The Relation between Travel Agencies and their Stakeholders on the Example of DİDİM

• Autorzy: Osman E. Çolakoğlu , Reyhan A. Ayazlar

Warianty tytułu

Relacje pomiędzy biurami podróży a ich interesariuszami na przykładzie DİDİM

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Changing conditions of business world provide a transition to governance from government concern. Governance, in which interaction and communication is forefront, is a process incorporates all of the actors which influence company government. These actors are the stakeholders that affects or can be affected by the companys' actions. The relation between the company and their stakeholders is one of the most important factor that helps the company to sustain. Defining their stakeholders, determining the relations with their stakeholders and sustaining these relations is important for the travel agencies which are a crucial part of the tourism industry. Travel agencies can develop these relations and benefit this situation to provide competitive advantage and innovative behaviors. This research aims to investigate a relation between travel agencies located in Didim region and their stakeholders. Questionnaire technique is used to obtain data from the travel agency managers. According to the findings, travel agencies have dependence on their stakeholders and communication is quite important for them. The contributions of the findings on the travel agency managers will be the ease of determining their stakeholders effectively.

Zmiana warunków w świecie gospodarczym powoduje zmianę z podejścia opartego na rządzeniu na współrządzenie. Współrządzenie, w którym czołowe znaczenie mają interakcje oraz komunikacja, stanowi proces łączący wszystkie podmioty oddziałujące na rządzenie w przedsiębiorstwie. Podmioty te określa się mianem interesariuszy, którzy wywierają wpływ bądź są pod wpływem działań przedsiębiorstwa. Relacje pomiędzy przedsiębiorstwem a jego interesariuszami to jeden z najważniejszych czynników umożliwiających jego przetrwanie. Zdefiniowanie interesariuszy, określenie wzajemnych zależności oraz utrzymanie tych relacji odgrywa istotną rolę dla biur podróży, stanowiących kluczowy element sektora turystycznego. Biura podróży mogą rozwijać owe relacje i czerpać korzyści z istniejącej sytuacji, aby zapewnić przewagę konkurencyjną oraz zachowania innowacyjne.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Stakeholders; Travel agency

PL

Interesariusze; Biuro podróży

• Czasopismo: Economic and Environmental Studies
• Rocznik: 2013
• Numer: nr 4
• Strony: 365--386

Twórcy

autor

Osman E. Çolakoğlu

• Adnan Menderes University, Turkey

autor

Reyhan A. Ayazlar

• Adnan Menderes University, Turkey

Bibliografia

• Bandsuch, M.; Pate, L.; Thies, J. (2008). Rebuilding Stakeholder Trust in Business: An Examination of Principle-Centered Leadership and Organizational Transparency in Corporate Governance. Business and Society Review 113(1): 99-127.
• Batı, G. B. (2006). Paydaş Teorisi ve Bankalarda Paydaş Analizi, Uludağ Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İşletme ABD. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Bursa.
• Bryson, J. M. (2004). What To Do When Stakeholders Matter Stakeholder Identification Analysis Techniques. Public Management Review 6(1): 21-53.
• Clarkson, M B. E. (1995). A Stakeholder Framework for Analizing and Evaluating Corporate Social Performance. Academy of Management Review 20(1): 92-117.
• Çolakoğlu, O. E.; Çolakoğlu, Ü. (2007). Seyahat Acentaları Yönetimi. Ankara: Detay yayıncılık.
• Dönmez, D. (2008). Paydaş Teorisi Çerçevesinde Otel İşletmelerinin Seyahat Acentaları İle İlişkileri ve Otel İşletmelerinin Performans Arasındaki İlişkiye Yönelik Bir Araştırma. Yönetim Dergisi 61: 91 - 112.
• Ekin, Y.; Ören, V. E. (2012). Turizm Paydaşlarının Turizm Deneyiminden Tatmin Düzeyleri ve Turizme Yönelik Genel Tutumları Üzerine Betimleyici Bir Araştırma: Antalya Örneği. Niğde Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi 5(1): 133-148.
• Ertuğrul, F. (2008). Paydaş Teorisi ve İşletmelerin Paydaşları İle İlişkilerinin Yönetimi. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi 31: 199 - 223.
• Grimble R.; Wellard, K. (1996). Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management: A review of principles, contexts, experiences and opportunities. Agricultural Systems 55(2): 173-193.
• Jarvenpaa, S. L.; Staples, D. S. (2000). The Use of Collaborative Electronic Media for Information Sharing: an Exploratory Study of Determinants. Journal of Strategic Information Systems 9: 129-154.
• Kaptein, M.; Tulder, R. V. (2003). Towqrd Effective Stakeholder Dialogue. Business and Society Review 108(2): 203-204.
• Kozak, R. A.; Cohen, D. H. (1997). Distributor-Supplier Partnering Relationships: A Case in Trust. Journal of Business Research 39: 33-38.
• Local Government Association. Available at: http://www.idea.gov.uk/idk/core/page.do?pageId=6948393. Accessed 20 May 2013.
• Maignan, I.; Ferrell, O. C.; Ferrell, L. (2005). A Stakeholder Model for Implementing Social Responsibility in Marketing. European Journal of Marketing 39(9/10): 956-977.
• Mitchell, R. K.; Agle, B. R.; Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward A Theory Of Identification And Salience: Defining The Principle Of Who And What Really Counts. Academy Of Management Review 22(4): 853-886.
• Nasi, J. (1995). Understanding Stakeholder Thinking. Helsinki: LSR-Julkaisut Oy.
• Oral, S. (1988). Türk Turizm Pazarlamasında Dağıtım-Fiyat Politikaları ve Turist Profili Analizi. İstiklal Matbaa, İzmir.
• Philips, R. (2004). Ethics and Manager's Obligations Under Stakeholder Theory. Ivey Business Journal Mar/April: 1-5.
• Pirson, M.; Malhotra, D. (2008). Unconventional Insights for Managing Stakeholder Trust. Sloon Management Review: 1-24.
• Rindfleisch, A. (2000). Organizational Trust and Interfirm Cooperation: An Examination of Horizontal Versus Vertical Alliances. Marketing Letters 11(1): 81-95.
• Sarıkaya, M. (2008). Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluğa Yeni Bir Bakış: Paydaş Teorisi, Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İşletme ABD. Doktora Tezi. Eskişehir.
• Sarıkaya, M. (2011). Paydaş Yaklaşımı Bağlamında İşletme-Paydaş Etkileşimi ve Stratejik Paydaş Analizi, Dosya, Ankara Sanayi Odası Yayınları, pp. 43-57.
• Shankar, V.; Urban, G. L.; Sultan, F. (2002). Online Trust: A Stakeholder Perspective, Concepts, Implications, and Future Directions. Journal of Strategic Information Systems 11: 325-344.
• Simmons, J.; Lovegrove, I. (2005). Bridging the Conceptual Divide: Lessons from Stakeholder Analysis. Journal of Organizational Change 18(5): 495-513.
• Stephens, K. K.; Malone, P. C.; Bailey, C. M. (2005). Communicating with Stakeholders During a Crisis, Evaluating Massage Strategies. Journal of Business Communication 42: 390-419.
• Torres, R. T.; Preskill, H. (1999). Ethical Dimensions of Stakeholder Participation and Evaluation Use. New Directions for Evaluation, Jossey-Bass Publish 82: 57-66.
• Wicks, A. C.; Gilbert, D. R. Jr.; Freeman, R. E. (1994). A feminist reinterpretation of the stake-holder concept. Business Ethics Quarterly 4(4): 475-497.
• World Bank. Multi-Stakeholder Dialogue. Available at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTGOVACC/Resources/MultiStakeholderweb.pdf. Accessed 8 May 2013.
• Zhang, J.; Dawes, S. S.; Sarkis, J. (2005). Exploring Stakeholders' Expectations of the Benefits and Barriers of e-government Knowledge Sharing. The Journal of Enterprise Information Management 18(5): 548-567.