IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/fan/rissri/vhtml10.3280-riss2016-002015.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrating stakeholders? perspectives to develop tourism business strategies: the case study of a wine route

Author

Listed:
  • Giuseppina Carr?
  • Mariagiulia Mariani
  • Ivana Radic
  • Iuri Peri

Abstract

The authors analyze stakeholders? perspective in tourism development of the Etna Wine Route, considering a wider set of organisations having an interest in the destination management and development and enhancement of the local tourism. The effective management for wine tourism development is the stakeholder involvement in generating ideas for products and services. A broader assessment of the EWR as a tourist destination helped an effective interaction of various stakeholders through co-ordination and consultation mechanisms, leading to a tourism development plan. The case study provides important insights for destination management integrating stakeholders? perspective. For this purpose, the Strategic Orientation Round (SOR), integrated in the SWOT analysis, was implemented, a qualitative approach, aiming to create awareness and promote action as prioritized by stakeholders?, through interviews and working groups.

Suggested Citation

  • Giuseppina Carr? & Mariagiulia Mariani & Ivana Radic & Iuri Peri, 2016. "Integrating stakeholders? perspectives to develop tourism business strategies: the case study of a wine route," RIVISTA DI STUDI SULLA SOSTENIBILITA', FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2016(2), pages 173-186.
  • Handle: RePEc:fan:rissri:v:html10.3280/riss2016-002015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.francoangeli.it/riviste/Scheda_Rivista.aspx?IDArticolo=58289&Tipo=ArticoloPDF
    Download Restriction: Single articles can be downloaded buying download credits, for info: https://www.francoangeli.it/DownloadCredit
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sidney G. Winter, 2003. "Understanding dynamic capabilities," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(10), pages 991-995, October.
    2. Shrestha, Ram K. & Alavalapati, Janaki R. R. & Kalmbacher, Robert S., 2004. "Exploring the potential for silvopasture adoption in south-central Florida: an application of SWOT-AHP method," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 81(3), pages 185-199, September.
    3. Waligo, V.M. & Clarke, J. & Hawkins, R., 2014. "The ‘Leadership–Stakeholder Involvement Capacity’ nexus in stakeholder management," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(7), pages 1342-1352.
    4. Kurttila, Mikko & Pesonen, Mauno & Kangas, Jyrki & Kajanus, Miika, 2000. "Utilizing the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in SWOT analysis -- a hybrid method and its application to a forest-certification case," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 41-52, May.
    5. Maurizio Zollo & Sidney G. Winter, 2002. "Deliberate Learning and the Evolution of Dynamic Capabilities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 339-351, June.
    6. Rutsaert, Pieter & Pieniak, Zuzanna & Regan, Áine & McConnon, Áine & Kuttschreuter, Margôt & Lores, Mònica & Lozano, Natàlia & Guzzon, Antonella & Santare, Dace & Verbeke, Wim, 2014. "Social media as a useful tool in food risk and benefit communication? A strategic orientation approach," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 84-93.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tobias Knabke & Sebastian Olbrich, 2018. "Building novel capabilities to enable business intelligence agility: results from a quantitative study," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 493-546, August.
    2. Pandza, Krsto & Ellwood, Paul, 2013. "Strategic and ethical foundations for responsible innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1112-1125.
    3. Jim Andersén, 2023. "Green resource orchestration: A critical appraisal of the use of resource orchestration in environmental management research, and a research agenda for future study," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(8), pages 5506-5520, December.
    4. Hazhir Rahmandad & Nelson Repenning, 2016. "Capability erosion dynamics," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 649-672, April.
    5. Shastitko, Andrey & Golovanova, Svetlana, 2016. "Meeting blindly… Is Austrian economics useful for dynamic capabilities theory?," Russian Journal of Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 86-110.
    6. Burke, A.E. & van Stel, A.J. & Thurik, A.R., 2009. "Blue Ocean versus Competitive Strategy: Theory and Evidence," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2009-030-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    7. Ortiz García Navas, Beatriz & Donate Manzanares, Mario Javier & Guadamillas Gómez, Fátima, 2019. "Social capital as a theoretical approach in Strategic Management," Cuadernos de Gestión, Universidad del País Vasco - Instituto de Economía Aplicada a la Empresa (IEAE).
    8. Iman Seoudi & Matthias Huehn & Bo Carlsson, 2008. "Penrose Revisited: A Re-Appraisal of the Resource Perspective," Working Papers 14, The German University in Cairo, Faculty of Management Technology.
    9. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    10. Dario Blanco-Fernandez & Stephan Leitner & Alexandra Rausch, 2022. "Interactions between the individual and the group level in organizations: The case of learning and autonomous group adaptation," Papers 2203.09162, arXiv.org.
    11. Anja Schulze & Stefano Brusoni, 2022. "How dynamic capabilities change ordinary capabilities: Reconnecting attention control and problem‐solving," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(12), pages 2447-2477, December.
    12. Kindström, Daniel & Kowalkowski, Christian & Sandberg, Erik, 2013. "Enabling service innovation: A dynamic capabilities approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(8), pages 1063-1073.
    13. Hafeez, Salima & Rana, Asif Mehmood & Chaudhry, Rashid Mehmood & Khan, Muhammad Aslam & Ahmad, H.Mushtaq & Rehman, Kashif Ur, 2011. "Perspectives of entrepreneurial orientation with the quality of life," MPRA Paper 53860, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Shaker A. Zahra & Olga Petricevic & Yadong Luo, 2022. "Toward an action-based view of dynamic capabilities for international business," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(4), pages 583-600, June.
    15. Schriber, Svante & Löwstedt, Jan, 2015. "Tangible resources and the development of organizational capabilities," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 54-68.
    16. Huy-Cuong Vo-Thai & Shihmin Lo & My-Linh Tran, 2021. "How Capability Reconfiguration in Coping With External Dynamism Can Shape the Performance of the Vietnamese Enterprises," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(3), pages 21582440211, July.
    17. Richard Arend, 2013. "Ethics-focused dynamic capabilities: a small business perspective," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 1-24, June.
    18. Schmidt, Heiko M. & Santamaria-Alvarez, Sandra Milena, 2022. "Routines in International Business: A semi-systematic review of the concept," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(2).
    19. Cleverton Rodrigues Fernandes & André Gustavo Carvalho Machado, 2019. "Technology Transfer Capability: development dynamics in higher education institutions," Brazilian Business Review, Fucape Business School, vol. 16(1), pages 1-15, January.
    20. Rui Silva & Cidália Oliveira, 2020. "The Influence of Innovation in Tangible and Intangible Resource Allocation: A Qualitative Multi Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-22, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fan:rissri:v:html10.3280/riss2016-002015. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Stefania Rosato (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.francoangeli.it/riviste/sommario.aspx?IDRivista=168 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.