1. No category

Kim, et al., J Tourism Res Hospitality 2014, 4:1
http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2324-8807.1000142
Case Report
Journal of Tourism
Research & Hospitality
A SCITECHNOL JOURNAL
Any Difference? A Comparative
Analysis: A Case Study of Two
Festivals
Young Hoon Kim1*, Jim Taylor2 and Tanya Ruetzler2
1Interim
Chair and Associate Professor, Hospitality & Tourism Management
University of North Texas, USA
2Associate Professor, Hospitality Management, University of Mississippi, 207
Lenoir Hall, Sorority Row University, USA
*Corresponding author: Young Hoon Kim, Ph. D, Interim Chair, Hospitality and
Tourism Management University of North Texas, 1155 Union Circle #311100/
Denton, Texas 76203-5017 USA, Tel: 1-940-565-4786; Fax: 1-940-565-4348; Email:Younghoon.Kim@unt.edu
Rec date: Feb 03, 2014 Acc date: Oct 16, 2014 Pub date: Oct 20, 2014
Introduction
The increased presence of events and festivals can be attributed to
many factors including positive economic impact, increased
community engagement, and enhanced destination image. Thus, there
has been an increased attention from destination marketing and event/
festival organizers to the development of local events and festivals.
Previous studies have supported that festivals provide a specific time
and place for their organizers to show their commitment to being
good citizens and neighbors [1,2]. Additionally, festivals and events
also generate intangible and tangible assets for a destination and have
been used as an instrument for local tourism business development
[3,4].
Festivals and special events present a good public image. They
create pure entertainment as well as generate revenue for communities
[5]. Special events and festivals provide the “place” as well as the “time
frame” for tourists. Additionally, this unique type of tourism offers
opportunities for the organizers and communities of events to bring
their potential resources together to showcase their offerings to
tourists. Getz [6] stated, “Festivals and public celebrations are found in
all societies. Together with a variety of other special events, they are
increasingly seen as unique tourist attractions and as destination
image makers”.
However, most studies on events and festivals have focused merely
on one event/festival or festival attendees’ behavior using samples
from events and festivals [7,8] or the comparison of two or more
events or festivals in different regions [9]. Although the findings and
results of these studies provide meaningful information for marketing
and management purposes, their implications were limited as they
were narrowly focused: there was no standard to compare one to
another within the same destination. According to Getz D [10],
festivals should be examined and compared for better ideas and
strategic development of a destination. Therefore, the objectives of this
study were to apply Getz’s philosophy by comparing two events held
in the same region. The study was designed to 1) examine attendees’
characteristics of each festival at the same region and compare them;
2) to see if there are any significant differences on perceived value,
satisfaction, and intention to revisit between two festivals.
Research Background of this Study
For nearly 13 years, the Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB) of a
small southeastern city in the United States has hosted an immensely
successful arts festival (from here on out referred to as the “Arts”
festival) held annually during the last weekend of April. The event,
which started off as a small, one day festival with limited
entertainment has evolved into a weekend long event that hosts over
50,000 participants. Attendees have access to merchandise from over
100 artists, food from over 30 food vendors, and live music and
entertainment. This growth was due solely to word of mouth over the
initial years and not to any specific marketing plan. In more recent
years, the festival and its organizers, the city’s Convention and
Visitor’s Bureau (CVB) have won numerous awards from the
Southeast Festival and Events Association (SFEA) for the Arts festival,
including a Gold Awards for Best Event Program/Brochure and Best
Merchandise, Silver Awards for Best T-shirt, Website, and Promo
Poster, and Bronze Awards for Best Marketing Campaign and Best
Sponsor. Additionally the State Tourism Association has voted the
event as Best Large Festival in the State.
Following the increased success of the event over the years, the
city’s CVB decided it was time to develop another regionally focused
event to be held during the fall month of October. Considering the
location of the southeastern city to the proximity of the major city of
Memphis, the second festival developed was a Memphis Barbeque
(BBQ) Network-sanctioned event. This is a professional team prequalifier for the Memphis in May World Championship Cook-off
event which is held during the nationally famous Memphis in May.
While each festival differed in scope and focus, they have been
organized, promoted, and executed by the city’s CVB. Both festivals
received the same promotional methods with marketing efforts kept at
a local level. Neither of the events targeted a specific demographic
group, they both were promoted through the same vehicles including
the CVB’s website, strategically placed posters around the city
including the local conference center, and newspaper blasts in area
newspapers a few weeks prior to the events. Since the city and its
surrounding areas have a reputation of showing a strong sense of
community with great support for community events, marketing
efforts were not targeted to any specific groups. It was expected that
the social nature of the city and its skirting communities would
automatically bring the BBQ festival up to the successful status based
on participation as the Arts festival. The two festivals; however, have
had very different outcomes.
While the Arts festival has been highly successful, the BBQ festival
never had more than just a couple of hundred attendees. The lack of
participation has left the CVB perplexed and wondering why there has
been such a lack of interest in the second event. This question has led
to the premise of this study, where researchers were asked to assist the
CVB by completing a preliminary study to examine both festivals.
They specifically wanted to indentify gaps that could possibly be fixed
to help ensure stronger participation at the BBQ event. Past studies
have shown that quality, value, and satisfaction should be examined to
understand tourists’ behavior and their intention to return [11,12]. By
understanding the potential causes of failure, festival managers may be
provided with ideas for improvement and increase the chances of
event success [10].
All articles published in Journal of Tourism Research & Hospitality are the property of SciTechnol and is protected by
copyright laws. Copyright © 2015, SciTechnol, All Rights Reserved.
Citation:
Young HK, Jim T, Tanya R (2014) Any Difference? A Comparative Analysis: A Case Study of Two Festivals. J Tourism Res Hospitality 4:1.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2324-8807.1000142
The primary purposes of this study are three-fold: 1. to investigate
each festival’s socio-demographic profile, 2. to compare attendees’
behavior on perceived value, satisfaction, and behavioral intentions
and 3. to provide the CVB with any managerial implications in an
effort to better understand the success and lack of each event. The
instrument development was explained through pilot and pretest in
the methodology section. The data collection, analysis, and results
were followed. Finally, theoretical and practical implications were
discussed.
Literature Review
Festivals and events
Festivals and special events are very important for the life of a
community because they provide not only important activities for
residents and visitors, but they also enhance the image of the local
community [13]. Festivals offer a specific time and place where
families can show their commitment to each other. By participating in
a festival or a special event, a family demonstrates its commitment to
being active members of the community, good citizens and a potential
partner in mutually reciprocal relationships [1]. This allows citizens to
develop strong ties to other families [5]. As a result, the growth of
festivals and special events in numbers, diversity, and popularity has
been enormous in recent years [6,13-15].
Currently, special events and festivals are one of the fastest growing
types of tourism attractions [14-16]. Thus, there is no doubt that a
number of conceptual and empirical studies on festivals and special
events have increased rapidly [16-18]. The impact of festivals and
special events on host communities and tourists is beneficial to both
sides. It has been suggested that the economic impact of festivals and
special events is one of the most important reasons for their
organization [19-21]. However, there has been a lack of research to
determine how to differentiate these two festivals, and to develop
branding and a focused marketing strategy. Pearce [22] stated that
comparative research is very useful to assist in understanding and
solving the problems in more than two cases; one over the other.
According to Getz [10], festivals within one region or area should be
examined and investigated for improvement by understanding each
festival’s unique characteristics. Getz et al. [23] point out that “Single
case studies have their value, but often much more can be learned
from comparisons among festivals” (p. 31). This comparison can help
planners maximize the benefits to the community.
Small scale festivals
In 1991 [6], predicted a trend in leisure and tourism activities where
tourists would desire to take shorter trips, with greater frequency as a
means of escape. These predictions have been confirmed with reports
including a study by Yesawich [24], stating that consumer preferences
reportedly have changed, preferring trips closer to home, using
highways, and going to rural destinations, rather than using air
transportation and traveling to major cities.
Kim et al. [11] stated that small and local festivals are very different
from large festivals. The success of small festivals and events is more
dependent on the passion of the community and its organizer. It may
be easier for small festivals to attract people to participate, watch,
learn, taste, feel, experience, and enjoy the moment at the beginning of
creating new festival and event. Kim et al. [11] also emphasized that
small and local festivals may be very attractive for a destination’s
Volume 4 • Issue 1 • 142
organizers because it can both generate revenue and develop the
destinations’ image positively with better operation perspective (e. g. ,
creation and maintenance).
Food festivals
Over the past decade, food festivals have been on the rise due to
their popularity among tourists. Recently, “food tourism” was defined
as, “visitation to primary and secondary food producers (e.g., food
festivals, restaurants, and specific locations) for tasting/experiencing
food and for learning different cultures and lifestyles through food
consumption and food-related activities” [2]. Food festivals have
emerged globally with the influx of interest in food tourism. They have
played a key role in economic development and regional tourism
development [25]. A food festival is where participants engage in the
celebration and promotion of local foods [2]. Additionally, Kivela &
Crotts, [26] stated that gastronomy tourism is a valid construct that
motivates destination tourism. A food festival has been defined as an
event where communities engage in the public celebration and
promotion of local foods [2].
The comparison of two festivals
Peace indicated that comparative study investigate and examine any
subjects and problems in two or more cases using common research
method. A typical group comparison can be applied (e.g., cross study,
longitudinal study, and group comparison). Getz emphasized “Single
case studies have their value, but often much more can be learned
from comparisons among festivals” (p. 31). A number of studies
concluded that different marketing strategies/channels for different
targeted consumer (herein, event attendees) at the different festivals
and events [26-29] asserted that the comparative methods are very
limited because of common problems and difficulties (e. g. , limited
time or place).
Success and failure of event: theoretical approach
According to Getz [10], festivals fail for a number of reasons
including weather, lack of sponsorship, overreliance on one source of
funds, inadequate marketing or promotion, and lack of strategic
planning. Carlsen et al. [23] also pointed out that lack of marketing as
well lack of innovation of programming, financial planning and
service provisions as attributes to event failure. Other reasons that
festivals may fail can be attributed to over-reliance on other
organizations through single sponsorships or other controls of
financial resources [23]. The saturation of multiple festivals in short
time span can also lead to the demise of festivals. Sound festival
management, strategic planning, and treating individual festivals
differently all attribute to overall success [23].
The importance of treating festivals differently and accordingly was
a key factor to consider. According to Butler [30], the attendees’
characteristics are different in the introductory stage than in the later
stages of festivals. It is critical to analyze the current status of festivals,
especially for a new festival. The goal of the study was therefore to
identify similarities and differences of each of the event attendees to
clarify why the dichotomous level of success based on participation of
the events exist. It is essential for festival managers to understand the
financial, marketing, and programming performance challenges and
opportunities associated with an event will determine their ability to
avoid failure [23].
• Page 2 of 7 •
Citation:
Young HK, Jim T, Tanya R (2014) Any Difference? A Comparative Analysis: A Case Study of Two Festivals. J Tourism Res Hospitality 4:1.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2324-8807.1000142
Festival success is dependent on multidimensional factors, such as
the environment, residents’ involvement, plan preparation, and the
historical background of the event. Among those factors, an
understanding of the differences between two or more festivals in one
region and differentiating one from another (e. g. , festival’s
characteristics, segment, and target market) may be one of the most
critical processes and should be explored. According to Getz [10], it is
vital to maximize the ability of destination marketing organizers
(DMOs) to find and use resources effectively since resources are not
always obtainable. Customized services are required to satisfy
customers’ demand based on supplies for each festival. Images
emerging from a festival might be unsuitable for the culture of the
destination and the local community that detracts from the support of
the events [25].
Donaldson (1996) emphasized that “fit” is dependent on the ability
of organizations to adapt and utilize environmental situations with
limited resources. Again, Getz [10] stated that “resources are often
scarce, and competition exists, so the successful festival must become
effective in securing and sustaining resources” (p. 213). The Resource
Dependence Theory explained this unique “weight and balance”
environment in management and decision aspects [31]. Success of
festivals and events cannot be decided only by creativeness or
uniqueness but also DMOs’ ability to evaluate, balance, or prioritize
festivals in one region, considering its characteristics, benefits,
impacts, and merits.
Research hypotheses
A review of the literature identified the variables and linkage among
variables which were used for hypotheses. These variables were
examined to accomplish the objectives of this study. An analysis was
conducted considering possible relationships. The following
hypotheses were tested and examined.
H1: There is significant difference on demographic profile between
two groups (i. e. , the Arts and BBQ festival)
H1a: There is a significant difference on gender between two
groups.
H1b: There is a significant difference on age between two groups.
H1c: There is a significant difference on marital status between two
groups.
H1d: There is a significant difference on household income between
two groups.
H1e: There is a significant difference on education between two
groups.
H2: There is significant difference on perceived value between two
groups.
H2a: There is a significant difference on “pleasure” perceived value
between two groups.
H2b: There is a significant difference on “quality” perceived value
between two groups.
H2c: There is a significant difference on “reputation” perceived
value between two groups.
H3: There is significant difference on satisfaction between two
groups.
Volume 4 • Issue 1 • 142
H3a: There is a significant difference on “overall” satisfaction
between two groups.
H3b: There is a significant difference on “expenditure” satisfaction
between two groups.
H4: There is a significant difference on intention between two
groups.
Methodology
Instrument development
A questionnaire was developed to examine satisfaction, perceived
value, intention to revisit and socio-demographic characteristics of the
attendees. The initial survey instrument was created by the researchers
and included criteria requested by the CVB and event organizers as
well as information gathered through the literature review. In addition
to demographic data, measures of satisfaction, value, and intent to
revisit were also recorded.
The instrument was pilot tested by using 100 participants at an
Oyster Festival in Charleston, South Carolina, USA. All scales
obtained reliabilities above 0. 78. Based on this previous study and the
literature review, a slightly modified version of the original instrument
was designed to measure attendees’ perceived value, satisfaction, and
the intention. The instrument for this study was reviewed by
researchers and pretested. The pretest was administered to fifteen
graduate students majoring in hospitality, business, or engineering,
who had previously attended the festival. The instrument was also sent
for review to the event organizers. After receiving feedback, the
comments were evaluated and the questionnaire was further modified.
To measure satisfaction, three seven-point Likert scale satisfaction
measures were based on Oliver’s [32] cumulative satisfaction measure.
The possible responses ranged from “very satisfied” to “very
dissatisfied”. Three items were constructed to measure perceived
value. Based on the scale which was adapted and developed from
Petrick’s multi-dimensional scale, the three items; emotional response,
behavioral price, and event reputation were addressed scaling from
“strongly disagree” (1) to “strongly agree” (7). Additionally, two items
were employed to measure satisfaction including “overall” satisfaction
and satisfaction based on participants “total expenditures”. These were
also measured on a Likert scale from 1-7, ranging from “very
dissatisfied” (1) to “very satisfied” (7). These measurements were
modified and adapted from Oliver’s [32] cumulative satisfaction
measure. Finally, to measure the intention to revisit this event, a
question “how likely are you going to attend this festival next year?”
was asked. This measurement scale was modified from those used in
the services marketing literature. The scale ranges from “unlikely” (1)
to “likely” (7). Socio-demographic data was also collected as well for
comparison purposes.
To review for content and clarity prior to final data collection, the
initial draft of the survey was reviewed by five research faculty who
attended both of the events in the past as well as the staff of the event
organizers. Recommendations to simplify the survey and keep it to
one front and back page resulted in condensing the instrument to 24
questions. After these revisions, the local university’s Hospitality
Management (HM) program student organization members (who
were also the group assisting with data collection) as well as HM
faculty who attended the both the events in the past were asked to
examine the instrument to further check for clarity. No major
• Page 3 of 7 •
Citation:
Young HK, Jim T, Tanya R (2014) Any Difference? A Comparative Analysis: A Case Study of Two Festivals. J Tourism Res Hospitality 4:1.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2324-8807.1000142
revisions were suggested after this final round of review (see Appendix
I: Instrument)
Data collection
The population for the study consisted of the attendees of both the
Arts and the BBQ festivals. The samples of this study consisted of
participants at the festivals who were 18 years and older. A paper and
pencil survey was used to collected data. Surveys were distributed by
Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative (CITI) trained students
and faculty from the local university’s Hospitality Management
program. All participants were systematically selected via intercept at
both festivals: the Arts festival in April and BBQ festival in September
during a two day period. Purposive convenience sampling method is
considered to be appropriate when the goal of a study is to obtain
specific insights into a phenomenon, individuals, or events. Since the
study aims to probe and compare the segmentation of the attendees of
festivals but not to generalize to the general population, utilizing
purposive convenience sampling is legitimate for this study. The
festival geographies were both segmented and CITI certified team
members were assigned specific quadrants and time parameters for
survey collection. The festival areas were divided into quadrants and
two students along with one faculty member were assigned to each
area to collect surveys. As potential participants approached the team
members, they requested time for completion of the survey.
Frequency
Arts
Participants were first asked if they were at least 18 years old and if
they would agree to complete the survey. If they were willing, the
researchers handed the participants a survey on a clipboard to
complete. To ensure participants were not intercepted more than
once, they were given a sticker to wear indicating they had already
participated in the survey. The survey instruments (both blank and
completed), pencils, clipboards and stickers were carried by
investigators in a mail carrier satchel for simplicity and organization to
reduce clutter. To increase participation’s rate, subjects were able to
register for a cash prize of $100, which was drawn for later in the
afternoon at each event.
Data analysis
One way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was conducted to
determine whether there were differences on expenditures,
satisfaction, perceived value, intention to revisit and sociodemographic characteristics between groups. Additionally Chi-square
test was performed to examine if gender, a dichotomous variable, was
a significant factor of festival participant demographics. The tests were
performed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS 19. 0
for Windows).
Results
Valid %
BBQ
Arts (%)
Frequency
BBQ (%)
Gender
Arts
BBQ
Valid %
Arts (%)
BBQ (%)
Total Household Income
Male
156
50
40%
56%
Less than $35,000
115
22
31%
22%
Female
230
40
60%
44%
$35,001
$50,000
43
9
11%
9%
N/A
38
18
22
8
6%
8%
42
12
11%
12%
40
9
11%
9%
16
5
4%
5%
15
6
4%
6%
20
11
5%
11%
64
18
17%
18%
Total
424
108
$50,001
$65,000
100%
100%
Age
to
to
%
$65,001
$80,000
to
$80,001
$95,000
to
$95,001
$110,000
to
18 – 27
158
32
40%
32%
$110,001
$125,000
to
28 – 37
76
23
19%
23%
$125,001
$140,000
to
38 – 47
69
28
17%
28%
More
$140,000
than
48 – 57
46
12
11%
12%
N/A
47
8
58 – 67
51
6
13%
6%
N/A
24
7
Total
424
108
100%
100%
8
4
2%
4%
Education
Total
424
108
Volume 4 • Issue 1 • 142
100%
100%
Some
School
High
• Page 4 of 7 •
Citation:
Young HK, Jim T, Tanya R (2014) Any Difference? A Comparative Analysis: A Case Study of Two Festivals. J Tourism Res Hospitality 4:1.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2324-8807.1000142
Marital Status
High
Graduate
Single
193
42
48%
40%
Some College
97
22
23%
21%
Married
196
54
48%
51%
College graduate
144
46
35%
44%
Other
15
9
4%
9%
Post Graduate
100
22
24%
21%
N/A
20
3
Other
12
1
3%
1%
N/A
11
3
Total
424
108
100%
100%
Total
424
108
100%
100%
School
Table 1: Socio-demographic Profile of Sample
The larger arts festival yielded 424 surveys while at the BBQ festival
only 108 surveys were completed. The socio-demographic data from
the two event attendees in the study are presented in Table 1. For both
events over 50% of the attendees in the study were between 18 and 37.
At the arts festival more females (60%) were surveyed than males
(40%) and at BBQ festival more males (56%) were surveyed than
females (44%). When examining marital status, the arts festival yielded
equal quantities of married and singled participants (45% each) while
the BBQ festival represented more married (51%) than single
participants (40%). For total household income, the largest
represented category for both festivals was “Less than $35,000” with
the second largest represented category at the complete opposite end
of the scale at “More than $140,000”. Lastly, over 50% of the
respondents for each festival were college graduates, with nearly a
quarter having completed postgraduate work.
The most effective advertising tools for BBQ festival were
newspapers (14.2%) and radio (13.8%) followed by brochures and
In the results of the analysis of the socio-demographic variables,
Pearson Chi-square revealed that there was a significant between
gender groups, χ²(1,N=476)=6.82, p<.01, indicating that there was a
significant difference between the gender of attendees of the two
festivals in the study: all of the hypotheses 1 were rejected except H1a.
There were significantly more females at the Arts festival. There were
no other significant differences discovered in any other sociodemographic categories between the festivals.
Arts Festival
BBQ Festival
Mean (St. Dev. )
Mean (St. Dev. )
Feel Pleased
6. 12 (1. 14)
5. 96 (1. 21)
1. 57 (NS)
Quality
6. 08 (1. 11)
5. 91 (1. 21)
1. 89 (NS)
Reputation
6. 42 (0. 96)
5. 98 (1. 21)
15. 182*
Overall
6. 21 (1. 08)
6. 01 (1. 26)
3. 65 (NS)
Expenditure
6. 143(1. 20)
6. 05 (1. 28)
. 504 (NS)
Likeliness
6. 38 (1. 05)
6. 23 (1. 18)
1. 59 (NS)
Items/Measurement
Perceived Value
pamphlets (19%), general internet websites (1.9%), CVB websites
(1.9%), tourist information center (1.5%), travel agencies (1.0%), and
travel magazines (0.8%). On the other hand, the most effective form of
advertising for the Arts festival was word of mouth advertising, as
selected by 71.2% of respondents. Newspaper advertising was the
second most effect form, with 30.6% of individuals noting that they
read about the festival in the newspaper. Additionally, 16.2% reported
that they heard advertising for the Arts festival on the radio, and a
further 8.8% saw festival advertising on the TV.
F-Value
Satisfaction
Intention
Table 2: ANOVA for Perceived Value, Satisfaction, and Intentions. Note. All reported F-values of ANOVA analyses in this table are significant at
p<0. 05. *Significant at p<.01 and NS=not significant.
After examining the variables that measured perceived value,
satisfaction, and behavioral intentions, ANOVA analysis yielded
significantly higher scores for the statement “The event has a good
reputation” (meaning well-known), F(496)=15.182, p<.05, for the Arts
festival than the BBQ festival, indicating that the BBQ event did not
have a reputation as good as the Arts festival. No additional significant
differences were found in the other statements that measured
satisfaction, or perceived value and behavioral intentions: all H2, H3,
and H4 were rejected except H2c: There is a significant difference on
“reputation” perceived value between two groups (Table 2).
Volume 4 • Issue 1 • 142
Conclusions and Future Study
The purpose of this research was to compare two local festivals
based on perceived value, satisfaction, and behavioral intentions and
participant demographics in an effort to better understand why one of
the events was not as successful as the other. The significant result of
the demographic analysis (i.e., gender difference) indicated that
females are more likely to attend the local Arts festival than the BBQ
festival. There could be several reasons for this. First, female festival
goers may prefer the extra options that are available at the Arts festival,
• Page 5 of 7 •
Citation:
Young HK, Jim T, Tanya R (2014) Any Difference? A Comparative Analysis: A Case Study of Two Festivals. J Tourism Res Hospitality 4:1.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2324-8807.1000142
including the shopping, music, and food vendors as opposed to just
watching a food cook-off which is the primary purpose of the BBQ
event. Additionally, the time honored American tradition of men
“showing off” their BBQ skills may suggest that a food cook-off festival
such as the BBQ event is more appealing to males more than the Arts
festival. This result implied that from a programming and sponsorship
perspective, the CVB and event planners should develop a theme or
image for BBQ festival in a long-term branding plan. Although it is
stressed that more targeted and customized communication strategies
are growing through a specific theme of the event [33], it is suggested
that even similar themed events should be developed and designed by
different demands and motivations of attendees. Thus, the marketing
efforts and promotions, such as venues and activities for the BBQ
festival, should be more focused on men as a decision maker for
attending the event versus a generic approach to attracting festival
participants. Gupta [34] stated that event marketing enables
programmers to break through the advertising clutter and enhance
event image to target audiences. Additionally, programmers may want
to expand the offerings at the BBQ festival to include music, vending,
and even culinary presentations to increase the scope of the event in an
effort to attract more females who would be more enticed to
participate in the event with such added attractions. Mosely and
Mowatt suggested that exhibitors should be included in the planning
and evaluation of festivals because, as participants have, they may have
similar or different motivations, expenses, and intentions that heavily
influence on successful festival management.
There was a significant difference in the attendees’ perception of the
reputation of the events as one of the perceived value. This may be due
to the fact that the well-known Art festival was in its thirteenth year
while the BBQ festival was only in its second. The question, of course,
is how to increase attendance of the BBQ event and how to amplify its
reputation. Certainly as an event has passed the test of time, the
reputation will develop; however, if there is a negative perception of
the event, then the event will most likely fail. In the BBQ festival’s case,
the CVB may need to ask how it was that the very small Arts festival
gained a positive reputation to grow into such an enormous
established event with multiple attractions such as food, music, and
shopping being offered beyond just the original artwork. Additionally,
the CVB and BBQ festival organizers and planners should develop
festival’s reputation through marketing, public relationship, or
community engagement in a strategic and long-term plan.
Since the satisfaction levels and intentions to revisit both events
were positive and not significantly different, the programming of the
events appeared well planned and the individuals surveyed that
attendees at the both events were satisfied and would plan on
returning to the event in future years. Festival satisfaction has been
shown to have a direct correlation to event success and participant
intention to revisit. However, since both events catered to a different
segment of the population; marketing may have played a key role in
the limited attendance of the BBQ festival. Festival management stated
that the event, while it had enough sponsorship to break even for
another year, was not receiving the attention required from attendees
for its continuance in the down economy. Many times festival
managers duplicate festival programs rather than innovate festival
programming, branding, and marketing which leads to a lack of
opportunity to sell attendees on unique features of the perspective
events. The smaller festival may have benefited from increasing the
offerings to the participants in the hopes of attracting more attendees.
Because of the differences in the festival core values, strategic target
marketing may have improved festival attendance. Drengner, Gaus, &
Volume 4 • Issue 1 • 142
Jahn [35] suggest that developing event content is one of many
interests to the target market. Therefore, market segmentation and
target marketing specific demographic groups might benefit
sponsorship, attendance, and overall participation.
In addition, it would be beneficial to conduct focus group sessions
with both people in the community and prior BBQ attendees to gain
deeper insight. Another approach would be to conduct a theory-based
behavioral comparison study of those who have attended both events
to further explore what the specific perceptions of the BBQ event are
from a consumer perspective. Additionally, as suggested by Loots et al.
[36] the community could be involved in further planning the BBQ
event and other future planned events to help increase enthusiasm and
optimally, participation and increased word-of-mouth exposure.
Finally, festival longevity is important for destination festivals to
become synonymous with their destination [36-39]. Since the BBQ
festival is still in its infancy, future research may be required to
evaluate its success.
This study holds promise for festival planning both from industry
perspective but also from an academic posture [40]. Through the use
of validated and reliable research tools and methodology, the festival
planners now have valuable data for future strategic planning. By
comparing two different festivals hosted by the same organization, the
study demonstrates the importance of researching and identifying
festival target markets and directing marketing and programming
toward specific demographic groups creating a branded product.
Limitations of this Study
There were a few considerations when analyzing the limitations of
this study. Although all data were collected from one location in two
different festivals, the seasonal variation was not considered. It may
have affected the process and results of this study. On the other hand,
the nature and characteristic of each festival may be the issues
considering the Arts festival has many components, such as music,
arts, and food. It may lend itself to be more appealing overall. Thus, it
is strongly recommended that instrument should be carefully
developed to ask what needs to be measured and compared within
given environment (e. g. , seasonal influence).
Even with the given weakness, this study contributed to the
literature on festivals and events by examining festival attendees’
behavior and characteristics at the two different festivals in a same
destination. The reciprocal factors in many perspectives can assist in
preparing new festival and developing existing festivals in a same
destination. For example, annual strategic plans on each event could
be prepared: including budgeting and human resource allocation. This
strategic plan also will help to determine long-term goals and
objectives for a destination.
References
1.
2.
3.
Gursoy D, Kim K, Uysal M (2004) Perceived impacts of festivals
and special events by organizers: An extension and validation.
Tourism Management 25: 171-181.
Kim YH, Kim M, Taylor J, Ruetzler T (2010) An examination of
festival attendee’s behavior using SEM. International Journal of
Event and Festival Management 1: 86-95.
Dwyer L, Mellor R, Mistilis N, Mules T (2000) A framework for
assessing “tangible” and “intangible” impacts of events and
conventions. Event Management 6: 175-189.
• Page 6 of 7 •
Citation:
Young HK, Jim T, Tanya R (2014) Any Difference? A Comparative Analysis: A Case Study of Two Festivals. J Tourism Res Hospitality 4:1.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2324-8807.1000142
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Felsenstein D, Fleischer A (2003) Local festivals and tourism
promotion: The role of public assistance and visitor expenditure.
Journal of Travel Research 41: 385-392.
Rao V (2001) Celebrations as social investments: Festival
expenditures, unit price variation and social status in rural India.
The Journal of Development Studies 38: 71-97.
Getz D (1991) Festivals, special events, and tourism. New York:
Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Kim YH, Goh BK, Yuan J (2010) A development of a multidimensional scale for measuring the motivation factors of food
tourists at a food event: What does motivate people to travel?
Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality and Tourism 11:
56-71.
Walo M, Bull A, Green H (1996) Achieving economic benefits at
local events: A case study of a local sport event. Festival
Management , Event Tourism 3: 96-106.
Nicholson R E, Pearce DG (2001) Why do people attend events:
A comparative analysis of visitor motivations at four South
Island events? Journal of Travel Tourism 39: 449-460.
Getz D (2002) Why festivals fail. Event Management 7: 209-219.
Kim YH, Taylor J, Ruetzler T (2008) A small festival and its
economic impact on a community: A case study. Frontiers in
Southeast CHRIE Hospitality , Tourism Research : 49-52.
Petrick JF (2006) Development of a multi-dimensional scale for
measuring the perceived value of a service. Journal of Leisure
Research 34: 119-134.
Getz D (1993) Festivals, special events. Encyclopedia of
hospitality and tourism : 789-810.
Crompton JL , McKay S L (1997) Motives of visitors attending
festival events. Annals of Tourism Research 6: 425-439.
Getz, D. (1997) Event management and event tourism. NY:
Cognizant Communication.
Formica S , Uysal M (1996) A marker segmentation of festival
visitors: Umbria Jazz Festival in Italy. Festival Management ,
Event Tourism 3: 175-182.
Horng JS, Su CS, So SIA (2013) Segmenting food festival visitors:
Applying the Theory of Planned Behavior and Lifestyle. Journal
of Convention and Event Tourism 14: 193-216.
Scheneider IE, Backman SJ (1996) Cross cultural equivalence of
festival motivations: A studying Jordan. Festival Management ,
Event Tourism 4: 139-144.
Ruetzler T, Taylor J, Kim YH (2008)The economic impact of the
Southern Alliance Annual Symposium. Frontiers in Southeast
CHRIE Hospitality , Tourism Research 12: 42-46.
Thrane C (2002) Jazz festival visitors and their expenditures:
Linking spending patterns to musical interest. Journal of Travel
Research 40: 281-286.
Uysal M, Gitelson RM (1994) Assessment of economic impacts:
Festival and special events. Festival Management , Event Tourism
2: 3-10.
Butler R, Pearce DG (1993) Comparative studies in tourism
research. Tourism research: Critique and challenges : 113-134.
Getz D, Andersson T, Carlsen J (2010) Festival management
studies: Developing a framework and priorities for comparative
and cross-cultural research. International Journal of Event and
Festival Management 1: 29-59.
Volume 4 • Issue 1 • 142
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
Yesawich P (2010) “Survey shows brighter days ahead for
business”.
Lee I, Lee T (2009) The failure of using festivals for destination
branding: Inconsistency between the destinations and the
festival. 3rd International Conference on Destination Branding
and Marketing Institute For Tourism Studies, Macao SAR,
China: 250-259.
Kivela J, Crotts JC (2006) Tourism and Gastronomy:
Gastronomy's Influence on How Tourists Experience a
Destination. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research 30:
354-377.
Formica S, Murrmann S (1998) The effects of group membership
and motivation on attendance: An international festival case.
Tourism Analysis 3: 197-207.
Mohr KK, Backman F, Gahan LW, Backman SJ (1993) An
investigation of festival motivations and events satisfaction by
visitor type. Festival Management and Event Tourism, 1: 89-97.
Nicholson R, Pearce DG (2000) Who goes to events: A
comparative analysis of the profile characteristics of visitors to
four south island events in New Zealand. Journal of Vacation
Marketing 6: 236-253.
Butler RW (1980) The concept of a tourist area cycle of
evolution: Implications for management of resources. The
Canadian Geographer 24: 5-12.
Casciaro T, Piskorski MJ (2005) Power imbalance, mutual
dependence, and constraint absorption: A closer look at resource
dependence theory. Administrative Science Quarterly 50:
167-199.
Oliver RL (1977) Effect of expectation and disconfirmation on
post exposure product evaluation: An alternative interpretation.
Journal of Applied Psychology 62: 480-486.
Crowther P (2011) Marketing event outcomes: from tactical to
strategic. International Journal of Event and Festival
Management 2: 68-82.
Gupta S (2003) Event marketing: issues and challenges. IIMB
Management Review, 15: 7-96.
Drengner J, Hansjoerg G, Jahn S (2008) Does flow influence the
brand image in event marketing? Journal of Advertising
Research 48: 138-147.
Loots, Ellis S, Slabbert E (2011) Factors predicting community
support: The case of aSouth African arts festival. Tourism and
Management Studies 7: 121-130.
Backman KF, Backman SJ, Uysal M, Sunshine KM (1995) Event
tourism: An examination of motivations and activities. Festival
Management , Event Tourism 3: 15-24.
Carson J, Anderson TD (2011) Strategic SWOT analysis of
public, private and not-for-profit festival organizations.
International Journal of Event and Festival Management 1: 8396.
Donaldson L (1996) The normal science of structural
contingency theory. Handbook of organization studies : 57-77.
Yuan J, Jang S (2008) The Effects of Quality and Satisfaction on
Awareness and Behavioral Intentions: Exploring the Role of a
Wine Festival. Journal of Travel Research 46: 279-288.
• Page 7 of 7 •