-
Thông tin
-
Hỏi đáp
Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing | Đại học Ngoại Ngữ - Tin Học Thành Phố Hồ Chí Minh
Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing | Đại học Ngoại Ngữ - Tin Học Thành Phố Hồ Chí Minh được sưu tầm và soạn thảo dưới dạng file PDF để gửi tới các bạn sinh viên cùng tham khảo, ôn tập đầy đủ kiến thức, chuẩn bị cho các buổi học thật tốt. Mời bạn đọc đón xem
Môn: Phương pháp nghiên cứu (123456)
Trường: Đại học Ngoại ngữ - Tin học Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh
Thông tin:
Tác giả:
Preview text:
Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing
ISSN: 1054-8408 (Print) 1540-7306 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wttm20
Customer experience and engagement in
tourism destinations: the experiential marketing perspective Raouf Ahmad Rather
To cite this article: Raouf Ahmad Rather (2020) Customer experience and engagement in tourism
destinations: the experiential marketing perspective, Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 37:1,
15-32, DOI: 10.1080/10548408.2019.1686101
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2019.1686101 Published online: 17 Dec 2019.
Submit your article to this journal Article views: 1 View related articles View Crossmark data
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wttm20
JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING 2019, VOL. 37, NO. 1, 15–32
https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2019.1686101 ARTICLE
Customer experience and engagement in tourism destinations: the experiential marketing perspective Raouf Ahmad Rather
Department of Tourism Studies, Central University of Kashmir, Jammu and Kashmir, Kashmir, India ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY
Tourism destinations are increasingly offering experiential services to promote the development of Received 2 August 2019
their competitive advantage. This research investigates the effects of customers’ tourism engage- Revised 17 September 2019
ment with experiential marketing activities and develops and tests a framework in this area. Accepted 11 October 2019
Findings suggest that customer engagement’s dimensions exert differing effects on customer KEYWORDS
experience and identification, which subsequently affect behavioral intention toward destinations. Experiential marketing;
Findings also suggest the indirect effects of customer engagement dimensions on behavioural customer experience;
intentions via experience and identification. Further, findings propose the significant difference customer engagement;
between first-time and repeat-visitors in terms of the underlying constructs. Theoretical and identification; behavioral
practical implications of results are discussed.
intention; first-time visitors; repeat-visitors; destination; tourism Introduction
(2019) propose that customers don’t like to purchase
the product/s, but rather the stories behind and the
Market globalization is influencing tourism industry
experience enabled by offerings.
globally. Economic downturn, intensified competition,
The reason behind the current tourism boom is
and growth of new technologies offer opportunities as
a question asked by both academics and industry.
well as threats (Hollebeek & Macky, 2019; Hultman,
Experiential marketing has been derived from the experi-
Skarmeas, Oghazi, & Beheshti, 2015). Researchers con-
ence economy concept (Pine & Gilmore, 1998), that is
sider the tourism industry as a technology adoption
undoubtedly strongly present in the highly intangible
pioneer, which innovates from computerized reservation
experience economy (Le et al., 2019; Quan & Wang,
systems to new marketing practices and E-business
2004; Song et al., 2015; Tsaur, Chiu, & Wang, 2007), as
(Hultman et al., 2015). In the context of this, tourism
illustrated by Disneyland’s 1955 opening (Hannam, 2004).
service providers are promptly employing branding stra-
Therefore, what does a customer gets from tourism or
tegies parallel to those product marketers in an attempt
travel offerings? First and foremost, the customer’s per-
to highlight the tourist destination uniqueness (Usakli &
ceived benefits lie in experience. While economic offer-
Baloglu, 2011). In accordance with these developments,
ings like goods, commodities, or services are external to
tourism destination numbers have increased to cater
customer, experiences are intrinsically personal and exist
with the fast developing demand of global tourism.
only in the customer’s minds who have been engaged on
With the help of these technologies, customers are pro-
intellectual, physical, emotional, and/or spiritual level
gressively shaping their own tourism experiences, as
(Hol ebeek, Glynn, & Brodie, 2014; Pine & Gilmore, 1998;
substantiated by Pine and Gilmore’s (1998) experiential
Tsaur et al., 2007). A delightful experience would last long
marketing perspective (Le, Scott, & Lohmann, 2019;
in customer’s minds and influence their consequent beha-
Schmitt, 1999a; Song, Ahn, & Lee, 2015). Kumar, Rajan,
viors. Consequently, managing the customer’s experien-
Gupta, and Dalla Pozza (2019) claims that the business
tial environment is a key concern for the survival and
development is shifting from products toward customer-
competitive advantage of tourism firms.
based processes. This leads Prahalad and Ramaswamy
Despite these invaluable conceptual works on the
(2003, p. 12) to propose that “a new point of view is
experience economy, empirical study remains limited.
required, one that allows individual customers to actively
One main reason probably lies in the fact that few of
construct their own consumption experiences through
these theoretical writings offer an easily operationalizable
personalized interaction, thereby co-creating unique
foundation for empirical investigation (Brodie & Hollebeek,
value for themselves.” Likewise, Hollebeek and Macky CONTACT Raouf Ahmad Rather r.raouf18@gmail.com
© 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group 16 R. A. RATHER
2011). One exception to this observation is indeed offered
unknown. Addressing this research gap, this study investi-
by Pine and Gilmore (1998), which explicitly operationalizes
gates CE’s nomological network in tourism destination
the experience economy in terms of four dimensions:
marketing context. In particular, this research explores the
Escapism, esthetics, education, and entertainment. In addi-
role of CE dimensions in driving customer experience and
tion, “Given the relatively nascent state of the customer
customer identification, and their impact on behavioral
experience (CX) literature, there is limited empirical work
intention. Moreover, various constructs and variables
directly related to customer experience and the customer
have been examined as the consequences of CE in extant
journey” (Lemon & Verhoef, 2016, p. 70). For example,
research, incorporating brand usage intention and self-
“there is a strong need to explore how extant marketing
brand connection (Hollebeek et al., 2014), brand trust and
constructs, like customer engagement (CE) and commit-
co-creation (Rather, Hollebeek, & Islam, 2019), repatronage
ment, relate to customer experience and interact with each
intent and brand experience (Islam et al., 2019), electronic
other, resulting in the overall customer experience” (Lemon
word-of-mouth (Taheri, Jafari, & O’Gorman, 2014), satisfac-
& Verhoef, 2016, p. 85). Moreover, “there is a critical need
tion and loyalty (Rather, 2018a; So et al., 2014). Although
for researchers to develop and test such an integrated
given its relative significance, empirical research to under-
conceptual model of customer experience and the custo-
stand engagement while actually experiencing tourism
mer journey” (Homburg, Jozić & Kuehn, 2017; Lemon &
destinations/offerings are scant. Thus, there are few exist-
Verhoef, 2016, p. 85). Because of the absence of sound
ing studies and none (to our knowledge) in the area of
measurement development for CX, there exists a scarcity
tourism destination marketing that explores the associa-
of research on how CX can be affected and on the con-
tion between customer engagement dimensions and cus-
sequences of CX (Homburg et al., 2017; Lemon & Verhoef,
tomer experience and other related variables (e.g.
2016). Research have mostly investigated the drivers of
customer identification, behavioral intention) that are
customer value, commitment or satisfaction (e.g. Hultman
deemed to be of interest to tourism destinations/firms.
et al., 2015; Rather & Hollebeek, 2019; Song et al., 2015) but
Further, since engaged and loyal visitors have constantly
haven’t measured CX drivers as a broad construct (Islam,
been recognized as essential factors for market segment
Hollebeek, Rahman, Khan, & Rasool, 2019; Lemon &
(Brodie & Hollebeek, 2011; Liu, Lin, & Wang, 2012), little is
Verhoef, 2016; Verhoef et al., 2009). Thus, this research
known about the differences relating to first-time custo-
extends this gap by exploring the role of CE as a driver of
mers and repeat visitors (e.g. Chua, Lee, & Han, 2017; Li,
customer experience in a broader nomological network.
Cheng, Kim, & Petrick, 2008; Liu et al., 2012). The differences
Customer engagement/CE has transpired as a construct
between first-time and repeat tourists are getting more
of growing relevance in topical marketing literature and as
interest from the marketing and tourism scholar’s perspec-
a new technique in fostering consumer value and under-
tive. Information regarding visitor’s status like first-time
standing contemporary marketing (Brodie, Hollebeek,
and/or repeat tourists could be helpful in identifying
Jurić, & Ilić, 2011; Harrigan, Evers, Miles, & Daly,
a tourism destination’s position in its life cycle, signalling
2018; Hollebeek et al., 2019a; Kumar et al., 2019). The MSI
destination familiarity and market segmentation (Li et al.,
(2014–2016) and (2016–2018) positioned CE and CX as the 2008).
most significant research challenges in upcoming years.
Recent destination marketing and management
Over the previous decade, customer engagement research
research (e.g. Chen, Drennan, Andrews, & Hollebeek,
has been performed with online foci or substantial service
2018; Hultman et al., 2015; Le et al., 2019; Rather,
(e.g. Hollebeek & Andreassen, 2018). For example, existing
Hollebeek et al., 2019; Song et al., 2015; Taheri et al.,
research has examined customer engagement in virtual/
2014) develops on conventional marketing and branding
social media brand communities (e.g. Hollebeek et al.,
literature (such as Aaker, 1997), that proposes individuals
2014), with reference to hedonic (vs. utilitarian) brands
likely to identify towards brands or destinations. Customer
(Hollebeek, 2011) and integrated resort brands (Ahn &
engagement and customer brand identification/customer
Back, 2018), to name a few. In tourism/destination market-
identification are critical in purchase likelihood, brand
ing and management that signifies a particular service
choice, and finally success of brand (e.g. Aaker, 1997;
subsector, this research identifies studies which address
Hollebeek et al., 2014; Kumar & Kaushik, 2018). An exten-
customer engagement in heritage places/sites (Bryce,
sive consent subsists in management and marketing lit-
Ross, Kevin, & Taheri, 2015), social media interactions
erature on three different statements: (i) CE can lead to
(Harrigan et al., 2018), luxury hotel brands (Islam et al.,
sustainable competitive advantage, value-creating consu-
2019; Rather & Camilleri, 2019), and airline brands (So,
mers and develop strong loyal consumer base (ii) retain-
King, & Sparks, 2014), amongst others. In spite of extant
ing consumers is good business, and (iii) customer
insight, the role of tourism destination customer engage-
experience and identification are main drivers for future
ment and its specific conceptual associations remain
customer behavior, particularly in tourism, in which
JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING 17
intangible services/offerings are hard to assess before
thrill-seeking), which typically result from participation
consumption (Hultman et al., 2015; Kumar & Kaushik,
and/or direct observation in events, whether dreamlike,
2018; Kumar et al., 2019; Lemon & Verhoef, 201 ) 6 .
virtual or real (Schmitt, 1999b). In the tourism context,
Building on the above gaps, this study makes important
experience has been viewed as a subjective mental state
theoretical and managerial contributions. First, as sug-
felt by consumers (Tsaur et al., 2007). Further, experiences
gested multiple authors have called for more empirical
are normally not self-generated but induced. Experiences
studies that investigate CE phenomena, particularly in the
are linked to events which they react to. Furthermore,
tourism context (Harrigan et al., 2018; Kim & Chen, 2019; So
experiences can be described as complex, emerging
et al., 2014; Taheri et al., 2014). This research satisfies these
structures, that is, no two experiences are alike accurately
calls by investigating two major outcomes of customer
(e.g. Schmitt, 1999b; Tsaur et al., 2007).
engagement dimensions namely customer experience
In marketing, the idea of experience was first discussed
and identification and offers a framework in this area.
and conceptualized in the topical work of Hirschman and
Due to this association, the present research uncovers the
Holbrook (1982), which has to turn out to be an important
insights into those CE dimensions which are more favor-
element in understanding customer behavior through the
able in building tourism customer experience and identifi-
overall consumption experience (Coudounaris & Sthapit,
cation. This study thus examines the association between
2017; Lemon & Verhoef, 2016). The experiential facets of
CE and CX, which although being studied conceptually so
consumption emerged at 1990s after Pine and Gilmore
far (e.g. Hollebeek, 2011; Hollebeek & Andreassen, 2018;
(1998) addressed how economies change. Economic activ-
Lemon & Verhoef, 2016), to the best of our information lags
ities intend not only for output but for experience through
behind as for empirical exploration is concerned.
consumption (Quan & Wang, 2004). Pine and Gilmore
The advancement of increased insight into customer
(1998) further advocate that experience represents
engagement’s role in influencing consumers’ overall jour-
a specific type of economic offering that generates compe-
ney-linked perceptions thereby reveals a worthwhile con-
titive benefit which is difficult to imitate or substitute.
tribution to the marketing and management literature
Based on these developments, Hirschman and Holbrook
(Lemon & Verhoef, 2016). Second, this research tests the
(1982) and Lemon and Verhoef (2016) propose customer
mechanism through which these outcomes affect beha-
experience orientation as an eminent approach for scholars
vioural intention. Third, the present research explores the
as well as marketing practitioners. Schmitt (1999a) argues
indirect effects of CE including affective, cognitive, and
that because traditional marketing provides a rational,
behavioral dimensions on behavioural intention through
engineering-driven and outdated, a need exists for the
customer experience and identification in tourism destina-
development of experiential marketing. The author also
tions. Fourth, this study also intends to explore the differ-
suggests that what consumer’s desire is communications,
ence between first-time and repeat customers in terms of
products, and marketing campaigns which touch their
customer’s engagement, experience, identification, and
hearts, overwhelm their senses, stimulate their minds and
loyalty constructs. Finally, future research directions are
include into their lifestyles. Customers thus desire for com-
discussed to address research gaps in the literature.
munications, marketing campaigns and offerings to deliver
Practically, the study findings reveal that CE makes an experience.
a substantial contribution to customer experience, there-
Consequently, experiential marketing is increasingly uti-
fore revealing a superior level of managerial significance.
lized by marketers to build experiential connections with
This study thus presumes that not only customer engage-
consumers (Homburg et al., 2017; Le et al., 2019; Schmitt,
ment should be regarded as an integrated strategic and 1999a). Schmitt 1
( 999a, 1999b) suggested the strategic
core aspects to promote increased customer experience,
experiential modules (SEMs) concept which marketing man-
but also guides to strong customer’s identification, which
agers can adopt to generate different kinds of CX for their
in turn effects behavioural intention.
consumers (Song et al., 2015; Tsaur et al., 2007). In experi-
ential marketing, the experiential modules include affective
experiences (FEEL), sensory experiences (SENSE), creative
Theoretical framework and hypotheses
cognitive experiences (THINK), behaviors and lifestyles
Experiential marketing is a rising marketing management
(ACT), social-identity experiences and physical experiences
philosophy (Le et al., 2019; Lemon & Verhoef, 2016; Song
which result from relating to a reference group/culture
et al., 2015; Tsaur et al., 2007), which has been shown
(RELATE). Experiential marketing aims to generate compre-
effective in driving tourist behavior (Brun, Rajaobelina, hensive integrated experiences which possess
Ricard, & Berthiaume, 2017; Rather, 2018c; Sharma &
simultaneously the qualities of FEEL, SENSE, ACT, THINK,
Nayak, 2019). Experiences are private events, which hap-
and RELATE. Each of these dimensions/aspects is
pen in reply to customer’s sense(s) being stimulated (e.g. discussed below. 18 R. A. RATHER Sense marketing Relate marketing
SENSE marketing or SENSE module are focused on
RELATE marketing extends outside the customer’s pri-
senses by generating sensory experiences due to sight,
vate, personal feelings, thereby linking the customer to
taste, touch, sound, and smell. Sense is the key response
something beyond its private state. RELATE campaigns
in which one individual engages in an experiential envir-
enrich customer’s desire for self-improvement (such as
onment. SENSE marketing can be employed to distin-
a future “ideal self”, which she/he desires to relate to).
guish firms, products, and brands (e.g. destinations) to
Relate appeal to the need to be recognized positively by
motivate consumers by adding value to products/ser-
others like one’s family, peers, and colleagues (Schmitt,
vices (e.g. through excitement or aesthetics) (Schmitt,
1999a). They relate the visitors to a large social system 1999a; Tsaur et al., 2007).
like sub-culture, a country, so on (Tsaur et al., 2007). Feel marketing Customer engagement
FEEL marketing enriches consumer’s emotions and
Although the engagement concept is examined across
inner feelings by generating affective experiences
fields including psychology (such as task engagement),
which range from slightly positive moods related to
organizational behavior (like employee engagement),
a brand/destination (e.g. for a non-involving) to
sociology (like civic engagement), and marketing (like
strong feelings/emotions of pride and joy (e.g. for
customer engagement; Ahn & Back, 2018; Hollebeek,
a customer durable, social marketing campaign or
Srivastava, & Chen, 2019b; So et al., 2014; Verhoef, technology) (Schmitt, 1999a).
Reinartz, & Krafft, 2010), its dynamics in particular set-
tings such as tourism remain nebulous (Harrigan et al.,
2018; Rather, Hollebeek et al., 2019; Taheri et al., 2014). Think marketing
The conceptualization and dimensionality of CE have
been a key topic of discussion. Based on different theo-
THINK marketing appeals to the intellect by generating
retical viewpoints, few researchers suggest customer
problem-solving, cognitive experiences, which engage con-
engagement to encompass both in-role and extra-role
sumes creatively. In tourism, one of the objectives is har-
consumer emotions, cognitions and behaviors (Islam
mony. It proposes that the tourism destination authority
et al., 2019; Kumar et al., 2019), whereas other authors
allocates itself to harmonizing the relationship between
restrict its scope to extra-role merely (e.g. helping beha-
nature and humankind. In tourism, various educational
viors/consumer citizenship (Van Doorn et al., 2010). The
tours accumulate the ideas of environmental security
present employs the former perspective which provides
on the explanation boards to engage its visitor’s divergent
a most influential, inclusive outlook of customer engage-
and convergent thinking via surprise, intrigue, and
ment (e.g. Harrigan et al., 2018; Hollebeek et al., 2014,
provocation (Tsaur et al., 2007). Such reconsiderations cre-
2019). Similarly, given its interactive theoretical roots
ate the problem-solving and cognitive experiences for its
(Brodie et al., 2011), customer engagement has been customers/visitors. viewed from relationship marketing perspectives
(Rather, 2018a) and SD logic perspectives (Hollebeek
et al., 2019b). These authors view customer engagement Act marketing
as customers’ resource investments in their interactions
ACT marketing appeals consumer’s lives by focusing their
(Kumar et al., 2019), which is highly relevant in tourism
physical experiences, showing customers alternative life- destination marketing.
styles and interactions, alternative ways of doing things.
Relatedly, there is no consent about CE’s definition. For
Rational perspectives to behaviour change (e.g. theories
example, Brodie et al. (2011, p. 258) defined CE as “a psy-
of reasoned actions) are just one of the several behavioural
chological state, which occurs by virtue of interactive cus-
change alternatives (Schmitt, 1999a). Changes in beha-
tomer experiences with a focal object (e.g. a brand/
viours and lifestyles are usually most inspirational, emo-
destination)”. Van Doorn et al. (2010, p. 254) defined CE as
tional and motivational and normally inspired by
“behaviors that go beyond transactions and may be speci-
exemplars like athletes or movie stars. In tourism, customers fically d fi
e ned as a customer’s behavioral manifestations
understand ways to appreciate focal objects (like other
that have a brand or firm focus, beyond purchase, resulting
customers) and change their lifestyles and attitudes (Tsaur
from motivational drivers”. Hollebeek et al. (2014, p. 154) et al., 2007).
define it as “a consumer’s positively valenced brand-related
JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING 19
cognitive, emotional and behavioral activity during or
et al., 2017), that, for Lemon and Verhoef 2 ( 016), could be
related to focal consumer/brand interactions”. Regardless
extended to other spiritual, sensory, and physical aspects.
of these differences, CE has been widely viewed to include
CX as a broad construct includes three typical phases of
affective, cognitive and behavioral dimensions, thus reveal-
purchase e.g. pre-purchase, purchase and post-purchase.
ing its multidimensional aspect (Harrigan et al., 2018;
Thus, it is a process which amalgamates cognitive as well as
Hollebeek et al., 2014; Taheri et al., 2014). Consequently,
affective components (Verhoef et al., 2009). Homburg,
omission of CE’s psychological aspects or behavioral activ-
Schwemmle, and Kuehnl (2015, p. 8) define CX as “the
ities would likely provide insufficient insight to properly
evolvement of a person’s sensorial, affective, cognitive,
investigate the concept (Ahn & Back, 2018; Hollebeek
relational and behavioural responses to a brand by living
et al., 2014). Although, neither the behavioral activities nor
through a journey of touch points along pre-purchase,
psychological aspects alone reflect the CE in full. True CE
purchase and post-purchase and continually judging this
should reveal the psychological connection in addition to
journey against response thresholds of co-occurring experi-
interactive behavioral participation towards the brand/
ences.” Lemon and Verhoef (2016) assert that CX results due
object (Ahn & Back, 2018; Rather, Hollebeek et al., 2019).
to the interaction between the consumer and parts/ele-
Thus, this study employs three-dimensional (cognitive,
ments of firm, like services, products, or employees.
affective, and behavioral) CE in this study (Ahn & Back,
Experience is specific to each consumer; thus, it is
2018; Hollebeek et al., 2014). Relatedly, cognitive CE refers
a personal experience with distinct levels of involvement
to “a consumer’s level of brand-related thought processing
including emotional, sensorial, rational, physical, and
and elaboration in a particular consumer/brand interac- spiritual.
tion”. Secondly, affective CE is defined as “a consumer’s
Brakus, Schmitt and Zarantonello (2009, p. 54) argue
degree of positive brand-related affect in a particular con-
that “customer experience . . . differs from motivational
sumer/brand interaction”. Thirdly, behavioral CE refers to “a
concepts, such as involvement,” thus further differenti-
consumer’s level of energy, effort and time spent on
ates brand/customer experience from customer engage-
a brand in a particular consumer/brand interaction”
ment’s motivational aspect (Hollebeek & Macky, 2019). In
(Hollebeek et al., 2014, p. 6).
spite of such differences, both CX and CE fit in
Given the interactive aspect of customer engagement,
a relational paradigm that aims to optimize consumer–
it has specific significance towards service context which
brand interactions from consumer and company view-
is typified by high customer–brand interaction (e.g.
points (e.g. Islam et al., 2019). Eventually, customer
Hollebeek & Macky, 2019; Islam et al., 2019; Rather, engagement’s intra-interaction focus ends in
Hollebeek et al., 2019). For instance, tourists are looking
a particular brand experience (e.g. Hollebeek &
for transformative, engaging, interactive, and enjoyable
Andreassen, 2019, Islam et al., 2019). Engaged customers
activities, often surrounding temporary modes of being.
are expected to play a key role in cocreating customer
On the basis of these features, customer engagement
experience and value (Brakus et al., 2009; Lemon &
has been generally examined via service-dominant (SD)
Verhoef, 2016). Furthermore, customer engagement’s
logic, which alike CE emphasizes the improvement of
influence on experience is addressed in hotel contexts
perceived value by virtue of interactivity (see Brodie
(Islam et al., 2019), and online branding literature
et al., 2011; Hollebeek et al., 2019b; Islam et al., 2019).
(Hollebeek et al., 2014). Therefore, regardless of concep-
tual assertions of customer engagement’s influence on
CX, this relationship is yet to be investigated empirically
CE as an antecedent of customer experience
as for our best knowledge. In response to this gap, we
Customer experience or CX acts as a crucial driver of com-
aim to investigate this association in tourism destination
petitive advantage and commercial success (Kim & Chen,
marketing context. This research proposes CE’s dimen-
2019; Lemon & Verhoef, 2016). Regarding marketing – spe-
sions (i.e. cognitive, affective and behavioral) as impor-
cifically tourism destination services practitioners and aca-
tant predictors of customer experience with tourism
demics settle that focusing on CX is helpful and may destinations/sites. Thus:
generate a sustainable and unique advantage for any
brand (or destination) (Sharma & Nayak, 2019; Song et al.,
H1: Cognitive CE with the tourism destination positively
2015; Tsaur et al., 2007). Thus, defining CX concept and
influences customer experience.
ascertaining how to measure it is crucial for marketing
(Lemon & Verhoef, 2016; Sharma & Nayak, 2019). For exam-
H2: Affective CE with the tourism destination positively
ple, CX involves emotional and rational evaluations (Brun
influences customer experience. 20 R. A. RATHER
H3: Behavioral CE with the tourism destination positively
value for them (e.g. status, affiliation, identification;
influences customer experience.
Hollebeek, 2011; Rather & Hollebeek, 2019). Consumers
exchange, economic, social, emotional, cognitive, and phy-
sical resources with service marketers (e.g. Hollebeek, 2011;
Rather, 2018a). For customer engagement to persist both
Customer identification as a consequence of CE
consumer and marketer have to state that it is equivalent
(Harrigan et al., 2018; Rather, 2018a), defining customer
Social identity theory or SIT is a key theoretical underpin-
engagement as a social exchange. These claims imply
ning for marketing based customer identification (Hultman
that when tourists are engaged, they tend to identify
et al., 2015; Mael & Ashforth, 1992; Rather, Tehseen, &
themselves towards the destination/brand. Hence, higher
Parrey, 2018). Based on SIT, customer–brand identification
the customer’s cognitive, affective and behavioral engage-
or customer identification denotes a consumer’s psycholo-
ment, higher is the customer’s identification with the des-
gical state of feeling, perceiving and valuing their belong-
tination brand. Therefore, it is hypothesized:
ingness with the offering/brand (Rather & Hollebeek, 2019).
SIT proposes that individuals can spend substantial efforts
H4: Cognitive CE with the tourism destination positively
to build their own social identity, besides their personal
affects customer identification.
identity (e.g. Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003; Rather, Tehseen,
Itoo, & Parrey, 2019). These claims also fit with social
H5: Affective CE with the tourism destination positively
exchange theory or SET that focus on individuals’ likely
affects customer identification.
rewards from their social efforts (Hollebeek, 2011), thus
revealing a proper linkage between these perspectives as
H6: Behavioral CE with the tourism destination positively employed in the present research. Researchers
affects customer identification.
applied identification to consumer–brand relationships
(Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003; Rather & Hollebeek, 2019).
Behavioural intention as a consequence of
These researchers contend that consumers have social as customer identification
well as personal identities which collectively contribute to
their self-images. Customers engage in a matching process
Oliver (1997, p. 28) defined behavioral intention as
to identify offerings or brands which are congruent with
a “stated likelihood to engage in a behavior”. Zeithaml,
their sense of self (Escalas, 2004; Hultman et al., 2015). In
Berry, and Parasuraman (1996) conceptualize four types
line with this, Sprott, Czellar, and Spangenberg (2009)
of behavioral loyalty including purchase intention, price
argue the customer–brand engagement (CBE) in self-
sensitivity, complaining behavior and word-of-mouth.
concept construct, wherein CE and customers’ identifica-
Understanding how brands affect consumer behavioral
tion are linked. Hollebeek et al. (2014) ponder consumer
intention is key, as it is an indicator of actual ensuing
self-brand connection (SBC) as a consequence of CE that
consumption behavior (Ahn & Back, 2018; Coudounaris
develops from consumers’ particular interactive brand
& Sthapit, 2017; Rather & Hollebeek, 2019; Zeithaml et al.,
experiences. The connections that customers generate
1996). Strong customer’s identification can prove vital for
between a brand (e.g. destination) and their own identity
developing long-term relationships (Bhattacharya & Sen,
are known as customer identification. Consequently, desti-
2003; Rather, 2017, 2018b; Rather & Hollebeek, 2019),
nation brand/s is believed to be most important the more
such as by affecting brand re-buying intentions. Further,
closely they link to self (Kumar & Kaushik, 2018). Coherent
researchers recommend that identification increases cus-
with the literature, this study advocates that cognitive,
tomers’ resistance towards switching brands (Lam,
affective, and emotional CE will persuade customer’s iden-
Ahearne, Hu, & Schillewaert, 2010). In nation-brand set-
tification. For instance, Hollebeek et al. (2014) suggested
tings, people who articulated higher identification
that consumers’ cognitive and affective CE in social media
towards nation as a brand were most expected to visit
serve to predict customer’s self-brand connection and
and/or revisit the destination in future (Stokburger-Sauer,
identification towards the offering/brand. Relatedly,
2011). Through social identity theory-based insights, cus-
Harrigan et al. (2018) propose that customers engage
tomer identification could be employed to enlighten var-
actively towards social media tourism brands, and their
ious consumer-based consequences, including customer–
self-brand connection and/or identification is reinforced.
brand loyalty (Rather & Hollebeek, 2019). Thus, the cur-
Clearly, this connects their brand to the customer’s identity.
rent research proposes that tourists build heightened
As social exchange theory (SIT) implies that customers
loyalty with tourism destination by re-visiting it in the
would invest resources only when the exchange creates
nearby future if they cater to build a strong relationship
JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING 21
and identification with that specific tourism destination.
tourism destination extensively, whereas repeat-tourists Hence, it is assumed that:
explore it more intensively, spending more time at sites/
places by visiting smaller number of sites/places (Liu et al.,
H7: Customer identification with the tourism destination
2012). Moreover, first-time tourists start to gather informa-
positively affects behavioural intention.
tion earlier than repeat tourists (Li et al., 2008). In making
travel decisions, first-time tourists depend highly on recom-
mendations from friends, family, and travel professionals
(e.g. Li et al., 2008). Lehto, O’Leary, and Morrison 2 ( 004)
Behavioural intention as a consequence of
examined the effects of prior experience on vacation beha- customer experience
vior. They assert that repeat-trip varies from regular service/
Prior research has examined customer experience in zoos
product re-purchases as prior-trip experiences can’t be
(e.g. Tsaur et al., 2007), travel agencies (Rajaobelina, 201 ) 8 ,
duplicated. Further, a more differentiated and complex
wineries (Lee & Chang, 2012), resorts (Ahn & Back, 2018),
brand image and identification of tourism site builds
theme parks (e.g. Kao, Huang, & Wu, 2008), and yoga
once tourists spend some amount of time there (e.g.
tourism (Sharma & Nayak, 2019), to name a few.
Fakeye & Crompton, 1991; Lehto et al., 2004). Likewise,
Experience has also been used in tourism. For example,
Wang (2004) claims that repeat-tourists are more involved
previous research indicates that experiential marketing
in local life-linked activities, engaged in smaller number of
positively effects tourist emotions, satisfaction, and beha-
activities and tend to stay longer than first-time tourists. In
vioural intent in zoos (Lee & Chang, 2012; Tsaur et al.,
addition, while making travel decisions, repeat tourists
2007) and customers with a better experience tend to
depend largely on their personal experiences compared
recommend the firm to others. Therefore, we postulate
to other information sources, and thereby spent smaller
that customers develop strong loyalty (revisit) intentions
amount of time on travel planning (e.g. Li et al., 2008).
toward a destination if they have a positive experience
Hence, attaining support from the literature presented
with that destination. Recently, Sharma and Nayak (2019)
above, this study proposed that:
also found the influence of memorable tourism experi-
ences on tourist’s behaviour via destination image and
H9: There is a significant difference between first-time
tourist’s satisfaction. In the same way, CE is likely to estab- tourists and repeat tourists.
lish the core relationship marketing tenets of consumer/
tourist retention, loyalty and repeat patronage through Methodology
influencing CX (Verhoef et al., 2009, 2010). Hence, acquir-
ing support from the literature presented above, it is Research site
presumed in a tourist destination that:
Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) is the northern-most state of
India placed in the Himalayan Mountains. J&K is home to
H8: Customer experience with the tourism destination
various valleys like the Kashmir valley, Chenab valley, Sindh
positively affects behavioural intention.
valley, and Lidder valley. The famous and major tourism
sites/destinations of J&K, includes Srinagar, Gulmarg,
Differences between first-time and repeat
Phalgam, Kokernag, Daksum, and Jammu, were selected visitors
as the study settings for this research due to various rea-
Difference between first-time visitors and repeat visitors in
sons. Firstly, as mentioned, these sites/places provide pop-
terms of customer-based outcomes including experience,
ular tourism destinations in India. Secondly, these
identification, loyalty and satisfaction is questionable (Chua
attractions/destinations are well-renowned tourist spots,
et al., 2017; Shavanddasht & Allan, 2019). In tourist destina-
which offer leisure, recreation, cultural, adventure, religious
tion context, few research works indicated that first-time
and other attractions, thus providing broad insight into
customers showed a higher satisfaction level towards
consumer behaviors and motivations. Thirdly, in India, the
a destination compared to repeat customers (e.g. Liu
tourism industry offers a growing and substantive contri-
et al., 2012; Shavanddasht & Allan, 2019), other research
bution to employment and gross domestic product (IBEF,
studies indicated that the levels of satisfaction and loyalty
2019; UNWTO, 2017). Finally, the strong level of customer-
of repeat tourists have been more compared to first-time
provider interactivity in tourism makes the significance of
tourists (Li et al., 2008). Research established that first-time
investigating relational concepts, like customer engage-
customers are most expected in search of different experi-
ment and experience (Ahn & Back, 2018; Hollebeek &
ences (e.g. Liu et al., 2012). First-time customers explore the
Rather, 2019; Taheri et al., 2014). 22 R. A. RATHER Sampling and data collection
missing values. At last, 520 questionnaires were retained
for final examination that resulted in 83.67% of response
Using self-administrated survey technique, data were col-
rate (i.e. 520/600 = 83.67%). The descriptive analyses
lected from a major tourist destination that includes
revealed that 56% of sample were male and 44% female.
Srinagar, Gulmarg, Kokernag, Daksum, Jammu, and
An examination of the respondents’ age shows that 31%
Phalgam in Jammu and Kashmir, India. Both domestic
were 20–30 years, 20% of respondents were 31–49 years,
and international tourists visiting these destinations
29% of respondents were 41–50 years, while 20% were
were targeted to conduct the survey. Convenience sam-
above 51 years. With respect to respondents' educational
pling has been used to choose the participants for this
qualification, 10% had matriculation degree, and 40% had
research (Parrey, Hakim, & Rather, 2019; Taheri et al.,
graduation and post-graduation degrees, respectively.
2014). Questionnaire was pre-tested with a convenience
With respect to travel purposes, 70% were leisure, recrea-
sample of 40 participants in 10 days. On the basis of
tional, and adventure visitors, followed by 20% religious
results, relevant items were modified as required to
visitors, and 10% business clients. Moreover, 51% of visi-
ensure the clarity of items. Results showed no concerns
tors were first-time and 49% were repeat visitors.
about the readability of questionnaire. In the final study,
The sample profile of tourist/respondents is indicated
participants were asked to rate the items on 7-point Likert in Table 1.
scales ranged from 1 = strongly-disagree to 7 = strongly-
agree. Data have been collected from the tourists with the
help of four field investigators. The whole process of data Measures
collection has been examined personally by the author.
Data have been collected mostly during holidays, winter
A questionnaire was adopted to measure the variables
and summer periods when huge numbers of domestic as
or constructs enclosed in the proposed conceptual fra-
well as international visitors visiting at the above men-
mework, as shown in Figure 1. The conceptualization of
tioned major tourism destinations. The surveys were con-
brand or customer experience is based on the strategic
ducted during the period of December 1 2018 to May 31
marketing management literature (Brakus et al., 2009;
2019. Surveyors approached tourists in the major areas
Pine & Gilmore, 1998; Schmitt, 1999a, 1999b) where the
where the possibility of finding tourists was maximum like
concept has been considered as a vital element for
hotels, bus stands, railway stations, relaxation spots, and
theory construction and testing. The construct has its
destination sites. This technique was often used by many
origins in Brakus et al. (2009) original brand experience
studies (e.g. Bryce et al., 2015; Sharma & Nayak, 2019).
scale but has been adapted to this research based on
Surveyors approached travelers and requested a few
Tsaur et al.’s (2007) more tourism specific five-
screening questions (like, are you a tourist? and your
dimensional conceptualization of customer experience,
main purpose of visiting the specific destination?). It facil-
including sense, relate, feel, think, and act. The customer
itates to determine the respondents' suitability in line with
experience dimensions were captured with 12 items in
the objectives of this research. Those suitable visitors who
total. A sample item includes: “I would like to share what
joined eagerly in the survey have been requested to recall
I experienced in this destination”. Customer engagement
their latest tourism destination experience in selected
tourism destinations. On an average, the participants Table 1. Sample profile.
take nearly 10 minutes to complete the questionnaires. Respondents’ Respondents
Based on the ratio of sample size to variables/items Variables Categories proportion (n = 520)
under examination, the present research estimated the Gender Male 56% 292
required sample size (Hair, Anderson, Babin, & Black, Female 44% 228 Age (years) 20 – 30 31% 162
2010). For that reason, 5:1 ratio is regarded as minimum; 31 – 40 20% 104
10:1 ratio is suggested as most acceptable; and 20:1 ratio 41 – 50 29% 150 Above 51 20% 104
is regarded as the more desired (Hair et al., 2010). As 29 Qualification Matriculation 10% 52
variables/items investigated in the present study, Graduation 40% 208
a sample size of minimum 580 (i.e. 29 * 20 = 580) has Post-graduation 40% 208 Others 10% 52
been considered as adequate (Hair et al., 2010). For data Reasons for Leisure 40% 208
collection, 600 customers have been approached. Five travelling Adventure 30% 156
hundred and thirty visitors/customers filled their ques- Religious 20% 104
tionnaires and send back it to field investigator. Out of Business 10% 52 Visitation First time visit 51% 266
530 filled questionnaires received from participants, 10 status
were deleted owing to the existence of outliers and Repeat visit 49% 254
JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING 23 Cognitive H1 Engagement Customer H4 Experience H2 H8 Affective Behavioural Engagement Intention H5 H3 H7 Customer Identification Behavioral H6 Engagement
Figure 1. Conceptual framework.
was measured by employing Hollebeek et al.’s (2014)
analysis has been employed to assess the psychometric
ten-item multidimensional scale with a sample item:
properties of the variables/constructs (Table 2). Survey
“Using this tourism destination stimulates my interest to
data have been tested for the measurement adequacy
learn more about this destination”. Customer identification
and underlying factor structure. Initially, standardized
was gauged by using Kumar and Kaushik (2018) four-
factor loadings (SFLs) for all items/indicators were eval-
item scale. A sample item includes: “If a story in the media
uated to verify if the items load on their own constructs.
criticized this destination, I would feel embarrassed”.
The results signify the substantial convergent validity,
Finally, behavioral Intention items were sourced from
where SFLs are above 0.70 (e.g. Hair et al., 2010). Further,
Coudounaris and Sthapit’ s (2017) three-item tourism-
Cronbach’s alpha value is in the acceptable range (0.-
based scale, with a sample item reading: “Visit this desti-
901–0.945) in accordance with the threshold; α greater
nation more in the next few years.” All the variables and
than 0.70 (Hair et al., 2010), verifying strong reliability.
measurement items are presented in Appendix A.
Constructs internal consistency is assessed due to values
of composite reliability (CR) that fall in the suggested
limit i.e. CR above 0.70 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Average Common method bias testing
variance extracted or AVE for each construct maintains
the convergent validity. The criterion value for AVE
Common method bias (CMB) may be problematic in
should be greater than 0.50 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981)
cross-sectional studies (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, &
(Table 2). Moreover, all the inter-construct correlations
Podsakoff, 2003). Thus, this study employed Podsakoff
are below 1, hence supporting the discriminant validity
et al.’s (2003) method to prove the presence of common
of the study (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Discriminant valid-
method bias in survey data. Firstly, the confidentiality
ity was further ascertained to compare the square root
and anonymity of participants were maintained.
value of AVE score of each factor/construct (Table 3) with
Secondly, CMB is unlikely if correlations are not very
inter-construct correlations (e.g. Hair et al., 2010).
high (below 0.9; Hair et al., 2010). In Table 3, correlation
Subsequently, this study generated a CFA model com-
matrix indicates that the lack of very high correlation
posed of six constructs with all the 29 indicators/items
values in survey data, thereby common method bias is
and the model attained a reasonable fit: χ2 = 252.84, df = not an issue in this study.
119, χ2/d. f. = 2.12, NFI = .94, CFI = .95, GFI = 0.91, and
RMSEA = .065, in line with criterion: NFI, CFI, TLI, GFI
greater than 0.90, and RMSEA less than 0.08 (Bentler & Analysis and results Bonnett, 1980). Measurement model
Data analysis was conducted by employing a two-stage
Structural model and hypothesis testing
structural equation modelling technique that is confir-
matory factor analysis or CFA followed by structural
Second, to perform the structural analysis, this study
equation modeling or SEM (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988).
adopted SEM using AMOS 20.0 software. Structural
Software AMOS 20.0 has been utilized to examine the
equation modeling approach facilitates the simulta- proposed relationships. First, confirmatory factor
neous estimation of relationships among various