Description
The purpose of this paper is to provide a detailed description of the various activities and
processes undertaken by a particular national tourism organization (NTO) in carrying out its goal of
developing a destination brand.
International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research
From destination image building to identity-based branding
Saila Saraniemi
Article information:
To cite this document:
Saila Saraniemi, (2011),"From destination image building to identity-based branding", International J ournal of Culture, Tourism and
Hospitality Research, Vol. 5 Iss 3 pp. 247 - 254
Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17506181111156943
Downloaded on: 24 January 2016, At: 22:16 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 31 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 4033 times since 2011*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Ana María Munar, (2011),"Tourist-created content: rethinking destination branding", International J ournal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality
Research, Vol. 5 Iss 3 pp. 291-305http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17506181111156989
Sameer Hosany, Yuksel Ekinci, Muzaffer Uysal, (2007),"Destination image and destination personality", International J ournal of Culture,
Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 1 Iss 1 pp. 62-81http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17506180710729619
Melodena Stephens Balakrishnan, (2009),"Strategic branding of destinations: a framework", European J ournal of Marketing, Vol. 43 Iss 5/6
pp. 611-629http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090560910946954
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:115632 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about
how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/
authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than
290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional
customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and
also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
1
6
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
From destination image building to
identity-based branding
Saila Saraniemi
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide a detailed description of the various activities and
processes undertaken by a particular national tourism organization (NTO) in carrying out its goal of
developing a destination brand.
Design/methodology/approach – A single qualitative case study is primarily employed, though the
study draws on data from multiple sources of information.
Findings – The study af?rms the co-creation and stakeholder viewpoints from having modeled the
branding process and outlining the complex interaction of destination-branding activities in the
country-level context. The study provides a critical discussion of the different approaches to branding,
and the adoption of branding philosophies, in the destination context.
Research limitations/implications – Though this paper is based on a single country case study, it
provides a strong and empirically grounded framework for identifying, in-depth, several key destination
branding processes and activities in great detail.
Originality/value – The co-creation view of brands and branding is a neglected area in
destination-branding literature. Destination-branding research, in particular, lacks grounded models
that profoundly describe branding activities. This study contributes to the lack of empirically grounded
knowledge of destination branding.
Keywords Brand identity, Destination image building, Destination branding, Country branding,
Tourism development
Paper type Case study
Introduction
The general branding literature is fragmented and lacks a model that describes brand
building activities of the company (Wallstro¨m et al., 2008). Destination branding research, in
particular, is also in need of models that profoundly describe branding activities. In his review
of the ?eld, Pike (2009) identi?es three notable research streams in destination branding:
1. destination brand identity development;
2. destination brand positioning; and
3. destination brand equity measurement and tracking.
However, he states that all of these areas are de?cient in providing in-depth analysis of
activities involved.
Some recent attempts to develop frameworks for destination brand management or
destination branding, however, occur, stress that destination branding has special features
that have to be understood. These views also suggest that corporate branding and service
branding approaches have important and useful similarities with destination branding
(Hankinson, 2007, 2009; Saraniemi, 2009). Recently, emerging streams in general marketing
and branding literature recognize that companies and their stakeholders co-create value
DOI 10.1108/17506181111156943 VOL. 5 NO. 3 2011, pp. 247-254, Q Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1750-6182
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 247
Saila Saraniemi is a
Lecturer in the Department
of Marketing at the
University of Oulu, Oulu,
Finland.
Received: June 2009
Revised: February 2010
Accepted: May 2010
The author would like to
acknowledge Professor Raija
Komppula for her guidance
throughout the development of
the related dissertation
process.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
1
6
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
(i.e. the perceived use value of stakeholders) (Vargo and Lusch, 2004; Merz et al., 2009).
This co-creation view seems to be useful in a tourism destination context, where customers
and providers co-produce experiences in an interactive context (Hankinson, 2007;
Saraniemi and Kyla¨ nen, 2010). However, the co-creation view of brands is a neglected area
in destination branding literature. Although destination branding has gained signi?cant
academic interest, empirical knowledge is still limited.
The purpose of this study is to identify and describe destination brand building activities
during the branding process. The study aims to achieve this purpose by answering the
research question: How are destination branding and image building processes related?
The study adopts the perspective of a national tourism organization (NTO) and draws
primarily from identity-based branding literature (Burmann et al., 2009; de Chernatony and
Cottam, 2005; de Chernatony and Harris, 2000; Dunn and Davis, 2003; Urde, 2003) that
emphasizes the internal aspects of the process, such as the supportive culture of the
organization undergoing a branding exercise. This approach builds on research dwelling on
relationships between identity and image dimensions of organizations (Burmann et al.,
2009).
The paper expounds on a case study of one country and its image building activities during
a 30-year period. Multiple data was gathered through standardized personal interviews
conducted with consumers in a chosen source market, in-depth conversational interviews
with tourism practitioners of the country’s NTO and with tourism companies in both the
country case and in the target market. In addition, marketing documents of the NTO and the
vast press media data were content analyzed. Based on the above data and analysis, the
study constructs an empirically grounded model for co-created destination branding.
The paper ?rst reviews the different main streams of literature in destination brand
conceptualization as well as destination brand building activities and processes. This is
followed by a description of the methodology undertaken and the ?ndings fromanalysis. The
paper then concludes with a proposed process model of co-created destination branding
and provides suggestions for further studies.
Literature review
Merz et al. (2009) divide the evolution of branding literature into four areas that conceptualize
the brand and brand value from different perspectives:
1. individual goods-focus;
2. value-focus;
3. relationship-focus; and
4. stakeholder-focus.
According to the ?rst view, brand value is embedded in physical goods, whereas the
value-focus emphasized creation of the brand image for the customer. The
relationship-focus highlights dyadic brand relationships and the brand as a promise.
Finally, the stakeholder-focus acknowledges brands as a dynamic and social process
between the ?rm, brand and all stakeholders (Merz et al., 2009). This division is in part useful
when understanding the evolution of the destination branding literature and practices.
Although tourism research has adapted several perspectives from general branding
literature Saraniemi and Ahonen (2008) most efforts have emphasized brand management
and the customer image approach (Hankinson, 2005; Hosany et al., 2006) and refer strongly
to the value-focus and some features of the relationship-focus.
Ritchie and Ritchie (1998) introduced one of the most cited de?nitions for destination brand:
‘‘A name, symbol, logo, word mark or other graphic that both identi?es and differentiates the
place; furthermore, it conveys the promise of a memorable travel experience that is uniquely
associated with the place; it also serves to consolidate and reinforce pleasurable memories
of the place experience.’’ Although this de?nition limits a brand as being only a symbol of the
place, it clearly infers a brand to be related to differentiation and, in relation to competitors,
PAGE 248
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 5 NO. 3 2011
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
1
6
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
not an isolated perception as an image might be (Konecnik and Go, 2008). Interestingly, the
early de?nitions of value in marketing literature, for example in the bene?ts-sacri?ce
perspective, describe value as the trade-off between bene?ts and sacri?ces, including a
third component, relative to competition (de Chernatory et al., 2000), stressing that
customers compare alternatives when making an evaluation. Thus, the concepts of brand
and value seem to have common features and it is therefore reasonable to argue that both
brand and value can be conceived to co-create.
Konecnik (2004) proposes that evaluating the destination image is a self-analysis process
towards branding. Therefore, considering the images in the target market (Konecnik and
Gartner, 2007) is an important step in the branding process. However, few models
encompass the destination brand building process and only a couple that have
incorporated image evaluation or image building as part of the process. None has
encompassed the co-creation approach to brand development.
Cai’s (2002) co-operative branding model incorporates image building but is limited as an
explicit process or activity description. Niininen et al. (2007) present a process model,
which, however, does not consider images. Their model notes many challenges of
destination branding, such as planning of brand strategy and managing of stakeholder
relationships but large includes the following phases:
1. determining a brand vision;
2. communicating the brand vision;
3. managing partnerships; and
4. measuring brand performance (Niininen et al., 2007).
Konecnik and Go (2008) criticize destination branding studies as being customer-centric
and propose a framework for destination brand identity that adapt the product brand
leadership model by Aaker and Joachimsthaler (2000). According to Cai (2002), the missing
link between image building and branding is the brand identity that becomes an integral part
of the destination branding process. Konecnik and Go’s destination brand identity
framework acknowledges the importance of the producer in the branding process and
emphasizes the role of brand identity. Accordingly, this view highlights the role of internal
stakeholders and relates to the relationship-focus brand era (see Merz et al., 2009).
According to Merz et al. (2009), the stakeholder perspective emphasizes that process rather
than output orientation is important and that all stakeholders contribute to a brand’s value. In
addition, Gregory (2007) proposes that the brand process is dynamic, evolving and
negotiated by the ?rm and its stakeholders. In the destination context, the importance of
stakeholders is acknowledged (Morgan et al., 2003) but the co-creation perspective is
under theorized.
Methodology
Case studies focus on describing and ?nding out as much as possible fromone or fewcases
meriting attention and investigation. Although the key interest is the case, the research is
theoretically informed and capable of developing a theory (Dyer and Wilkins, 1991). This
study intends to produce a story of the image building activities undertaken by a particular
NTO. Thus, the case is centered on the phenomenon of destination branding at a country
context. The setting of the case describes the actors in the case (Stake, 2000), which is
primarily the NTO in this study, but the study also investigates a speci?c target (or source)
market for destination branding by the country, selected according to its importance and
size as a target market.
This is characteristically a development story in which internal changes are important to
identify. Following in detail and dissecting the changes makes the case unique and worthy of
study. The research process utilized several data collection and analysis methods, which are
useful when conducting case study research that typically draws on multiple sources of
information (Creswell, 2007).
VOL. 5 NO. 3 2011
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 249
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
1
6
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
This case study describes the image building efforts of the speci?c NTO (supply
side/induced image formation) during the last three decades, press media in?uence
(independent /autonomous) and tourist associations formed during the period (demand
side/organic). Data for the study was assembled from standardized and structured
interviews (n ¼ 2001) regarding spontaneous country images generated in the target
market; in-depth interviews conducted with tourism practitioners in the NTO, domestic
companies and tour operators in the target market (18 interviews, 21 interviewees); and
press articles about the country from the target market press (n ¼ 155). In addition, the
marketing documents of the NTOfromthe study period were content analyzed. Analysis was
done by categorizing interview data and press article text according to identi?able themes.
Pictures and articles from press media or media tours were subjected to content and
rhetorical analysis. Because interviews may re?ect memories or constructed realities and
understanding of the respondents, rather than objective reality, interpretation and
categorization of data was cross-checked several times and veri?ed using secondary
data of archives considering, for example, the marketing plans of the NTO.
The research process started by conducting standardized interviews, with open responses,
in the seven target markets of the NTO. The aim of the spontaneous images research was to
identify the prevailing images of the country in providing a basis for brand strategy. In order
to identify the background of the revealed country image in the chosen target market, press
articles ?led by the NTO were analyzed. These ?rst steps focused on image in the market.
The next step of data collection focused on the image building activities of the NTO, from
which image as a dimension of the destination brand building process started to emerge.
The next stage of data collection focused on understanding the media work of the NTO and
the press media in?uence on the demand side image. Finally, interviews with managers in
the NTO and tourism practitioners’ were conducted and analyzed to understand the image
building and branding activities of the NTO over the three decades.
Findings
Image building as a dimension of branding emerged from the analysis. In Figure 1, two
models of image building and identity-based branding are simultaneously conducted in
interaction. The self-analysis of the destination image is often the ?rst activity of the branding
process. In particular NTO studied, spontaneous image studies across seven target
markets were conducted for identifying images that can form the basis of brand strategy.
However, the NTO did not fully utilize the results of these studies. Positioning and identifying
target markets was another relevant activity for both processes. Based on interviews with the
general manager of NTO, the problem has been the lack of targeted marketing and
dif?culties in arousing initial interest within the markets.
The ?rst two steps of both processes emerged as similar. Beyond these two steps
differences in activities occur in both processes. ‘‘We tried to decide what the country
represents. . .and among a huge number of attributes, these four were gradually identi?ed’’
(NTO General Manager). This comment relates to an initial branding process of the NTOand
the phase where the brand identity or philosophy behind the brand, was determined within a
small group of the important stakeholders.
Various data from the case study converge to refer mostly to an image building process.
Some activities are oriented toward enhancing favorable images:
Attempts have been made to brand or strengthen and promote the country’s image for decades
and by several different actors (NTO General Manager).
Data speaks also of a lack of co-ordination between different stakeholders which has
hindered the communication of the brand promise:
With relatively little co-ordination every operator has promoted the Country’s image, each in its
own way (NTO General Manager).
PAGE 250
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 5 NO. 3 2011
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
1
6
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Results of various interviews also centered on management problems. The message
delivered, for example, in promotional pictures was not based on any particular planning or
research:
I assume that the choosing of pictures and preference of artists was based on experience and
knowledge (Former general manager).
It was also apparent from the data that the internal characteristics and activities of the NTO
are important when implementing the branding process. This study revealed how the
structure, strategy and culture of the NTO (i.e. the identity of the NTO itself) play a signi?cant
role. In one account, the results of the image study and the planned marketing campaign
were forgotten for years before the branding process started systematically:
It was approved by the operative steering group of tourism companies and regional DMOs and
afterwards, it was forgotten (Marketing manager).
The NTO has co-operated with its stakeholders during the years with varying success:
The tourism industry started to gain respect from other industries and fruitful cooperation abroad
started, resulting in me becoming a board member of the Foreign Trade Association (Former
general manager).
Figure 1 A grounded model of destination image building and identity-based branding
VOL. 5 NO. 3 2011
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 251
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
1
6
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
However, a later comment reveals:
It is a pity that for so long the activities were not undertaken systematically, together (General
manager).
The concrete involvement of stakeholders in the branding process of the country was not
evident during the research process, likely because the systematic branding process was in
a very initial phase. The systematic co-creation of the brand did not emerge although
producing, for example, services and tourist experiences together with customers and
stakeholders was clearly undertaken as part of the branding process.
The image building process produces projected images to interpret for the stakeholders
whereas identity-based branding delivers promises based on destination values. The former
process implements tactical, reactive planning and the latter strategic, proactive planning
with regular monitoring of the brand performance.
Although identifying the values-based identity of the destination and involving stakeholders
to the branding process (as co-creators) are the principal activities that seem to differentiate
destination branding from image building, it is clear that destination branding includes
image building. Moreover, image building is analogous with product-bound branding
whereas identity-based branding is not just a branding structure or an implementation
strategy, but a way for understanding the branding in the destination. The branding
philosophy may well change in the destination because the process of brand development
is usually long. It is useful therefore to do historical studies whenever possible in this context.
In this particular NTO, the analyzed time-period can be divided into a period of traditional
image building, concentrating on the (potential) customer’s perspective on image, and a
period of identity-based, or inside-out, branding where the basis of the brand promise, the
destination values, are identi?ed.
Conclusion
This study provides an empirically grounded framework of a co-created destination
branding process that also described in detail the various branding activities undertaken by
a particular NTO. It seems that the approach of branding or philosophy of branding in the
destination, and more speci?cally, in the NTO makes the biggest difference between image
building and branding. These branding philosophies are differentiated by the level of
involvement of stakeholders and involvement of the destination’s internal values, towards the
destination branding process. Product-bound branding approaches (Burmann et al., 2009)
in the way presented by Ritchie and Ritchie (1998) do not differ greatly from image building
techniques in the ‘‘senders-end’’ of the destination. Considering both the internal and
external generated activities and factors of the destination, more comprehensively,
distinguishes other approaches of branding from mere image building. For example,
Hankinson (2007) modeled destination brand management using the concepts of internal
and external brand identities. This approach has several similarities with multidisciplinary
corporate branding discussion that, for example, emphasizes identity of the entity as a
source of the brand (He and Balmer, 2007). However, the advantages of the destination
branding framework adopt multidimensional corporate branding ideas yet still do not
describe the branding process in the destination profoundly. Moreover, they do not take into
consideration the emerging co-creation view of the brand. Thus, re?ecting the branding
research categorization by Merz et al. (2009), destination branding studies rarely perform
stakeholder-focused branding with views of dynamic branding processes. Finally,
identity-based branding could be based on both internal and external values and
identities as well as their interaction in a process of co-creating the destination brand.
Building an image for customers remains only a narrow aspect of branding.
In conclusion, a destination brand is de?ned in a number of hierarchically connected ways.
First, it is a subjective impression that conveys the core values, commitment and promise
uniquely associated with a particular place emerging from the identities of the destination
and its supply-side and demand-side stakeholders (Urde, 2003). Supply-side stakeholders
are, for example, tourism related businesses, government agencies, whereas on the
PAGE 252
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 5 NO. 3 2011
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
1
6
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
demand-side are primarily customers. The destination brand emerges and evolves from the
interactions of all stakeholders. Second, a destination brand is a holistic co-created identity
based on a destination’s core values interpreted by both supply and demand side
stakeholders, in line with Hankinson’s (2007) observation of the co-production of services by
providers and customers in a destination. Third, destination identity emerges from
interactions between all stakeholders and is not controlled by anyone. Fourth, destinations
should be viewed as an evolving brand process and not a ?xed and completed identity.
For managers, this study suggests that without systematic and strategic, pro-active
branding activities, the image that emerges in the market is less manageable. Analysis of
this case study suggests that it is useful to co-ordinate different image building activities
under the same branding strategy (e.g. publicity management) and should have follow-up
systems. It is also useful for the industry to understand branding as a philosophy, rather than
taking it as just a collection of advertising campaigns or just a brand strategy choice. In this
regard, branding philosophy relates to the brand orientation concept of the organization
(Urde, 2003).
This study has limitations. The demand-side data in this study is restricted to certain markets
and communication channels, notably the press media. However, the potential for bias is
alleviated by analysis of the supply-side (NTO) activities from a wider market perspective
(i.e. across different markets), providing a more complementary and objective basis of
knowledge about the branding process in the studied NTO.
The study opens up several new insights for further studies. Among most interesting areas
yet to be studied in this context are brand equity, brand value and brand architectures. In
addition, as previous literature suggests (Hankinson, 2004, 2007), management of different
stakeholder groups and relationships within them remains as an important role for NTOs.
This perspective along with active brand co-creation with stakeholders demands further
study. In the end, focusing on different stakeholders inside and outside of the destination
would be fruitful for improving brand management and consequently brand performance.
References
Aaker, D.A. and Joachimsthaler, E. (2000), ‘‘The brand relationship spectrum: the key to the brand
architecture challenge’’, California Management Review, Vol. 42 No. 4, pp. 8-22.
Burmann, C., Hegner, S. and Riley, N. (2009), ‘‘Towards an identity-base branding’’, Marketing Theory,
Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 113-18.
Cai, L. (2002), ‘‘Cooperative branding for rural destinations’’, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 29 No. 3,
pp. 720-42.
Creswell, J.W. (2007), Qualitative Inquiry. Choosing among Five Approaches, 2nd ed., Sage, Thousand
Oaks, CA.
de Chernatony, L. and Cottam, S. (2005), ‘‘Internal brand factors driving successful ?nancial service
brands’’, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 40 Nos 5/6, pp. 611-33.
de Chernatony, L. and Harris, F. (2000), ‘‘Developing corporate brands through considering internal and
external stakeholders’’, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 268-74.
de Chernatory, L., Harris, F. and Dall’Olmo Riley, F. (2000), ‘‘Added value: its nature, roles and
sustainability’’, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 34 Nos 1/2, pp. 39-56.
Dunn, M. and Davis, S. (2003), ‘‘Building brands from inside’’, Marketing Management, Vol. 12 No. 3.
Dyer, W. Jr and Wilkins, A. (1991), ‘‘Better stories, not better constructs, to generate theory: a rejoinder to
Eisenhardt’’, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 613-19.
Gregory, A. (2007), ‘‘Involving stakeholders in developing corporate brands: the communication
dimension’’, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 23 Nos 1-2, pp. 59-73.
Hankinson, G. (2004), ‘‘Relational network brands: towards a conceptual model of destination brands’’,
Journal of Vacation Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 227-37.
VOL. 5 NO. 3 2011
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 253
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
1
6
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Hankinson, G. (2005), ‘‘Destination brand images: a business tourism perspective’’, Journal of Services
Marketing, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 24-32.
Hankinson, G. (2007), ‘‘The management of destination brands: ?ve guiding principles based on recent
developments in corporate branding theory’’, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 240-54.
Hankinson, G. (2009), ‘‘Managing destination brands: establishing the theoretical foundation’’, Journal
of Marketing Management, Vol. 25 Nos 1-2, pp. 97-115.
He, H-W. and Balmer, J.M.T. (2007), ‘‘Identity studies: multiple perspectives and implications for
corporate-level marketing’’, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 41 Nos 7/8, pp. 765-85.
Hosany, S., Ekinci, Y. and Uysal, M. (2006), ‘‘Destination image and destination personality: an application
of branding theories to tourism places’’, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 59, pp. 638-42.
Konecnik, M. (2004), ‘‘Evaluating Slovenia’s image as a tourism destination: self-analysis process
toward building a destination brand’’, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 307-16.
Konecnik, M. and Gartner, W.C. (2007), ‘‘Customer-based brand equity for a destination’’, Annals of
Tourism Research, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 400-21.
Konecnik, M. and Go, F. (2008), ‘‘Tourism destination brand identity. The case of Slovenia’’, Journal of
Brand Management, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 177-89.
Merz, M.A., He, Y. and Vargo, S.L. (2009), ‘‘The evolving brand logic: a service-dominant logic
perspective’’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 328-44.
Morgan, N., Pritchard, A. and Piggott, R. (2003), ‘‘Destination branding and the role of the stakeholders:
the case of New Zealand’’, Journal of Vacation Marketing, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 285-99.
Niininen, O., Hosany, S., Ekinci, H. and Airey, D. (2007), ‘‘Building a place brand: a case study of Surrey
Hills’’, Tourism Analysis, Vol. 12 Nos 5/6, pp. 371-85.
Pike, S. (2009), ‘‘Destination brand positions of a competitive set of near-home destinations’’, Tourism
Management, Vol. 30 No. 6, pp. 857-66.
Ritchie, B.J.R. and Ritchie, R.J.B. (1998), ‘‘The branding of tourism destination: past achievements and
future trends in destination marketing – scope and limitations’’, Reports of 48th Congress, AIEST,
St-Gall, pp. 89-116.
Saraniemi, S. (2009), ‘‘Destination branding in a country context. A case study of Finland in the British
market’’, academic dissertation, University of Joensuu, Joensuu.
Saraniemi, S. and Ahonen, M. (2008), ‘‘Destination branding from a corporate branding perspective’’,
Proceedings of the Conference on Corporate Communication, Wroxton, England.
Saraniemi, S. and Kyla¨ nen, M. (2010), ‘‘Problematizing the concept of tourismdestination: an analysis of
different theoretical approaches’’, Journal of Travel Research, 19 March.
Stake, R.E. (2000), ‘‘Case studies’’, in Denzin, N. and Lincoln, Y. (Eds), Handbook of Qualitative
Research, Sage, London.
Urde, M. (2003), ‘‘Core value-based corporate brand building’’, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 37
Nos 7/8, pp. 1017-40.
Vargo, S.L. and Lusch, R.F. (2004), ‘‘Evolving to a new dominant logic of marketing’’, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 68 No. 1, pp. 1-17.
Wallstro¨ m, A
?
., Karlsson, T. and Salehi-Sangari, E. (2008), ‘‘Building a corporate brand: the internal
brand-building process in Swedish service ?rms’’, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 16 Nos 1-2,
pp. 40-50.
Corresponding author
Saila Saraniemi can be contacted at: saila.saraniemi@oulu.?
PAGE 254
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 5 NO. 3 2011
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
1
6
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
This article has been cited by:
1. Mar Gómez, Carmen Lopez, Arturo Molina. 2015. A model of tourism destination brand equity: The case of wine tourism
destinations in Spain. Tourism Management 51, 210-222. [CrossRef]
2. Luai E. Jraisat, Mamoun N. Akroush, Ruba Jaser Alfaouri, Laila T. Qatu, Dina J. Kurdieh. 2015. Perceived brand salience and
destination brand loyalty from international tourists’ perspectives: the case of Dead Sea destination, Jordan. International Journal
of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research 9:3, 292-315. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
3. S.F. Adeyinka-Ojo, V. Nair, C. Khoo-Lattimore. 2014. Case Studies Approach in Tourism Destination Branding Research.
SHS Web of Conferences 12, 01061. [CrossRef]
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
1
6
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
doc_114475574.pdf
The purpose of this paper is to provide a detailed description of the various activities and
processes undertaken by a particular national tourism organization (NTO) in carrying out its goal of
developing a destination brand.
International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research
From destination image building to identity-based branding
Saila Saraniemi
Article information:
To cite this document:
Saila Saraniemi, (2011),"From destination image building to identity-based branding", International J ournal of Culture, Tourism and
Hospitality Research, Vol. 5 Iss 3 pp. 247 - 254
Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17506181111156943
Downloaded on: 24 January 2016, At: 22:16 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 31 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 4033 times since 2011*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Ana María Munar, (2011),"Tourist-created content: rethinking destination branding", International J ournal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality
Research, Vol. 5 Iss 3 pp. 291-305http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17506181111156989
Sameer Hosany, Yuksel Ekinci, Muzaffer Uysal, (2007),"Destination image and destination personality", International J ournal of Culture,
Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 1 Iss 1 pp. 62-81http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17506180710729619
Melodena Stephens Balakrishnan, (2009),"Strategic branding of destinations: a framework", European J ournal of Marketing, Vol. 43 Iss 5/6
pp. 611-629http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090560910946954
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:115632 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about
how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/
authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than
290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional
customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and
also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
1
6
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
From destination image building to
identity-based branding
Saila Saraniemi
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide a detailed description of the various activities and
processes undertaken by a particular national tourism organization (NTO) in carrying out its goal of
developing a destination brand.
Design/methodology/approach – A single qualitative case study is primarily employed, though the
study draws on data from multiple sources of information.
Findings – The study af?rms the co-creation and stakeholder viewpoints from having modeled the
branding process and outlining the complex interaction of destination-branding activities in the
country-level context. The study provides a critical discussion of the different approaches to branding,
and the adoption of branding philosophies, in the destination context.
Research limitations/implications – Though this paper is based on a single country case study, it
provides a strong and empirically grounded framework for identifying, in-depth, several key destination
branding processes and activities in great detail.
Originality/value – The co-creation view of brands and branding is a neglected area in
destination-branding literature. Destination-branding research, in particular, lacks grounded models
that profoundly describe branding activities. This study contributes to the lack of empirically grounded
knowledge of destination branding.
Keywords Brand identity, Destination image building, Destination branding, Country branding,
Tourism development
Paper type Case study
Introduction
The general branding literature is fragmented and lacks a model that describes brand
building activities of the company (Wallstro¨m et al., 2008). Destination branding research, in
particular, is also in need of models that profoundly describe branding activities. In his review
of the ?eld, Pike (2009) identi?es three notable research streams in destination branding:
1. destination brand identity development;
2. destination brand positioning; and
3. destination brand equity measurement and tracking.
However, he states that all of these areas are de?cient in providing in-depth analysis of
activities involved.
Some recent attempts to develop frameworks for destination brand management or
destination branding, however, occur, stress that destination branding has special features
that have to be understood. These views also suggest that corporate branding and service
branding approaches have important and useful similarities with destination branding
(Hankinson, 2007, 2009; Saraniemi, 2009). Recently, emerging streams in general marketing
and branding literature recognize that companies and their stakeholders co-create value
DOI 10.1108/17506181111156943 VOL. 5 NO. 3 2011, pp. 247-254, Q Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1750-6182
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 247
Saila Saraniemi is a
Lecturer in the Department
of Marketing at the
University of Oulu, Oulu,
Finland.
Received: June 2009
Revised: February 2010
Accepted: May 2010
The author would like to
acknowledge Professor Raija
Komppula for her guidance
throughout the development of
the related dissertation
process.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
1
6
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
(i.e. the perceived use value of stakeholders) (Vargo and Lusch, 2004; Merz et al., 2009).
This co-creation view seems to be useful in a tourism destination context, where customers
and providers co-produce experiences in an interactive context (Hankinson, 2007;
Saraniemi and Kyla¨ nen, 2010). However, the co-creation view of brands is a neglected area
in destination branding literature. Although destination branding has gained signi?cant
academic interest, empirical knowledge is still limited.
The purpose of this study is to identify and describe destination brand building activities
during the branding process. The study aims to achieve this purpose by answering the
research question: How are destination branding and image building processes related?
The study adopts the perspective of a national tourism organization (NTO) and draws
primarily from identity-based branding literature (Burmann et al., 2009; de Chernatony and
Cottam, 2005; de Chernatony and Harris, 2000; Dunn and Davis, 2003; Urde, 2003) that
emphasizes the internal aspects of the process, such as the supportive culture of the
organization undergoing a branding exercise. This approach builds on research dwelling on
relationships between identity and image dimensions of organizations (Burmann et al.,
2009).
The paper expounds on a case study of one country and its image building activities during
a 30-year period. Multiple data was gathered through standardized personal interviews
conducted with consumers in a chosen source market, in-depth conversational interviews
with tourism practitioners of the country’s NTO and with tourism companies in both the
country case and in the target market. In addition, marketing documents of the NTO and the
vast press media data were content analyzed. Based on the above data and analysis, the
study constructs an empirically grounded model for co-created destination branding.
The paper ?rst reviews the different main streams of literature in destination brand
conceptualization as well as destination brand building activities and processes. This is
followed by a description of the methodology undertaken and the ?ndings fromanalysis. The
paper then concludes with a proposed process model of co-created destination branding
and provides suggestions for further studies.
Literature review
Merz et al. (2009) divide the evolution of branding literature into four areas that conceptualize
the brand and brand value from different perspectives:
1. individual goods-focus;
2. value-focus;
3. relationship-focus; and
4. stakeholder-focus.
According to the ?rst view, brand value is embedded in physical goods, whereas the
value-focus emphasized creation of the brand image for the customer. The
relationship-focus highlights dyadic brand relationships and the brand as a promise.
Finally, the stakeholder-focus acknowledges brands as a dynamic and social process
between the ?rm, brand and all stakeholders (Merz et al., 2009). This division is in part useful
when understanding the evolution of the destination branding literature and practices.
Although tourism research has adapted several perspectives from general branding
literature Saraniemi and Ahonen (2008) most efforts have emphasized brand management
and the customer image approach (Hankinson, 2005; Hosany et al., 2006) and refer strongly
to the value-focus and some features of the relationship-focus.
Ritchie and Ritchie (1998) introduced one of the most cited de?nitions for destination brand:
‘‘A name, symbol, logo, word mark or other graphic that both identi?es and differentiates the
place; furthermore, it conveys the promise of a memorable travel experience that is uniquely
associated with the place; it also serves to consolidate and reinforce pleasurable memories
of the place experience.’’ Although this de?nition limits a brand as being only a symbol of the
place, it clearly infers a brand to be related to differentiation and, in relation to competitors,
PAGE 248
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 5 NO. 3 2011
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
1
6
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
not an isolated perception as an image might be (Konecnik and Go, 2008). Interestingly, the
early de?nitions of value in marketing literature, for example in the bene?ts-sacri?ce
perspective, describe value as the trade-off between bene?ts and sacri?ces, including a
third component, relative to competition (de Chernatory et al., 2000), stressing that
customers compare alternatives when making an evaluation. Thus, the concepts of brand
and value seem to have common features and it is therefore reasonable to argue that both
brand and value can be conceived to co-create.
Konecnik (2004) proposes that evaluating the destination image is a self-analysis process
towards branding. Therefore, considering the images in the target market (Konecnik and
Gartner, 2007) is an important step in the branding process. However, few models
encompass the destination brand building process and only a couple that have
incorporated image evaluation or image building as part of the process. None has
encompassed the co-creation approach to brand development.
Cai’s (2002) co-operative branding model incorporates image building but is limited as an
explicit process or activity description. Niininen et al. (2007) present a process model,
which, however, does not consider images. Their model notes many challenges of
destination branding, such as planning of brand strategy and managing of stakeholder
relationships but large includes the following phases:
1. determining a brand vision;
2. communicating the brand vision;
3. managing partnerships; and
4. measuring brand performance (Niininen et al., 2007).
Konecnik and Go (2008) criticize destination branding studies as being customer-centric
and propose a framework for destination brand identity that adapt the product brand
leadership model by Aaker and Joachimsthaler (2000). According to Cai (2002), the missing
link between image building and branding is the brand identity that becomes an integral part
of the destination branding process. Konecnik and Go’s destination brand identity
framework acknowledges the importance of the producer in the branding process and
emphasizes the role of brand identity. Accordingly, this view highlights the role of internal
stakeholders and relates to the relationship-focus brand era (see Merz et al., 2009).
According to Merz et al. (2009), the stakeholder perspective emphasizes that process rather
than output orientation is important and that all stakeholders contribute to a brand’s value. In
addition, Gregory (2007) proposes that the brand process is dynamic, evolving and
negotiated by the ?rm and its stakeholders. In the destination context, the importance of
stakeholders is acknowledged (Morgan et al., 2003) but the co-creation perspective is
under theorized.
Methodology
Case studies focus on describing and ?nding out as much as possible fromone or fewcases
meriting attention and investigation. Although the key interest is the case, the research is
theoretically informed and capable of developing a theory (Dyer and Wilkins, 1991). This
study intends to produce a story of the image building activities undertaken by a particular
NTO. Thus, the case is centered on the phenomenon of destination branding at a country
context. The setting of the case describes the actors in the case (Stake, 2000), which is
primarily the NTO in this study, but the study also investigates a speci?c target (or source)
market for destination branding by the country, selected according to its importance and
size as a target market.
This is characteristically a development story in which internal changes are important to
identify. Following in detail and dissecting the changes makes the case unique and worthy of
study. The research process utilized several data collection and analysis methods, which are
useful when conducting case study research that typically draws on multiple sources of
information (Creswell, 2007).
VOL. 5 NO. 3 2011
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 249
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
1
6
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
This case study describes the image building efforts of the speci?c NTO (supply
side/induced image formation) during the last three decades, press media in?uence
(independent /autonomous) and tourist associations formed during the period (demand
side/organic). Data for the study was assembled from standardized and structured
interviews (n ¼ 2001) regarding spontaneous country images generated in the target
market; in-depth interviews conducted with tourism practitioners in the NTO, domestic
companies and tour operators in the target market (18 interviews, 21 interviewees); and
press articles about the country from the target market press (n ¼ 155). In addition, the
marketing documents of the NTOfromthe study period were content analyzed. Analysis was
done by categorizing interview data and press article text according to identi?able themes.
Pictures and articles from press media or media tours were subjected to content and
rhetorical analysis. Because interviews may re?ect memories or constructed realities and
understanding of the respondents, rather than objective reality, interpretation and
categorization of data was cross-checked several times and veri?ed using secondary
data of archives considering, for example, the marketing plans of the NTO.
The research process started by conducting standardized interviews, with open responses,
in the seven target markets of the NTO. The aim of the spontaneous images research was to
identify the prevailing images of the country in providing a basis for brand strategy. In order
to identify the background of the revealed country image in the chosen target market, press
articles ?led by the NTO were analyzed. These ?rst steps focused on image in the market.
The next step of data collection focused on the image building activities of the NTO, from
which image as a dimension of the destination brand building process started to emerge.
The next stage of data collection focused on understanding the media work of the NTO and
the press media in?uence on the demand side image. Finally, interviews with managers in
the NTO and tourism practitioners’ were conducted and analyzed to understand the image
building and branding activities of the NTO over the three decades.
Findings
Image building as a dimension of branding emerged from the analysis. In Figure 1, two
models of image building and identity-based branding are simultaneously conducted in
interaction. The self-analysis of the destination image is often the ?rst activity of the branding
process. In particular NTO studied, spontaneous image studies across seven target
markets were conducted for identifying images that can form the basis of brand strategy.
However, the NTO did not fully utilize the results of these studies. Positioning and identifying
target markets was another relevant activity for both processes. Based on interviews with the
general manager of NTO, the problem has been the lack of targeted marketing and
dif?culties in arousing initial interest within the markets.
The ?rst two steps of both processes emerged as similar. Beyond these two steps
differences in activities occur in both processes. ‘‘We tried to decide what the country
represents. . .and among a huge number of attributes, these four were gradually identi?ed’’
(NTO General Manager). This comment relates to an initial branding process of the NTOand
the phase where the brand identity or philosophy behind the brand, was determined within a
small group of the important stakeholders.
Various data from the case study converge to refer mostly to an image building process.
Some activities are oriented toward enhancing favorable images:
Attempts have been made to brand or strengthen and promote the country’s image for decades
and by several different actors (NTO General Manager).
Data speaks also of a lack of co-ordination between different stakeholders which has
hindered the communication of the brand promise:
With relatively little co-ordination every operator has promoted the Country’s image, each in its
own way (NTO General Manager).
PAGE 250
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 5 NO. 3 2011
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
1
6
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Results of various interviews also centered on management problems. The message
delivered, for example, in promotional pictures was not based on any particular planning or
research:
I assume that the choosing of pictures and preference of artists was based on experience and
knowledge (Former general manager).
It was also apparent from the data that the internal characteristics and activities of the NTO
are important when implementing the branding process. This study revealed how the
structure, strategy and culture of the NTO (i.e. the identity of the NTO itself) play a signi?cant
role. In one account, the results of the image study and the planned marketing campaign
were forgotten for years before the branding process started systematically:
It was approved by the operative steering group of tourism companies and regional DMOs and
afterwards, it was forgotten (Marketing manager).
The NTO has co-operated with its stakeholders during the years with varying success:
The tourism industry started to gain respect from other industries and fruitful cooperation abroad
started, resulting in me becoming a board member of the Foreign Trade Association (Former
general manager).
Figure 1 A grounded model of destination image building and identity-based branding
VOL. 5 NO. 3 2011
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 251
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
1
6
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
However, a later comment reveals:
It is a pity that for so long the activities were not undertaken systematically, together (General
manager).
The concrete involvement of stakeholders in the branding process of the country was not
evident during the research process, likely because the systematic branding process was in
a very initial phase. The systematic co-creation of the brand did not emerge although
producing, for example, services and tourist experiences together with customers and
stakeholders was clearly undertaken as part of the branding process.
The image building process produces projected images to interpret for the stakeholders
whereas identity-based branding delivers promises based on destination values. The former
process implements tactical, reactive planning and the latter strategic, proactive planning
with regular monitoring of the brand performance.
Although identifying the values-based identity of the destination and involving stakeholders
to the branding process (as co-creators) are the principal activities that seem to differentiate
destination branding from image building, it is clear that destination branding includes
image building. Moreover, image building is analogous with product-bound branding
whereas identity-based branding is not just a branding structure or an implementation
strategy, but a way for understanding the branding in the destination. The branding
philosophy may well change in the destination because the process of brand development
is usually long. It is useful therefore to do historical studies whenever possible in this context.
In this particular NTO, the analyzed time-period can be divided into a period of traditional
image building, concentrating on the (potential) customer’s perspective on image, and a
period of identity-based, or inside-out, branding where the basis of the brand promise, the
destination values, are identi?ed.
Conclusion
This study provides an empirically grounded framework of a co-created destination
branding process that also described in detail the various branding activities undertaken by
a particular NTO. It seems that the approach of branding or philosophy of branding in the
destination, and more speci?cally, in the NTO makes the biggest difference between image
building and branding. These branding philosophies are differentiated by the level of
involvement of stakeholders and involvement of the destination’s internal values, towards the
destination branding process. Product-bound branding approaches (Burmann et al., 2009)
in the way presented by Ritchie and Ritchie (1998) do not differ greatly from image building
techniques in the ‘‘senders-end’’ of the destination. Considering both the internal and
external generated activities and factors of the destination, more comprehensively,
distinguishes other approaches of branding from mere image building. For example,
Hankinson (2007) modeled destination brand management using the concepts of internal
and external brand identities. This approach has several similarities with multidisciplinary
corporate branding discussion that, for example, emphasizes identity of the entity as a
source of the brand (He and Balmer, 2007). However, the advantages of the destination
branding framework adopt multidimensional corporate branding ideas yet still do not
describe the branding process in the destination profoundly. Moreover, they do not take into
consideration the emerging co-creation view of the brand. Thus, re?ecting the branding
research categorization by Merz et al. (2009), destination branding studies rarely perform
stakeholder-focused branding with views of dynamic branding processes. Finally,
identity-based branding could be based on both internal and external values and
identities as well as their interaction in a process of co-creating the destination brand.
Building an image for customers remains only a narrow aspect of branding.
In conclusion, a destination brand is de?ned in a number of hierarchically connected ways.
First, it is a subjective impression that conveys the core values, commitment and promise
uniquely associated with a particular place emerging from the identities of the destination
and its supply-side and demand-side stakeholders (Urde, 2003). Supply-side stakeholders
are, for example, tourism related businesses, government agencies, whereas on the
PAGE 252
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 5 NO. 3 2011
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
1
6
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
demand-side are primarily customers. The destination brand emerges and evolves from the
interactions of all stakeholders. Second, a destination brand is a holistic co-created identity
based on a destination’s core values interpreted by both supply and demand side
stakeholders, in line with Hankinson’s (2007) observation of the co-production of services by
providers and customers in a destination. Third, destination identity emerges from
interactions between all stakeholders and is not controlled by anyone. Fourth, destinations
should be viewed as an evolving brand process and not a ?xed and completed identity.
For managers, this study suggests that without systematic and strategic, pro-active
branding activities, the image that emerges in the market is less manageable. Analysis of
this case study suggests that it is useful to co-ordinate different image building activities
under the same branding strategy (e.g. publicity management) and should have follow-up
systems. It is also useful for the industry to understand branding as a philosophy, rather than
taking it as just a collection of advertising campaigns or just a brand strategy choice. In this
regard, branding philosophy relates to the brand orientation concept of the organization
(Urde, 2003).
This study has limitations. The demand-side data in this study is restricted to certain markets
and communication channels, notably the press media. However, the potential for bias is
alleviated by analysis of the supply-side (NTO) activities from a wider market perspective
(i.e. across different markets), providing a more complementary and objective basis of
knowledge about the branding process in the studied NTO.
The study opens up several new insights for further studies. Among most interesting areas
yet to be studied in this context are brand equity, brand value and brand architectures. In
addition, as previous literature suggests (Hankinson, 2004, 2007), management of different
stakeholder groups and relationships within them remains as an important role for NTOs.
This perspective along with active brand co-creation with stakeholders demands further
study. In the end, focusing on different stakeholders inside and outside of the destination
would be fruitful for improving brand management and consequently brand performance.
References
Aaker, D.A. and Joachimsthaler, E. (2000), ‘‘The brand relationship spectrum: the key to the brand
architecture challenge’’, California Management Review, Vol. 42 No. 4, pp. 8-22.
Burmann, C., Hegner, S. and Riley, N. (2009), ‘‘Towards an identity-base branding’’, Marketing Theory,
Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 113-18.
Cai, L. (2002), ‘‘Cooperative branding for rural destinations’’, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 29 No. 3,
pp. 720-42.
Creswell, J.W. (2007), Qualitative Inquiry. Choosing among Five Approaches, 2nd ed., Sage, Thousand
Oaks, CA.
de Chernatony, L. and Cottam, S. (2005), ‘‘Internal brand factors driving successful ?nancial service
brands’’, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 40 Nos 5/6, pp. 611-33.
de Chernatony, L. and Harris, F. (2000), ‘‘Developing corporate brands through considering internal and
external stakeholders’’, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 268-74.
de Chernatory, L., Harris, F. and Dall’Olmo Riley, F. (2000), ‘‘Added value: its nature, roles and
sustainability’’, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 34 Nos 1/2, pp. 39-56.
Dunn, M. and Davis, S. (2003), ‘‘Building brands from inside’’, Marketing Management, Vol. 12 No. 3.
Dyer, W. Jr and Wilkins, A. (1991), ‘‘Better stories, not better constructs, to generate theory: a rejoinder to
Eisenhardt’’, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 613-19.
Gregory, A. (2007), ‘‘Involving stakeholders in developing corporate brands: the communication
dimension’’, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 23 Nos 1-2, pp. 59-73.
Hankinson, G. (2004), ‘‘Relational network brands: towards a conceptual model of destination brands’’,
Journal of Vacation Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 227-37.
VOL. 5 NO. 3 2011
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 253
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
1
6
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Hankinson, G. (2005), ‘‘Destination brand images: a business tourism perspective’’, Journal of Services
Marketing, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 24-32.
Hankinson, G. (2007), ‘‘The management of destination brands: ?ve guiding principles based on recent
developments in corporate branding theory’’, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 240-54.
Hankinson, G. (2009), ‘‘Managing destination brands: establishing the theoretical foundation’’, Journal
of Marketing Management, Vol. 25 Nos 1-2, pp. 97-115.
He, H-W. and Balmer, J.M.T. (2007), ‘‘Identity studies: multiple perspectives and implications for
corporate-level marketing’’, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 41 Nos 7/8, pp. 765-85.
Hosany, S., Ekinci, Y. and Uysal, M. (2006), ‘‘Destination image and destination personality: an application
of branding theories to tourism places’’, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 59, pp. 638-42.
Konecnik, M. (2004), ‘‘Evaluating Slovenia’s image as a tourism destination: self-analysis process
toward building a destination brand’’, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 307-16.
Konecnik, M. and Gartner, W.C. (2007), ‘‘Customer-based brand equity for a destination’’, Annals of
Tourism Research, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 400-21.
Konecnik, M. and Go, F. (2008), ‘‘Tourism destination brand identity. The case of Slovenia’’, Journal of
Brand Management, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 177-89.
Merz, M.A., He, Y. and Vargo, S.L. (2009), ‘‘The evolving brand logic: a service-dominant logic
perspective’’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 328-44.
Morgan, N., Pritchard, A. and Piggott, R. (2003), ‘‘Destination branding and the role of the stakeholders:
the case of New Zealand’’, Journal of Vacation Marketing, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 285-99.
Niininen, O., Hosany, S., Ekinci, H. and Airey, D. (2007), ‘‘Building a place brand: a case study of Surrey
Hills’’, Tourism Analysis, Vol. 12 Nos 5/6, pp. 371-85.
Pike, S. (2009), ‘‘Destination brand positions of a competitive set of near-home destinations’’, Tourism
Management, Vol. 30 No. 6, pp. 857-66.
Ritchie, B.J.R. and Ritchie, R.J.B. (1998), ‘‘The branding of tourism destination: past achievements and
future trends in destination marketing – scope and limitations’’, Reports of 48th Congress, AIEST,
St-Gall, pp. 89-116.
Saraniemi, S. (2009), ‘‘Destination branding in a country context. A case study of Finland in the British
market’’, academic dissertation, University of Joensuu, Joensuu.
Saraniemi, S. and Ahonen, M. (2008), ‘‘Destination branding from a corporate branding perspective’’,
Proceedings of the Conference on Corporate Communication, Wroxton, England.
Saraniemi, S. and Kyla¨ nen, M. (2010), ‘‘Problematizing the concept of tourismdestination: an analysis of
different theoretical approaches’’, Journal of Travel Research, 19 March.
Stake, R.E. (2000), ‘‘Case studies’’, in Denzin, N. and Lincoln, Y. (Eds), Handbook of Qualitative
Research, Sage, London.
Urde, M. (2003), ‘‘Core value-based corporate brand building’’, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 37
Nos 7/8, pp. 1017-40.
Vargo, S.L. and Lusch, R.F. (2004), ‘‘Evolving to a new dominant logic of marketing’’, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 68 No. 1, pp. 1-17.
Wallstro¨ m, A
?
., Karlsson, T. and Salehi-Sangari, E. (2008), ‘‘Building a corporate brand: the internal
brand-building process in Swedish service ?rms’’, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 16 Nos 1-2,
pp. 40-50.
Corresponding author
Saila Saraniemi can be contacted at: saila.saraniemi@oulu.?
PAGE 254
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 5 NO. 3 2011
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
1
6
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
This article has been cited by:
1. Mar Gómez, Carmen Lopez, Arturo Molina. 2015. A model of tourism destination brand equity: The case of wine tourism
destinations in Spain. Tourism Management 51, 210-222. [CrossRef]
2. Luai E. Jraisat, Mamoun N. Akroush, Ruba Jaser Alfaouri, Laila T. Qatu, Dina J. Kurdieh. 2015. Perceived brand salience and
destination brand loyalty from international tourists’ perspectives: the case of Dead Sea destination, Jordan. International Journal
of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research 9:3, 292-315. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
3. S.F. Adeyinka-Ojo, V. Nair, C. Khoo-Lattimore. 2014. Case Studies Approach in Tourism Destination Branding Research.
SHS Web of Conferences 12, 01061. [CrossRef]
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
1
6
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
doc_114475574.pdf