas and processes. For example, the US tourism indus-try enjoys an advantage arising from its leader-ship in various entertainment technologies. The USA also benefits from the many excellent tourism and hospitality schools situated within respected universities. US energy costs are also low, and service quality standards are generally high. French cuisine and the training of chefs confer a distinct advantage on the French tour-ism industry. The low cost and high quality of food and wine produced in Australia are advan-tages for that country as a tourist destination.

Strong, home-based suppliers are able to lower input costs, raise input quality and assist downstream users to utilize inputs more effec-tively. As Porter (1990) notes, their proximity to downstream customers reduces transaction costs and encourages preferential, rapid and efficient resource utilization. National pride also ties home-based suppliers more closely to their domestic customers, and cultural bonds enhance communication and cooperation.

Although we have emphasized the com-petitive strengths conferred by the presence of strong home-based suppliers, foreign alter-natives might also enhance a destination’s competitiveness. This is particularly the case

for developing countries or regions that lack options domestically. However, some care may be required by destinations in these circum-stances to ensure that the dependent relation-ship on foreign suppliers is managed in the best long-term interests of the destination and its residents. The transfer of technology may, for example, be part of such a relationship.

Tourism and Hospitality Enterprises A destination’s tourism and hospitality enter-prises provide the backbone of its product. It is these firms that actively produce the core commercial services that tourists consume once they are at the destination. They are distinguished from other commercial enter-prises involved in the competitive (micro)envi-ronment (i.e. suppliers, related and supporting industries, and marketing intermediaries and facilitators) in that: (i) the products and services they produce are targeted principally at tourist markets; (ii) they produce core services and products for tourists; and (iii) they have a high level of interaction with tourists.

Collectively, however, these enterprises do not produce and deliver all of what a tourist con-sumes while visiting a destination because the tourism and hospitality industry’s product is no less than the gestalt of all experiences, commer-cial and otherwise, arising from the destination as a whole. And as we discussed earlier, much of the quality of the visitor experience stems from non-commercial activity, such as enjoying the climate and scenery, mixing socially with local inhabitants, using free public services and infrastructure, and strolling along a beach.

Thus, the competitiveness of a destination is significantly dependent on the competitive-ness of its local tourism and hospitality enter-prises, both individually and collectively. What is it that creates a situation in which some destina-tions enjoy a strong, vibrant tourism industry with numerous active, innovative and competi-tive firms whereas other destinations lack these characteristics? There appear to be two princi-pal explanations. First, the tourism industry may be driven by an abundance of comparative advantages that favour tourism development.

For example, climate, scenery and historical

or cultural resources may act as a catalyst for tourism development and entrepreneurial behaviour. But as we have discussed earlier, effective resource deployment (competitive advantage) is not guaranteed by resource abundance (comparative advantage) (recall the comparison between Russia and Singapore in Chapter 2, Part I).

The second principal explanation is that a variety of social, cultural, political and economic factors may create a more fertile environment in which enterprises are able to develop, grow, flourish and sustain competitive advantage in tourism. We explore this matter in greater detail towards the end of this chapter and again in Chapter 8. For the moment it is important to note that these factors differ across desti-nations, and that the nature and mix of these factors may be conducive or detrimental to the creation of a competitive, thriving cluster of tourism and hospitality enterprises.

Porter (1990, p. 117), who has examined this situation extensively, notes that ‘Among the strongest empirical findings from our research is the association between vigorous domestic rivalry and the creation and persistence of competitive advantage in an industry’. There-fore, an environment that encourages vigorous rivalry is more likely to result in innovative, adaptable and customer-responsive tourism enterprises ready to exploit new market opportunities and technological advancement.

Rivalry also places emphasis on the efficiency of operations and opportunities for productivity improvements.

The tourism industry covers a large number of enterprises that vary greatly in size and in the nature of their products. There are some very large enterprises, such as the airlines, hotel corporations and some food service firms.

As tourism continues to grow, many of these companies have become major multinational operations. There are also a vast number of small to medium-sized enterprises spread throughout the industry. Many of these are very small firms representing the grass roots of the industry, but increasingly, through the expan-sion of franchising and management contracts, the tourism and hospitality industry is under-going something of a revolution in the con-centration, consolidation and cross-ownership of many of these small companies. Small

businesses, though, are likely to remain a feature of the tourism and hospitality industry.

As in any industry, industry associations may play a critical role in creating the sort of environment that affects the health and vitality of tourism enterprises in a destination over the long term. Positive outcomes, for example, might stem from concerted efforts, coordinated through these associations, to maintain, improve and foster factor creation. Many strong industries have found that the establishment and funding of university research centres can help an industry and its enterprises to better address long-term development issues. In tour-ism, there is a need for more interdisciplinary research, which commercial research is often unable or unwilling to address. While com-mercial research tends to focus on the needs of individual enterprises, interdisciplinary research can attend more to the needs of the industry and destination as a whole. Issues concerning the social and environmental effects of tourism, sustainable tourism development and the broad questions of destination competitiveness are examples of research needs that specialized university centres would be able to address.

Australia’s Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism Pty Ltd, in which govern-ment, industry and 15 universities participate, is an excellent example of the sort of arrangement that can foster interdisciplinary and strategic industry research.

Industry associations may also take a lead role in developing industry standards, improving training and professional standards, and demonstrating the need for specialized infrastructure or tourism superstructure.

There is also the risk, however, that some collective industry actions, although super-ficially appearing to be in the best interests of the industry as a whole, may work over the long term to decrease industry competitiveness. For example, ‘It is often argued that domestic competition is wasteful, because it leads to duplication of effort and prevents firms from gaining economies of scale. The right solution is seen as nurturing one or two firms who become “national champions”, with the scale and strength to compete against foreign rivals or, alternatively, to promote inter-firm coopera-tion’ (Porter, 1990, p. 117). Porter found this view not to be supported by overwhelming

evidence. The net effects of inter-firm rivalry work to promote rather than hinder industry competitiveness over the long term.

The perceived profitability or returns on investment, together with the perceived risks of investing in tourism enterprises in a destination, will influence the interests of investors and entrepreneurs in the tourism and hospitality industry. Differences between destinations in these perceptions and in attitudes towards short- and long-term profitability and risk will substantially govern the extent of private sector interest in tourism development and the com-petitive attributes of destinations that depend upon this interest.

Finally, where pride and prestige are at stake, greater importance may be placed on a nation or destination doing well in an industry.

Where tourism is seen to be an important tool for economic development and prosperity, tourism and hospitality enterprises are more likely to attract promising graduates into the industry, as well as entrepreneurs and capital resources. Increasingly, many cities and nations take great pride in showcasing their home to the world.

Marketing Intermediaries and Facilitators: the Industry’s Lubricants Tourism and hospitality enterprises are con-nected to customers through tourism market-ing channels consistmarket-ing of intermediaries and facilitators. This system of contacts, inter-connection and accessibility between operators and customers enables destinations and their enterprises to reach the market with their products and services. The same system pro-vides a convenient and efficient network that allows customers to access tourism products and services from around the world. Thus, the competitiveness of a destination is in part dependent upon the efficacy with which the destination utilizes marketing intermediaries and facilitators.

Intermediaries and facilitators streamline the tourism system by performing several worthwhile functions that confer advantages on operators and customers. Middleton (1994, pp. 205–206) identified ten of these functions.

1. Points of sale and convenient customer

1. Points of sale and convenient customer