Turizm Paydaşlarının Turizm Deneyiminden Tatmin Düzeyleri ve Turizme Yönelik Genel Tutumları Üzerine Betimleyici Bir Araştırma: Antalya Örneği

Yıl 2012, Cilt: 5 Sayı: 1, 133 - 148, 01.04.2012

Yakın Ekin Veli Erdinç Ören

Öz

Gathering the information about satisfaction of tourism experience and general tourism attitudes from the point of view of various tourism stakeholders is of great importance in the relevant future direction of tourism policy implementations. For this reason, the main objective of the study is to adress the opinions of tourism stakeholders in Antalya and to reveal a due diligence about the mentioned topics. This study is implemented on the management level of employees in chamber of commerce, hotels, holiday villages, tourism-related faculties and vocational schools, travel agencies and directorate of tourism and culture in Antalya. While examining the satisfactions of tourism stakeholders in certain subjects, the results prevail that satisfaction levels seem to be somewhat low. Competitiveness performance of Antalya as a tourism destination is evaluated as competitive by the stakeholders, while they state that tourism in Antalya is still in the phase of development. Tourist attracting aspects of Antalya were also perceived positively by the stakeholders.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Tourism, Destination Competitiveness, Stakeholder Theory, Satisfaction, Attitude.

Turizm Paydaşlarının Turizm Deneyiminden Tatmin Düzeyleri ve Turizme Yönelik Genel Tutumları Üzerine Betimleyici Bir Araştırma: Antalya Örneği

Öz

Çeşitli turizm paydaşlarının gözünden bir destinasyonun sunduğu turizm deneyimi ile ilgili tatmin ve genel tutumlarla ilgili bilgiye sahip olmak, gelecekteki turizm planlaması uygulamalarının doğru yönlendirilebilmesinde önem taşımaktadır. Bu nedenle, turizm ürün ve hizmetleriyle ilgili tatmin düzeyleri ve turizmle ilgili genel tutumları konusundaki algılarını belirlemek için Antalya’daki turizm paydaşlarının görüşlerine başvurmak ve anılan konularla ilgili bir durum tespiti yapmak bu çalışmanın temel amacıdır. Bu araştırma Antalya ve çevresinde etkinlikte bulunan ticaret odası, oteller, tatil köyleri, turizmle ilgili fakülte ve yüksekokullar, seyahat acentaları, kültür ve turizm il müdürlüğünde üst düzey çalışanlara uygulanmıştır. Antalya’daki turizm paydaşlarının belli konulardaki tatminleri incelendiğinde elde edilen sonuç genel olarak tatminlerin düşük çıktığını göstermektedir. Antalya’nın bir turizm destinasyonu olarak rekabetçilik performansını rekabetçi olarak değerlendiren paydaşlar, turizmin Antalya’da halen gelişme aşamasında olduğunu öne sürmüştür. Antalya’nın turisti çeken yönleri de paydaşlar tarafından genellikle olumlu algılanarak çekici olarak değerlendirilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Turizm, Destinasyon Rekabetçiliği, Paydaş Kuramı, Tatmin, Tutum.

Kaynakça

• AGLE, Bradley, Ronald MITCHELL ve Jeffrey SONNENFELD (1999), “Who matters to CEOs? An investigation of stakeholder attributes and salience, corporate performance, and CEO values”, Academy ofManagement Journal, 42(5): 507-525.
• BACCARINI, David, Geoff SALM ve Peter. LOVE (2004), “Management of risks in information technology projects”. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 104(4), 286-295.
• BARNEY, Jay (1991), “Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage”, Journal of Management, 17, 99-120.
• BOONSTRA, Albert (2006), “Interpreting an ERP-implementation project from a stakeholder perspective”, International Journal of Project Management 24, 38–52.
• BRUGHA, Ruairi. ve Varvasovszky ZSUZSA, (2000), “Stakeholder analysis: A Review”, Health Policy and Planning, 15(3):239-246.
• BURCHELL, Jon ve COOK, Joanne (2006), “Assessing the impact of stakeholder dialogue: changing relationships between NGOs and companies”, Journal of Public Affairs, 6:210–227.
• CLARKSON, Max. (1995), “A Stakeholder Framework for Analyzing and Evaluating Corporate Social Performance”, Academy of Management Review, 20(1): 92-117.
• CLELAND, David (1999), Project management: strategic design and implementation. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• DE BUSSY, Nigel, Michael EWING ve Leyland PITT., (2003), “Stakeholder theory and internal marketing communications: a framework for analysing the influence of new media”, Journal of Marketing Communications, 9:147-161.
• FREEMAN, Edward, (1984), StrategicManagement: A Stakeholder Approach, Pitman Inc., Boston, USA.
• FRIEDMAN, Arthur ve Steve MILES (2002), “Developing Stakeholder Theory”, Journal of Management Studies, 39(1), 1-21.
• GREENWOOD, Michelle (2001), “The Importance of Stakeholders According to Business Leaders”, Business and Society Review, 106(1):29-49.
• GUNN, Claire, Tourism Planning, (3rd Edition), Taylor and Francis, New York, 1994.
• HILLMAN, Amy ve Gerald KEIM (2001), “Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: What's the bottom line?”, Strategic Management Journal, 22(1): 125-139.
• JONES, Thomas, (1995), “Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics”, Academy of Management Review, 20(2): 404-437.
• JONKER, Jan. ve David FOSTER (2002), “Stakeholder excellence? Framing the evolution and complexity of a stakeholder perspective of the firm”, Corporate social responsibility and Environmental Management, 9:187-195.
• LEGRIS Paul ve Pierre COLLORETTE, (2006), “A Roadmap for IT Project Implementation: Integrating Stakeholders and Change Management Issues”, Project Management Journal; 37(5), 64.
• LEIPER Neil, (1990), “Tourist Attraction System”, Annals of Tourism Research, 17(3), 367-384.
• LEW, Alan, (1987), “A Framework of Tourist Attraction Research”, Annals of Tourism Research, No.14(4):553-575.
• LORCA, Pedro ve GARCIA-DIEZ, Julita, (2004), “The Relation between Firm Survival and The Achievement of Balance Among Its Stakeholdes: An Analysis” International Journal of Management, 21(1):93.
• MC WILLIAMS Abagail. ve Donald SIEGEL, (2001), “Corporate Social Responsibility: A Theory of the Firm Perspective”, The Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 117-127.
• MCDANIEL, Julie ve Cecil MISKEL, (2002), “Stakeholder Salience: Business and Educational Policy”, Teachers College Record, 10 (2): 325-356.
• MITCHELL, Ronald, Bradley AGLE ve Donna WOOD, (1997), “Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of how and what really counts”. Academy of Management Review, 22(4):853-886.
• OLANDER Stefan ve Anne LANDIN, (2005), “ Evaluation of stakeholder influence in the implementation of construction projects”, International Journal of Project Management, 23, 321–328.
• PETTER, Stacey ve Adriane RANDALPH, (2009), “Developing Soft Skills to Manage User Expectations in IT Projects”. Project Management Journal,40, (4) 45-59.
• STONEY, Christopher. ve Diana WINSTANLEY, (2001), “Stakeholding: Confusion or utopia? Mapping the conceptual terrain”, Journal of Management Studies, 38(5): 603-626.
• UYSAL, Muzaffer, (1998) The Determinants of Tourism Demand: A Theoretical Perspective, The Economic Geography of the Tourist Industry, Routledge, London, UK.
• YOON, Yooshik, (2002), Development of a Structural Model for Tourism Destination Competitiveness from Stakeholders’ Perspectives, Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, USA.