Travel Reference
In-Depth Information
information-intensive nature of tourism puts it at the forefront of adopting knowledge-based
operation and practices. Destinations are hence not just competing with each other based on
natural resource endowment, but operant resources and network.
The following paragraphs elaborate on three major implications this author deems important
to tourism marketing, particularly destination marketing practices.
Service is not inferior to goods
Conventional wisdom of services marketing suggests that services are uniquely different from
goods for at least four characteristics, i.e. intangibility (service is impalpable), heterogeneity
(service production cannot be standardized), inseparability (service production and consumption
is simultaneous, whereas goods production, purchase, and consumption is sequential), and
perishability (service cannot be inventoried after production) (Zeithaml, Parasuraman and
Berry 1985). These four features, collectively termed the IHIP characteristics by Lovelock and
Gummesson (2004), are considered limitations or shortcomings of services that service marketers
need to work exceptionally hard to make up for. Both Vargo and Lusch (2004b) and Lovelock
and Gummesson (2004) argued that these four characteristics do not necessarily differentiate
services from goods. Most importantly, the complaints about the IHIP characteristics of service
refl ect a goods- and manufacturing-based mentality, i.e. the G-D logic (Vargo and Lusch 2004a).
SDL instead calls for a new mindset, and suggests service marketers make no apologies for
what service is about. In today's market environment, competence in customization, co-creation,
and providing solutions, as opposed to standardization, scale of economy, and tangible outputs,
are likely to bring marketers a competitive edge. The IHIP characteristics of service will be more
desirable because fundamentally 'value is always intangible, heterogeneously experienced,
co-created, and potentially perishable' (Vargo and Lusch 2008b: 28). Thus, one may argue that
instead of making service more 'goods-like', goods should be marketed more like service
(Grönroos 2006). Further, the traditional goods-service distinction is getting blurred, and
service appears to be the more encompassing idea because ultimately, 'manufacturing is a service,
and its output is part of the service-provision process' (Vargo and Lusch 2004b: 334). No longer
do destination marketers need to be ashamed of the heterogeneity of their offerings, as designing
and promoting highly customized travel experiences will become a norm rather than an
exception. Put differently, SDL directs destination marketers to actively customize travel
experiences and pursue tourists' involvement in product design and innovation (Lee, Tussyadiah
and Zach 2010).
Tourists as co-creators and operant resources
Marketers used to view customers as white rats in labs or fi sh in ponds, i.e. objects to be observed,
analyzed, and taken advantage of (AMA Task Force 1988; Li and Petrick 2008). Much has been
said about the empowerment of customers in recent decades, mainly owing to the development
of the information technology (Chen and Popovich 2003; Cova and Pace 2006). SDL goes one
step further and emphasizes the idea of value-in-use, and the role and activities performed by
customers to achieve their goal in the experiential value creation process (FP10) (Payne,
Storbacka and Frow 2008; Vargo and Lusch 2004a). During this process, customers contribute
their knowledge and skills to co-create value of their experiences with service providers.
Customer value is created and determined by their total experience of all service elements. Thus,
a tourism destination or service provider gains its competitive advantage by better understanding
a tourist's values and needs (e.g. goals in life), by providing better solutions and resources to
