Select Page
  

You are going to apply the Market Appeal-Robusticity model by McKercher and du Cros (2002) on a cultural asset/cultural tourism product of your choice. This cannot be an entire city or destination, but should be a more specific and concrete cultural asset, for example the Eifel Tower or the Anne Frank House. Of course, you start with explaining the theory and discussion of the assessment method and indicators as reviewed in class and in course literature. Describe and explain your chosen cultural asset. For each of the indicators you describe how your cultural asset scores. You choose a grading system (5 point scale or other) and guide the reader through the quantitative assessment process of the asset and come to a final score and literally position this within the matrix. What ‘box’ does this score result in (A1-D3)? What does that mean? Give management suggestions on how to improve the asset’s market appeal and/or robusticity.Format automatic reference using Microsoft Word( easier for later update and check) I enclosed a good example of this assignment in the attachment ( the file named ” BOK assessment ,check the chapter” Cultural Tourism) .Please follow the given example to structure the assignment.Font: Calibri 12
bok_assessment_4.2._lotta_attenberg_final_pdf.pdf

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Cultural Tourism The Oude Kerk Competitiveness Of Heritage Sites
Just from $10/Page
Order Essay

Bod
BODY OF KNOWLEDGE
Destination Development 4.2
31st of January 2019
Lotta Attenberg
Student number: 567577
Foreword
This Body of Knowledge report has been written for the Destination Development minor
4.2. The minor is part of the final year of the Tourism Management degree at the Inholland
University of Applied Sciences.
The report starts with an individual assignment for cultural tourism, where a market appeal
of a cultural attraction has been studied. The second part is about content analysis. Here,
different online sources from an organisation have been analysed in order to determine the
image they portray of the destination. Thirdly, a part for the lectures intercultural
communication have been done, to evaluate the experience of visiting Morocco. Finally,
related documents to the individual assignments have been provided in the appendices.
This was the last assignment I did before starting my graduation thesis. Reflecting to it, I
found it challenging to evaluate the market appeal of an attraction, due to the complexity of
the model. When it comes to the content analysis, it was similarly challenging, however, I
enjoyed doing it and believe it will be useful also for my thesis. Writing about my
expectations and experiences in Tangier, Morocco, was eye opening. It was interesting to
compare my thoughts beforehand to the actual experience and then evaluate what I had
learned during the trip. I had a good time completing the Destination Development minor
and feel I am now ready to start with my thesis assignment.
Lotta Attenberg
In Amsterdam 31st of January 2019
1
Table of Contents
Foreword …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 1
1.
Individual assignment 1 – Cultural tourism ……………………………………………………………… 3
1.1.
Discussion of the assessment and methods ……………………………………………………… 3
1.2.
Description of Anne Frank House ……………………………………………………………………. 5
1.3.
Assessment of tourism potential …………………………………………………………………….. 6
1.4.
How to further improve the cultural asset ……………………………………………………… 11
2.
Individual assignment 2 – Content analysis ……………………………………………………………. 12
2.1.
Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………… 12
2.2.
Research Questions ……………………………………………………………………………………… 12
2.3.
Content analysis ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 13
2.4.
Results ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 14
2.5.
Conclusion and recommendations ………………………………………………………………… 17
References ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 23
3.
Individual assignment 3 – Intercultural Communication …………………………………………. 24
3.1.
At home ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 24
3.2.
Description and analysis of my experiences ……………………………………………………. 25
3.3.
Learning aims ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 29
References ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 33
Appendices………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 35
I.
Notes from the first 24 hours in Tangier ……………………………………………………………. 35
II.
TripAdvisor reviews…………………………………………………………………………………………. 35
2
1. Individual assignment 1 – Cultural tourism
1.1.
Discussion of the assessment and methods
According to an insider article (Pantazi, 2017), Amsterdam was ranked as the number one
city in the world based on its cultural offering. The list considered the number of cultural
attractions per capita, using data from various sources such as UNESCO World Heritage
Sites, TripAdvisor and Michelin Guide (Pantazi, 2017). The research concluded the city of
Amsterdam is a home to 81 museums, 54 art galleries, 2 world heritage site, 8 concert halls,
and 43 Michelin-starred restaurants (Pantazi, 2017). Despite the wide array of attractions,
most of the visitors in Amsterdam go for big attractions such as the Rijksmuseum, the Van
Gogh museum, and the Anne Frank House, which are all mentioned in the ‘top 20 things to
do in Amsterdam’ list on the I Amsterdam website (2019).
In this research I wanted to zoom into the tourism potential of Anne Frank house. There has
been recent critic towards the attraction, such as the long waiting line of two hours outside
the museum (Sykes, 2016). Improvements have been made (Sykes, 2016), however, since
the Anne Frank house attracts over 1,2 million visitors per year (Anne Frank House, n.d.), a
more sustainable option for a tourism in a city would be to shift the demand to underutilized attractions. However, not many tourists are willing to do the shift from the primary
attractions and the demand stays within a small number of attractions (McKercher & Ho,
2006).
The demand for visiting the Anne Frank house is not likely to change, thus it is important to
understand the attractions ability to withstand the large number of visitors it currently
receives (McKercher & Ho, 2006). This is where the market appeal/robusticity framework of
du Cros will be useful. This model investigates the likely appeal of an attraction to tourists
and the ability of the attraction to cope with visitation. With the help of this model a
manager of an attraction sees which assets are best suited for the specific tourism
attraction, leading to them making the right management plans for the attraction at hand
(McKercher & Ho, 2006). The matrix of the model has four grade assets: A, B, C, and D,
which indicate the following according to McKercher & Ho (2006):
A. Means that a cultural asset is ideally suited for significant tourism activity, having
moderate to high market appeal and moderate to high robusticity in the matrix.
B. Indicates that a cultural asset has strong market appeal but is fragile, meaning
tourism might compromise the heritage values of the attraction.
C. Refers to a cultural asset that has a limited market appeal but can withstand
visitation meaning its robusticity is high.
D. Cultural assets that fall in the grade D of the matrix will not attract a lot of visitors
and have a low market appeal.
3
Figure 1 Market Appeal/Robusticity Matrix (McKercher & Ho, 2006)
In addition to the four grades, the model is composed of a 3 x 3 matrix, having low, medium
and high sectors on each axis (McKercher & Ho, 2006). The model has two axis, market
appeal and robusticity. The market appeal axis incorporates two dimensions: market appeal,
which measures the ambiance and setting, storytelling level, complementarity with other
activities; and design need for a product, which evaluates the accessibility, amenities, and
openness for public (McKercher & Ho, 2006). The robusticity dimension refers to cultural
significance of an attraction or area, that assesses aesthetic, historical, educational and
social values; and robusticity which refers to the fragility, needed repairments, plans for
management and impact form increased visitation (McKercher & Ho, 2006). Each of the
dimensions have variables that are individually assessed on a six-point scale. The sum of
these variables in each sector is then placed in the matrix to see the position of the cultural
asset in the model (McKercher & Ho, 2006).
The du Cros model has its strengths, such as the ability to assess a sustainable tourism
potential of an attraction. However, due to the shortcomings of the model revolving around
the subjective nature of the indicators and its tendency to personal bias, an alternative
assessment practice was developed by a group of students of the Hong Kong Polytechnic
University (McKercher & Ho, 2006). The students divided the model into four dimensions
being: cultural, physical, product, and experiential values, followed by the development of
indicators for each of the dimensions (McKercher & Ho, 2006). The students decided to
follow the original marking system of the du Cros model, having five categories of ‘Low’,
‘Low/Moderate’, ‘Moderate’, ‘Moderate/High’, and ‘High’, since this scale only measures that
something is better than one and not how much better it is, making it possible to assess
each dimension in whole (McKercher & Ho, 2006). The developed indicators can be seen in
the table below.
4
Table 1. Cultural tourism assessment indicators (McKercher & Ho, 2006)
With the help of the model of du Cross and the indicators developed by the students from
the Honk Kong Polytechnic University, an assessment of the tourism potential of the Anne
Frank house has been completed. The results can be found in the following chapters, closing
with suggestions on how to improve the asset’s market appeal and robusticity.
1.2. Description of Anne Frank House
During a period of two years over the Second World War, Anne Frank hid in the secret
annex of a house on Prinsengracht 263 in Amsterdam, with her family and friends where she
wrote a series of diaries. After the war, Anne’s father Otto Frank, the only family member
who returned from Auschwitz, published his daughters’ writings and the hiding place was
restored and opened to public as The Anne Frank House in 1960 (Anne Frank House, n.d.).
Today, the diary has been translated into more than 70 languages and The Anne Frank
House receives 1.2 million visitors a year and has become an iconic cultural sight in
Amsterdam (Anne Frank House, n.d.). The museum consists of a cloakroom, a main house
5
and living courters, the secret annex, a room where you can see the original diary and other
notebooks from Anne, a museum café and a museum shop (Anne Frank House, n.d.)
1.3. Assessment of tourism potential
To evaluate the tourism potential of Anne Frank house, all the indicators of the four
dimensions developed by the students (McKercher & Ho, 2006), where answered. The
assessment of the cultural asset was done by using several TripAdvisor reviews (which can
be found in the Appendix II), information from the official site of the Anne Frank House, and
personal experience when visiting the attraction. Due to the use of personal experience, the
level of bias of the results is not certain, however as first-hand information, it was regarded
useful for the purpose of the assessment and therefore was not left out.
Cultural values
Do the stakeholders want tourists/tourism?
– Yes, this is evident since Anne Frank House operates as a museum, and the life story
of Anne Frank continues to attract visitors year after year (Anne Frank House, n.d.).
Can the asset withstand visitation without damaging its cultural values (tangible and
intangible)?
– In the recent years there has been expansions made and public facilities have been
renewed in order to withstand the visitor numbers (Anne Frank House, n.d.).
Moreover, to protect the tangible items in the museum, photography is not allowed
(Anne Frank House, n.d.). On the contrary the large number of visitors will brings
huge amounts of work to be able to conserve the assets cultural values (Anne Frank
House, n.d.).
Does the asset reflect a unique cultural tradition (living or disappeared)?
– It could be said that writing a diary is a disappearing tradition, however, in this case
the Anne Frank House does not reflect a unique cultural tradition.
Is the asset of local, regional or international cultural significance?
– Yes, the asset has a large cultural significance locally and internationally, due to the
fact that the diary of Anne Frank has been translated to more than 70 languages and
her story lives on. Also, the Anne Frank House has cultural significance when it
comes to the Second World War in Europe and the Jewish cultural heritage (Anne
Frank House, n.d.).
Does a visit create an emotional connection with the individual?
– According to personal experiences and the many reviews on TripAdvisor (2019),
expressions, such as, powerful experience, moving experience, humbling experience,
highly emotional are often used to describe the visit. Thus, it can be said the asset
creates an emotional connection with visitors.
Is the asset worth conserving as a representative example of the community’s heritage?
– Due to the asset’s significance internationally and locally, and the increasing number
of visitors, it can be said that Anne Frank House is worth conserving.
6
Physical values
Can all areas be accessed (if not what can be done to rectify)?
– The old part of the museum and the secret annex are not possible to visit by a
disabled person, due to the climbing up the many narrow stairs. It is only possible to
visit the modern parts of the museum with a wheelchair. To rectify this, a virtual
reality experience has been provided to have a look at the Secret Annex (Anne Frank
House, n.d.). However, this brings down the authenticity of the experience for
disabled visitors.
Does the site represent potential hazards for visitors (if so what can be done to rectify)?
– Yes, steep and narrow staircases, with a potential of tripping (Anne Frank House,
n.d.). To avoid potential hazards, children under 12 years old can only visit the
museum with an adult (Anne Frank House, n.d.). Also, having a lot of people outside
the museum on a small street in Amsterdam where there are cars and bicycles
passing by, hazards are almost inevitable.
What is the physical state of repair (any wear and tear) and will its authenticity be
damaged after repairs are made?
– The asset has modern parts to it, which have been added to the original house. The
authenticity of the house and annex have been conserved and kept mostly in their
original condition, however, these parts may still be damaged by a large number of
visitors.
Can it be modified for use (legally, practically)?
– As the Anne Frank is an old canal house in Amsterdam it has its own number of
specific rules and regulations when it comes to modification. Also, the site is small,
and the museum has already expanded to the neighbouring buildings, but when it
comes to practicality the space will eventually run out.
Are both the site (inside its physical boundaries) and the setting (its surrounds) appealing
to tourists?
– Anne frank House has a picturesque location on Prinsengracht, one of the many
canals of Amsterdam. However, the long queues to get into the museum are not
appealing for tourists. In many TripAdvisor reviews, the long queues outside and
inside the museum have been mentioned, and one person has even referred it like
being on a cattle market (TripAdvisor LLC, 2019).
Product values
Is the site big enough to attract and retain tourists for a long time?
– The museum is small compared to the number of visitors it receives. The asset has
modern parts to it; however, the older authentic parts of the original house may be
damaged by a large number of visitors. However, Anne Frank House has value as an
attraction to attract tourist in the long run.
Is the effort required by tourists to get to it too difficult to make a visit worthwhile (time,
cost, effort)?
7

According to some reviews, the staff at the assets show no kindness and long queues
outside put off visitors from visiting the museum (TripAdvisor LLC, 2019). However, if
tickets are booked online the experience can be much more enjoyable. In addition,
the cost is much lower than some other museums in Amsterdam, costing 10 euros
for an entrance to the museum (Anne Frank House, n.d.).
Is it near other attractions (similar or different types)?
– Amsterdam is relatively small city and other attractions, such as museums, are not
far away from the asset. However, the Anne Frank House is a unique attraction.
Is there sufficient information about the site available (e.g. magazine, website, etc.)?
– The website of Anne Frank is comprehensive, providing the visitors with abundance
of information, for example, what to remember prior to the visit, the museum, the
story of Anne Frank, and the education programs the museum is involved in (Anne
Frank House, n.d.). The I Amsterdam website also provides information of the asset
(I amsterdam, 2019).
Does the site have tourist market appeal?
– Anne Frank House attract over 1,2 million visitors per year (Anne Frank House, n.d.),
so it can be concluded that the asset does have tourism market appeal.
Experiential values
Does this asset have the potential to offer interesting experiences to tourists?
– The museum guides the visitors first through interesting parts of the original house
where the visitors can immerse themselves to the daily life of the people and the
conditions they had living in the house and the secret annex. After, the modern parts
of the museum showcase more of the collection, offer a film and other interactive
experiences. Thus, there is potential to offer interesting experiences.
In what ways is this asset capable of providing a participatory, engaging and/or
entertaining experience?
– This would come evident from the educational programs the museum provides. They
have digital lessons, worldwide activities, and make school visits (Anne Frank House,
n.d.) Moreover, the available collection is engaging and educational.
Is this asset capable of meeting different tourists’ expectations?
– I believe the museum is visited by people who know something or have at least
heard of Anne Frank, thus having expectations that the asset is capable of meeting.
On the other hand, according to some reviews (TripAdvisor LLC, 2019), the visitors
expectations were not met, for example the information the museum provided was
seen as having little context to the actual reasons why the Frank family went into
hiding (TripAdvisor LLC, 2019).
How authentic would general tourists perceive of the experiences offered by the asset?
– The experience inside the Anne Frank House is perceived as authentic according to
many reviews. The original house and the annex are seen as providing an authentic
8
feel. However, some reviews say that by having furniture in the rooms, a more
authentic feeling could be achieved (TripAdvisor LLC, 2019).
Is good quality interpretation currently available and if not, how can it be provided?
– “Although the museum had a number of interesting artifacts to view, we were
surprised how little interpretation of the items was provided and how little
interaction was possible with the history on display” (TripAdvisor LLC, 2019). This is
a quote from a 1-star TripAdvisor review from a year ago. Evidently It is only one
person’s opinion, other reviews have similar things to say about expecting to see
more in-depth information in the museum. For example, some people say it was
hard to imagine the life of the family based on the empty rooms (TripAdvisor LLC,
2019). Better interpretation can be achieved when the visitors have a better
understanding of the material and something to relate it to, which is obviously hard
to manage, since every individual will have their own experience and ways of
interpretation.
For the assessment of the tourism potential of the attraction, the marki …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment

Order your essay today and save 10% with the discount code ESSAYHSELP