This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Purpose This research aims to verify the mismatches between the tourists’ and residents’ perceptions and satisfaction regarding the tourism destination attributes and provides a list of priorities for public organisations and Destination Management Organisation managers. Design/methodology/approach The authors combined the importance-performance-analysis and the analysis of Penalty-reward contrast, Impact Range Satisfaction and Impact Asymmetry (IAA). Data were collected from residents and tourists in Santa Maria da Feira, Portugal. Findings Results revealed the accumulated effect of each attribute to improve overall satisfaction with the destination and enhance the tourism destination’s image and attractiveness as a place to visit and to live. It can help develop tourism destinations from the placemaking perspective. IAA results showed some attributes dissatisfiers. It is an alert to city managers since they are the basic conditions for the destination. Research limitations/implications The theoretical implications build the society-centric tourism development approach. For the destinations, it means focusing on serving different consumers’ profiles and understanding that part of the market target lives in the city or nearby; they are “staycationers.” Practical implications The findings also represent insights into building a two-tier destination brand architecture for internal and external consumers. Social implications Understanding the residents as leisure consumers helps public city managers improve the quality of life in society. Originality/value The theoretical implications build the society-centric tourism development approach. For the destinations, it means focusing on serving different consumers’ profiles and understanding that part of the market target lives in the city or nearby; they are “staycationers.” The findings also represent insights into building a two-tier destination brand architecture for internal and external consumers.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Costa et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: