A warm welcome for destination quality brands: the example of the Pays Cathare region

ABSTRACT

In this paper, the salient complexitiescharacterising quality management at thetourism destination are outlined, and inlight of these, a number of qualityprinciples are deemed particularlyappropriate for the further investigation ofdestination quality management (DQM).The complexities include the significantnumber of services provided at thedestination, the highly fragmented nature ofthe tourism destination product and thelarge number of small businesses that go tocomprise this product. General principlesare drawn from the SERVQUAL, Kano andEFQM Business Excellence models in orderto provide a tentative framework forinvestigating how one destination hasstriven to overcome these challenges. Theexample of the Pays Cathare Region insouthern France, which has been recognisedby the European Commission as an exampleof best practice in integrated qualitymanagement (IQM), shows how thesequality tenets can be translated from thetheoretical framework into actual practiceby means of its destination quality brand.Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Received 7 November 2002; revised 24 March 2003; accepted27 March 2003

Keywords: destination quality management;quality models; destination quality brand;standards; small businesses; collaboration.

INTRODUCTION

Quality is perhaps the most importantprinciple for competitiveness in thetravel and tourism industry’ (Poon,

1993, p. 254). Two main factors account for the increasing importance being placed onquality in the tourism and hospitality industry(Gilbert and Joshi, 1992). These are, firstly,increased consumerism and greater mediaattention on quality issues within the tourismindustry, and secondly, an increasing sophisti-cation of consumer markets with non-pricefactors becoming more important. Owing tothe increasingly sophisticated tourist or the‘new consumer’ (Poon, 1993), a new qualityconsciousness has emerged (Laws, 1995). As aresult of this development, quality has becomenot only the basis for the competitiveness ofthe product, but for its survival (Soriano, 1999).This has been recognised by many operators inthe tourism industry. Airlines predominate inthe literature (Lane, 1986; Bruce, 1987; Carlzon,1987; Van Borrendam, 1989; Labick, 1991;Miller, 1992; Ostrowski et al., 1993; Farner,1994; Street, 1994; Witt and Muhlemann, 1994;Bunz and Maes, 1998; Laslo, 1999; Soriano,1999; Chan, 2000). Similarly, the literatureabounds with examples of hotels that havechosen to follow the path of total quality man-agement (TQM). A review of the instigators ofbest practice in the hospitability industryreveals names such as Ritz-Carlton (Partlow,1993) Accor North America, Disney, FourSeasons and Regent Hotels and Resorts, HyattRegency, Marriott International and Hilton(Hirst, 1991; Enz and Siguaw, 2000).

The foregoing demonstrates that manymajor players in the industry have embarkedon a quality journey with the help of recog-

Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCHInt. J. Tourism Res. 5, 269–282 (2003)Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/jtr.436

A Warm Welcome for DestinationQuality Brands: the Example of the PaysCathare RegionMegan Woods* and Jim DeeganNational Centre for Tourism Policy Studies, Foundation Building, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland

*Correspondence to: M. Woods, National Centre forTourism Policy Studies, Foundation Building, Universityof Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.E-mail: [email protected]

‘

nised quality tools. However, what also mate-rialises from a literature review of quality man-agement in the tourism hospitality industry, isthat most often the focus has been on theagency level, i.e. on the individual organisa-tion (and the larger one at that), as opposed tothe domain level, i.e. the level of the tourismdestination. Yet, it is the tourism destination asa whole which appeals to potential tourists.‘The fundamental product in tourism is thedestination experience. Competition thereforecentres on the destination’ (Ritchie andCrouch, 2000, p. 1). Owing to the effects ofglobalisation, the competition in tourism hasshifted from interfirm competition to the competition between destinations (Go andGovers, 2000). This increased competition has highlighted the concepts of quality and branding value as important factors that canmake visiting a place more attractive (Stevens,1992). It also suggests that it is time to devotemore attention to the issue of quality at a des-tination or domain level as opposed to solelyconcentrating on the individual or agencylevel. This paper investigates the complexitiesthat characterise quality management at thedestination level, by examining the qualitymodels that give an insight into overcomingthese difficulties and lastly, by showing howone destination has translated the principlesinto practice.

COMPLEXITIES AT THE DESTINATION LEVEL

Quality management at the destination level isparticularly complex in view of several factors.Firstly, the tourism destination product is anamalgam of mostly services and, therefore,shares certain characteristics that are commonto all services and which render the imple-mentation of quality more difficult. A secondfactor that contributes to the difficulty of managing quality at a destination is the highlyfragmented nature of the tourism destina-tion product. Thirdly, tourism destinations are comprised largely of small and mediumtourism enterprises (SMTEs), which are un-likely to implement quality in the same way as the larger operators mentioned earlier.These factors are now examined.

Services

One factor contributing to the complexity ofdestination quality management (DQM) is thelarge number of services of which the tourismdestination product is comprised. Manyauthors (Berry, 1984; Shostack, 1984; Zeithamlet al., 1985, 1990; Lovelock, 1996; Bateson, 1999)have drawn attention to characteristics specificto services, as opposed to products, whichhave implications for quality management intourism, in particular: intangibility, insepara-bility and heterogeneity. Already presenting a significant challenge for the individualtourism service provider, it is compounded atthe level of the destination. Furthermore, in anEuropean Commission report on DQM at ruraltourism destinations (EC, 1999), it is specifiedthat one of the principles of quality at the destination is the aspect of distinctiveness. ‘Visitors travel to experience something different . . . Delivering quality should beabout bringing out the special, distinctive features and flavours of the destination’ (EC, 1999; p. 62). Thus, implicit in the conceptof destination service quality is the aspect ofdistinctiveness and the unique identity of the destination, in addition to dealing with the complexities of service quality listedabove.

Fragmentation

A further factor contributing to the complexityof quality management at the destination levelis the fragmented nature of the tourism desti-nation product. Quality management at a des-tination concerns not just one service, but alarge and various range of services and prod-ucts. According to Murphy et al. (2000, p. 43),a tourism destination is, essentially, ‘anamalgam of products and services available in one location, that can draw visitors frombeyond its spatial confines’. Gunn (1988)denotes the tourism product as a complex consumptive experience that results from aprocess where tourists use multiple travel ser-vices during the course of their visit, such asinformation, transportation, accommodationand attraction services. Likewise, Smith (1994)recognises the role of such travel services increating a product experience, and outlines

270 M. Woods and J. Deegan

Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Tourism Res. 5, 269–282 (2003)

how various ‘inputs’ from the destinationcould produce an experiential ‘output’ fortourists. There are those, however, who arguethat tourism is not just a series of inputs but isin itself an experience (Mayo and Jarvis, 1981;Mannell and Iso-Ahola, 1987; Ross, 1994). ‘Adestination may be viewed as an amalgam ofindividual products and experience opportu-nities that combine to form a total experienceof the area visited’ (Murphy et al., 2000, p. 44).This definition underlines how, despite thefragmentation on the supply side, the experi-ence at the destination is perceived, at the sametime, as a gestalt by the visitor, and that thereis a demand on the part of the consumer for a total quality of experience (QOE) (Otto and Ritchie, 1995). The fragmentation of thetourism destination product set against thedemand for a total quality of experienceunderlines the challenge facing destinationmanagers to ensure a seamless, hassle-freeinterface among all elements of the total travelexperience.

Small businesses

This complexity of fragmentation is added to by the predominance of small and med-ium tourism enterprises at most tourism destinations. Many of these are known tooperate to quite different imperatives to thoseof large firms (Lee-Ross and Ingold, 1994;Buhalis and Cooper, 1998; Friel, 1999; Luciani,1999; Page et al., 1999; Yusof and Aspinwall,2000; Becton and Graetz, 2001; Tinsley andLynch, 2001). Differences are found, forexample, in business objectives, managementstyle, marketing techniques and access tofunding. Often, many do not use the samesophisticated quality tools as a number oflarger enterprises (Breiter and Bloomquist,1998). In view of the significant role they playat the tourist destination, quality initiatives atthe tourism destination should be directed atincluding, involving and guiding SMTEs onthe road to quality. Thus, a priority for desti-nation quality managers is to develop andimplement a quality tool that will respond tothese challenges. The second part of this studyinvestigates to what extent the Pays Catharedestination quality brand provides a frame-work for doing this.

CONTEXT AND METHODOLOGYOF THE STUDY

Given the complexities of DQM added to apaucity of corresponding theory, there is aneed for exploratory research in this domain.A case study on the Pays Cathare region inFrance was carried out as a preliminary step ina larger study currently being undertaken, thepurpose of which is to develop a theoreticalframework for DQM. In light of the aforemen-tioned dearth of theory and the consequentneed to build theory, the general approach ofthe larger study is more inductive than deduc-tive. This is in keeping with Leonard andMcAdam’s (2000) call for a more inductiveapproach when it comes to TQM research ingeneral. However, Yin in his seminal work oncase studies, maintains that ‘theory develop-ment as part of the design phase is essential,whether the ensuing case study’s purpose is todevelop or to test theory’ (Yin, 1994, p. 27), sothat it acts as a blueprint for the study. In orderto develop a tentative theoretical foundation,existing quality models were looked at in orderto draw principles that would act as constructsto guide further inquiry into the area. As afurther stage in an effort to refine and developsuitable constructs for a tentative theoreticalframework for the larger study, the principlesderived from the quality models were used toinvestigate the Pays Cathare, a recognised caseof best practice in DQM (EC, 1999). It is thefindings of this case study that are the focus ofthis paper. The main method used was contentanalysis of 20 customised standards for each ofthe different sectors belonging to the brand.This was supplemented with an in-depth interview with the pioneer and manager of the brand. Access was also given to a widerange of documents concerning the develop-ment and implementation of the brand in addition to market research findings. A dis-cussion of appropriate models for guidingfurther in-vestigation into DQM follows. (The review of the quality models and the findings from the descriptive case study pre-sented here were then used to develop aninterview protocol for a case study of Ireland’sfirst and only regional destination qualitybrand. Thus, this paper is concerned primarilywith the preliminary steps, which were to

Destination Quality Brands 271


inform the more inductive and theory building part of the research, out of which it ishoped a contribution to DQM theory will bemade.)

QUALITY MODELS

In light of the strong service component at thetourism destination, one of the models deemedappropriate to the study of DQM is theSERVQUAL Gap model (Zeithaml et al., 1985,1990; Parasuraman et al., 1988a,b). This modelexamines specifically the issue of managingand implementing service quality. The servicequality (SERVQUAL) model or applications ofit have been applied widely in the tourism and hospitality industry (Fick and Ritchie,1991; Saleh and Ryan, 1991), suggesting a flexibility that caters to the numerous anddiverse service components of the tourismvalue chain.

According to the model, quality manage-ment is largely about meeting or exceeding visitors’ expectations by setting the right standards, meeting them and communicatingthem effectively, and identifies a series of (5)gaps in this process. The sum of four gaps rep-resents the difference between the consumer’sexpectations and their perceptions of servicequality experienced, i.e. gap 5 (see below).Applied to the tourism destination, the identification of these gaps is followed by corrective action required in a tourism desti-nation to close them. These gaps are outlinedbelow.

(1) The Knowledge Gap: the differencebetween consumer expectations and management perceptions of consumerexpectations.

(2) The Standards Gap: the difference betweenwhat management perceives the consumerto expect and the quality specifications setfor service delivery.

(3) The Delivery Gap: the difference betweenthe quality standards set for service de-livery and the actual quality of servicedelivery.

(4) The Communications Gap: the differencebetween the actual quality of service deliv-ery and the service as it is communicated toconsumers.

(5) The sum of the four gaps represents the dif-ference between the consumer’s expecta-tions and their perceptions of servicequality experienced.

Zeithaml et al. (1990) recommend measures tobe taken to close each of the gaps. Critical tothe preventive and corrective measures arestandards. Setting the right standards and per-forming according to those standards are fun-damental to gaps 2 and 3, the standards gapand the delivery gap, respectively. Insofar asstandards, when recognised publicly, are pow-erful instruments by which to inform the cus-tomer of what to expect, they play a significantrole in determining gap 4. According to Zeithaml et al., 1985, 1990; Parasuraman et al.,1988a,b, as well as the five gaps, there are fivedimensions, i.e. five criteria used by customersin judging service quality. These are reliabil-ity, responsiveness, empathy, assurance and tangibility.

The SERVQUAL model has not beenwithout criticism. Indeed, the merit of theinstrument has been much debated (Carman,1990; Cronin and Taylor, 1992, 1994; Teas, 1993)and the criticisms are well documented in VanDyke et al. (1999). However, as its relevancehere is as a conceptual model from which todraw general principles, criticisms that relateto its power as an instrument of measurementare not applicable. With regard to the criticismof unstable dimensionality of the SERVQUALinstrument, here the relevant point is notwhether it is the five dimensions listed abovethat are the sole valid dimensions, but ratherthe point that there are dimensions to bereflected in a service standard that are differ-ent and more complex to those relevant to aproduct standard.

In the second part of this paper, the extent towhich the quality brand initiative in place inPays Cathare acts as a quality standard will beexamined, and the extent to which differentdimensions are reflected in that standard.

The SERVQUAL gap model highlights theimportance of customer expectations. In lightof the diversity and number of goods and ser-vices of which the destination is comprised, itis likely that these customer expectations willbe numerous and varied. This poses a chal-lenge when creating a standard for the desti-



nation. The Kano model (Kano, 1984; Shiba etal., 1993) highlights how, when setting stan-dards and criteria for facilities and services, itcan be helpful to categorise visitors’ needs, asnot all customer requirements are equal. Theimplication is that destination managersshould categorise visitors’ needs in terms ofwhether these needs or customer requirements(CRs) are ‘satisfiers’,’must be’ or ‘attractive’CRs. With regard to the satisfiers, the more ful-filled this requirement is, the more satisfied thecustomer is. However, the ‘must-be’ or ‘dis-satisfier’ requirement represents a situationwhere the customer is dissatisfied when therequirement is not fulfilled yet not more satis-fied when it is fulfilled. The ‘attractive’ or‘delighter’ requirement is one that leads tomore satisfaction when present, yet no dissat-isfaction when not present. Improving perfor-mance on a must-be customer requirementthat is already at a satisfactory level is not productive compared with improving per-formance on a satisfier or an attractive CR. In general, must-be requirements should becovered adequately, the set of satisfiers must becompetitive and some attractive requirementsare necessary to be a competitive destination.Whether and how destination managers at PaysCathare incorporate this concept of categoris-ing criteria into their quality standards will beconsidered shortly.

With regard to the issue of fragmentation ofthe tourism destination product and the pre-dominance of SMTEs, it is argued that the European Foundation for Quality Management(EFQM) model might offer valuable principlesappropriate for a tentative theoretical and con-textual framework for the examination ofDQM. A model of quality management devisedby the EFQM, this is being widely applied inEurope in the public and private sectors. Themodel is a relationship model that linkstogether nine criteria, against which organisa-tions assess and measure their excellence andstrive for continuous improvement. The crite-ria are divided into two categories: enablersand results. Similar to inputs and outputs,enablers relate to how things are done in theorganisation, whereas results constitute what is achieved by the organisation. Results arecaused by enablers. The enablers are: leader-ship; people management; policy and strategy;

partnerships and resources; and processes. Theresults relate to people satisfaction; customersatisfaction; impact on society; and businessresults. The five enablers and the four resultsare depicted in the model in Figure 1.

As a quality model, the EFQM boasts anumber of general strengths as well asstrengths particularly pertinent to the case ofthe tourism destination product (Woods, 2001).Of specific interest here is the way in which themodel stresses the need for standards andmeasurements, similar to the SERVQUALmodel. In addition to this is its emphasis on aholistic approach, which other quality man-agement concepts lack (Zink, 1995) and whichreflects the need to look at the tourism desti-nation product as a gestalt, despite its frag-mentation and complexity; and the way itconsiders, importantly for this study, not just inter alia elements such as customer and employee satisfaction and continuousimprovement, but recognises that delivery ofquality is dependent on others in the supplychain. Thus, the importance of partnerships isemphasised. This is highly pertinent to such afragmented product as the tourism destina-tion. Moreover, the emphasis on leadership,strategy and policy, and partnerships suggestsguidance for and involvement of small busi-nesses as well as the integration of all compo-nents of the tourism value chain. Thus, in theface of the fragmentation characterising thetourism destination product, the relevant prin-ciples to be distilled from the EFQM model areits holistic framework and its emphasis onpartnerships between suppliers and relation-ships between criteria. In a later section of the



Enablers Results

Innovation and Learning

Leadership

People

Policy & Strategy

Partner- ships and Resources

Processes

People Results

CustomerResults

Society Results

Key Perform- ance Results

Figure 1. The EFQM model

paper, the degree to which the Pays Catharequality brand rises to the challenge of cross-sectoral integration, partnership and cateringto the needs of small firms, in a way mostappropriate for the destination, will be exam-ined. (Similar to the SERVQUAL Gap model,the EFQM model, as a ‘large-scale qualitymodel,’ has had its share of criticism (Leonardand McAdam, 2000; Wilson and Durant, 1995).However, here again it is argued that themodels are being drawn upon for their con-ceptual worth and relevant principles, andthus criticisms related to operational andimplementational problems are not consideredrelevant. Furthermore, the principles are sup-ported by other bodies of theory. For instance,the advocacy here of partnerships is supportedby network and collaboration theory.)

The above section has looked at elementsfrom existing quality models that might be appropriate to a theory for DQM. TheSERVQUAL gap model suggests that stan-dards should be in place, and in accord-ance with the Kano model, that the criteria ofthe standard be categorised with regard towhether they refer to minimum standards(‘must be’ requirements) or maximum stan-dards (‘satisfiers’ and ‘delighters’) andwhether they serve to highlight those facets of a destination that differentiate it from itscompetitors. Lastly, principles drawn from theEFQM model suggest that those standardsshould be embedded in a system whichencourages a holistic approach with an em-phasis on partnerships. The following sec-tion deals with the next preliminary stage inexploring elements that might be relevant to aDQM theory. A case of best practice in DQM isexamined with a view to investigating if theprinciples of standards (adapted to the desti-nation) and participation and networking playa role in DQM. The quality tool used, i.e. a des-tination quality brand, is discussed in relationto the way in which it acts as a standard ingeneral; as a standard in which criteria anddimensions are categorised or rated; and as aframework for integration.

THE PAYS CATHARE QUALITY BRAND

The ‘Pays Cathare’ is a promotional namegiven to the Département of Aude in southern

France. This area was the base of Catharism, areligious movement in the 13th century. As aresult of the many battles witnessed duringthis period, the area boasts a rich legacy of for-tified towns, villages and castles. Althoughwine production is the mainstay of the ruraleconomy, the tourism industry comes a closesecond, with the region receiving approxi-mately 15 million visitors per annum. Duringthe 1980s, however, in an attempt to confrontthe economic crisis in which the region founditself, an effort was made to add value to itscultural legacy. Initially a marketing initiative,the Pays Cathare brand has gradually come toplace quality at the core of its strategy. Recog-nition of its efforts was given to the PaysCathare when it was selected as one of theexamples of best practice in a European Com-mission study of Integrated Quality Manage-ment at rural tourism destinations (EC, 1999).The quality system developed has involvedidentifying quality criteria for a wide range ofproducts and services. On satisfaction of thesecriteria, they are awarded the ‘Pays Cathare’brand label. The objective is for the public to automatically associate the words ‘PaysCathare’ with quality. There are currently justunder 600 members. It is now examined towhat extent the Pays Cathare quality brandtranslates some of the principles of the qualitytheory described above into practice.

The brand as a standard

The SERVQUAL model underlines the impor-tance of drawing up standards that reflect theexpectations of consumers and then ensuringthat service delivery quality matches thosestandards. The standard should let suppliersknow what to supply and allow customersknow what to expect. When the Pays Catharestrategy was drawn up in 1987, it was basedon two surveys, one of visitor satisfactionamongst 2000 actual visitors to historical sites,and another of the image and expectations ofthe area held by 7000 potential visitors from allover Europe. With the results of these surveysin mind, separate, detailed sets of criteria wereworked out by professionals alongside groupsof operators for 20 different types of productand service, falling into three categories:tourism, agricultural produce and services. For



example, in light of the market research find-ings that visitors to the Pays Cathare arelooking for a high quality, authentic and cul-tural experience and seek accommodationwith character and outdoor activities, compo-nents of the charters that relate to rural accom-modation cover:

(1) signposting, parking, quality of entrance,display of the Pays Cathare label;

(2) external appearance, local authenticity ofmaterials, landscaping;

(3) interior décor with a local flavour;(4) nature of personal welcome, provision of

a hamper of produce or small gifts;(5) little extras to provide comfort and well-

being in bedrooms and bathrooms;(6) a display case of Pays Cathare produce;(7) telling guests about the area, literature

available, possibly special lectures/events;

(8) recipes from the immediate local area;(9) professionalism in all transactions,

including use of credit cards, etc.;(10) readiness to work with others in the

network on promotion and support.

In order to ensure that service quality corre-sponds to these standards, the Pays Catharebrand, which is registered with the InstitutNational de la Propriété Industrielle (INPI —National Institute of Industrial Property), isonly awarded to the candidate when the cri-teria have been satisfactorily fulfilled. Theawarding of the brand label is approved by acertification committee for each sector, includ-ing representatives of the département, as wellas the relevant national body, the Chamber ofCommerce, and a consumer body related tothe sector.

Each certification committee meets amiminum of once a year. A detailed checklist iscompleted, where each establishment is scoredagainst a list of certain criteria . This is cross-checked by a technical visit to the site. As wellas this, there are mystery visits to the accom-modation units. Awarding of the brand label isdependent on a score equal or superior to one-third of the maximum score possible for therespective sector and to score an average markon the global total. The right to advertise underthe brand will be withdrawn if the enterprisefails on further assessments to reach the stipu-

lated standard. Should an applicant fail, theyare trained and assisted in their weak areas witha view to ensuring a successful application thenext time. The next section takes a closer lookat the standard and its criteria.

The brand and the categorisation of criteria

The Kano model implies that destination man-agers should differentiate between the ‘mustbe’ customer requirements (i.e. basic stan-dards) and ‘satisfiers’ and ‘delighters’, ensur-ing that ‘must be’ CRs are adequately covered,that there are sufficient ‘satisfiers’ and thatthere are a number of ‘delighters’ to guaranteea competitive edge. Pays Cathare achieves thisby incorporating basic national and associa-tional standards into the charters as well asbuilding in other criteria that pertain specifi-cally to the authentic and unique features ofthe Pays Cathare.

Firstly, the brand charters strive to ensurethat ‘must be’ CRs are met by stipulating thateach sector already satisfy basic national orassociational standards. For example, ‘aminimum level of comfort as indicated bynational standards is required for all accom-modation units’. More specifically, a prerequi-site for a gîte (see glossary for translation ofFrench hospitality terms) is that it has beenawarded two or three star status or higher bythe national association, Gîtes de France. SeeTable 1 for more examples.

As stated in the charter, the destinationquality brand managers start from the premisethat the establishments fulfill these basicrequirements, many of which are concernedwith quality criteria of a tangible nature.

Having ensured that all the establishmentssatisfy minimum standards or ‘must be’ cus-tomer requirements, Pays Cathare destinationmanagers have chosen to include in their def-inition of quality at the destination other moreintangible dimensions, such as the the warmthof welcome, the notion of uniqueness, andcharacter and authenticity, in order to differ-entiate themselves from other tourism destina-tions. That the Pays Cathare charter revolvesmore around the principle of maximum stan-dards, as opposed to minimum standards, ishighlighted by the very name of its qualityprogramme — ‘Quality Plus’.



‘The Quality Plus’ of Pays Cathare certi-fication is based on inter alia the quality ofthe welcome and the capacity of theservice provider to inform the client andto maintain the link in the Pays Catharenetwork. Each rural accommodation hasits particularities, but the common objec-tive must be to uphold the authenticity,the character and the difference that is particular to the destination ‘PaysCathare’.

Examples of criteria which go beyond the stan-dard tangible requirements, laid down bynational norms, and which aim to foster thedistinct and welcoming quality of experienceavailable at the Pays Cathare are numerous. Astrong emphasis is placed on the provision ofdetailed information regarding various localservices, including their location and theiropening hours. To further accommodateguests this information should be translatedinto English, Catalan (in view of the proximityof Catalonia to Pays Cathare and the highnumber of Catalan visitors) and German aswell as French. As mentioned earlier, criteriarelate specifically to the provision of thewelcome baskets and gifts of local produceoffered at rural accommodation, as well as thecriterion governing social interchange with the

visitors. For many of the sectors, the presenceof displays and the sale of local produce to vis-itors are required. Criteria relate to particular-ities of external and internal décor, with aseparate list of criteria for those buildings in atraditional architectural style. For the fermeauberge, criteria pertain to details relating tosuch things as the table décor and floralarrangements.

Another element of this ‘quality plus’ isauthenticity, which is a crucial component of the charters. For example, it is stipulated that ‘it is desirable that the rural character ofaccommodation be neither clichéd nor be characterised by common standards of “falserusticity”.’ Similarly, with regard to meals inrural areas, at the tables d’hôte and aubergesrurales for example, efforts are made to offer acuisine that makes use of recipes from theimmediate locality and, indeed, of the family,and not simply those from the region. Theobjective of the criteria is that the ‘cuisineoffered . . . enhances the value of micro-localrecipes — more original than the simple tradi-tional clichés of the most well-known typicaldishes.’ Thus, this destination quality brandaims to ensure that the must-be criteria are sat-isfied adequately by assuming national andprofessional standards as departure points, and by concentrating energies on a competitiverange of ‘satisfier’ and ‘delighter’ criteria thatserve to highlight the uniqueness of the PaysCathare and the welcome experience it offers.

The brand as a framework for partnershipand collaboration

The diverse and fragmented nature of thetourism destination suggests the need for anumber of customised standards for each ofthe products and services, yet the visitor’sdesire for a holistic and seamless experiencerequires that these standards are incorporatedinto an integrative and collaborative frame-work. The EFQM model highlights the importance of partnerships in the path to quality.The Pays Cathare initiative recognises that thetourism destination is highly fragmented; separate, detailed sets of criteria have beenworked out for 20 types of product and service.These can be grouped into: hotels and restau-rants; rural self-catering and B&Bs; camping



Table 1. Minimum standards for the various hospi-tality sectors.

Enterprise Type Basic standard required

Gîtes Gîtes of France, 2 star or moreChambres d’Hôtes Rural Gîtes of France, 2 star

(B&Bs) or more Tables d’Hôtes Rural Gîtes of France, 2 star or

moreFermes Auberges Standards laid down in the

‘Welcome to the Farm’charter

Hotels 2 star or moreRestaurants Associational standards for

Cuisiniers en Terroir d’Aude1

Auberges Rurales DSV2 standards Camp and National standards for camp

caravan sites and caravan sites

1 Chefs of the Region of Aude.2 Direction des Services Vétérinaires = Board of VeterinaryServices.

sites; places to sample and buy produce; artistsand craftsmen; guides; and food products. Tobreak down the accommodation sector morespecifically, there are charters for each of thefollowing: hotels in urban areas, hotels in ruralareas, gîtes, B&Bs, fermes auberges, and caravanand camp sites. The following examples high-light how the criteria are customised to theparticular type of product or service. The PaysCathare brand managers in this mainly ruralarea appreciate the importance of culturalexchange and contact with the host popula-tion. For the chambre d’hôte, the French equiva-lent of the B&B, it is recognised that breakfastpresents itself as a prime opportunity todelight the guest. The criteria relating to thismeal are much emphasised. Breakfast must beincluded in the price of a night’s stay. It mustbe supervised by a person trained in andaware of the importance of service quality. Thefirst meal of the day should be used as anopportunity to offer home-made and locallyproduced products, and to furnish the guestwith documentation regarding tourist attrac-tions and events in the area. Indeed, the charterencourages the host/hostess ‘to be as imagi-native as possible in order to make this meal amemorable occasion’. In self-catering accom-modation such as the gîtes, where breakfast is not provided by the host, specific criteriaensure, however, that cultural exchanges andexperiences of local products are still a facet of the guest’s holidays. Criteria outlined in the charter for gîtes stipulate ‘a convivial get-together’ between the holidaymaker and theowner during the stay, the provision of docu-mentation in French or English regarding localservices and events and practical informationabout the gîte, along with a welcome basket,which should contain locally produced wine,bread, fruit, vegetables, oil, etc. In the case ofthe ferme auberge, criteria extend to the area ofactivities around the farm, stipulating walksaround the farm and viewing of farming activ-ities. For camp and caravan sites, importanceis laid on the facilities and amenities in thevicinity. Thus, it can be seen that, for each ofthe numerous and diverse elements of thetourism destination product, there are separateand customised charters.

Recognising that all these separate anddiverse products and services constitute a

gestalt for the visitor to the Pays Cathare, thedestination managers there have striven toensure that all the different sectors work in aconcerted fashion by making the concept ofparticipation and collaboration integral to theirquality system. One way in which they havedone this is to stress in all introductory and rel-evant documentation that the charter is verymuch a collective initiative. Examples abound:

The Pays Cathare programme wishes tobring about a harmonious developmentof quality in all sectors of the economy.

The interaction between these differentdomains should allow each group toimprove their ‘quality performance’.

The Pays Cathare is a programme ofglobal development which has as itsobjective the fostering of a synergybetween the various networks engaged inthe quality initiative.

This aspirational tone becomes more concretein the numerous declarations of commitmentthat the various subscribers to the charterundersign, e.g.

The Tour Guides of Pays Cathare committhemselves to participating in the collec-tive efforts of production and promotionwith other service providers in the accom-modation or hospitality sector, in order to strengthen the Pays Cathare network‘Objective Quality Plus’.

To further ensure that this promise to act col-lectively is upheld, it is incorporated into thecharter as a criterion. To be awarded the rightto use the brand label, a certain number of cri-teria must be satisfied by the service provider.Whereas the charter does allow a certainamount of scope as to which criteria are to be satisfied (insofar as the awarding of thelabel depends on a score equal or superior toone-third of the maximum score), fulfilment of criteria regarding collective action and participation are obligatory. This effectivelymeans that breach of commitment to the col-lective goal of the network will lead to with-drawal of the award of the Pays Cathare label.Thus, whilst recognition is given to the varyingnature and characteristics of the very individ-



ual elements of the tourism destinationproduct, great emphasis is placed on the factthat all the elements or links in the tourismvalue chain are interdependent, and as suchthe providers thereof must participate in thequality programme in a collective and collab-oratory spirit.

Like many tourism destinations, the vastmajority of tourism, service and agriculturalbusinesses in the Pays Cathare are small andmicro-enterprises, and consequently the tailor-ing of the Pays Cathare quality initiative to thefeatures and needs of these small enterprises iscrucial. The collective spirit of the network iscritical to achieving this. An important forumfor interaction and exchange is the trainingprogramme, which has been incorporated intothe framework of the Pays Cathare quality ini-tiative. Training is seen as vital for the successof the programme and, along with participa-tion, is a criterion that must be satisfied by allenterprises who wish to be awarded and main-tain the quality brand. Training sessions covertwo main areas: firstly, a general componentrelating to information about the Pays Cathareso that each enterprise is better able to conveyto visitors the cultural and historical merits ofthe destination along with practical detailsregarding local services, events, tourist attrac-tions and other members of the network, andsecondly, a practical component tailored toeach particular sector. For example, in the caseof the ferme aubergistes where evening mealsare provided for the guests, culinary instruc-tion and guidance regarding authentic tradi-tional dishes forms an important element oftheir training. Often small firms are limitied by funding. The training is funded partly byLEADER (a programme established by theEuropean Commission with a view to encour-aging local economic and social developmentin rural areas) monies and partly by theConseil Général d’Aude (the Regional Councilof Aude) and is free to the participants. Fur-thermore, the training course is normally givenover 5 days throughout the year, a time frameconsidered realistically feasible for entrepre-neurs, many of whom are from family-runbusinesses. Taking into account that it is oftendifficult for entrepreneurs from small orfamily-run businesses to take time away fromtheir business, training takes place during the

winter months from October to March, whenthere are less visitors. Each particular sectoragrees upon a day and a time that best suitsthem. Often, the venue of training sessionsrotate between the participants’ own premises,which affords the additional benefit of bench-marking and gaining an insight into how otherservice providers run their businesses. Besidesthe issue of training, special reference is madeto SMTEs throughout the charter. For instance,particular recommendations are made, such asthe use of names instead of numbers for roomsin the smaller accommodation units. Withregard to the fulfilment of a number of criteria,a certain flexibility is exercised concerning the smaller tourism enterprises. For example,the charter for camping and caravan sites highlights the importance of services on offersuch as the availability of washing machines, TV rooms, bars, access to supermarkets andrestaurants as well as a number of sports andactivities. Camp and caravan sites will bejudged on the number of these that are avail-able within a 1 mile radius. However, it isnoted that small establishments will be judgedmore lightly with regard to this: ‘Each manageris obliged to offer a maximum of services onsite or within immediate proximity, i.e. withina one-kilometre radius. However, small estab-lishments will be judged in a more lenientmanner.’ Training, interaction and the specialregard given to the small and microtourismenterprises are a manifestation of the destina-tion managers’ intention to offer guidance toand encourage participation amongst a coregroup of service providers in the Pays Cathareregion.

CONCLUSION

It can be seen that the Pays Cathare qualitybrand initiative overcomes certain challengesparticular to quality implementation at thedestination level. With regard to the largenumber of services of which the tourism des-tination product consists, and as recom-mended by the SERVQUAL gap model, thePays Cathare brand constitutes a standard,with the purpose of guaranteeing customers a quality experience and communicating toservice providers what is expected from them.Recognising that the destination is a highly



fragmented product, yet needs to be presentedto the visitor as a holistic experience, the brandis composed of customised charters for 20various products and services yet, in keepingwith the EFQM model philosophy, incor-porates a mechanism that ensures a collabora-tive and integrated approach. This providesguidance and inclusivity for the small andmicroplayers in the economy. Lastly, as re-commended by the Kano model, the qualitybrand distinguishes between minimum andmaximum standards, with the aim of, not onlysatisfying the visitor, but delighting them also.Indeed, the Pays Cathare brand is a standard,the objective of which is not to standardise butto differentiate!

The quality system is by no means withoutits weaknesses. To fully benefit from thequality charter it is important that the brand iswidely recognised as a sign of quality. It wasmentioned earlier that one of the advantagesof a standard is that it allows consumers toknow what to expect as well as to guide enter-prises in what to provide. There is still muchwork to be done in this area. In a surveycarried out in Pays Cathare in the summer of2000, in which 642 interviews were conductedwith visitors to the area, it was found that only28% of the visitors were familiar with thebrand. This means that, although the brandmight ensure quality for the visitor once theyarrive in the region and happen upon anaccredited property, the brand does not play asignificant role in most consumer’s decision-making process as to which destination to visit,i.e. it does not play an effective role in placingthe region in the consumer’s consideration sets(Crompton, 1992; Crompton and Ankomah,1993). Thus, despite the fact that the brand hasled to higher levels of quality, more effortneeds to be put into increasing the consumer’sawareness of the brand and of its associationwith a quality product. Some solace can befound in the fact that those who are aware ofthe brand appear to understand the brandvalues. Of the 28% of visitors surveyed thatwere familiar with the Pays Cathare brand,84% linked it with the historical patrimony,69% with specialities of the region, and overone-third with a warm hospitable welcome,testifying to the fact that many of those whoare familiar with the brand are interpreting it

correctly. Accommodation units listed underthe Pays Cathare quality brand are normallythe first to be reserved and boast the highestoccupancy rates. Owing to the local hospital-ity trade’s demand for regional agriculturalproduce and the strong network links betweenthese two sectors, the price of a Pays Catharecarcass of lamb, for example, has almostdoubled in real terms in the space of 10 years,thus fulfilling the EFQM model’s tenets thatthe enablers lead to the results, for instancethat leadership and partnerships, etc., have ledto results.

Similarly, efforts are being made to over-come another weakness, which concerns the‘home-grown’ nature of the brand. The brandhas been refused official national recognitionas a quality seal, because it is a bottom-up ini-tiative specific to one region. Therefore it lacksthe authority and influence that characterisesnationally and internationally recognised stan-dards such as the RAC, AA or the MichelinGuide. Moreover, because it is the only one ofits kind, unlike in the EFQM model, there is no best practice benchmark against which tomeasure the Pays Cathare’s quality standards,and this remains a weakness of the qualitysystem. Nevertheless there may exist such abenchmark at some point in the future. Themodel has proven to be transferable, and twotourism destinations, one in Spain, one in Italy,were quick to establish quality systems basedon that of the Pays Cathare. Further collabora-tion has led to at least 15 destinations in eachof the three countries currently working to thePays Cathare model. Their goal now is to per-suade the European Union to recognise an offi-cial destination quality brand (marque qualité deterritoire), which would give them the bench-mark and official recognition they need.

On the whole, much progress has been madesince the brand was established in the 1980s.The number of establishments that subscribeto the brand has increased from 30 to almost600. The destination brand managers haveincreasingly taken a sustainable approach,focusing on the quality of life of the host pop-ulation and are currently benchmarking inter-national best practice in enviromental qualityprojects (reflecting the EFQM model’s empha-sis on societal results). The brand managers’commitment to the Pays Cathare quality ini-



tiative has been witnessed by the recruitmentof five quality consultants in 2001, whose spe-cific responsibility is to work with the subsec-tors on developing the quality charters.

In view of the importance of quality at thedestination, the lack of theory in the area,together with the apparent success of the PaysCathare brand, further research is currentlybeing carried out by the author at another des-tination. This paper acts as a precursor to asubsequent paper based on that research, inwhich it will be attempted to build a DQM the-oretical framework. The focus of further inves-tigations revolves around the dynamics behindthe quality brand, the difficulties and the keysuccess factors, and the benefits — economic,social and environmental — of establishingsuch a quality initiative at a tourism destina-tion. The immediate implication from thisreview of best practice suggests that tourismdestination managers around the world whowish to follow suit need to define what qualitymeans in the context of their destination,develop a standard appropriate to their desti-nation, and implement this against a frame-work for collaboration and partnership.

GLOSSARY OF FRENCHACCOMMODATION TERMS

Auberge rurale country innChambre d’hôte bed and breakfastFerme auberge farmhouse accommodationGîte self-catering cottageTable d’hôte a family home opened up to

visitors who wish to dinethere and enjoy local cuisine

REFERENCES

Bateson JE. 1999. Managing Services Marketing: Textsand Readings. Dryden Press: London.

Becton S, Graetz B. 2001. Small business — smallminded? Training attitudes and needs of thetourism and hospitality industry. InternationalJournal of Hospitality Research 3: 105–113.

Berry LL. 1984. Services marketing is different. InServices Marketing, Christopher Lovelock (ed.).Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ; 29–37.

Breiter D, Bloomquist P. 1998. TQM in Americanhotels: an analysis of application. Cornell Hoteland Restaurant Administration Quarterly 39(1):26–33.

Bruce L. 1987. British Airways jolts staff with a cul-tural revolution. International Management March:36–38.

Buhalis D, Cooper C. 1998. Competition or co-operation? Small and medium sized tourismenterprises at the destination. In Embracing and Managing Change in Tourism: International CaseStudies, Laws E, Faulkner HW, Moscardo G (eds).Routledge: London; 324–346.

Bunz UK, Maes JD. 1998. Learning excellence:Southwest Airlines’ approach. Managing ServiceQuality 8(3): 163–169.

Carlzon J. 1987. Moments of Truth. Harper and Row:New York.

Carman JM. 1990. Consumer perceptions of servicequality: an assessment of the SERVQUAL dimen-sions. Journal of Retailing 66(1): 33–55.

Chan D. 2000. The story of Singapore Airlines andthe Singapore girl. Journal of Management Devel-opment 19(6): 456–472.

Crompton JL. 1992. Structure of vacation destina-tion choice sets. Annals of Tourism Research 19(3):420–434.

Crompton JL, Ankomah PK. 1993. Choice set propo-sitions in destination decisions. Annals of TourismResearch 20(3): 461–476.

Cronin JJ Jr, Taylor SA. 1992. Measuring servicequality: a reexamination and extension. Journal ofMarketing 56(3): 33–55.

Cronin JJ Jr, Taylor SA. 1994. SERVPERF versusSERVQUAL: reconciling performance-based andperceptions-minus-expectations measurement ofservice quality. Journal of Marketing 58(1): 125–131.

Crouch GI, Ritchie JRB. 2000. Tourism, competi-tiveness, and societal prosperity. Journal of Busi-ness Research 44: 137–152.

EC. 1999. Towards Quality Rural Tourism: IntegratedQuality Management (IQM) of Rural Tourist Desti-nations. European Commission: Brussels.

Enz CA, Siguaw JA. 2000. Best practices in humanresources. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Adminis-tration Quarterly 41(1): 48–61.

Farner G. 1994. Quality on course at Swissair. Man-aging Service Quality 4(3): 19–20.

Fick GR, Ritchie JRB. 1991. Measuring servicequality in the travel and tourism industry. Journalof Travel Research 30(2): 2–9.

Friel M. 1999. Marketing practice in small tourismand hospitality firms. International Journal ofTourism Research 1: 97–109.

Gilbert DC, Joshi I. 1992. Quality management inthe tourism and hospitality industry. Progress andResearch in Tourism 4: 149–168.

Go FM, Govers R. 2000. Integrated quality mange-ment for tourism destinations: a European per-spective on achieving competitiveness. TourismManagement 21: 79–88.



Gunn CA. 1988. Tourism Planning. Taylor andFrancis: New York.

Hirst M. 1991. Newer and better ways. ManagingService Quality 1(5): 247–251.

Kano 1984. Attractive quality and must-be quality.Journal of the Japanese Society for Quality ControlApril: 39–48.

Labick K. 1991. Delta aims for a higher altitude.Fortune 16 December: 52–53.

Lane C. 1986. Putting people first: a company-wideapproach to good service. In Are They Being ServedMoores B (ed.). Phillip Allan: Oxford; 50–53.

Laslo GP. 1999. Southwest Airlines — living totalquality in a service organisation. Managing ServiceQuality 9(2): 90–95.

Laws E. 1995. Tourism Destination Management:Issues, Analysis and Policies. Routledge: London.

Lee-Ross D, Ingold T. 1994. Increasing productivityin small hotels: are academic proposals realistic?International Journal of Hospitality Management13(3): 201–207.

Leonard D, McAdam R. 2000. Grounded theorymethodology and practitioner reflexivity in TQMresearch. International Journal of Quality and Relia-bility Management 18(2): 180–194.

Lovelock CH. 1996. Services Marketing. PrenticeHall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Luciani S. 1999. Implementing yield management insmall and medium sized hotels: An investigationof obstacles and success factors in Florence hotels.International Journal of Hospitality Management18(2): 129–142.

Mannell RC, Iso-Aloha SE. 1987. Psychologicalnature of leisure and tourism experience. Annalsof Tourism Research 124(2): 314–331.

Mayo EJ, Jarvis PL. 1981. The Psychology of LeisureTravel. CBI Publishing: Boston.

Miller BW. 1992. High flyer. Managing ServiceQuality 2(3): 153–156.

Murphy P, Pritchard MP, Smith B. 2000. The desti-nation product and its impact on traveller per-ceptions. Tourism Management 21(1): 43–52.

Ostrowski PL, O’Brien TV, Gordon GL. 1993.Service quality and customer loyalty in the com-mercial airline industry. Journal of Travel Research32(2): 16–25.

Otto JE, Ritchie JRB. 1995. Exploring the quality ofthe service experience: a theoretical and empiri-cal analysis. Advances in Services Marketing andManagement 5: 37–63.

Page SJ, Forer P, Lawton GR. 1999. Small businessdevelopment and tourism: Terra incognita?Tourism Management 20: 435–459.

Parasuraman A, Zeithaml VA, Berry LL. 1988a.SERVQUAL: a multiple-item scale for measuringconsumer perceptions of service quality. Journal ofRetailing 64(1): 12–40.

Parasuraman A, Zeithaml VA, Berry LL. 1988b.Refinement and reassessment of the SERVQUALscale. Journal of Retailing 76(4): 420–449.

Partlow CG. 1993. How Ritz-Carlton applies ‘TQM’.Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quar-terly 30(4): 16–24.

Poon A. 1993. Tourism, Technology and CompetitiveStrategies. CAB International: Wallingord.

Ritchie JRB, Crouch GI. 2000. The competitive destination: a sustainability perspective. TourismManagement 21(1): 1–7.

Ross GF. 1994. The Psychology of Tourism. Hospital-ity Press: Melbourne.

Saleh F, Ryan C. 1991. Analyzing service quality inthe hospitality industry using the SERVQUALmodel. The Services Industry Journal 11(2):324–342.

Shiba S, Graham A, Walden D. 1993. A New American TQM: Four Practical Revolutions in Management. Productivity Press: Portland, OR.

Shostack GL. 1984. Breaking Free from ProductMarketing. In Services Marketing: Texts, Cases and Readings, Lovelock CH (ed.). Prentice-Hall:Englewood Cliffs, NJ; 7–47.

Smith SLJ. 1994. The tourism product. Annals ofTourism Research 21(3): 582–595.

Soriano DR. 1999. Total quality management: apply-ing the European model to Spain’s urban hotels.Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quar-terly 40(1): 54–59.

Stevens BF. 1992. Price value perceptions of travel-ers. Journal of Travel Research 31: 44–48.

Street M. 1994. Training people to deliver serviceexcellence in British Airways. Managing ServiceQuality 4(4): 13–16.

Teas RK. 1993. Expectations, performance evalua-tion, and consumers’ perceptions of quality.Journal of Marketing 57: 18–34.

Teas RK. 1994. Expectations as a comparison stan-dard in measuring service quality: An assess-ment of a reassessment. Journal of Marketing 58:132–139.

Tinsley R, Lynch P. 2001. Small tourism businessnetworks and destination development. Inter-national Journal of Hospitality Management 20:367–378.

Van Borrendam A. 1989. KLM strives for customersatisfaction. Total Quality Management Magazine1(2): 105–109.

Van Dyke TP, Prybutok VR, Kappelman LA. 1999.Cautions on the use of the SERVQUAL measureto assess the quality of information systems ser-vices. Decision Sciences 30(3): 1–15.

Wilson L, Durant R. 1995. Evaluating TQM: the casefor a theory driven approach (total quality management). Public Administration ReviewMarch–April (2): 137–146.



Witt CA, Muhlemann AP. 1994. The implementationof total quality management in tourism: someguidelines. Tourism Management 15(6): 416–424.

Woods M. 2001. Tourism destination quality: a the-oretical launchpad for some practical investiga-tion. In Trends and Challenges for Hospitality andTourism: Proceedings of the 2001 EuroCHRIE Con-ference, Brig, Switzerland, October 25–27.

Yin RK. 1994. Case Study Research: Designs andMethods. Sage Publications: London.

Yusof SM, Aspinwall E. 2000. A conceptual framework for TQM implementation for

SMEs. Total Quality Management Magazine 12(1): 31–36.

Zeithaml VA, Parasuraman A, Berry LL. 1985. Aconceptual model of service quality and its impli-cations for future research. Journal of Marketing 49:41–50.

Zeithaml VA, Parasuraman A, Berry LL. 1990. Delivering Quality Service: Balancing Customer Per-ceptions and Expectations. The Free Press: New York.

Zink KJ. 1995. Total Quality Management as a HolisticManagement Concept: The European Model for Busi-ness Excellence. Springer-Verlag: London.



Documents

A warm welcome for destination quality brands: the example of the Pays Cathare region