IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zag/busexc/v13y2019i1p77-86.html

Derived-Importance Performance Analysis As A Tool To Identify Priorities For Destination Product Development

Author

Listed:
  • Josip Mikulić

    (Ekonomski fakultet, Sveučilište u Zagrebu, Hrvatska)

Abstract

Importance-performance analysis (IPA) is an analytical tool used to define priorities for improving product or service attributes. In this research note, IPA is applied to the context of a tourist destination in order to identify the most important development priorities. More specifically, the study applies derived-importance IPA to Mostar, one of the most popular destinations in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and shows how IPA can reveal critical areas of the tourist destination product.

Suggested Citation

  • Josip Mikulić, 2019. "Derived-Importance Performance Analysis As A Tool To Identify Priorities For Destination Product Development," Poslovna izvrsnost-Business Excellence, University of Zagreb Faculty of Economics & Business, vol. 13(1), pages 77-86.
    • Handle: RePEc:zag:busexc:v:13:y:2019:i:1:p:77-86
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hrcak.srce.hr/file/323011
    Download Restriction: None
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jaccard, James & Brinberg, David & Ackerman, Lee J, 1986. "Assessing Attribute Importance: A Comparison of Six Methods," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 12(4), pages 463-468, March.
    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. Suk, Kwanho & Yoon, Song-Oh, 2012. "The moderating role of decision task goals in attribute weight convergence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 118(1), pages 37-45.
    2. Chen, Pin-Zheng & Liu, Wan-Yu, 2019. "Assessing management performance of the national forest park using impact range-performance analysis and impact-asymmetry analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 121-138.
    3. Gilbride, Timothy J. & Currim, Imran S. & Mintz, Ofer & Siddarth, S., 2016. "A Model for Inferring Market Preferences from Online Retail Product Information Matrices," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 92(4), pages 470-485.
    4. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & Farla, Jacco C.M., 2014. "Identifying and explaining public preferences for the attributes of energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 71-82.
    5. Abalo, Javier & Varela, Jesus & Manzano, Vicente, 2007. "Importance values for Importance-Performance Analysis: A formula for spreading out values derived from preference rankings," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 115-121, February.
    6. C M Yates, 2007. "A positive approach to estimating the weights for quadratic multiple objective programming," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(10), pages 1332-1340, October.
    7. Van Ittersum, Koert & Pennings, Joost M.E. & Wansink, Brian & van Trijp, Hans C.M., 2007. "The validity of attribute-importance measurement: A review," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(11), pages 1177-1190, November.
    8. Barlas, Sema, 2003. "When choices give in to temptations: Explaining the disagreement among importance measures," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 310-321, July.
    9. Martinovici, A., 2019. "Revealing attention - how eye movements predict brand choice and moment of choice," Other publications TiSEM 7dca38a5-9f78-4aee-bd81-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    10. Marcel GERDS, 2010. "Which characteristics of workers are important for employers in Northeast Germany?," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 56(11), pages 449-507.
    11. Yanchun Jin & Yoonseo Park, 2019. "An Integrated Approach to Determining Rural Tourist Satisfaction Factors Using the IPA and Conjoint Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(20), pages 1-16, October.
    12. Nita Umashankar & Yashoda Bhagwat & V. Kumar, 2017. "Do loyal customers really pay more for services?," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 45(6), pages 807-826, November.
    13. Fernando, Angeline Gautami & Aw, Eugene Cheng-Xi, 2023. "What do consumers want? A methodological framework to identify determinant product attributes from consumers’ online questions," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    14. Azzopardi, Ernest & Nash, Robert, 2013. "A critical evaluation of importance–performance analysis," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 222-233.
    15. Maria del Mar Casanovas-Rubio & Bernat Vinolas, 2024. "New method for assigning cardinal weights in multi-criteria decision-making: the constant weight ratio method," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 1-33, June.
    16. Bottomley, Paul A. & Doyle, John R., 2013. "Comparing the validity of numerical judgements elicited by direct rating and point allocation: Insights from objectively verifiable perceptual tasks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(1), pages 148-157.
    17. Louviere, Jordan J. & Islam, Towhidul, 2008. "A comparison of importance weights and willingness-to-pay measures derived from choice-based conjoint, constant sum scales and best-worst scaling," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(9), pages 903-911, September.
    18. Ahn, Byeong Seok, 2011. "Compatible weighting method with rank order centroid: Maximum entropy ordered weighted averaging approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 212(3), pages 552-559, August.
    19. Jessica Zeiss & Les Carlson & A. Dwayne Ball, 2021. "Uncalculated first‐party externalities given a beverage tax," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(6), pages 2706-2717, November.
    20. James Jaccard, 2012. "The Reasoned Action Model," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 640(1), pages 58-80, March.

    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:zag:busexc:v:13:y:2019:i:1:p:77-86. 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: Dario Dunković (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fefzghr.html .

    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.