Type: Process Essays
Sample donated: Lorraine Bradley
Last updated: August 18, 2019
2.2 Festival attributes Motivation is characterised by an individual’s mindset resulting in action and this was described in the consumer behaviour literature (Schiffman & Kanuk, 1978). Dann (1981, p.
205) defined motivation as “a meaningful state of mind which adequately disposes an actor or group of actors to travel, and which is subsequently interpretable by others as a valid explanation for such a decision” in the area of tourism and travel. It has often been concerned as a marketing strategy to promote products in the area of tourism (Zhang & Marcussen, 2007). The social and psychological phenomenon is seen when reasons and motivation to travel help gain an understanding of tourism (Cohen, 1974). Motivation is also provided to decide practical managerial judgement (Young, 1999). Being aware of what provides tourists’ motivation offers the fundamental basis for a marketing strategy because it is associated with consumer decision process and tourist behaviour and activity at the destination (Lee, O’Leary, Lee, & Morrison, 2002; Caber & Albayrak, 2016). The push and pull model (Crompton, 1979) has been used to understand tourist motivation and is one of the most popular theoretical framework of tourist motivations. Crompton (1979) used in-depth interviews to examine the decisions of adults’ vacation and identified nine motivations: seven motivations were classified as socio-psychological and two as cultural.
Cha, McCleary, and Uysal (1995) conducted to explore the travel motivation of Japanese overseas travellers and they found that three marketing segments of sports seekers, novelty seekers, and family and relaxation seekers based on six motivational factors of relaxation, knowledge, adventure, travel bragging, family, and sports. Goeldner and Ritchie (2003) classified motivation as physical (e.g. relaxation) cultural (e.
g. discovering new geographical areas), interpersonal (e.g., socializing and meeting new people), and prestige (e.g., self-esteem and self-actualization). More current work (Caber & Albayrak, 2016) investigated the relationship between tourist motivation of rock climbing and overall satisfaction by adopting a combination of push (e.
g., risk taking, challenge, catharsis, recognition, creativity, and physical setting) and pull (e.g., climbing novelty seeking, destination novelty seeking, climbing tourism infrastructure, non-climbing sport and leisure activities, and reclusiveness) framework.
They found that ‘physical setting’ was one of the most significant push motivations otherwise ‘climbing novelty seeking’ was the most important pull motivation. In this respect, the push dimensions indicated the internal forces regarding the aspect of the social-psychological motivations that led to a person to travel. While the pull dimensions indicated the external forces that impacted an individual’s decision on the specific destination’s features and attractions (Kim & Prideaux, 2005). Also pull dimensions were closely related to the festival drawing-power or attributes in terms of positioning attributes (Schofield & Thompson, 2007). Again the push motivations were interpreted to explicit an individual desire to travel and it was required to perceive tourists’ behaviour (Zoltan & Masiero, 2012; Caber & Albayrak, 2016). Pull motivators are commonly associated with the attractiveness of destination (Kim & Prideaux, 2005; Bowen & Clarke, 2009).
In short, “push factors focus on whether to go, and pull factors focus on where to go” (Kim, Lee, & Klenosky, 2003, p. 171). Botha (1998) referred to the festival attributes as the ‘push and pull attributes’ and a number of tourism researches have applied ‘the push and pull attributes’ into their studies to understand the specific and appropriate marketing strategies in tourist destinations (Kim & Prideaux, 2005; Park & Yoon, 2009; Zoltan & Masiero, 2012; Konu & Laukkanen, Hsu, Wang, & Huang, 2014; Caber & Albayrak, 2016). The distinctive differences between pull and push motivations have been evaluated in tourism literature (Bieger & Laesser, 2002; Pearce, 2005; Caber & Albayrak, 2016). In relation to link the push and pull factors, Yoon and Uysal (2005) pointed out “destination attributes as pull factors may be used to reinforce push motivation” (p. 47), this implied that pull factors were more important than push factors because push factors may be difficult to motivate tourists’ behaviour in the light of management.
Therefore it is important to look at how pull factors are used to enable a better understanding of tourist destinations. Hughes (2000) noted that common pull factors found in the studies included ‘entertainment’ (e.g., performances, music, and arts), ‘refreshments’ (e.g., food and beverages), ‘information and marketing’, ‘transport’ (e.g., accessibility to venues) and ‘ticket prices of entertainment’.
The factors of pull motivation considered were ‘entertainment activities’ (productions offered), ‘food and beverages’ (refreshments), ‘transport to venues’ (accessibility), and ‘price of tickets’ (Van Zyl, 2008). Pull factors are made up of divergent destination attributes as follow: natural sights (e.g., natural park), water park and/or spa, child-friendly destination, easy access at the destination, and option for packaged services (Konu & Laukkanen, 2010). More recent study involved the pull factors of convenience (e.g.
, convenient public transportation) cultural aspects (e.g., experience a different culture), and historical aspects (e.g., historical sites) (Hsu, et al., 2014). In this regard, the most perceptual seen pull factors were ‘food and beverage’, ‘facilities’, ‘accessibility’, ‘safety’, ‘cost’, tourism infrastructure, and ‘information’.
In a similar vein, a festival programme (e.g., varied programme) with a powerful impact is a very important factor in attracting festival attendees to a festival so it is regarded as influential festival attribute to establish destination marketing strategy (Yoon, et al., 2010). Furthermore Yoon and Uysal (2005) attempted to extend theoretical framework of a mix of push and pull motivations and how those factors were associated with travel satisfaction and on destination loyalty by adopting a structural equation modelling approach. Push factors of eight dimensions (e.
g., exciting, and relaxation) and pull factors of ten dimensions (e.g., modern atmosphere & activities, and different culture) were used in the research and they found that destination loyalty had a casual relationship with motivation and satisfaction. Also the study suggested that the model could be applicable in different tourism context as it provided proper empirical evidence on how to build up a construct model regarding how to produce reliable indicators of push and pull motivations, satisfaction, and destination loyalty.
As mentioned above, the study which looked at the festival attribute design included the pull factors which were found to be the most important features in attracting people to a festival. Hence this study focused on pull factors to understand what forces influenced a person’s decision to visit Gamcheon culture village and the pull factors were driven by the dimensions of ‘programme and food’ (Chi & Qu, 2008; Yoon et al., 2010), ‘facility and infrastructure’ (Chi & Qu, 2008; Yoon et al.
, 2010; Hsu et al., 2014; Akhoondnejad, 2016; Mussalam & Tajeddini, 2016), and ‘informational service’ (Yoon & Uysal, 2005; Chi & Qu, 2008; Hsu et al., 2014; Mussalam & Tajeddini, 2016) by using a structural approach which involved making a link between festival attributes (pull motivation), satisfaction, and loyalty (Yoon & Uysal, 2005; Yoon et al., 2010; Tanford & Jung, 2017; Yürük et al., 2017).