IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i9p4213-d1650469.html

Optimizing Tour Guide Selection: A Best–Worst Scaled Assessment of Critical Performance Criteria for Enhanced Tour Quality

Author

Listed:
  • Omer Bafail

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, College of Engineering, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah 80204, Saudi Arabia)

  • Abdulkader Hanbazazah

    (Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Jeddah, Jeddah 23890, Saudi Arabia)

Abstract

This study addresses the critical need for an evaluation framework for tour guides within the rapidly expanding tourism sector of Saudi Arabia. Employing the best–worst method, a robust multi-criteria decision-making technique, this study identifies and prioritizes key criteria for tour guide performance. Experts ranked local cultural and historical background as the most significant attribute, demonstrating its importance in delivering authentic and enriching visitor experiences. Results revealed the relative weights of other criteria, highlighting the significance of several factors such as language proficiency, time management, and environmental and ethical awareness. Notably, technology adaption criterion received the lowest weighting, indicating a potential area for future focus within the Saudi tourism sector. The study’s findings provide a foundational framework for developing a comprehensive tour guide evaluation system. This study contributes to the growing body of literature on tour guide evaluation and offers practical implications for training and development initiatives within the Saudi Arabian tourism industry.

Suggested Citation

  • Omer Bafail & Abdulkader Hanbazazah, 2025. "Optimizing Tour Guide Selection: A Best–Worst Scaled Assessment of Critical Performance Criteria for Enhanced Tour Quality," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-18, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:9:p:4213-:d:1650469
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/9/4213/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/9/4213/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sarbast Moslem & Muhammet Gul & Danish Farooq & Erkan Celik & Omid Ghorbanzadeh & Thomas Blaschke, 2020. "An Integrated Approach of Best-Worst Method (BWM) and Triangular Fuzzy Sets for Evaluating Driver Behavior Factors Related to Road Safety," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-20, March.
    2. Jairo Ortega & Sarbast Moslem & János Tóth & Tamás Péter & Juan Palaguachi & Mario Paguay, 2020. "Using Best Worst Method for Sustainable Park and Ride Facility Location," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-18, December.
    3. Huchang Liao & Shanshan Yang & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Marinko Škare, 2023. "An overview of fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making methods in hospitality and tourism industries: bibliometrics, methodologies, applications and future directions," Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(3), pages 2150871-215, December.
    4. Ming Xu & Chunjing Bai & Lei Shi & Adis Puška & Anđelka Štilić & Željko Stević, 2023. "Assessment of Mountain Tourism Sustainability Using Integrated Fuzzy MCDM Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-24, September.
    5. Ammar Y. Alqahtani & Anas A. Makki, 2023. "A DEMATEL-ISM Integrated Modeling Approach of Influencing Factors Shaping Destination Image in the Tourism Industry," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-30, September.
    6. Dragan Pamučar & Fatih Ecer & Goran Cirovic & Melfi A. Arlasheedi, 2020. "Application of Improved Best Worst Method (BWM) in Real-World Problems," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-19, August.
    7. Zeinab Neisani Samani & Ali Asghar Alesheikh & Mohammad Karimi & Najmeh Neysani Samany & Sayeh Bayat & Aynaz Lotfata & Chiara Garau, 2024. "Advancing Urban Healthcare Equity Analysis: Integrating Public Participation GIS with Fuzzy Best–Worst Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-17, February.
    8. Badri Ahmadi, Hadi & Kusi-Sarpong, Simonov & Rezaei, Jafar, 2017. "Assessing the social sustainability of supply chains using Best Worst Method," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 99-106.
    9. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    10. Reefke, Hendrik & Sundaram, David, 2017. "Key themes and research opportunities in sustainable supply chain management – identification and evaluation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 66(PB), pages 195-211.
    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. Rehman, Ubaid ur, 2025. "Evaluation and assessment of clean energy technologies: A bipolar fuzzy BWM-EDAS method for sustainable solution," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 254(C).
    2. Xiao-Kang Wang & Wen-Hui Hou & Chao Song & Min-Hui Deng & Yong-Yi Li & Jian-Qiang Wang, 2021. "BW-MaxEnt: A Novel MCDM Method for Limited Knowledge," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(14), pages 1-17, July.
    3. Shorabeh, Saman Nadizadeh & Firozjaei, Hamzeh Karimi & Firozjaei, Mohammad Karimi & Jelokhani-Niaraki, Mohammadreza & Homaee, Mehdi & Nematollahi, Omid, 2022. "The site selection of wind energy power plant using GIS-multi-criteria evaluation from economic perspectives," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    4. Feng, Jianghong & Guo, Ping & Xu, Guangyi & Xu, Gangyan & Ning, Yu, 2024. "An integrated decision framework for resilient sustainable waste electric vehicle battery recycling transfer station site selection," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 373(C).
    5. Sarfaraz Hashemkhani Zolfani & Ramin Bazrafshan & Fatih Ecer & Çağlar Karamaşa, 2022. "The Suitability-Feasibility-Acceptability Strategy Integrated with Bayesian BWM-MARCOS Methods to Determine the Optimal Lithium Battery Plant Located in South America," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(14), pages 1-18, July.
    6. Liu, Xiao & Li, Ming-Yang, 2024. "Sustainable service product design method: Focus on customer demands and triple bottom line," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    7. Vieira, Fabiana C. & Ferreira, Fernando A.F. & Govindan, Kannan & Ferreira, Neuza C.M.Q.F. & Banaitis, Audrius, 2022. "Measuring urban digitalization using cognitive mapping and the best worst method (BWM)," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    8. Ridvan Ertugrul Yildirim & Aziz Sisman, 2025. "Spatial Decision Support for Determining Suitable Emergency Assembly Places Using GIS and MCDM Techniques," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-28, March.
    9. Aleksandar Aleksić & Danijela Tadić, 2023. "Industrial and Management Applications of Type-2 Multi-Attribute Decision-Making Techniques Extended with Type-2 Fuzzy Sets from 2013 to 2022," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-24, May.
    10. Hesam Shidpour & Mohsen Shidpour, 2025. "A quantitative study on the impact of corporate social responsibility on supplier selection and suppliers’ market share in the oil industry," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 1-43, March.
    11. Chen, Faan & Li, Yaxin & Feng, Qianqian & Dong, Zehao & Qian, Yiming & Yan, Yi & Ho, Mun S. & Ma, Qianchen & Zhang, Dashan & Jin, Yuanzhe, 2023. "Road safety performance rating through PSI-PRIDIT: A planning tool for designing policies and identifying best practices for EAS countries," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    12. G. Reza Nasiri & Elnaz Miandoabchi & Mohaddeseh Javadi, 2025. "Developing a Two-Stage Decision-Making Method for Selecting and Clustering Suppliers Based on the Resilience Criteria," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 7-34, February.
    13. Marcelo Werneck Barbosa & María de los Ángeles Raimann Pumpin & Gonzalo Vargas, 2025. "Prioritization of Water Footprint Management Practices and Their Effect on Agri-Food Firms’ Reputation and Legitimacy: A Best–Worst Method Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-24, April.
    14. Yu Du & Jianwei Ren & Xinyu Xiang & Chenxi Feng & Rui Zhao, 2025. "An Integrated BWM–GIS–DEA Approach for the Site Selection of Pallet Pooling Service Centers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-29, September.
    15. Gholamreza Haseli & Reza Sheikh & Jianqiang Wang & Hana Tomaskova & Erfan Babaee Tirkolaee, 2021. "A Novel Approach for Group Decision Making Based on the Best–Worst Method (G-BWM): Application to Supply Chain Management," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(16), pages 1-20, August.
    16. Teerasak Charoennapharat & Poti Chaopaisarn, 2022. "Factors Affecting Multimodal Transport during COVID-19: A Thai Service Provider Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-25, April.
    17. Ortega-Rodríguez, Cristina & Labella, Álvaro & Ruiz-Rodríguez, Ma del Consuelo, 2025. "The Compliance Officer in Nonprofit Cooperative Societies: Validation of the figure through the Best–Worst Method," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    18. Jurgita Kuizinaitė & Mangirdas Morkūnas & Artiom Volkov, 2023. "Assessment of the Most Appropriate Measures for Mitigation of Risks in the Agri-Food Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-18, June.
    19. Hamid Reza Fazeli & Qingjin Peng, 2023. "Integrated approaches of BWM-QFD and FUCOM-QFD for improving weighting solution of design matrix," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 1003-1020, March.
    20. Karadag, Mehmet & Gul, Muhammet & Yucesan, Melih & Ortiz-Barrios, Miguel & Ishizaka, Alessio & Khan, Jehangir, 2025. "Evaluation of Green Deal compliance performance with a hybrid comparative multi-attribute decision model," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:9:p:4213-:d:1650469. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.