mdC
|
pequeño (250x250 max)
mediano (500x500 max)
grande
Extra Large
grande ( > 500x500)
Alta resolución
|
|
Vol. 6 Nº 2 págs. 231-247. 2008 Special Issue – Número Especial www.pasosonline.org © PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. ISSN 1695-7121 A framework for the evaluation of winery servicescapes: A New Zealand case Angela McDonnell i C. Michael Hall ii University of Canterbury (New Zealand) Abstract: In an increasingly competitive market to attract visitors, wineries are often seeking new means to enhance the visitor experience. However, despite recognition of the importance in the wine tourism literature of the setting in which wine experiences occur there has been little adoption of the servicescape concept from the marketing literature and its adoption as a potential diagnostic tool. The paper utilizes the concept to develop a potential diagnostic tool that may be used by wineries and cellar door venues to evaluate their servicescape attributes. Preliminary results are provided which demonstrate the utility of the servicescape framework but further research is required to test the framework in different culture and design settings. Keywords: Servicescape; New Zealand; Wine tourism; Cellar door Abstract: En mercados cada vez más competitivos, donde se intentan captar mayores cuotas de deman-da, las bodegas buscan a menudo nuevas formas de realzar las experiencias de los visitantes. Sin embar-go, a pesar del reconocimiento de la importancia en la literatura del constructo "turismo del vino" y "ex-periencias del visitante", el ajuste entre éstas últimas y el nuevo concepto de interacción social (services-cape) como herramienta potencial de diágnóstico ha tenido poca atención en la literatura del marketing. El papel que utiliza el concepto comentado para desarrollar un instrumento de diagnóstico potencial, debería ser usado por las bodegas y distribuidoras para evaluar los atributos de ésta llamada "interacción social". Los resultados preliminares proporcionan y demuestran la utilidad del marco conceptual de la "interacción social", pero se requiere de investigaciones adicionales en diferentes culturas y entornos, así como ajustes de diseño del mismo. Keywords: Relación comida versus bebida; Picante; Pizza; Diferencias de género i • Angela McDonnell. Department of Management. University of Canterbury. Christchurch (New Zealand). E-mail: angelakevin@inspire.net.nz ii • C. Michael Hall Department of Management. University of Canterbury. Christchurch (New Zealand). E-mail: michael.hall@canterbury.ac.nz 232 A framework for the evaluation of winery servicescapes: ... PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 6(2). 2008 Número Especial. Turismo Gastronómico y Enoturismo ISSN 1695-7121 Introduction Wine is an increasingly important part of the New Zealand rural economy. The number of wineries in New Zealand has increased from 262 in 1997 to 543 in 2007 with the number of tonnes crushed growing from 60,000 tonnes to 205,000 tonnes over the same period and further growth ex-pected to continue in the foreseeable future. This has meant that total production has also grown from 45.8 million litres in 1997 to 147.6 million in 2007 (New Zealand Winegrowers 2007). However, the per capi-ta consumption of wine in New Zealand has only marginally increased over the same period, meaning that wineries are constant-ly seeking to expand their export base and/or increase the amount of domestic consumption. This is being done via a variety of mar-keting techniques and promotional chan-nels, including, for larger companies, tele-vision, magazine and other forms of media advertising as well as event sponsorship. However, the vast majority of New Zealand wineries are small producers by interna-tional standards (Hall and Mitchell 2008). For example, of the 543 wineries that ex-isted in the country in 2007, 483 of them produced less than 200,000 litres each and only nine produced more than two million litres (New Zealand Winegrowers 2007). This has meant, therefore, that the wine market is extremely competitive and that wineries are often looking for new avenues of sale such as direct sales from the wine-ries, what is widely referred to as cellar door sales or wine tourism. However, while there is a growing literature on wine tour-ism as well as business and industry inter-est in the subject, the way in which the physical aspects of the wineries themselves contribute to the overall marketing of their product has been little studied, even though ‘atmosphere’ for example, is recog-nized as a significant factor in the cellar door experience (Hall et al. 2000; Carlsen and Charters 2006; Mitchell and Hall 2006). Therefore, this article aims to devel-op a potential framework for the evaluation of what is defined in the marketing litera-ture as the ‘servicescape’, the physical evi-dence of service in wineries and its poten-tial value as a diagnostic tool. The paper is divided into several sec-tions. First, it provides a background to wine tourism in New Zealand. Second, it discusses the servicescape context in light of research on wine tourism. Third, it presents the methodology for the develop-ment of the servicescape framework and then goes on to discuss its application. Fi-nally, the paper draws some preliminary findings as to its application. Wine Tourism in New Zealand The New Zealand Ministry of Tourism (2007) defines wine tourists as internation-al and domestic visitors, aged 15 years and over, who visit a winery at least once while travelling in New Zealand. Tourists who visit multiple wineries in a single area or visit a single winery on more than one oc-casion are counted only once. However, the Ministry approach does not count residents of an area who visit a winery within their ‘local area’ as a wine tourist. Unfortunate-ly, what exactly constituted a local area was not defined in the report. Therefore, Ministry figures understate the actual fre-quency of winery visitation among New Zealand residents and, to a lesser extent, international tourists when in comparison to other New Zealand research on the sub-ject (Mitchell and Hall 2006; Hall and Mit-chell 2008). Using data derived from the interna-tional and domestic tourism surveys the Ministry of Tourism (2007) estimated that in 2006 507,500 tourists visited New Zeal-and wineries, made up of 44% international tourists and 56% domestic tourists (includ-ing those on overnight and day trips). They estimated that the number of in-ternational tourists visiting wineries in-creased from 108,500 visitors in 2001 to 224,700 visitors in 2006, an annual average growth rate of 16%. In contrast, the num-ber of domestic wine tourists was estimated to have declined from 532,400 visitors in 2001 to 282,800 in 2006. The Regional Tourism Organisation (RTO) areas which attracted the greatest number of interna-tional wine tourists over the 2005/2006 Angela McDonnell and C. Michael Hall 233 PASOS. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Heritage, 6(2). 2008 Special Issue. Gastronomic and wine tourism ISSN 1695-7121 period were Marlborough (an average of 45,300 wine visitors per year, or 22% of all international wine visitors), Hawke’s Bay (40,100, 19%), and Auckland (34,600, 16%). These market shares were relatively con-sistent over the period 2001-2006 and the numbers were estimated to have grown in line with the total (Ministry of Tourism 2007). In contrast to the use of secondary sur-vey data by the Ministry of Tourism, a na-tional survey of wineries with respect to their utilization of wine tourism as part of their business practices was conducted in 1997/98 (Hall and Johnson 1998) and re-peated, with minor modifications, in 2003/4 (Christensen et al. 2004). The survey was the first national level survey of the supply of the wine tourism product conducted in the world and produces some distinctly different results when compared to those obtained by other surveys as the focus is on visits rather than individual visitor activi-ty. The sample population for each survey was the total number of wineries in the country. Wineries reported that wine tourism is important in terms of: • enhancing product/brand awareness • helping to differentiate one wineries wine from another • helping to develop mail order sales • and, in the 2003 survey only, helping to educate customers. Wineries share a strong belief that wine tourism enhances product/brand aware-ness, with those either agreeing or strongly agreeing with this statement totalling 72.4% in 1997 and 73.2% in 2003 while almost half favour wine tourism's role in differentiating their wine from another wineries, In 2003, 54.2% supported a statement that wine tourism was impor-tant for mail order sales growth. In general wineries believed that tourism provided them with significant marketing opportuni-ties. Other research also supports the value of tourism to New Zealand wineries (e.g. Hall, Longo et al. 2000; Mitchell and Hall 2001a, 2001b, 2004, 2006; Simpson et al. 2004). However, while the potential signi-ficance of winery or cellar door design and atmosphere on wine tourists’ satisfaction and potential long-term relationship with wineries is noted, no analysis of the physi-cal environment of the cellar door expe-rience has been undertaken. Servicescapes and the Cellar Door Studies in New Zealand have found that cellar door sales account for, on average, around 15% to 20% of wine sales but there is substantial variability in this figure with the overall size of wine production being a significant influence on the overall impor-tance of wine tourism with cellar door sales being more important for small producers (Johnson and Hall 1998; Hall, Longo et al. 2000; Christensen et al. 2004). Usually cellar door sales comprise a larger amount of sales early in the development of a wine-ry and are particularly important for the smaller wineries, where there are examples where more than 75% of revenue is gained through the cellar door (Christensen et al. 2004; Mitchell and Hall 2006). Hall and Mitchell (2008) state that one winery in New Zealand reported that just one bottle of their Reserve Pinot sold at the cellar door gave them the same return as seven bottles of their normal Pinot Noir sold via their New Zealand distributor, even though the retail price for the reserve is only around 2.5 times that of the normal Pinot. Such direct sales can improve margins con-siderably for wineries as payments to in-termediaries and retailers take their share for retail sales. Drawing on lessons from the environ-mental design, retail and marketing litera-ture this paper takes the perspective that the winery and cellar door space are part of the overall packaging of wine as expe-rienced by wine tourists. Product attributes, packaging, display, retail at-mospherics, and the physical environment are nested inside each other to help gener-ate sales, encourage the development of relationships with customers and develop positive experiences and customer satisfac-tion. Literature on servicescapes (Bitner, 1986, 1990, 1992; Sherry 1998; Newman 2007) and retail atmospherics (Baker et al., 1994, 1998, 2002) clearly associates the environment with service quality. “The servicescape is the physical setting 234 A framework for the evaluation of winery servicescapes: ... PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 6(2). 2008 Número Especial. Turismo Gastronómico y Enoturismo ISSN 1695-7121 within which service occurs and which in-fluences customers’ perceptions of the ser-vicescape (perceived quality) and the sub-sequent internal (i.e. degree of satisfaction) and external (i.e. behaviour with respect to patronage and purchase) response” (Hall and Mitchell 2008: 179). The servicescape is important for consumer experiences be-cause this environment gives customers and employees tangible and intangible signs and signals about potential service delivery. Hall and Mitchell (2008) stress the importance of servicescapes for wine sales but in the context of the retail setting as opposed to the winery setting and cellar door sales. Bitner (1992) argues that the environ-ment in which the service encounter and experience are jointly produced between customer and producer, i.e. the service-scape, affects customer outcomes and expe-riences. She distinguishes the interior ser-vicescape which includes interior design, equipment, signage and layout, from the exterior servicescape which includes exte-rior design, parking, the landscape, and the surrounding environment. Although, as Wels-Lips et al. (1997) note, it may be worthwhile to restrict the servicescape from a production standpoint to the mar-keting- controlled environment, and to dis-tinguish it from environmental influences which are not marketing-controlled, such as the weather. Zeithaml, Bitner and Gremlerl (2006) suggest that the physical evidence of a ser-vice, or servicescape offers tangible com-munication about the service provided. Wineries can use the tangible cues of their physical design and the interior and exte-rior attributes of a winery and its environs for visitors and customers to assess levels of satisfaction, before, during and after consumption. An example of how the ser-vicescape may affect satisfaction before consumption is through cues such as visual and virtual images of winery layout, exter-nal design and car parks. Although the potential significance of the environment in which the wine tourism experience occurs is seen as significant for the nature of that experience the role of the servicescape has received only passing ac-knowledgement (e.g. Dodd 1995; Dodd and Bigotle 1997; Mitchell and Hall 2001a; O’Neil et al. 2002) and little in-depth inves-tigation (Hall and Mitchell 2008), with the focus tending to be on the personal attributes of the service encounter rather than the tangible attributes of the winery. This is despite recognition of the impor-tance of the tangible evidence of service for wineries. As O’Neil et al. (2002: 345) state, “The cellar door is often the first contact consumers have with a winery and its wines. Therefore every aspect of the cellar door (including layout, appearance and staff) is of extreme importance. The cellar door is unique in that it provides the visitor with a complete profile of the winery and its wines, and it is here that perceptions of the winery are established”. Therefore, gaining a better understanding of the ser-vicescape may potentially assist wineries in improving customer experiences as well as providing opportunities for brand develop-ment and customer relationship building. Methodology Given that no winery specific service-scape framework had been developed, the study utilized elements identified from relevant wine tourism, wine marketing and servicescape literature (e.g. Bitner 1992; Wakefield and Blodgett 1996). A draft framework was developed and pre-tested in the field on several wineries so as to deter-mine the applicability of servicescape di-mensions. The final study was undertaken over a three month period between August and October 2007 and was used to assess the servicescapes of 27 South Island wineries in New Zealand. In several cases multiple site visits were conducted so as to try and ensure that non-controllable environmental conditions such as the weather were consis-tent over all the wineries that were eva-luated. The wineries in this study included eleven in the Canterbury region (including Waipara and Kaikoura sub-regions) and seventeen in the Marlborough region. Wineries were selected so as to represent different volumes of annual wine produc-tion as well as architectural designs. Research was undertaken via a form of visual content analysis (CA). CA is an ob- Angela McDonnell and C. Michael Hall 235 PASOS. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Heritage, 6(2). 2008 Special Issue. Gastronomic and wine tourism ISSN 1695-7121 servational research method that is used to systematically evaluate the actual and symbolic content of all forms of communica-tion. In addition to its application to rec-orded communication CA is an increasingly important element of hermeneutics and semiotic analysis in critical social science and in consumer studies (Aghuvia 2001; Hall and Valentin 2005). The framework used for the study of the wineries initially had five dimensional sec-tions that were categories derived from the servicescape literature: physical external and internal presentation; staff presenta-tion and; ambience and merchandise, in order to provide an overall picture of the on site experience of each of the 27 wineries visited. However, following field testing it was decided to add a sixth element ‘Direct and Indirect External Influences’ which, although not necessarily including ele-ments directly controlled by the winery, did include material that was co-produced with other organizations. In addition, identifica-tion of this material may have broader im-plications for the presentation of wine re-gions or winery clusters to consumers. Each section evaluated the physical presentation of a range of servicescape di-mensions of the winery and included sec-tions on the following dimensions: Section A: Physical Environment – Exter-nal Presentation. Aspects of the service-scape that are often perceived on first impression. The architecture of the building, exterior signs, car parks paths and access-ways can often provide a per-ception of what the likely experience outcome may be at each winery. The condition of the paintwork, outdoor seat-ing arrangements and landscape were also evaluated. Section B: Physical Environment – Inter-nal Presentation. Including interior de-sign, flow and colour. Condition of the functional equipment was also eva-luated along with the condition of the paintwork, and housekeeping standards. In this section, evidence of merchandis-ing and design skill is examined on a variable scale. Section C: Staff Presentation. Includes uni-forms and personal grooming as an im-portant element of the servicescape and one that can often be overlooked in the overall impression of a servicescape Section D: Interior and Exterior Ambient Conditions. Includes evidence of shelter and impact on the natural environmen-tal setting of the servicescape. Also some of the more intangible aspects such as air temperature, noise, odour are evaluated. Section E: Prod-uct/ Merchandise/Brochures/Menus/Web Pages A broader section that deals with many of the items customers take with them from the experience including the wine bottle and label, wine carriers, bags, souvenirs and brochures. This sec-tion also includes an evaluative score for the winery web page. Section F: Direct and Indirect External Influences on Servicescape. Includes ex-ternal impact of other tangible and in-tangible variables including information provided by people external to the wine-ry and tangible evidence such as maps, magazines, events or brochures the winery may be included in. Some of these variables may be controllable if in-formation flows are managed and con-trolled by the winery. Other variables such as weather conditions may not be within control of the winery. Scoring for the dimensions was ranked: Very good –Excellent 7 – 10; Satisfactory – Good; 4 – 6; and Poor 1 – 3. Spreadsheets were also developed to provide results from the servicescape framework score sheets for each winery (Tables 1-6). An informal ‘wine log’ was also used also to assess each winery and provide a brief commentary summarising certain criteria identified in the servicescape framework evaluation and general perceptions and observations. This was also done to achieve consistency in approach to each winery. Similarly, obser-vations and recording were typically done by pairs of observers in order to reduce impacts of personal bias. 236 A framework for the evaluation of winery servicescapes: ... PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 6(2). 2008 Número Especial. Turismo Gastronómico y Enoturismo ISSN 1695-7121 Table 1 Section A-Physical Environment: External Presentation Very Good - Excellent Satisfactory-Good Poor – Not applicable Total Score 7-10 4-6 1-3 Architecture/Exterior building design Consistent style reflect-ing wine brand or image Inconsistent with wine brand or image or mixed architectural design No architectural design/inconsistent with wine brand or image Car Parking Ample spaces/ close to entrance/well paved or sealed Moderate amount availa-ble/ moderate walk to entrance. Average paving or sealing surface Minimal spaces available/long walk to entrance/poor paving or sealing surface. Signage on building exterior/Fascia/ billboards Excellent condition. Clean. Advertises business name and/or products accurately Fair condition. Advertises business name and/or products Poor condition. Ap-pears rarely cleaned. Fails to promote business name and/or products Opening hours/other notices Opening hours sign dis-played and in good con-dition. Reflects current trading hours. Other relevant notices displayed/ good condi-tion. Current trading Hours displayed. Most other relevant notices on display and in reasonable condition No opening hours displayed. Notices in poor condition or not current Paint-work/ Walls/window frames Clean. Excellent condi-tion. Reasonable condition. Needs cleaning. In poor repair. Pavement area/Doorways No rubbish. Appears regularly swept. Door paintwork good condition. Door mats good condition. Safety. Appears swept as re-quired. Door paint work fair condition. Door mats fair condition. Not swept. Door paintwork in Poor condition. Door mats in poor condition/ Rubbish Access (for buggies and wheelchairs where appropriate) Entrance designed for safety for buggies, wheelchairs and other mobility devices. Reasonably safe access for buggies, wheelchairs and other mobility devic-es. Entrance unsuitable for buggies. Wheel-chairs and other mo-bility devices. Windows/exterior window treatments. Clean windows. Blinds umbrellas/ awnings in good condition - bright and attractive. Clean windows. Blinds umbrellas/ awnings rea-sonably clean and in good condition Dirty windows. Blinds umbrellas /awnings in poor condition Outdoor seating fur-nishing and equipment arrangement Modern/style suits over-all architecture of wine-ry/ well maintained. No specific style to match winery design or architecture /average condition. Plastic or ugly furni-ture/ shabby poor condition. Window dis-plays/ promotions Attractive display. Eye catching from outside. Promotes products/prices/ service inside. Material current. Attempted eye catching display. Tries to promote products/prices/ service inside. Material current. Poor attempt at window display. Conflicting messages/out of date material. External Lighting All lights either are or appear in working order. Lighting does or may enhance exterior Lighting either in or appears to be in working order but may not en-hance outdoor area Poor external light-ing/ apparent dark areas Overall impression of exte-rior/ layout/design/land scape External presentation creates highly favourable impression. Attracts interest and looks inviting Reasonable external presentation likely to attract and encourage customers to enter External presentation of premises unlikely to attract interest or encourage customers to enter Total Score Angela McDonnell and C. Michael Hall 237 PASOS. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Heritage, 6(2). 2008 Special Issue. Gastronomic and wine tourism ISSN 1695-7121 Table 2 Section B - Physical Environment: Internal Presentation Very good- Excellent Satisfactory -Good Poor – Not applicable Total 7-10 4-6 1-3 Score Interior design/colour/ style/Furnishings Professionally designed. Conforming to high quality distinctive de-sign/ consistency in style and colour Good quality/ consis-tency in de-sign/ style/colour No design/poor quali-ty/ confused style/theme/colours Interior light-ing/ fixtures and fit-tings Good lighting for dis-plays areas/in working order/ Lighting creates bright attractive image. High quality fixtures and fit-tings in good condi-tion/ conforming to high standard of overall de-sign Reasonable lighting for displays/ fittings in working order. Fixtures and fittings of reasona-ble quality, in good condition/ in keeping with and suitable for overall style Dim or unsuitable Lighting for displays. Fittings not in working order. Fixtures and fittings of poor quality, in poor condition or unsuitable for purpose. Too many conflicting styles. Functional Equip-ment/ cash regis-ters/ fridge Excellent condition Average condition Poor condition/dirty Clean functioning Restrooms Spotlessly clean with ample toiletry supplies of soap/toilet paper. Has hand cloth/air drying facility. Reasonably clean. Minimal spare toile-tries. Dirty/no soap/no toilet paper. Housekeeping Winery retail area very clean, tidy and well maintained. Presents a professional image. Retail area reasonably clean and tidy. Good maintenance. Flooring reasonably clean condi-tion. Retail area poorly cleaned or untidy. Poor maintenance. Dirty floors Merchandising and Product Display Evidence of good merchandising skills. Retail interior used well with balance and good displays. Attractive pro-duct presentation Evidence of reasonable merchandising skills. Retail interior used reasonably well. Most shelves ‘faced-up’. Limited gaps Little or no evidence of merchandising skills. Poor use of space. Unattractive product display. Scrambled merchandis-ing Table décor/coverings Fresh flow-ers/ stylish/cutlery and crockery style in keeping with interior décor de-sign. Clean fresh table cloths/matching serviet-tes Minimal table decora-tion/ dried flow-ers/ mismatched crock-ery/ cutlery/no table cloths/moderately clean/paper serviettes No table decora-tion/ dirty tables/cluttered/chipped or dirty crockery/no serviettes Point of Pur-chase/ cellar door area Well designed, attractive and functional. Has aesthetic appeal. unclut-tered Practical design, un-cluttered. Poor design. Cluttered. Detracts or is mis-matched with overall appearance of rest of the servicescape 238 A framework for the evaluation of winery servicescapes: ... PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 6(2). 2008 Número Especial. Turismo Gastronómico y Enoturismo ISSN 1695-7121 Table 2 (cont.) Section B - Physical Environment: Internal Presentation Very good- Excellent Satisfactory -Good Poor – Not applicable Total 7-10 4-6 1-3 Score Layout and arrange-ment of internal floor space Attractive. Has immedi-ate impact/ distinctive qualities that differenti-ate it from other wineries / excellent spatial layout Welcoming/ layout planned to suit only access or to maximise occupancy Austere or cluttered/ unattractive/no spatial planning Indoor/Outdoor flow Direct/excellent flow/outside and inside appear unified Indirect/un-natural flow/some unification No flow/segregated Artefacts/ Collectibles/ Artwork/ photos/Awards Artistic /distinctive/ Integrates well with overall theme/ excellent condition Mixed theme/good condition None or cluttered or austere/no relationship with winery or theme of winery/dirty Total Score Table 3 Section C-Staff Presentation Very good- Excellent Satisfactory-Good Poor Total 7-10 4-6 1-3 Score Uniforms Clean/tidy/colour coor-dinated/ branding Clean/Tidy/colour coordinated No uni-form/ uncoordinated Personal Grooming Impeccable/well groomed/hair off face Tidy Untidy Total Score Table 4 Section D - Interior and Exterior Ambient Conditions Very good- Excellent Satisfactory-Good Poor Total 7-10 4-6 1-3 Score Exterior Shelter Excellent shelter from wind and sun. Integrates with overall architectural design of winery Moderate shelter from wind and sun No or little shelter Interior Temperature / air quality Comfortable Mostly comfortable Uncomfortable /unpleasant/stuffy Noise Comfortable Mostly comfortable Uncomfortable /unpleasant Music Suitable for atmosphere Mostly suitable Unsuitable Odour Fresh/Pleasant Mostly pleasant Smoke/stuffy/musty/du sty Natural Environment / Impact of winery on setting Surrounding environ-ment has been consid-ered in winery design In keeping with sur-roundings Not in keeping with natural environment or impacted in parts, ie erosion, rubbish on ground Total Score Angela McDonnell and C. Michael Hall 239 PASOS. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Heritage, 6(2). 2008 Special Issue. Gastronomic and wine tourism ISSN 1695-7121 Table 5 Section E - Product/Merchandise/Brochures/Menus/Web Page Very good- Excellent Satisfactory-Good Poor Total 7-10 4-6 1-3 Score Wine Bottle/ Label Headline defines brand / unique or distinctive / easy to read / uncluttered layout, copy and visuals / artistic Fairly distinctive bottle or label / easy to read / ordinary looking lay-out, copy and visuals Non-distinctive branding / cluttered / bland layout, copy and visuals Wine Bottle Carrier Artistic / strong winery branding/ packaging used as an advertising medium Modest winery brand-ing / easy to carry Plain, no art work/cheap looking Merchandise in-cluding Souve-nirs/ Gifts/ T-shirts/ Aprons /Wine Glasses Wide selection / tastefully designed in keeping with wine brand and image Moderate selection / generic branding with no artistic flair None or minimal merchandise avail-able / unbranded Brochures/ business cards/price list stationery Informative / distinctive winery branding and logos/ artistic/paper /easy to read / good layout Informative/ indistinct winery branding and logos/ordinary paper Cluttered layout/no clear branding/ unprofessional look-ing Menu Clean and crisp presentation. Excellent structure, easy to read / distinctive winery branding and logo / inte-grated marketing communi-cation( IMC) Clean, tidy / good structure, easy to read / has winery logo or branding / not integrated with other marketing com-munication literature Tatty looking menus / not integrated with other marketing communication lit-erature / out of date / hand written price amendments Web Page Design Easy to navigate website / well designed / colourful / (IMC)/distinctive branding / informative / artistic head-line, copy layout, visuals / links provided Easy to navigate / good design / plain / some branding / no links Difficult to navigate / Indistinct branding / amateur looking Total Score 240 A framework for the evaluation of winery servicescapes: ... PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 6(2). 2008 Número Especial. Turismo Gastronómico y Enoturismo ISSN 1695-7121 Table 6 Section F - Direct/Indirect External Servicescape Influences Very good- Excellent Satisfactory-Good Poor Total 7-10 4-6 1-3 Score Tangible Directions to Winery via Tour-ism company / Information Centres / Maps Clear and concise/ multi-national signs and symbols or diagrams. Distinctive and defines brand. Unclut-tered layout, copy and visuals/artistic Fairly clear instructions that are reasonably easy to read. A few symbols and diagrams but ordi-nary looking layout, copy and visuals Non-distinctive brand-ing / cluttered / bland layout, copy and visuals. No multi-national symbols or signs. Regional or area promotional activi-ties / trade fairs Positively promote and accurately represent or inform desired market image positioning of win-ery Promotes winery but does not represent actual market position or image of No activities planned in area or taken advantage of by winery Tourist or Travel Agents/Bus o Tour Operators own ser-vicescape Professional appealing image and brand associa-tion positioned to com-plement or enhance winery image and branding Average image brand and image association. No flair. May not match winery visitor demo-graphic Poor image and brand association. Unprofes-sional and unattractive staff and premises. No effort put into effec-tively promoting win-ery Environmental con-ditions affecting access – weather / road signage Easily accessible roads-wide / smooth tarseal sur-face / pleasant or interest-ing scenery in-keeping with winery design and reflecting market position-ing Average conditions – road / signage / indistinc-tive or uninteresting scenery / average or uncomfortable road jour-ney / reasonable road signs Adverse conditions, poor road- potholes / shingle surface / nar-row no road signs / scenery not in keeping with image of winery / Exposed and wind gusts / steep grade road Wine Retail outlets Professional looking ser-vicescape. Staff trained in product knowledge of winery and wines in gen-eral. Distinctive brand displays and profiles. Premises not outstanding in presentation as a wine outlet. Wine not attrac-tively displayed or pro-filed. Staff have only generalised knowledge of wine. Untidy or cluttered outlet. Wine boxes used to display wine with no brand profil-ing. Staff have minimal or no wine knowledge. Results Results are shown to illustrate the po-tential of the approach with respect to winery servicescape evaluation. The inten-tion is to identify perceptual and empirical dimensions of servicescapes rather than for the evaluation to be used as ranking sys-tem. Scores are provided for individual wineries as well as observations with re-spect to regional characteristics. The wineries with the highest scores for their physical external presentation in-cluded Wither Hills, Nautilus and Allan Scott with the lowest being Daniel Schus-ter, Hintons, Bouldevines and Torlesse (Tables 7 and 8). Most wineries scored reasonably well in areas of paintwork of exterior walls, win-dow frames and door ways. Exterior sig-nage and billboards were in general of a high standard with the average signage scoring 7.1. Many car parks were found to be of a lower than expected standard in the study in terms of aesthetic appeal and seal-ing surfaces. The average score for car parks was only 6.5. Angela McDonnell and C. Michael Hall 241 PASOS. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Heritage, 6(2). 2008 Special Issue. Gastronomic and wine tourism ISSN 1695-7121 Table 7 Physical Environment – Highest Scores Physical Environment: External Presentation Allan Scott Wither Hills Nautilus Architecture/ext building design 10 10 7 Car parking 10 10 10 Signage on building ext/fascia/billboard 10 10 9 Opening hours/other notices 9 8 10 Paintwork-walls/window frames 10 10 10 Pavement/doorways 10 10 10 Access for buggies/disabled 10 8 9 Windows/ext window treatments 10 10 9 Outdoor seating/equipment 10 10 10 Window displays/promotion 0 0 0 Ext lighting 10 10 7 Overall impression ext/layout/design/landscape 10 10 9 Total 109 106 100 Table 8 Physical environment – lowest scores Physical Environment: External Presenta-tion Hintons Daniel Schuster Torlesse Bouldvines Architecture/ext building design 1 7 7 6 Car parking 2 1 7 2 Signage on building ext/fascia/billboard 6 1 1 6 Opening hours/other notices 6 10 2 5 Paintwork-walls/window frames 7 5 5 8 Pavement/doorways 8 5 4 8 Access for buggies/disabled 5 1 8 2 Windows/ext window treatments 1 4 6 4 Outdoor seating/equipment 4 2 5 0 Window displays/promotion 0 1 1 4 Ext lighting 5 4 4 4 Overall impression ext/layout/design/landscape 5 2 6 3 Total 50 43 56 52 The study also found that outdoor seat-ing was an area of neglect for many wine-ries. The average score was 6.9. This was surprising given that, at the time of the survey with the southern hemisphere summer approaching, this was an area that many wineries which depend on outdoors elements to attract visitors could have been expected to have invested in. Given its po-tential significance in peak visitor periods aesthetic appeal including seating should be prioritised and addressed in winery business plans. Exterior lighting was also neglected by some wineries and brought the average score down to 6.3, but as many are not open in the evenings that was an aspect given minimal attention by many wineries. The most dramatic observation made was that less than a quarter of the wineries surveyed paid attention to any form of ex-terior window display or promotion. This may be in part due to the design of the ac-tual buildings, but also through lack of understanding or skill in this area. Oppor-tunities for promotional product or infor- 242 A framework for the evaluation of winery servicescapes: ... PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 6(2). 2008 Número Especial. Turismo Gastronómico y Enoturismo ISSN 1695-7121 mation displays in exterior servicescapes are numerous and could be integrated in business promotional planning. Opportuni-ties noted in this study included outdoor seating areas where promotional informa-tion could have been displayed on tables or exterior billboards or windows. Incorporat-ing aesthetically pleasing and subtle pro-motional displays were apparently ignored due to a general lack of planned display space at most wineries. With respect to internal presentation of the physical environment, highest scores were assigned to Wither Hills and Pegasus Bay. Lowest scores went to Hintons, Wai-para, Torlesse and Huia. Allan Scott did not rate as highly for physical internal presentations as they did in their external. The majority of wineries scored very well on housekeeping standards with an average of 8.2. One particular forgotten area for most wineries was that of table decoration. Even wineries that had no restaurant or dining facilities still had tables that could have been decorated in some way with branded table talkers, flowers or art pieces. The minimalist austere look was prevalent. The average score was only 3.4. Display of artifacts and awards was also inconsistent across the wineries. Renowned wineries like Pegasus Bay, Wither Hills and St Clair scored 10 marks and prided themselves with almost ostentatious dis-plays of their awards, while others like Cloudy Bay, who are positioned as similar in quality of wine and renown, were not as ambitious to impress and had no awards on display at all. Huia, also another similarly positioned winery only scored 1. However, it is possible that this may also reflect ele-ments of a winery’s positioning with re-spect to awards as well as branding. Uniform scores varied amongst the wineries from 0 at The Wineshed, Bould-vines, Highcrest and Huia, to impeccable representation at others scoring 10 at Wither Hills, Cloudy Bay, Melton Estate, Kaikoura Winery, Wairau River, Clifford Bay, Framingham, Nautilus, Mahi and Domaine. Matua Valley and Villa Maria scored only 7 and 3. Interestingly, these are large mass production wineries and may be influenced more by their focus on the production concept of marketing rather Table 9 Physical Environment: Internal Presentation Physical Environment: Inter-nal Presentation Hintons Waipara Pegasus Bay Torlesse Cloudy Bay Huia Wither Hills Interior design / colour/ style/ furnishings 1 3 10 3 10 4 10 Interior lighting / fixtures and fittings 3 5 10 3 10 7 10 Functional Equipment / cash registers / fridge 5 4 10 6 10 7 10 Clean functioning restrooms 6 3 10 0 10 0 10 Housekeeping standards 4 6 10 6 10 9 10 Merchandising and Product Display 1 1 10 3 10 4 10 Table décor / coverings 2 5 5 3 0 0 10 Point-of-purchase / cellar door area 1 2 10 4 10 5 10 Layout and arrangement of internal floor plan 0 1 10 4 10 6 10 Indoor / outdoor flow 2 7 5 9 10 1 10 Artifacts / collectibles / artwork / photos / awards 1 3 10 3 0 1 10 Total 26 40 100 44 90 44 110 Angela McDonnell and C. Michael Hall 243 PASOS. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Heritage, 6(2). 2008 Special Issue. Gastronomic and wine tourism ISSN 1695-7121 than a customer focused marketing con-cept. Personal grooming at most of the wine-ries was of a high standard however it was noted that the presentation of staff at the wine cellar sales counter and restaurant at Highfield had soiled polo shirts and hand wipe marks on their aprons. This particular winery positions and prides itself on its export quality wines and strong branding. Therefore, it was surprising that uniforms and staff presentation should not reflect the desired branding image. Most wineries scored fairly well with re-spect to interior and exterior ambient posi-tions. The highest score went to Wither Hills with full marks of 60. The lowest was Hintons with 26. Most wineries scored well with respect to their labels and wine bottle carriers as well as web pages. There were varied re-sults for branded merchandise and souve-nirs. Some wineries such as Matua Valley and St Clair had vast amounts of branded merchandise for sale while others like Hin-tons had nothing obvious. Results for bro-chures were very disappointing at the Christchurch wineries. The Wineshed had none and scored 0, Larcomb Wines scored 1, Hintons had none and scored 0. The only Marlborough result for brochures that was disappointing was Matua Valley, scoring 1. Discussion As noted in the introduction wine tour-ism has become an important component of the marketing and business strategies of many wineries in New Zealand (Hall and Mitchell 2008). If visitors are significant target markets for wineries as in the case of the wineries studied for this paper, then the servicescape must be an important con-sideration of wineries that seek to increase their sales at the cellar door and develop a positive post-visit consumer relationship (Mitchell and Hall 2004, 2006). First sightings and impression of the winery for tourists should instill the feeling of a positive visitor experience. If the first impression of the winery is one of unkempt car parks, tourists may not perceive the brand as intended by the winery. For ex-ample, Pegasus Bay (www.pegasusbay.com/) presents visitors with artistic creativity, evident in the gar-den design, the art work on display and the wine itself. The Pegasus Bay Winery web page reinforces its positioning as a profes-sional business which takes food and wine seriously, but the car parks and access are less than desirable. Their overall physical external environment score was only 71, and yet they position themselves professio-nally. They promote their positioning through various tourism intermediaries on the World Wide Web and are nominated as one of the best wineries in the Canterbury region. First impressions of the stunning archi-tecture of Wither Hills (www.witherhills.co.nz/) alongside envi-ronmental extrinsic cues enhance the per-ceived image of sophistication and artistic flair. These perceptual cues make a state-ment about the quality expectation from the moment you set eyes on the building from the road and play a vital role in pre-dicting service quality. The authors found that being able to predict product quality through extrinsic cues prior to consumption of wine at the wineries was especially important for wine products when quality was difficult to evaluate by customers with little viticul-tural knowledge (see also Hall and Mitchell 2008). Professional looking wineries that used their servicescape as an opportunity to communicate the quality of the wine produced were perceived as memorable and provided? customer focussed experiences. The servicescapes of these wineries also communicated and invoked invitation through these intrinsic cues which influ-enced longevity of a visit. For example, Wither Hills invited visitors to view its cellar and immerse themselves in the am-bience of the surrounds. Therefore, other visual indicators become part of the evalua-tion and, in the longer term, relationship process. This supports Wakefield and Blodgett’s (1996) hypothesis that “facility aesthetics” are a function of architectural design and that as customers approach or drive by they are likely to evaluate the at-tractiveness of the exterior. In the case of wineries this is very relevant as customers may not have visited before and if they are 244 A framework for the evaluation of winery servicescapes: ... PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 6(2). 2008 Número Especial. Turismo Gastronómico y Enoturismo ISSN 1695-7121 international tourists, may not visit again, yet they will often have opportunities to purchase in the longer term either via mail order or retail outlets and restaurants as well as provide positive word-of-mouth. The servicescape also needs to consider more than extrinsic cues of the external physical presentation. The internal physi-cal presentation, staff presentation, ambi-ence and merchandise are also important contributors to the overall impression and enduring satisfaction of the winery experi-ence. Internal layout and presentation and the dimensions used to evaluate each win-ery in this paper provide cues which make statements about the winery business. Newman (2007) argues that spatial factors such as internal layouts can often be more powerful as they can make clear and dis-tinguishing visual statement about expec-tations of quality and standard. Newman (2007) draws on the theory of Mehrabian and Russell’s (1974) variables of approach and avoidance behaviours. These behaviours may be a consequence of con-tributing spatial factors such as where cus-tomers may feel cramped or exposed, espe-cially where social interaction is important. The personal space allocated for wine tast-ing at Rossendale (www.rossendale.co.nz/), for example, was non-existent. The sole counter serviced all restaurant, bar and cellar customers. A tasting room separated from the main restaurant dining area would have been advantageous to enable wine enthusiasts to experience a more re-laxed servicescape. Having to stand in an entrance-way/point of sale area for the res-taurant even though visitors are seeking a tasting does not provide legibility for cus-tomers in terms of the servicescape and as Newman (2007) observes, customers may feel coerced into a stressed and uncomfort-able emotional state. Similarly at Kaikoura Winery (www.kaikourawinery.co.nz/), the layout of the interior did not entice custom-ers to stay; Newman (2007) describes this as having no legibility of space. The seating area was in the way of the main access route to the outdoor viewing area which as Wakefield and Blodgett (1996) hypothesise impacts on accessibility. Also the seating lacked ambient appeal and, perhaps even more importantly, was uncomfortable, with a consequence of not encouraging custom-ers to return. Forrest Estate Winery (www.forrest.co.nz/) also had poor legibility where it was difficult to actually open the door and there was no directional extrinsic cues leading or inviting you to the closed door. The internal schematic had no struc-ture or environmental signposts for the eye to follow. Conversely, the spatial design of Nautilus Wines (www.nautilusestate.com/) influenced behaviour on the occasion one of the authors visited. Due to the close spatial environment customers were forced to gather in close proximity to hear about tasting notes from the staff member and to have their tasting glasses filled. The area was cramped and not conducive to comfort or relaxation. This is a significant aspect of servicescape design as Newman (2007) suggests that people’s reactions to each other may be determined by spatial factors. Newman (2007) refers to mood as hav-ing an influence on how people evaluate places and situations and that mood states and behaviour may involve associations in memory which tie specific moods to certain types of behaviour. The experience encoun-tered by one of the authors at St Clair Win-ery (www.saintclair.co.nz/) support this theory and may be influenced by the casual relaxed ambience of the winery which scored a high (59) for interior and exterior ambient conditions. However, Langdales (www.langdalerestaurant.com/home.htm) also scored a high 57 and Highfield Estate (www.highfield.co.nz/) scored 46 but the personnel at the wine cellar counters at both wineries were unfriendly and unwel-coming. As Newman (2007) suggests, the behaviour of contact personnel is likely to contribute significantly to customers’ mood states and thereby deciding the outcome of future behaviours toward that winery. Similarly, the service encounter at Forrest Estate and Villa Maria (www.villamaria.co.nz/) were also less than desirable with arrogant and preoccupied staff which encouraged avoidance behav-iour At the other end of the scale, Framing-ham (www.framingham.co.nz/) ensures their customer service delivery is presented in as polished a manner as is their winery. Angela McDonnell and C. Michael Hall 245 PASOS. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Heritage, 6(2). 2008 Special Issue. Gastronomic and wine tourism ISSN 1695-7121 In fact they were the friendliest, most pro-fessional and engaging of all the wineries, with Wither Hills, Mahi (www.mahi.co.nz/) and St Clair running second equal. Al-though this paper is not focussing on cus-tomer service and the socialscape, it does have an impact on the memory of the ser-vicescape. One of the authors requested some information on the Framingham brand. The staff were delighted to be able to assist and said they would email a news-letter and information on history of the brand. A service promise which was later met. Interestingly, Hall and Mitchell (2005, 2008) found in their research on the impact of the servicescape on the service expe-rience that although bad service expe-riences may produce negative feelings at the time, these may decline in significance over time while aspects such as the winery vineyard setting, the cellar door and at-mosphere will take on a much greater sig-nificance over time. They argue that the vineyard, the cellar door facilities and the winery itself may take on more significance in terms of negative recollection. There-fore, wineries should endeavor to plan and manage the servicescape in the long term. Furthermore, Hall and Mitchell (2005) in their case study on winery visitation and post-visit behaviour discuss the wider tem-poral context of wineries and in particular that wine itself is a tangible, transportable and durable product that can be expe-rienced in a number of locations before, during and after the on-site winery expe-rience. This supports the inclusion of sec-tion E in the servicescape dimensions scores of this paper, which includes the souvenirs, the wine bottle carriers, the newsletters and the wine bottles them-selves as they serve to act as reinforcement to the on-site winery servicescape expe-rience. Many tourists can relive the expe-rience of their holiday at home when they take a bottle of wine purchased on their holiday or at the retail store from their fridge or receive their Framingham New-sletter or Cloudy Bay Mentelle Notes in the mail. The servicescape, relationship mar-keting and reinforcement of brand image may have a more enduring, or at least as enduring, impact on customer post pur-chase behaviour than the initial consump-tion of wine at the winery itself (Hall and Mitchell 2008). Conclusions This study has identified the signific-ance of the servicescape as a component of wine tourism and wine marketing. A ser-vicescape evaluation framework was devel-oped and utilized in the evaluation of 27 wineries in the Canterbury and Marlbo-rough wine regions of New Zealand. The results support the identification of a con-tinuum of servicescape design with varying degrees of quality. Some wineries had very impressive servicescapes that matched the positioning of the wine quality and price, while others were more enigmatic in their design and market positioning variables. Most of the wineries were largely consis-tent in their integrated marketing commu-nication (IMC) of branded print material, signage and web page design, while some wineries were outstanding in integrating their brand and image in all elements of their servicescape. Wairau River (www.wairauriverwines.com/) and Wither Hills were good examples of this. However, in some wineries there were surprising irregularities and inconsisten-cies identified upon the more detailed as-sessment using the servicescape frame-work. These inconsistencies were most notable on variables of physical environ-ment dimensions and perceived market positioning based on price and product quality. Wineries that used a premium based pricing strategy in some cases exhi-bited servicescape elements which were inconsistent with the higher quality prod-uct which was being promoted and their physical environments did not fit well with their claimed market positioning. The value of the development of such an evaluation framework is not necessarily with respect to the scores themselves. Ra-ther the framework has potential value as a diagnostic tool by which wineries can consider the various factors in the service-scape and make decisions as to how they should be developed in line with their branding and markets. Clearly, different markets – and different cultures – will have differing opinions about what is ap- 246 A framework for the evaluation of winery servicescapes: ... PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 6(2). 2008 Número Especial. Turismo Gastronómico y Enoturismo ISSN 1695-7121 propriate in the winery and cellar door servicescape. Comparative studies are therefore to be encouraged so as to allow further refinement of the evaluation framework particularly with respect to the relative weightings of both empirical and perceptual factors. Nevertheless, it is es-sential that wineries engaged in cellar door sales and wine tourism seek to pay as much attention to the elements of their service-scape as they do their markets, their brand, and the quality of their wine. Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge the valuable comments of the referees. References Ahuvia, A. 2001 “Traditional, interpretive, and recep-tion based content analyses: Improving the ability of content analysis to address issues of pragmatic and theoretical con-cern”. Social Indicators Research, 54(2): 139-172. Baker, J. 1998 “Examining the informational value of store environments”. In Sherry, Jr. J.F. (Ed.), Servicescapes: The concepts of place in contemporary markets (pp. 55- 79), Chicago: NTC Business Books. Baker, J., Parasuraman, A., Grewal, D. and Voss, G.B. 2002 “The influence of multiple store envi-ronment cues on perceived merchandise value and patronage intentions”, Jour-nal of Marketing, 66: 120-141. Baker, J., Grewal, D. and Parasuraman, A. 1994 “The influence of store environment on quality inferences and store image”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 22(4): 328-339. Bitner, M.J. 1986 “Consumer responses to the physical environment in service setting”. In Ven-katesan, M., Schmalensee, D.M. and Marshall, C. (Eds.) Creativity in Servic-es Marketing (pp.89-93), Chicago: Amer-ican Marketing Association. Bitner, M.J. 1990 “Evaluating service encounter: The effects of physical surrounding and em-ployee responses”, Journal of Marketing, 54(2): 69-82. Bitner, M.J. 1992 “Servicescapes: The impact of physi-cal surroundings in customers and em-ployees”, Journal of Marketing, 56: 57- 71. Carlsen, J. and Charters, S (Eds.) 2006 Global Wine Tourism: Research, Management & Marketing. Wallingford: CABI. Christensen, D., Hall, C.M., Mitchell, R. 2004 “The 2002 New Zealand Wineries Survey”. In 2004 CAUTHE Conference, University of Queensland, Brisbane, February. Ipswich: University of Queen-sland [CDRom] Dodd, T. 1995 “Opportunities and pitfalls of tourism in a developing wine industry’’, Interna-tional Journal of Wine Marketing, 7(1): 5-16. Dodd, T. and Bigotle, V. 1997 “Perceptual differences among visitor groups to wineries’’, Journal of Travel Research, 35(2): 46-51. Hall, C.M. and Johnson, G. 1998 “Wine tourism: an imbalanced part-nership”. In Dowling, R. and Carlsen, J. (Eds.), Wine Tourism Perfect Partners, Proceedings of the first Australian Wine Tourism Conference, Margaret River, Western Australia, May 1998 (pp. 51- 72), Canberra: Bureau of Tourism Re-search. Hall, C.M. and Mitchell, R.D. 2005 “Gastronomy, food and wine tour-ism”. In Buhalis, D. and Costa, C. (Eds.), Tourism Business Frontiers: Consum-ers, Products and Industry (pp. 137- 147). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Hall, C.M. and Mitchell, R.D. 2008 Wine Marketing: A Practical Ap-proach. Oxford: Butterworth Heine-mann Hall, C.M., Longo, A.M., Mitchell, R. and Johnson, G. 2000 “Wine tourism in New Zealand”. In Hall, C.M., Sharples, E., Cambourne, B. & Macionis, N. (Eds.), Wine Tourism Around the World: Development, Man-agement and Markets, (pp. 150-174), Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Hall, C.M., Sharples, E., Cambourne, B. and Macionis, N. (Eds.) 2000 Wine Tourism Around the World: Angela McDonnell and C. Michael Hall 247 PASOS. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Heritage, 6(2). 2008 Special Issue. Gastronomic and wine tourism ISSN 1695-7121 Development, Management and Mar-kets. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann. Hall, C.M. and Valentin, A. 2005 “Content analysis”. In Ritchie, B., Burns, P. and Palmer, C. (Eds.), Tour-ism Research Methods (pp. 191-209). Wallingford: CAB International. Mehrabian, A. and Russell, J.A. 1974 An Approach to Environmental Psy-chology. Cambridge: Massachusetts In-stitute of Technology. Ministry of Tourism 2007 Tourist Activity: Wine Tourism, New Zealand Series B1. Wellington: Ministry of Tourism. Mitchell, R. and Hall, C.M. 2001a “The winery consumer: A New Zealand perspective”, Tourism Recreation Research, 26(2): 63-75. Mitchell, R. and Hall, C.M. 2001b “Lifestyle behaviours of New Zealand winery visitors: wine club activities, wine cellars and place of purchase”, In-ternational Journal of Wine Marketing, 13(3): 82-93. Mitchell, R.D. and Hall, C.M. 2004 “The post-visit consumer behaviour of New Zealand winery visitors”, Jour-nal of Wine Research, 15(1): 37-47. Mitchell, R.D. and Hall, C.M. 2006 “Wine tourism research: The state of play”, Tourism Review International, 9(4): 307-332. New Zealand Wine Growers 2007 Statistical Annual 2007. Auckland: New Zealand Wine Growers. Newman, A.J. 2007 “Uncovering dimensionality in the servicescape: Towards legibility”, Ser-vices Industries Journal 27(1): 15-28 O’Neil, M., Palmer, A. and Charters, S. 2002 “Wine production as a service expe-rience: The effects of service quality on wine sales”, Journal of Services Market-ing, 16(4): 342-362 Simpson, K., Bretherton, P., and de vere, G. 2004 “Lifestyle market segmentation, small business entrepreneurs and the New Zealand wine tourism industry”, Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospi-tality & Tourism, 5(2-4): 157-188. Tombs, A. and McColl-Kennedy, J.R. 2003 “Social-servicescape conceptual mod-el”, Marketing Theory, 3: 447-75. Wakefield, K.L. and Blodgett, J.G. 1996 “The effect of the servicescape on customers' behavioral intentions in lei-sure service settings”, Journal of Servic-es Marketing. 10(6), 45-61. Wels-Lips, I., van der Ven, M. and Peters, R. 1998 “Critical services dimensions: An empirical investigation across six indus-tries”, International Journal of Service Industry Management, 9(3), 286-309. Recibido: 13 de febrero de 2008 Reenviado: 8 de abril de 2008 Aceptado: 10 de abril de 2008 Sometido a evaluación por pares anónimos
Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.
Calificación | |
Título y subtítulo | A framework for the evaluation of winery servicescapes: A New Zealand case |
Autor principal | McDonnell, Angela ; Hall, C. Michael |
Publicación fuente | Pasos. Revista de turismo y patrimonio cultural |
Numeración | Volumen 06. Número 2 |
Sección | Artículos |
Tipo de documento | Artículo |
Lugar de publicación | El Sauzal, Tenerife |
Editorial | Universidad de La Laguna |
Fecha | 2008-04 |
Páginas | pp. 231-247 |
Materias | Turismo ; Patrimonio cultural ; Publicaciones periódicas |
Enlaces relacionados | Página web: http://todopatrimonio.com/revistas/101-pasos-revista-de-turismo-y-patrimonio-cultural |
Copyright | http://biblioteca.ulpgc.es/avisomdc |
Formato digital | |
Tamaño de archivo | 169869 Bytes |
Texto | Vol. 6 Nº 2 págs. 231-247. 2008 Special Issue – Número Especial www.pasosonline.org © PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. ISSN 1695-7121 A framework for the evaluation of winery servicescapes: A New Zealand case Angela McDonnell i C. Michael Hall ii University of Canterbury (New Zealand) Abstract: In an increasingly competitive market to attract visitors, wineries are often seeking new means to enhance the visitor experience. However, despite recognition of the importance in the wine tourism literature of the setting in which wine experiences occur there has been little adoption of the servicescape concept from the marketing literature and its adoption as a potential diagnostic tool. The paper utilizes the concept to develop a potential diagnostic tool that may be used by wineries and cellar door venues to evaluate their servicescape attributes. Preliminary results are provided which demonstrate the utility of the servicescape framework but further research is required to test the framework in different culture and design settings. Keywords: Servicescape; New Zealand; Wine tourism; Cellar door Abstract: En mercados cada vez más competitivos, donde se intentan captar mayores cuotas de deman-da, las bodegas buscan a menudo nuevas formas de realzar las experiencias de los visitantes. Sin embar-go, a pesar del reconocimiento de la importancia en la literatura del constructo "turismo del vino" y "ex-periencias del visitante", el ajuste entre éstas últimas y el nuevo concepto de interacción social (services-cape) como herramienta potencial de diágnóstico ha tenido poca atención en la literatura del marketing. El papel que utiliza el concepto comentado para desarrollar un instrumento de diagnóstico potencial, debería ser usado por las bodegas y distribuidoras para evaluar los atributos de ésta llamada "interacción social". Los resultados preliminares proporcionan y demuestran la utilidad del marco conceptual de la "interacción social", pero se requiere de investigaciones adicionales en diferentes culturas y entornos, así como ajustes de diseño del mismo. Keywords: Relación comida versus bebida; Picante; Pizza; Diferencias de género i • Angela McDonnell. Department of Management. University of Canterbury. Christchurch (New Zealand). E-mail: angelakevin@inspire.net.nz ii • C. Michael Hall Department of Management. University of Canterbury. Christchurch (New Zealand). E-mail: michael.hall@canterbury.ac.nz 232 A framework for the evaluation of winery servicescapes: ... PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 6(2). 2008 Número Especial. Turismo Gastronómico y Enoturismo ISSN 1695-7121 Introduction Wine is an increasingly important part of the New Zealand rural economy. The number of wineries in New Zealand has increased from 262 in 1997 to 543 in 2007 with the number of tonnes crushed growing from 60,000 tonnes to 205,000 tonnes over the same period and further growth ex-pected to continue in the foreseeable future. This has meant that total production has also grown from 45.8 million litres in 1997 to 147.6 million in 2007 (New Zealand Winegrowers 2007). However, the per capi-ta consumption of wine in New Zealand has only marginally increased over the same period, meaning that wineries are constant-ly seeking to expand their export base and/or increase the amount of domestic consumption. This is being done via a variety of mar-keting techniques and promotional chan-nels, including, for larger companies, tele-vision, magazine and other forms of media advertising as well as event sponsorship. However, the vast majority of New Zealand wineries are small producers by interna-tional standards (Hall and Mitchell 2008). For example, of the 543 wineries that ex-isted in the country in 2007, 483 of them produced less than 200,000 litres each and only nine produced more than two million litres (New Zealand Winegrowers 2007). This has meant, therefore, that the wine market is extremely competitive and that wineries are often looking for new avenues of sale such as direct sales from the wine-ries, what is widely referred to as cellar door sales or wine tourism. However, while there is a growing literature on wine tour-ism as well as business and industry inter-est in the subject, the way in which the physical aspects of the wineries themselves contribute to the overall marketing of their product has been little studied, even though ‘atmosphere’ for example, is recog-nized as a significant factor in the cellar door experience (Hall et al. 2000; Carlsen and Charters 2006; Mitchell and Hall 2006). Therefore, this article aims to devel-op a potential framework for the evaluation of what is defined in the marketing litera-ture as the ‘servicescape’, the physical evi-dence of service in wineries and its poten-tial value as a diagnostic tool. The paper is divided into several sec-tions. First, it provides a background to wine tourism in New Zealand. Second, it discusses the servicescape context in light of research on wine tourism. Third, it presents the methodology for the develop-ment of the servicescape framework and then goes on to discuss its application. Fi-nally, the paper draws some preliminary findings as to its application. Wine Tourism in New Zealand The New Zealand Ministry of Tourism (2007) defines wine tourists as internation-al and domestic visitors, aged 15 years and over, who visit a winery at least once while travelling in New Zealand. Tourists who visit multiple wineries in a single area or visit a single winery on more than one oc-casion are counted only once. However, the Ministry approach does not count residents of an area who visit a winery within their ‘local area’ as a wine tourist. Unfortunate-ly, what exactly constituted a local area was not defined in the report. Therefore, Ministry figures understate the actual fre-quency of winery visitation among New Zealand residents and, to a lesser extent, international tourists when in comparison to other New Zealand research on the sub-ject (Mitchell and Hall 2006; Hall and Mit-chell 2008). Using data derived from the interna-tional and domestic tourism surveys the Ministry of Tourism (2007) estimated that in 2006 507,500 tourists visited New Zeal-and wineries, made up of 44% international tourists and 56% domestic tourists (includ-ing those on overnight and day trips). They estimated that the number of in-ternational tourists visiting wineries in-creased from 108,500 visitors in 2001 to 224,700 visitors in 2006, an annual average growth rate of 16%. In contrast, the num-ber of domestic wine tourists was estimated to have declined from 532,400 visitors in 2001 to 282,800 in 2006. The Regional Tourism Organisation (RTO) areas which attracted the greatest number of interna-tional wine tourists over the 2005/2006 Angela McDonnell and C. Michael Hall 233 PASOS. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Heritage, 6(2). 2008 Special Issue. Gastronomic and wine tourism ISSN 1695-7121 period were Marlborough (an average of 45,300 wine visitors per year, or 22% of all international wine visitors), Hawke’s Bay (40,100, 19%), and Auckland (34,600, 16%). These market shares were relatively con-sistent over the period 2001-2006 and the numbers were estimated to have grown in line with the total (Ministry of Tourism 2007). In contrast to the use of secondary sur-vey data by the Ministry of Tourism, a na-tional survey of wineries with respect to their utilization of wine tourism as part of their business practices was conducted in 1997/98 (Hall and Johnson 1998) and re-peated, with minor modifications, in 2003/4 (Christensen et al. 2004). The survey was the first national level survey of the supply of the wine tourism product conducted in the world and produces some distinctly different results when compared to those obtained by other surveys as the focus is on visits rather than individual visitor activi-ty. The sample population for each survey was the total number of wineries in the country. Wineries reported that wine tourism is important in terms of: • enhancing product/brand awareness • helping to differentiate one wineries wine from another • helping to develop mail order sales • and, in the 2003 survey only, helping to educate customers. Wineries share a strong belief that wine tourism enhances product/brand aware-ness, with those either agreeing or strongly agreeing with this statement totalling 72.4% in 1997 and 73.2% in 2003 while almost half favour wine tourism's role in differentiating their wine from another wineries, In 2003, 54.2% supported a statement that wine tourism was impor-tant for mail order sales growth. In general wineries believed that tourism provided them with significant marketing opportuni-ties. Other research also supports the value of tourism to New Zealand wineries (e.g. Hall, Longo et al. 2000; Mitchell and Hall 2001a, 2001b, 2004, 2006; Simpson et al. 2004). However, while the potential signi-ficance of winery or cellar door design and atmosphere on wine tourists’ satisfaction and potential long-term relationship with wineries is noted, no analysis of the physi-cal environment of the cellar door expe-rience has been undertaken. Servicescapes and the Cellar Door Studies in New Zealand have found that cellar door sales account for, on average, around 15% to 20% of wine sales but there is substantial variability in this figure with the overall size of wine production being a significant influence on the overall impor-tance of wine tourism with cellar door sales being more important for small producers (Johnson and Hall 1998; Hall, Longo et al. 2000; Christensen et al. 2004). Usually cellar door sales comprise a larger amount of sales early in the development of a wine-ry and are particularly important for the smaller wineries, where there are examples where more than 75% of revenue is gained through the cellar door (Christensen et al. 2004; Mitchell and Hall 2006). Hall and Mitchell (2008) state that one winery in New Zealand reported that just one bottle of their Reserve Pinot sold at the cellar door gave them the same return as seven bottles of their normal Pinot Noir sold via their New Zealand distributor, even though the retail price for the reserve is only around 2.5 times that of the normal Pinot. Such direct sales can improve margins con-siderably for wineries as payments to in-termediaries and retailers take their share for retail sales. Drawing on lessons from the environ-mental design, retail and marketing litera-ture this paper takes the perspective that the winery and cellar door space are part of the overall packaging of wine as expe-rienced by wine tourists. Product attributes, packaging, display, retail at-mospherics, and the physical environment are nested inside each other to help gener-ate sales, encourage the development of relationships with customers and develop positive experiences and customer satisfac-tion. Literature on servicescapes (Bitner, 1986, 1990, 1992; Sherry 1998; Newman 2007) and retail atmospherics (Baker et al., 1994, 1998, 2002) clearly associates the environment with service quality. “The servicescape is the physical setting 234 A framework for the evaluation of winery servicescapes: ... PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 6(2). 2008 Número Especial. Turismo Gastronómico y Enoturismo ISSN 1695-7121 within which service occurs and which in-fluences customers’ perceptions of the ser-vicescape (perceived quality) and the sub-sequent internal (i.e. degree of satisfaction) and external (i.e. behaviour with respect to patronage and purchase) response” (Hall and Mitchell 2008: 179). The servicescape is important for consumer experiences be-cause this environment gives customers and employees tangible and intangible signs and signals about potential service delivery. Hall and Mitchell (2008) stress the importance of servicescapes for wine sales but in the context of the retail setting as opposed to the winery setting and cellar door sales. Bitner (1992) argues that the environ-ment in which the service encounter and experience are jointly produced between customer and producer, i.e. the service-scape, affects customer outcomes and expe-riences. She distinguishes the interior ser-vicescape which includes interior design, equipment, signage and layout, from the exterior servicescape which includes exte-rior design, parking, the landscape, and the surrounding environment. Although, as Wels-Lips et al. (1997) note, it may be worthwhile to restrict the servicescape from a production standpoint to the mar-keting- controlled environment, and to dis-tinguish it from environmental influences which are not marketing-controlled, such as the weather. Zeithaml, Bitner and Gremlerl (2006) suggest that the physical evidence of a ser-vice, or servicescape offers tangible com-munication about the service provided. Wineries can use the tangible cues of their physical design and the interior and exte-rior attributes of a winery and its environs for visitors and customers to assess levels of satisfaction, before, during and after consumption. An example of how the ser-vicescape may affect satisfaction before consumption is through cues such as visual and virtual images of winery layout, exter-nal design and car parks. Although the potential significance of the environment in which the wine tourism experience occurs is seen as significant for the nature of that experience the role of the servicescape has received only passing ac-knowledgement (e.g. Dodd 1995; Dodd and Bigotle 1997; Mitchell and Hall 2001a; O’Neil et al. 2002) and little in-depth inves-tigation (Hall and Mitchell 2008), with the focus tending to be on the personal attributes of the service encounter rather than the tangible attributes of the winery. This is despite recognition of the impor-tance of the tangible evidence of service for wineries. As O’Neil et al. (2002: 345) state, “The cellar door is often the first contact consumers have with a winery and its wines. Therefore every aspect of the cellar door (including layout, appearance and staff) is of extreme importance. The cellar door is unique in that it provides the visitor with a complete profile of the winery and its wines, and it is here that perceptions of the winery are established”. Therefore, gaining a better understanding of the ser-vicescape may potentially assist wineries in improving customer experiences as well as providing opportunities for brand develop-ment and customer relationship building. Methodology Given that no winery specific service-scape framework had been developed, the study utilized elements identified from relevant wine tourism, wine marketing and servicescape literature (e.g. Bitner 1992; Wakefield and Blodgett 1996). A draft framework was developed and pre-tested in the field on several wineries so as to deter-mine the applicability of servicescape di-mensions. The final study was undertaken over a three month period between August and October 2007 and was used to assess the servicescapes of 27 South Island wineries in New Zealand. In several cases multiple site visits were conducted so as to try and ensure that non-controllable environmental conditions such as the weather were consis-tent over all the wineries that were eva-luated. The wineries in this study included eleven in the Canterbury region (including Waipara and Kaikoura sub-regions) and seventeen in the Marlborough region. Wineries were selected so as to represent different volumes of annual wine produc-tion as well as architectural designs. Research was undertaken via a form of visual content analysis (CA). CA is an ob- Angela McDonnell and C. Michael Hall 235 PASOS. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Heritage, 6(2). 2008 Special Issue. Gastronomic and wine tourism ISSN 1695-7121 servational research method that is used to systematically evaluate the actual and symbolic content of all forms of communica-tion. In addition to its application to rec-orded communication CA is an increasingly important element of hermeneutics and semiotic analysis in critical social science and in consumer studies (Aghuvia 2001; Hall and Valentin 2005). The framework used for the study of the wineries initially had five dimensional sec-tions that were categories derived from the servicescape literature: physical external and internal presentation; staff presenta-tion and; ambience and merchandise, in order to provide an overall picture of the on site experience of each of the 27 wineries visited. However, following field testing it was decided to add a sixth element ‘Direct and Indirect External Influences’ which, although not necessarily including ele-ments directly controlled by the winery, did include material that was co-produced with other organizations. In addition, identifica-tion of this material may have broader im-plications for the presentation of wine re-gions or winery clusters to consumers. Each section evaluated the physical presentation of a range of servicescape di-mensions of the winery and included sec-tions on the following dimensions: Section A: Physical Environment – Exter-nal Presentation. Aspects of the service-scape that are often perceived on first impression. The architecture of the building, exterior signs, car parks paths and access-ways can often provide a per-ception of what the likely experience outcome may be at each winery. The condition of the paintwork, outdoor seat-ing arrangements and landscape were also evaluated. Section B: Physical Environment – Inter-nal Presentation. Including interior de-sign, flow and colour. Condition of the functional equipment was also eva-luated along with the condition of the paintwork, and housekeeping standards. In this section, evidence of merchandis-ing and design skill is examined on a variable scale. Section C: Staff Presentation. Includes uni-forms and personal grooming as an im-portant element of the servicescape and one that can often be overlooked in the overall impression of a servicescape Section D: Interior and Exterior Ambient Conditions. Includes evidence of shelter and impact on the natural environmen-tal setting of the servicescape. Also some of the more intangible aspects such as air temperature, noise, odour are evaluated. Section E: Prod-uct/ Merchandise/Brochures/Menus/Web Pages A broader section that deals with many of the items customers take with them from the experience including the wine bottle and label, wine carriers, bags, souvenirs and brochures. This sec-tion also includes an evaluative score for the winery web page. Section F: Direct and Indirect External Influences on Servicescape. Includes ex-ternal impact of other tangible and in-tangible variables including information provided by people external to the wine-ry and tangible evidence such as maps, magazines, events or brochures the winery may be included in. Some of these variables may be controllable if in-formation flows are managed and con-trolled by the winery. Other variables such as weather conditions may not be within control of the winery. Scoring for the dimensions was ranked: Very good –Excellent 7 – 10; Satisfactory – Good; 4 – 6; and Poor 1 – 3. Spreadsheets were also developed to provide results from the servicescape framework score sheets for each winery (Tables 1-6). An informal ‘wine log’ was also used also to assess each winery and provide a brief commentary summarising certain criteria identified in the servicescape framework evaluation and general perceptions and observations. This was also done to achieve consistency in approach to each winery. Similarly, obser-vations and recording were typically done by pairs of observers in order to reduce impacts of personal bias. 236 A framework for the evaluation of winery servicescapes: ... PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 6(2). 2008 Número Especial. Turismo Gastronómico y Enoturismo ISSN 1695-7121 Table 1 Section A-Physical Environment: External Presentation Very Good - Excellent Satisfactory-Good Poor – Not applicable Total Score 7-10 4-6 1-3 Architecture/Exterior building design Consistent style reflect-ing wine brand or image Inconsistent with wine brand or image or mixed architectural design No architectural design/inconsistent with wine brand or image Car Parking Ample spaces/ close to entrance/well paved or sealed Moderate amount availa-ble/ moderate walk to entrance. Average paving or sealing surface Minimal spaces available/long walk to entrance/poor paving or sealing surface. Signage on building exterior/Fascia/ billboards Excellent condition. Clean. Advertises business name and/or products accurately Fair condition. Advertises business name and/or products Poor condition. Ap-pears rarely cleaned. Fails to promote business name and/or products Opening hours/other notices Opening hours sign dis-played and in good con-dition. Reflects current trading hours. Other relevant notices displayed/ good condi-tion. Current trading Hours displayed. Most other relevant notices on display and in reasonable condition No opening hours displayed. Notices in poor condition or not current Paint-work/ Walls/window frames Clean. Excellent condi-tion. Reasonable condition. Needs cleaning. In poor repair. Pavement area/Doorways No rubbish. Appears regularly swept. Door paintwork good condition. Door mats good condition. Safety. Appears swept as re-quired. Door paint work fair condition. Door mats fair condition. Not swept. Door paintwork in Poor condition. Door mats in poor condition/ Rubbish Access (for buggies and wheelchairs where appropriate) Entrance designed for safety for buggies, wheelchairs and other mobility devices. Reasonably safe access for buggies, wheelchairs and other mobility devic-es. Entrance unsuitable for buggies. Wheel-chairs and other mo-bility devices. Windows/exterior window treatments. Clean windows. Blinds umbrellas/ awnings in good condition - bright and attractive. Clean windows. Blinds umbrellas/ awnings rea-sonably clean and in good condition Dirty windows. Blinds umbrellas /awnings in poor condition Outdoor seating fur-nishing and equipment arrangement Modern/style suits over-all architecture of wine-ry/ well maintained. No specific style to match winery design or architecture /average condition. Plastic or ugly furni-ture/ shabby poor condition. Window dis-plays/ promotions Attractive display. Eye catching from outside. Promotes products/prices/ service inside. Material current. Attempted eye catching display. Tries to promote products/prices/ service inside. Material current. Poor attempt at window display. Conflicting messages/out of date material. External Lighting All lights either are or appear in working order. Lighting does or may enhance exterior Lighting either in or appears to be in working order but may not en-hance outdoor area Poor external light-ing/ apparent dark areas Overall impression of exte-rior/ layout/design/land scape External presentation creates highly favourable impression. Attracts interest and looks inviting Reasonable external presentation likely to attract and encourage customers to enter External presentation of premises unlikely to attract interest or encourage customers to enter Total Score Angela McDonnell and C. Michael Hall 237 PASOS. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Heritage, 6(2). 2008 Special Issue. Gastronomic and wine tourism ISSN 1695-7121 Table 2 Section B - Physical Environment: Internal Presentation Very good- Excellent Satisfactory -Good Poor – Not applicable Total 7-10 4-6 1-3 Score Interior design/colour/ style/Furnishings Professionally designed. Conforming to high quality distinctive de-sign/ consistency in style and colour Good quality/ consis-tency in de-sign/ style/colour No design/poor quali-ty/ confused style/theme/colours Interior light-ing/ fixtures and fit-tings Good lighting for dis-plays areas/in working order/ Lighting creates bright attractive image. High quality fixtures and fit-tings in good condi-tion/ conforming to high standard of overall de-sign Reasonable lighting for displays/ fittings in working order. Fixtures and fittings of reasona-ble quality, in good condition/ in keeping with and suitable for overall style Dim or unsuitable Lighting for displays. Fittings not in working order. Fixtures and fittings of poor quality, in poor condition or unsuitable for purpose. Too many conflicting styles. Functional Equip-ment/ cash regis-ters/ fridge Excellent condition Average condition Poor condition/dirty Clean functioning Restrooms Spotlessly clean with ample toiletry supplies of soap/toilet paper. Has hand cloth/air drying facility. Reasonably clean. Minimal spare toile-tries. Dirty/no soap/no toilet paper. Housekeeping Winery retail area very clean, tidy and well maintained. Presents a professional image. Retail area reasonably clean and tidy. Good maintenance. Flooring reasonably clean condi-tion. Retail area poorly cleaned or untidy. Poor maintenance. Dirty floors Merchandising and Product Display Evidence of good merchandising skills. Retail interior used well with balance and good displays. Attractive pro-duct presentation Evidence of reasonable merchandising skills. Retail interior used reasonably well. Most shelves ‘faced-up’. Limited gaps Little or no evidence of merchandising skills. Poor use of space. Unattractive product display. Scrambled merchandis-ing Table décor/coverings Fresh flow-ers/ stylish/cutlery and crockery style in keeping with interior décor de-sign. Clean fresh table cloths/matching serviet-tes Minimal table decora-tion/ dried flow-ers/ mismatched crock-ery/ cutlery/no table cloths/moderately clean/paper serviettes No table decora-tion/ dirty tables/cluttered/chipped or dirty crockery/no serviettes Point of Pur-chase/ cellar door area Well designed, attractive and functional. Has aesthetic appeal. unclut-tered Practical design, un-cluttered. Poor design. Cluttered. Detracts or is mis-matched with overall appearance of rest of the servicescape 238 A framework for the evaluation of winery servicescapes: ... PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 6(2). 2008 Número Especial. Turismo Gastronómico y Enoturismo ISSN 1695-7121 Table 2 (cont.) Section B - Physical Environment: Internal Presentation Very good- Excellent Satisfactory -Good Poor – Not applicable Total 7-10 4-6 1-3 Score Layout and arrange-ment of internal floor space Attractive. Has immedi-ate impact/ distinctive qualities that differenti-ate it from other wineries / excellent spatial layout Welcoming/ layout planned to suit only access or to maximise occupancy Austere or cluttered/ unattractive/no spatial planning Indoor/Outdoor flow Direct/excellent flow/outside and inside appear unified Indirect/un-natural flow/some unification No flow/segregated Artefacts/ Collectibles/ Artwork/ photos/Awards Artistic /distinctive/ Integrates well with overall theme/ excellent condition Mixed theme/good condition None or cluttered or austere/no relationship with winery or theme of winery/dirty Total Score Table 3 Section C-Staff Presentation Very good- Excellent Satisfactory-Good Poor Total 7-10 4-6 1-3 Score Uniforms Clean/tidy/colour coor-dinated/ branding Clean/Tidy/colour coordinated No uni-form/ uncoordinated Personal Grooming Impeccable/well groomed/hair off face Tidy Untidy Total Score Table 4 Section D - Interior and Exterior Ambient Conditions Very good- Excellent Satisfactory-Good Poor Total 7-10 4-6 1-3 Score Exterior Shelter Excellent shelter from wind and sun. Integrates with overall architectural design of winery Moderate shelter from wind and sun No or little shelter Interior Temperature / air quality Comfortable Mostly comfortable Uncomfortable /unpleasant/stuffy Noise Comfortable Mostly comfortable Uncomfortable /unpleasant Music Suitable for atmosphere Mostly suitable Unsuitable Odour Fresh/Pleasant Mostly pleasant Smoke/stuffy/musty/du sty Natural Environment / Impact of winery on setting Surrounding environ-ment has been consid-ered in winery design In keeping with sur-roundings Not in keeping with natural environment or impacted in parts, ie erosion, rubbish on ground Total Score Angela McDonnell and C. Michael Hall 239 PASOS. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Heritage, 6(2). 2008 Special Issue. Gastronomic and wine tourism ISSN 1695-7121 Table 5 Section E - Product/Merchandise/Brochures/Menus/Web Page Very good- Excellent Satisfactory-Good Poor Total 7-10 4-6 1-3 Score Wine Bottle/ Label Headline defines brand / unique or distinctive / easy to read / uncluttered layout, copy and visuals / artistic Fairly distinctive bottle or label / easy to read / ordinary looking lay-out, copy and visuals Non-distinctive branding / cluttered / bland layout, copy and visuals Wine Bottle Carrier Artistic / strong winery branding/ packaging used as an advertising medium Modest winery brand-ing / easy to carry Plain, no art work/cheap looking Merchandise in-cluding Souve-nirs/ Gifts/ T-shirts/ Aprons /Wine Glasses Wide selection / tastefully designed in keeping with wine brand and image Moderate selection / generic branding with no artistic flair None or minimal merchandise avail-able / unbranded Brochures/ business cards/price list stationery Informative / distinctive winery branding and logos/ artistic/paper /easy to read / good layout Informative/ indistinct winery branding and logos/ordinary paper Cluttered layout/no clear branding/ unprofessional look-ing Menu Clean and crisp presentation. Excellent structure, easy to read / distinctive winery branding and logo / inte-grated marketing communi-cation( IMC) Clean, tidy / good structure, easy to read / has winery logo or branding / not integrated with other marketing com-munication literature Tatty looking menus / not integrated with other marketing communication lit-erature / out of date / hand written price amendments Web Page Design Easy to navigate website / well designed / colourful / (IMC)/distinctive branding / informative / artistic head-line, copy layout, visuals / links provided Easy to navigate / good design / plain / some branding / no links Difficult to navigate / Indistinct branding / amateur looking Total Score 240 A framework for the evaluation of winery servicescapes: ... PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 6(2). 2008 Número Especial. Turismo Gastronómico y Enoturismo ISSN 1695-7121 Table 6 Section F - Direct/Indirect External Servicescape Influences Very good- Excellent Satisfactory-Good Poor Total 7-10 4-6 1-3 Score Tangible Directions to Winery via Tour-ism company / Information Centres / Maps Clear and concise/ multi-national signs and symbols or diagrams. Distinctive and defines brand. Unclut-tered layout, copy and visuals/artistic Fairly clear instructions that are reasonably easy to read. A few symbols and diagrams but ordi-nary looking layout, copy and visuals Non-distinctive brand-ing / cluttered / bland layout, copy and visuals. No multi-national symbols or signs. Regional or area promotional activi-ties / trade fairs Positively promote and accurately represent or inform desired market image positioning of win-ery Promotes winery but does not represent actual market position or image of No activities planned in area or taken advantage of by winery Tourist or Travel Agents/Bus o Tour Operators own ser-vicescape Professional appealing image and brand associa-tion positioned to com-plement or enhance winery image and branding Average image brand and image association. No flair. May not match winery visitor demo-graphic Poor image and brand association. Unprofes-sional and unattractive staff and premises. No effort put into effec-tively promoting win-ery Environmental con-ditions affecting access – weather / road signage Easily accessible roads-wide / smooth tarseal sur-face / pleasant or interest-ing scenery in-keeping with winery design and reflecting market position-ing Average conditions – road / signage / indistinc-tive or uninteresting scenery / average or uncomfortable road jour-ney / reasonable road signs Adverse conditions, poor road- potholes / shingle surface / nar-row no road signs / scenery not in keeping with image of winery / Exposed and wind gusts / steep grade road Wine Retail outlets Professional looking ser-vicescape. Staff trained in product knowledge of winery and wines in gen-eral. Distinctive brand displays and profiles. Premises not outstanding in presentation as a wine outlet. Wine not attrac-tively displayed or pro-filed. Staff have only generalised knowledge of wine. Untidy or cluttered outlet. Wine boxes used to display wine with no brand profil-ing. Staff have minimal or no wine knowledge. Results Results are shown to illustrate the po-tential of the approach with respect to winery servicescape evaluation. The inten-tion is to identify perceptual and empirical dimensions of servicescapes rather than for the evaluation to be used as ranking sys-tem. Scores are provided for individual wineries as well as observations with re-spect to regional characteristics. The wineries with the highest scores for their physical external presentation in-cluded Wither Hills, Nautilus and Allan Scott with the lowest being Daniel Schus-ter, Hintons, Bouldevines and Torlesse (Tables 7 and 8). Most wineries scored reasonably well in areas of paintwork of exterior walls, win-dow frames and door ways. Exterior sig-nage and billboards were in general of a high standard with the average signage scoring 7.1. Many car parks were found to be of a lower than expected standard in the study in terms of aesthetic appeal and seal-ing surfaces. The average score for car parks was only 6.5. Angela McDonnell and C. Michael Hall 241 PASOS. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Heritage, 6(2). 2008 Special Issue. Gastronomic and wine tourism ISSN 1695-7121 Table 7 Physical Environment – Highest Scores Physical Environment: External Presentation Allan Scott Wither Hills Nautilus Architecture/ext building design 10 10 7 Car parking 10 10 10 Signage on building ext/fascia/billboard 10 10 9 Opening hours/other notices 9 8 10 Paintwork-walls/window frames 10 10 10 Pavement/doorways 10 10 10 Access for buggies/disabled 10 8 9 Windows/ext window treatments 10 10 9 Outdoor seating/equipment 10 10 10 Window displays/promotion 0 0 0 Ext lighting 10 10 7 Overall impression ext/layout/design/landscape 10 10 9 Total 109 106 100 Table 8 Physical environment – lowest scores Physical Environment: External Presenta-tion Hintons Daniel Schuster Torlesse Bouldvines Architecture/ext building design 1 7 7 6 Car parking 2 1 7 2 Signage on building ext/fascia/billboard 6 1 1 6 Opening hours/other notices 6 10 2 5 Paintwork-walls/window frames 7 5 5 8 Pavement/doorways 8 5 4 8 Access for buggies/disabled 5 1 8 2 Windows/ext window treatments 1 4 6 4 Outdoor seating/equipment 4 2 5 0 Window displays/promotion 0 1 1 4 Ext lighting 5 4 4 4 Overall impression ext/layout/design/landscape 5 2 6 3 Total 50 43 56 52 The study also found that outdoor seat-ing was an area of neglect for many wine-ries. The average score was 6.9. This was surprising given that, at the time of the survey with the southern hemisphere summer approaching, this was an area that many wineries which depend on outdoors elements to attract visitors could have been expected to have invested in. Given its po-tential significance in peak visitor periods aesthetic appeal including seating should be prioritised and addressed in winery business plans. Exterior lighting was also neglected by some wineries and brought the average score down to 6.3, but as many are not open in the evenings that was an aspect given minimal attention by many wineries. The most dramatic observation made was that less than a quarter of the wineries surveyed paid attention to any form of ex-terior window display or promotion. This may be in part due to the design of the ac-tual buildings, but also through lack of understanding or skill in this area. Oppor-tunities for promotional product or infor- 242 A framework for the evaluation of winery servicescapes: ... PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 6(2). 2008 Número Especial. Turismo Gastronómico y Enoturismo ISSN 1695-7121 mation displays in exterior servicescapes are numerous and could be integrated in business promotional planning. Opportuni-ties noted in this study included outdoor seating areas where promotional informa-tion could have been displayed on tables or exterior billboards or windows. Incorporat-ing aesthetically pleasing and subtle pro-motional displays were apparently ignored due to a general lack of planned display space at most wineries. With respect to internal presentation of the physical environment, highest scores were assigned to Wither Hills and Pegasus Bay. Lowest scores went to Hintons, Wai-para, Torlesse and Huia. Allan Scott did not rate as highly for physical internal presentations as they did in their external. The majority of wineries scored very well on housekeeping standards with an average of 8.2. One particular forgotten area for most wineries was that of table decoration. Even wineries that had no restaurant or dining facilities still had tables that could have been decorated in some way with branded table talkers, flowers or art pieces. The minimalist austere look was prevalent. The average score was only 3.4. Display of artifacts and awards was also inconsistent across the wineries. Renowned wineries like Pegasus Bay, Wither Hills and St Clair scored 10 marks and prided themselves with almost ostentatious dis-plays of their awards, while others like Cloudy Bay, who are positioned as similar in quality of wine and renown, were not as ambitious to impress and had no awards on display at all. Huia, also another similarly positioned winery only scored 1. However, it is possible that this may also reflect ele-ments of a winery’s positioning with re-spect to awards as well as branding. Uniform scores varied amongst the wineries from 0 at The Wineshed, Bould-vines, Highcrest and Huia, to impeccable representation at others scoring 10 at Wither Hills, Cloudy Bay, Melton Estate, Kaikoura Winery, Wairau River, Clifford Bay, Framingham, Nautilus, Mahi and Domaine. Matua Valley and Villa Maria scored only 7 and 3. Interestingly, these are large mass production wineries and may be influenced more by their focus on the production concept of marketing rather Table 9 Physical Environment: Internal Presentation Physical Environment: Inter-nal Presentation Hintons Waipara Pegasus Bay Torlesse Cloudy Bay Huia Wither Hills Interior design / colour/ style/ furnishings 1 3 10 3 10 4 10 Interior lighting / fixtures and fittings 3 5 10 3 10 7 10 Functional Equipment / cash registers / fridge 5 4 10 6 10 7 10 Clean functioning restrooms 6 3 10 0 10 0 10 Housekeeping standards 4 6 10 6 10 9 10 Merchandising and Product Display 1 1 10 3 10 4 10 Table décor / coverings 2 5 5 3 0 0 10 Point-of-purchase / cellar door area 1 2 10 4 10 5 10 Layout and arrangement of internal floor plan 0 1 10 4 10 6 10 Indoor / outdoor flow 2 7 5 9 10 1 10 Artifacts / collectibles / artwork / photos / awards 1 3 10 3 0 1 10 Total 26 40 100 44 90 44 110 Angela McDonnell and C. Michael Hall 243 PASOS. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Heritage, 6(2). 2008 Special Issue. Gastronomic and wine tourism ISSN 1695-7121 than a customer focused marketing con-cept. Personal grooming at most of the wine-ries was of a high standard however it was noted that the presentation of staff at the wine cellar sales counter and restaurant at Highfield had soiled polo shirts and hand wipe marks on their aprons. This particular winery positions and prides itself on its export quality wines and strong branding. Therefore, it was surprising that uniforms and staff presentation should not reflect the desired branding image. Most wineries scored fairly well with re-spect to interior and exterior ambient posi-tions. The highest score went to Wither Hills with full marks of 60. The lowest was Hintons with 26. Most wineries scored well with respect to their labels and wine bottle carriers as well as web pages. There were varied re-sults for branded merchandise and souve-nirs. Some wineries such as Matua Valley and St Clair had vast amounts of branded merchandise for sale while others like Hin-tons had nothing obvious. Results for bro-chures were very disappointing at the Christchurch wineries. The Wineshed had none and scored 0, Larcomb Wines scored 1, Hintons had none and scored 0. The only Marlborough result for brochures that was disappointing was Matua Valley, scoring 1. Discussion As noted in the introduction wine tour-ism has become an important component of the marketing and business strategies of many wineries in New Zealand (Hall and Mitchell 2008). If visitors are significant target markets for wineries as in the case of the wineries studied for this paper, then the servicescape must be an important con-sideration of wineries that seek to increase their sales at the cellar door and develop a positive post-visit consumer relationship (Mitchell and Hall 2004, 2006). First sightings and impression of the winery for tourists should instill the feeling of a positive visitor experience. If the first impression of the winery is one of unkempt car parks, tourists may not perceive the brand as intended by the winery. For ex-ample, Pegasus Bay (www.pegasusbay.com/) presents visitors with artistic creativity, evident in the gar-den design, the art work on display and the wine itself. The Pegasus Bay Winery web page reinforces its positioning as a profes-sional business which takes food and wine seriously, but the car parks and access are less than desirable. Their overall physical external environment score was only 71, and yet they position themselves professio-nally. They promote their positioning through various tourism intermediaries on the World Wide Web and are nominated as one of the best wineries in the Canterbury region. First impressions of the stunning archi-tecture of Wither Hills (www.witherhills.co.nz/) alongside envi-ronmental extrinsic cues enhance the per-ceived image of sophistication and artistic flair. These perceptual cues make a state-ment about the quality expectation from the moment you set eyes on the building from the road and play a vital role in pre-dicting service quality. The authors found that being able to predict product quality through extrinsic cues prior to consumption of wine at the wineries was especially important for wine products when quality was difficult to evaluate by customers with little viticul-tural knowledge (see also Hall and Mitchell 2008). Professional looking wineries that used their servicescape as an opportunity to communicate the quality of the wine produced were perceived as memorable and provided? customer focussed experiences. The servicescapes of these wineries also communicated and invoked invitation through these intrinsic cues which influ-enced longevity of a visit. For example, Wither Hills invited visitors to view its cellar and immerse themselves in the am-bience of the surrounds. Therefore, other visual indicators become part of the evalua-tion and, in the longer term, relationship process. This supports Wakefield and Blodgett’s (1996) hypothesis that “facility aesthetics” are a function of architectural design and that as customers approach or drive by they are likely to evaluate the at-tractiveness of the exterior. In the case of wineries this is very relevant as customers may not have visited before and if they are 244 A framework for the evaluation of winery servicescapes: ... PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 6(2). 2008 Número Especial. Turismo Gastronómico y Enoturismo ISSN 1695-7121 international tourists, may not visit again, yet they will often have opportunities to purchase in the longer term either via mail order or retail outlets and restaurants as well as provide positive word-of-mouth. The servicescape also needs to consider more than extrinsic cues of the external physical presentation. The internal physi-cal presentation, staff presentation, ambi-ence and merchandise are also important contributors to the overall impression and enduring satisfaction of the winery experi-ence. Internal layout and presentation and the dimensions used to evaluate each win-ery in this paper provide cues which make statements about the winery business. Newman (2007) argues that spatial factors such as internal layouts can often be more powerful as they can make clear and dis-tinguishing visual statement about expec-tations of quality and standard. Newman (2007) draws on the theory of Mehrabian and Russell’s (1974) variables of approach and avoidance behaviours. These behaviours may be a consequence of con-tributing spatial factors such as where cus-tomers may feel cramped or exposed, espe-cially where social interaction is important. The personal space allocated for wine tast-ing at Rossendale (www.rossendale.co.nz/), for example, was non-existent. The sole counter serviced all restaurant, bar and cellar customers. A tasting room separated from the main restaurant dining area would have been advantageous to enable wine enthusiasts to experience a more re-laxed servicescape. Having to stand in an entrance-way/point of sale area for the res-taurant even though visitors are seeking a tasting does not provide legibility for cus-tomers in terms of the servicescape and as Newman (2007) observes, customers may feel coerced into a stressed and uncomfort-able emotional state. Similarly at Kaikoura Winery (www.kaikourawinery.co.nz/), the layout of the interior did not entice custom-ers to stay; Newman (2007) describes this as having no legibility of space. The seating area was in the way of the main access route to the outdoor viewing area which as Wakefield and Blodgett (1996) hypothesise impacts on accessibility. Also the seating lacked ambient appeal and, perhaps even more importantly, was uncomfortable, with a consequence of not encouraging custom-ers to return. Forrest Estate Winery (www.forrest.co.nz/) also had poor legibility where it was difficult to actually open the door and there was no directional extrinsic cues leading or inviting you to the closed door. The internal schematic had no struc-ture or environmental signposts for the eye to follow. Conversely, the spatial design of Nautilus Wines (www.nautilusestate.com/) influenced behaviour on the occasion one of the authors visited. Due to the close spatial environment customers were forced to gather in close proximity to hear about tasting notes from the staff member and to have their tasting glasses filled. The area was cramped and not conducive to comfort or relaxation. This is a significant aspect of servicescape design as Newman (2007) suggests that people’s reactions to each other may be determined by spatial factors. Newman (2007) refers to mood as hav-ing an influence on how people evaluate places and situations and that mood states and behaviour may involve associations in memory which tie specific moods to certain types of behaviour. The experience encoun-tered by one of the authors at St Clair Win-ery (www.saintclair.co.nz/) support this theory and may be influenced by the casual relaxed ambience of the winery which scored a high (59) for interior and exterior ambient conditions. However, Langdales (www.langdalerestaurant.com/home.htm) also scored a high 57 and Highfield Estate (www.highfield.co.nz/) scored 46 but the personnel at the wine cellar counters at both wineries were unfriendly and unwel-coming. As Newman (2007) suggests, the behaviour of contact personnel is likely to contribute significantly to customers’ mood states and thereby deciding the outcome of future behaviours toward that winery. Similarly, the service encounter at Forrest Estate and Villa Maria (www.villamaria.co.nz/) were also less than desirable with arrogant and preoccupied staff which encouraged avoidance behav-iour At the other end of the scale, Framing-ham (www.framingham.co.nz/) ensures their customer service delivery is presented in as polished a manner as is their winery. Angela McDonnell and C. Michael Hall 245 PASOS. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Heritage, 6(2). 2008 Special Issue. Gastronomic and wine tourism ISSN 1695-7121 In fact they were the friendliest, most pro-fessional and engaging of all the wineries, with Wither Hills, Mahi (www.mahi.co.nz/) and St Clair running second equal. Al-though this paper is not focussing on cus-tomer service and the socialscape, it does have an impact on the memory of the ser-vicescape. One of the authors requested some information on the Framingham brand. The staff were delighted to be able to assist and said they would email a news-letter and information on history of the brand. A service promise which was later met. Interestingly, Hall and Mitchell (2005, 2008) found in their research on the impact of the servicescape on the service expe-rience that although bad service expe-riences may produce negative feelings at the time, these may decline in significance over time while aspects such as the winery vineyard setting, the cellar door and at-mosphere will take on a much greater sig-nificance over time. They argue that the vineyard, the cellar door facilities and the winery itself may take on more significance in terms of negative recollection. There-fore, wineries should endeavor to plan and manage the servicescape in the long term. Furthermore, Hall and Mitchell (2005) in their case study on winery visitation and post-visit behaviour discuss the wider tem-poral context of wineries and in particular that wine itself is a tangible, transportable and durable product that can be expe-rienced in a number of locations before, during and after the on-site winery expe-rience. This supports the inclusion of sec-tion E in the servicescape dimensions scores of this paper, which includes the souvenirs, the wine bottle carriers, the newsletters and the wine bottles them-selves as they serve to act as reinforcement to the on-site winery servicescape expe-rience. Many tourists can relive the expe-rience of their holiday at home when they take a bottle of wine purchased on their holiday or at the retail store from their fridge or receive their Framingham New-sletter or Cloudy Bay Mentelle Notes in the mail. The servicescape, relationship mar-keting and reinforcement of brand image may have a more enduring, or at least as enduring, impact on customer post pur-chase behaviour than the initial consump-tion of wine at the winery itself (Hall and Mitchell 2008). Conclusions This study has identified the signific-ance of the servicescape as a component of wine tourism and wine marketing. A ser-vicescape evaluation framework was devel-oped and utilized in the evaluation of 27 wineries in the Canterbury and Marlbo-rough wine regions of New Zealand. The results support the identification of a con-tinuum of servicescape design with varying degrees of quality. Some wineries had very impressive servicescapes that matched the positioning of the wine quality and price, while others were more enigmatic in their design and market positioning variables. Most of the wineries were largely consis-tent in their integrated marketing commu-nication (IMC) of branded print material, signage and web page design, while some wineries were outstanding in integrating their brand and image in all elements of their servicescape. Wairau River (www.wairauriverwines.com/) and Wither Hills were good examples of this. However, in some wineries there were surprising irregularities and inconsisten-cies identified upon the more detailed as-sessment using the servicescape frame-work. These inconsistencies were most notable on variables of physical environ-ment dimensions and perceived market positioning based on price and product quality. Wineries that used a premium based pricing strategy in some cases exhi-bited servicescape elements which were inconsistent with the higher quality prod-uct which was being promoted and their physical environments did not fit well with their claimed market positioning. The value of the development of such an evaluation framework is not necessarily with respect to the scores themselves. Ra-ther the framework has potential value as a diagnostic tool by which wineries can consider the various factors in the service-scape and make decisions as to how they should be developed in line with their branding and markets. Clearly, different markets – and different cultures – will have differing opinions about what is ap- 246 A framework for the evaluation of winery servicescapes: ... PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 6(2). 2008 Número Especial. Turismo Gastronómico y Enoturismo ISSN 1695-7121 propriate in the winery and cellar door servicescape. Comparative studies are therefore to be encouraged so as to allow further refinement of the evaluation framework particularly with respect to the relative weightings of both empirical and perceptual factors. Nevertheless, it is es-sential that wineries engaged in cellar door sales and wine tourism seek to pay as much attention to the elements of their service-scape as they do their markets, their brand, and the quality of their wine. Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge the valuable comments of the referees. References Ahuvia, A. 2001 “Traditional, interpretive, and recep-tion based content analyses: Improving the ability of content analysis to address issues of pragmatic and theoretical con-cern”. Social Indicators Research, 54(2): 139-172. Baker, J. 1998 “Examining the informational value of store environments”. In Sherry, Jr. J.F. (Ed.), Servicescapes: The concepts of place in contemporary markets (pp. 55- 79), Chicago: NTC Business Books. Baker, J., Parasuraman, A., Grewal, D. and Voss, G.B. 2002 “The influence of multiple store envi-ronment cues on perceived merchandise value and patronage intentions”, Jour-nal of Marketing, 66: 120-141. Baker, J., Grewal, D. and Parasuraman, A. 1994 “The influence of store environment on quality inferences and store image”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 22(4): 328-339. Bitner, M.J. 1986 “Consumer responses to the physical environment in service setting”. In Ven-katesan, M., Schmalensee, D.M. and Marshall, C. (Eds.) Creativity in Servic-es Marketing (pp.89-93), Chicago: Amer-ican Marketing Association. Bitner, M.J. 1990 “Evaluating service encounter: The effects of physical surrounding and em-ployee responses”, Journal of Marketing, 54(2): 69-82. Bitner, M.J. 1992 “Servicescapes: The impact of physi-cal surroundings in customers and em-ployees”, Journal of Marketing, 56: 57- 71. Carlsen, J. and Charters, S (Eds.) 2006 Global Wine Tourism: Research, Management & Marketing. Wallingford: CABI. Christensen, D., Hall, C.M., Mitchell, R. 2004 “The 2002 New Zealand Wineries Survey”. In 2004 CAUTHE Conference, University of Queensland, Brisbane, February. Ipswich: University of Queen-sland [CDRom] Dodd, T. 1995 “Opportunities and pitfalls of tourism in a developing wine industry’’, Interna-tional Journal of Wine Marketing, 7(1): 5-16. Dodd, T. and Bigotle, V. 1997 “Perceptual differences among visitor groups to wineries’’, Journal of Travel Research, 35(2): 46-51. Hall, C.M. and Johnson, G. 1998 “Wine tourism: an imbalanced part-nership”. In Dowling, R. and Carlsen, J. (Eds.), Wine Tourism Perfect Partners, Proceedings of the first Australian Wine Tourism Conference, Margaret River, Western Australia, May 1998 (pp. 51- 72), Canberra: Bureau of Tourism Re-search. Hall, C.M. and Mitchell, R.D. 2005 “Gastronomy, food and wine tour-ism”. In Buhalis, D. and Costa, C. (Eds.), Tourism Business Frontiers: Consum-ers, Products and Industry (pp. 137- 147). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Hall, C.M. and Mitchell, R.D. 2008 Wine Marketing: A Practical Ap-proach. Oxford: Butterworth Heine-mann Hall, C.M., Longo, A.M., Mitchell, R. and Johnson, G. 2000 “Wine tourism in New Zealand”. In Hall, C.M., Sharples, E., Cambourne, B. & Macionis, N. (Eds.), Wine Tourism Around the World: Development, Man-agement and Markets, (pp. 150-174), Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Hall, C.M., Sharples, E., Cambourne, B. and Macionis, N. (Eds.) 2000 Wine Tourism Around the World: Angela McDonnell and C. Michael Hall 247 PASOS. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Heritage, 6(2). 2008 Special Issue. Gastronomic and wine tourism ISSN 1695-7121 Development, Management and Mar-kets. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann. Hall, C.M. and Valentin, A. 2005 “Content analysis”. In Ritchie, B., Burns, P. and Palmer, C. (Eds.), Tour-ism Research Methods (pp. 191-209). Wallingford: CAB International. Mehrabian, A. and Russell, J.A. 1974 An Approach to Environmental Psy-chology. Cambridge: Massachusetts In-stitute of Technology. Ministry of Tourism 2007 Tourist Activity: Wine Tourism, New Zealand Series B1. Wellington: Ministry of Tourism. Mitchell, R. and Hall, C.M. 2001a “The winery consumer: A New Zealand perspective”, Tourism Recreation Research, 26(2): 63-75. Mitchell, R. and Hall, C.M. 2001b “Lifestyle behaviours of New Zealand winery visitors: wine club activities, wine cellars and place of purchase”, In-ternational Journal of Wine Marketing, 13(3): 82-93. Mitchell, R.D. and Hall, C.M. 2004 “The post-visit consumer behaviour of New Zealand winery visitors”, Jour-nal of Wine Research, 15(1): 37-47. Mitchell, R.D. and Hall, C.M. 2006 “Wine tourism research: The state of play”, Tourism Review International, 9(4): 307-332. New Zealand Wine Growers 2007 Statistical Annual 2007. Auckland: New Zealand Wine Growers. Newman, A.J. 2007 “Uncovering dimensionality in the servicescape: Towards legibility”, Ser-vices Industries Journal 27(1): 15-28 O’Neil, M., Palmer, A. and Charters, S. 2002 “Wine production as a service expe-rience: The effects of service quality on wine sales”, Journal of Services Market-ing, 16(4): 342-362 Simpson, K., Bretherton, P., and de vere, G. 2004 “Lifestyle market segmentation, small business entrepreneurs and the New Zealand wine tourism industry”, Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospi-tality & Tourism, 5(2-4): 157-188. Tombs, A. and McColl-Kennedy, J.R. 2003 “Social-servicescape conceptual mod-el”, Marketing Theory, 3: 447-75. Wakefield, K.L. and Blodgett, J.G. 1996 “The effect of the servicescape on customers' behavioral intentions in lei-sure service settings”, Journal of Servic-es Marketing. 10(6), 45-61. Wels-Lips, I., van der Ven, M. and Peters, R. 1998 “Critical services dimensions: An empirical investigation across six indus-tries”, International Journal of Service Industry Management, 9(3), 286-309. Recibido: 13 de febrero de 2008 Reenviado: 8 de abril de 2008 Aceptado: 10 de abril de 2008 Sometido a evaluación por pares anónimos |
|
|
|
1 |
|
A |
|
B |
|
C |
|
E |
|
F |
|
M |
|
N |
|
P |
|
R |
|
T |
|
V |
|
X |
|
|
|