"Networking within tourism destinations hinders innovation and freedom of choice." Critically discuss this statement

Résumé du document

Tourism, like many modern industries of today, is essentially an assembly process. Very rarely does one organization or company control all the components, or all the stages of decision-making with respect to the creation and delivery of the tourism product. Consequently, in most industrial sectors and particularly in the tourism industry, it has become commonplace for organizations to collaborate in order to realize the goals they have charted out for themselves. "A key reason for the growing interest in collaboration in tourism is the belief that organizations and destination areas may be able to gain competitive advantage by bringing together and sharing their combined knowledge, expertise, capital and other resources" (Kotler et al., 1999b). Does networking within tourism destinations hinder innovation and freedom of choice? First it is necessary to define the key words in the question above, the key words being, tourism destinations, innovation and freedom of choice. Before talking about tourism networking, it has to be proved that tourism destinations do not hinder innovation and freedom of choice. Secondly, I will present my research on networking in tourism and cite its importance for a tourism destination (in particular for SME's). Finally, I will also manifest the idea that it hinders innovation and freedom of choice by comparing the potential problems and benefits of networking.

Extraits

[...] The best way to prove that networking within tourism destinations allow for innovations and freedom of choice is by showing the reverse of the disadvantages quoted beforehand. According to Steve Borgatti, in order to innovate, people need access to a diversity of skills and knowledge. And if we want everyone in a group to be in a position to innovate, this will mean a very dense group in which everyone is connected to almost everyone else. That is the definition of a network. [...]

[...] While the two above definitions are useful, the definition that Cooper et al (1998) used is the one that this essay will use. He talks about the 4 - Attractions - Access - Amenities - Ancillary services To these 4 essential Units, it seems important to add to the definition the concept of community, i.e. the local people. In 1992, Mill and Morrison consider a destination as mix of interdependent elements” in order to produce a satisfying vacation experience, they think that all elements (Attractions, Access ) must be present. [...]

[...] For some, numbers and diversity of actors in a network represents a brake for innovation and freedom of choice. more diverse people a person can call on, the better the opportunities for knowledge created” (Steve Borgatti, 2005). Thus, in order to innovate people need access to a diversity of skills and knowledge. The involvement of several stakeholders may increase the social acceptance of policies, so that implementation and enforcement may be easier to effect. There may be involvement by a range of actors, all of whom are affected by the multiple issues of tourism development and may be well placed to introduce change and improvement. [...]

[...] In order not to begin a philosophical debate, I will simply define this expression like the right to decide, to enhance independence and to have control over your own destiny. II. Tourism destinations do not hinder innovation and freedom of choice Before targeting my research on networking within tourism destinations and discussing the fact that it hinders innovation and freedom of choice, it seems important to show as a prerequisite that tourism destinations don't hinder innovation and freedom of choice. In order to prove this affirmation, I will rest on the definition of Copper et al (1993) who defined a destination as 4”A's”. [...]

[...] In this way, the success of tourism within a destination is very much dependent upon the existence of key natural or cultural attractions. In order to always get more and more tourists, innovation seems being an essential criterion. It could be an innovation in order to protect a natural landscape like the construction of stairs in the Catlin's so as to protect the flora and fauna or the opening of a new park like the Disneyland resort in Paris with the creation of Walt Disney Studios. [...]