QUAN TRj-QUANLY
ANH HlJCfNG HINH ANH DIEM DEN DU LICH DEN HAI LONG
VA Y DINH VIENG THAM LAI THANH PHO PHAN THIET:
CACH TIEP CAN MO HINH CAU TRUC TUYEN TINH
• DINH PHI HO - DANG TRANG V I I N NGQC
T 6 M TAT:
Hau het cdc diem de'n du Itch dang do'i mat vdi hai van de la: giff vffng khdch hang va md rdng thi ph^n. Nghien cffu v^ md'i quan he giffa hinh anh diem de'n, hai Idng va y dinh quay lai cua du khach chffa dffdc quan tam diing mffc. dac biet la hinh anh ihffdng hieu. Day lii van de thdch thffc cho cdc nha nghien cffu v^ quan ly du lich,
Tae gia da tiS'n hdnh sff dung dff lieu khao sat 330 khach du ljch ndi dia va apdung md hinh ca'u true tuyen tinh trong phan tich. Ke't qua cho tha'y, cd md'i quan he luye'n tinh du'dng cua hinh anh diem den vdi sff hai ldng du khach va y dinh vie'ng tham Iai tai thanh phd Phan Thiet. Cdc yeu td'anh hffdng bao gom: (i) Hinh anh thirdng hieu diem de'n: (ii) Dich vu da dang va hie'u khdch: (iii) Chd d, thffc pha'm va do ud'ng; (iv) Giao thdng va sach se: (v) Dich vu hd trd; (vi) Sff kidn vd an loan.
Tff khda: Hinh anh diem den. hai Idng, y dinh vieng tham, md binh ca'u true tuye'n tinh, TP.
Phan Thiet. Viet Nam.
L DSt va'nde
Sir hai Idng du khdch vii hinh anh diem de'n du iich la ket qua quan irong nha'l Irong markeling du lich dja phffdng. Dieu nay nham Ihu htit khdch du ljch vii quan trpng hdn nffa la giff dffdc hp trd lai vieng thdm. Trong thdi gian qua. cd nhieu nghien ci?u ve mdl quan he gu7a sff hai Idng dd'i vdi cha't liTdng djch vu du Hch. luy nhien. nhffng nghien cffu nay lai chffa quan tam den md'i quan he giffa hinh
anh diem de'n. hai Idng du khach va y dinh quay Iai. Day cung la van de thach thffc cho cdc nha nghien effu vii quan l\ trong bd'i eanh Viet Nam hda nhap the gidi. nha't la trong linh vffc du lich dang cd sff canh tranh gay ga't ve khach hang vii thi phan,
TP, Phan Thie't Iii trung lam kinh te va van hda cua tinh Binh Thuan. Resort Miii Ne vdi nhi6u khu nahi dffdne da trd thanh "thu dd Resort" d Viet
So 9 - T h d n g 5/2020 139
TAP Cii cone lUm
Ndiii vil ciine IJ dieni d e n du lieh .m tu'dng iren the i:idi \ d i ^a.. d u danh ndi u d n g . nhir Hai J ^ n g Ke Gil. Dd] eat Bau Trdng - iieu s j m a c Sahara. Phan Thie'l d3 trd ihimh dicm d e n l> ti/dng cho nhffng ngifdi me du heh hien - eat Ngoiii ra. trong ndi thiinh Phan Thie't edn cd khu p h d T a \ vdi khdng g u n van hda d a e sdc mang phong each c h a u Au.
\ I n i so' diem thdm quan ddng ehii >' khae khi du lieh Phan Thie't la: Lau Ong H o a n g . nha M d n g C a m (ngu'di tinh cua Han M a e Tff). doi cdt Mui Nc, king ehai Miii N e . T h d p C h a m . Bien v a bai da Cd T h a c h . Bai Rang, d a o Phu Q u y . diic biet phai kc d e n van hda va iim thffc bien m a n g tinh n e n g c d c i i a vung smh thdi bien ndi dj>-
Nghien cffu iie'n himh khao sdt 330 du khdch ndi dia tai T P . Phan Thie'l nhiim tao ed sd thffc tien cho md hinh do lifdng. Bai viet tap trung v a o : (i) Xae dinh mdi quan he giffa hinh anh diem d e n du lich.
hai Idng \ii y dinh quay lai cua du khaeh; (u) Xa\
dffng md hinh cau triic tuyen linh ve md'i quan he nay: (lii) Hiim < ehinh sJch tti' ke't qua nghien effu.
2. T o n s q u a n Iy t h u y e l
2.1. Diem de'n vd hmh dnh diem den du lich T h e o Lynch va Tinslev (2001). diem d e n du lich lii mdt h e ihd'ng ed nhieu thanh phan nhff:
diem du lieh. chd d. giao thdng. dich vu khae \ a ed sit ha tang. T h e o Medlik (2012). d i e m de'n la mdt khu vdc dia ly (qud'e gia, vung. thanb phd. v . \ . i i h u but khach du lieh hodc la ndi ma moi ngffdi di du lich va ehpn d lai trong mpt thdi gian nha'l dinh (Leiper. 1995). Trong bd'i canh du lich. Briciu (2013) cho rang, d i e m de'n cd cdc gia tri lien quan chat ehe d e n nhffng hoal ddng du lich dffdc Ihffc hien trong mdt khdng gian dia Iv nha't dinh. Qu.
Kim va Im (2011) eho rang, bat kv diem de'n du ljch niio eung dffdc tao ihanh Iff ca hai v eu td' hffu hinh va vd hinh. C a c veu td' hffu hinh d e c a p de'n eae diem tham quan tff nhien (bai b i e n . mii) b o a c di san hch sff - viin hda. trong khi cdc \e'u to' vd hinhdffde the hien bdng van hda. phong tuc va lich sffcua diem de'n dd
T h e o Crompton (19791 Gartner va Hunt (MS""!- C.ij i : i i ( i : i . hinh i n h d i e m d e n I IV-siu'.iuon iri.!:jes i the hicn tdng hd.! niem tin. y iiidnj \ , ' V •' ni_ 1' , " , • - Mf,<i nhdn ihUc v c mdl dieiii ^c • I J i'..-p ^,:n k h a c . Piebi-n-^:: . ,,•, nil'- nh i.u.i mdt J i e i n di . • ,, bdi 3 nt:uoii: liL[ih .;• _ .a hinh
anh earn ffng du'de dieu chinh ' ' ' ' . ' ' ^ ' '""'^
(organic i m a g e ) d e c a p d e n n - - ' "'*^' " ^ ^ ^ ' t i m h i e u vc mdt dia d i e m cu thi. ' ;k>iig hoc hodc tff phffdng lien iruven thdng dai vliung. sdch hodc i n t e m e t ) vii nha'n m a n h ihifc te !'• 'HIM ngffdi ed kien thffe v e dia d i e m dd ma khdng nh.il thie'l biet dffdc thdng qua trai n g h i e m du Heh. Hinh anh cam ffng (induced i m a g e ) hi hinh anh dffde eho lii ke'i qua cua nhffng n o Iffe tie'p thi va tai lieu quang cdo du'de trinh biiy cho khach du ljch t i e m ndng, nhhm m u c dich thdng b d o va i h u y e i p h u e b p d e n thdm mdl d i e m de'n. Hinh a n h phdi sinh (modified- indueed i m a g e ) la hinh a n h dffdc hinh Ihanh do ket quii trai n g h i e m cua du k h a c h dd'i vdi d i e m de'n du hch. Blain va c d n g sff (2005) c h o rdng, thffdng hieu d i e m d e n the hien tinh phiin biet. r i e n g cd vd cung la bp phiin cua hinh a n h d i e m de'n du lich.
Md'i lien ke't giffa d i e m d e n va du khach Ihirdng Ihdng qua hinh a n h d i e m de'n. Hinh anh se Uie dOng den sff lua chpn d i e m de'n cua du khdch (Tapachai va W a r y s z a k , 2000). T h e o M a y o ; Crompton cho rang, phong c a n h , giao thdng va khi hau lii bd phgn quan trpng cua hinh anh d i e m de'n. Walmsley vil Jenkins (1993): C h e w vil Jahary (2014) cho rang, 5 bd phan quan trpng ciia hinh a n h d i e m den, bao g o m : (i) hinh anh nhan thffc (kie'n thffc va niem tin cd nhan cd dffdc v e d i e m de'n nhff c a n h quan, vdn hda va Iff nhien): (ii) hinh a n h tinh c a m (cdm xiic ma du khach trai n g h i e m nhff bau khdng khi, long hie'u khach). Eehiner vii Ritchie (2003) cho rdng.
hinh anh d i e m de'n the hien dffdc 3 thupc tinh: (i) hffu hinh (tda nha, kie'n true, phong c a n h ) ; (ii) vo hinh (bau khdng khi, sff than thien); (iii) vSt ly (H?
thd'ng dffdng giao thdng, cd sd vat chat, ndi d}; (iv) cam xiic (thff gian, vui v e ) .
Tff t h a p ni6n 2 0 0 0 de'n n a y , nhieu nghien cila thffc n g h i e m tren the gidi n h a n d i e n eau thanh cua hinh anh d i e m de'n du Hch bao g o m : Djch vu ho trd; Giao t h d n g va sach sc Dich vu da dang va hieu k h a c h ; C h d d, thirc ph.i , \ a d o ud'ng; Sffki^n va an loan: Hinh a n h ilur.jny hieu diem den ( P r c b e n s e n . 2 0 0 7 ; Qu va edng str ""^i ] ; Trost va edng sff, 2 0 1 2 : Rajesh. 201?- Schaar, 2013;
Khuong Mai Ngoc va Nguven n , , Trinh (2015);
M o h a m m a d va c d n g su'. 1 ;*, HLTIC 2018;
N g u y d n T h i L e Hu'dng. 2019) ' ' • 2.2. SU hdi long cua khdch ,/, T r o n g ITnh vu'c du bch. , , ,
= . - , , >!'•_• c u a du khach (visitors satisjaelioni ia ^i. - .^ ,
'"•' mh thiet
140 S6 9-Tharg :
QUANTR!-QUANLY
veil ctia nganh dich vu khach hang (Moisescu.
2009). Nd nhff mpl edng cu tiep thi de thu htit sff quan tiim cua cdng chting vii cung de xav dffng cac chifi'n lirdc phat trien nhdm nang cao chat ltf(?ng dieh vu du lich dia phiTdng (Moisescu.
201-1) Hdn nffa. sff hiii Idng ra't quan Irong de tie'p thj diem de'n thanh cdng, cting nhff to' chffc cac hoat dpng djch vu du Iich (Moisescu, 2014). Theo Mori2.in vd cdng sff (2011); Morrison va Anderson (2002) xac dinh rdng, sff hai Idng cua khach du ljch l;i mot yeu id' quan trpng cho khdch du lich trong viec quye't dinh vie'ng ihdm lai cdc diem de'n du lich. Oliver (1999) nha'n manh rdng, cac dich
\u deu lien he vdi sff hai long, bdi vi cac dich vu lae ddng trffc tiep de'n con ngffdi.
2.3. Y djnh vie'ng thdm lai
Zeilhaml vd Bitner (1996) cho rdng, y dinh hanh vi (Behavioural Intention) Id da'u hieu cho thd'y khdch hang hodc gdn ket hodc tff bd san pham/dich vu cung cii'p bdi mdt cdng ty. Oliver (I9K0) khiing dinh rd rang hdn, y djnh hanh vi the hien cdch cff xff cua khach hang ffa thieh vdi mdt san phiini/dich vu cu the. Theo Han va K i m (2009), y djnh hanh vi cd tff trai nghiem qua san piia'm/dich vu, khdch hang the hien thai dp mud'n mualdplaisanpha'm/dich vu dd.
Trong iinh vffc du hch - khach san. Chen va Tsai (2007) cho rdng, hanh vi ciia du khdch bao gom: nhan xei ve chuye'n vie'ng tham, danb gia
trai nghiem vd dff dinh sdp idi cd nen nep tuc vieng thdm lai hay khdng. Theo Abubakar va cdng sff (2016). v dinh qua.v Iai la su' sdn Idng vieng tham diem den lan nffa,
2.4. Qtmn he giSa hinh dnh. hdi long vd y dinh quay Iqi
Chen va Tsai (2007). \ \ u va cdng .sff (2011).
Yang va \ \ u (2013) cbo thay. hinh anh ed tac ddng den dff dinh quay lai cua khdch hang, Trong nganh du lich. quan he ciing chieu giffa hinh anh, hai Idng va dff dinh quay Iai cung dffdc tim tha'y trong cac nghien cffu cua Morrison va Anderson (2002); Kao va cpng sff (2008); Celeste va Vicira (2011); Morgan va cdng sff (2011): Coban (2012).
Wu (2013); Rajesh (2013): Herle (2018). Sff hai long cua khdch du lich ddng vai trd Id tien than cua y dinh hanh vi sau khi trai nghiem. vi nd dffa tren sff hieu bie't that sff cOa khach du Hch dd'i vdi dieh v u . thffdng hieu hodc san phiim. Rajesh (2013) nhan manh, sff hai Idng sau khi trai nghiem se nang cao y thffc cila khach du lich de hp trd Iai mpt liin nffa trong tu'dng lai.
3. Nghien cffu 3.1. Md hinh nghien cifu
Tham khdd eac nghien cffu tren trong ba ihap nien gan day, nhdm nghien cffu lffa chon md hinh nghien cffu cho TP Phan Thie'l, linh Binh Thuan nhu'Hinh 1
Hinh 1: Mo hinh nghien cifu DESI (Destination Images; Hinh anh diem den)
•' SSER (Support services; Djch vu hd"^trp)
J TCL (Transportation and cleanliness, I Giao thdng va sach se)
VSH (Variety of sen/ices and hospitality;
D|ch vy da dang va hieu khach)
I ACB (Accommodation, food and beverage;
Che'd, thi/c pham va do ud'ng)
EVS (event and safety; Su kien va an loan) -
IMA (Destination brand Images;
Hinh anh thtidng hl§u diem 6§n)
C
SAT (Tourist satisfaction, Hai long)RiN(Rewslt Intention;
Yd|nh vieng tham lai)
So 9-Thang 5/2020 141
TAP Cll CORG TimilNe
3.2. Gid thuyet nghien cdu
HI. Dich vu hd ird (SSER) Lie dpng dong chieu den sir hai ldng; H2: Giao thdng va sach se tTCL) lae ddng dong chieu de'n sff hai Idng: H3:
Dieh \u da dang \a hieu khdch (\SHl tac ddng dong ehieu den sff hai long: H4. Cho d. thffc pham vd do ud'ng (ACB) tac ddng dong chieu den sff hai Idng: H5: Sff kien va an toan 1 EVS) tac ddng dong chieu den .sff hai Idng: H6: Hinh anh thu'dng hieu dicm den (IMA) tae dpng dong chieu den sff hai Idng; H7: Dich vu hd trd (SSER) tac ddng dong chieu den y dinh vieng thdm lai; H8: Giao ihdng va sach se (TCL) tac ddng dong ehieu den y dinh vienii thiim lai: H9: Dieh vu da dang va hie'u
khdch (VSH) tac ddng ddni: J I K ' ' ^^ >' '^'"'^
vie'ng tham lai; HID: Chd d. i\v>ic lii'ii vd d6 ud'ng(ACB)lac ddng ddng ehieu Jen • dinh vi&'ng thamlai;Hil:Sffkien\a\mio.in 1 X^luicddng dong chieu de'n y dinh vie'ng thdm l.n HI-: Sif hai Idng (SAT) Idc dpng dong chidu den > dinh vieng tham lai.
Mdhinh khai quat:
SAT = f(SSER.TCL,VSH.
ACB. EVS, IMA) (1) RIN = f (SSER. TCL, VSH.
ACB. EVS. SAT) (2) Ta't ca cac bien trong md hinh dffdc do lffdng bdng thang do Likerl 5 mffe dp. (Bang I)
Bang 1. Thang do va c d c bien quan sat STT
1 1 2 3 4 II 5 6 7 8 III 9 10 11 12
THANG e o D|Ch vu h6'"trd (Support services)
DichvydullchvalOhanhchuyennghiep Gia ca cua Tour hdp [y
Tiidi gian iioat dpng ciia cac ddn v| kinii doanii du licil 24 gid/7 ngay trong tuan Diet! vy van ctiuyen Itiiacii du iicii dung gid, dung ljch sap xep
Giao thdng va sach se (Transportation and cleanliness)
He thong duong xa hien dai, an toan' cao toe, quoc ip, tinh 16, dudng ven bien Di^'m den sach - dep
Ti^n ich cao tai cac diem tham quan
Ivloi tnJdng Ithdng l<hi ra't trong lanh - til nhien cua bien Djch vu da dang va hieu Idiach (Variety of sendees and hospitality) Nguoi dan dia phudng rat hieu khach
Nhan vien du iich chu dao, tan tuy trach nhiem Dich vu bai tam an toan - tien loi Dich vugiai tri da dang
KYHlfU SSER SSER1 SSER2 SSER3 SSER4 TCL TCL1 TCL2 TCL3 TCL4 VSH VSH1 VSH2 VSH3 VSH4 13 Dich vu cham sdc lam dep dap dng yeu cau lam dep phu nu
Che'd, thuc pham va do udng (Accommodation and food and beverage) Chdo^ennghi thoai mai
Co so vat chat iKS VPGD) khang trang va chat iuong dich vy t6t '^''LC r'am va nudcudndcr' ? : :'?-::ao an toan ve sinh thuc pham Co so /at cnat :Nha hnng quan an) hien dai, an toan va chat iUdng DV Sn u6ng tot
VSH5 ACB ACB1 ACB2 '0B3 94
142 So9-Thdng5,'2020
miAIIIIII-gUAIILV
S T T ^ V
THANG DO Su ki$n va an toan (event and safety) 18 ! An toan 6 diem den
19 20 21 VI 22 23 24 VII 25 26 27 28 VIII 29 30 31
Le'hdi Iruyen thd'ng d]a phuong da dang va thu hut Su ki§n van hoa ngu dan nghe bien rat la va ha'p dan
Su kign the thao bi^n, cat va nui rat sdi dpng va tre tnjng, day sUc song Hal long du khach (tourist satisfaction)
Hai Idng ve chat ludng dich vy du hch
Hai long ve he thd'ng quan ly nha nudc dia phuong dd'i v6l nganh dich vy du lich Hai Idng ve canh quan - mdi tnidng - v§n hda than thien
Hinh anh thuong hi$u diem den (Destination brand Images) TR Phan Thie't la diem de'n du lich noi tie'ng Viet Nam TR Phan Thie't la diem de'n du hch ndi tie'ng vdi bien, cat va dao TR Phan Thie't la diem de'n du hch ndi tie'ng vdi men an truyen thdng rieng co TR Phan Thie't la die'm de'n du hch ndi heng vdi mdi trudng sach • xanh - dep Y d|nh quay 1^1 diem den (Revisit Intention)
ChScchSn chpn TP, Phan Thiet cho ky nghi tdi gan nhat Chpn diem de'n du ljch TP Phan Thiet trcng nam tdi Chpn diem den du ljch TP Phan Thiet bat ky cd hpi nao cd dupe
KYHIfU EVS EVS1 EVS2 EVS3 EVS4 SAT SATI SAT2 SAT3 IMA IMA1 IMA2 IMA3 \ IMA4
RIN RIN1 1 RIN2 RIN3
3.3. Dillifu vd quy trinh phdn tich
D3 lieu dffdc thu thap thdng qua phdng van trffc tiep 3.10 khach hang du lich tai TP. Phan Thie't tff thdng 10 de'n thang 12 ndm 2019, theo phu'dng phap lay mau phi xdc sua't, thuan lien bang bang eau hdi chi tiel de kiem dinh md hinh v;"i eae gia thuyet nghien effu.
Md hinh ly thuyel vdi mot tap hdp cdc quan he dan xen. md hinh cd'u triic luye'n Ifnh (Structural EquationModel. SEM) dffdc sff dung de kiem djnh cae gia ihuyet tren (Lorence va Mortimer. 1985.
Anderson & Gerbing. 198S). Theo Hair va cpng sff (2006); Kline (2011); Tabachnikva Fidell (2011), phan tich nhan id'va eau triic tuyen tinh dffdc thffc hien theo qu> trinh bao gom 4 bffdc: (i) Kiem djnh liti ed\ thang do (Cronbach test); (ii) Phan tich nhan to' khdm pha (Exploratory Factor Anahsis- EF.-\): (iii) Phan tich nhan Id' khdng dinh (Confirmatory Factor Analysis-CFA) \ii (i\') Md hinh cau tnic tuye'n tinh (Structural Equation Modeling-SEM).
4, Ke't qua va thao luSn
4.1. Md td ddc diem khdch du lich - Gidi tinh va dp tuoi: Trong 330 khdch khao sat, gidi tinh nam chie'm 55.8%. Dd tud' ye'u cda khdch hang la tff 25-60 tudi (79, (Hinh 2. 3)
Hinh 2: Gidi tinh cua khach hang (%}
Hinh 3: Do tuoi (nam)
tren 60 49-60 35-48 25-3<l 18-24
hang :hu ,4%).
So 9 - T h d n g 5/2020 143
TAP CIJ COM TllflfllB
- Irinh dd hoe \an \a nghe nghiep (Hinh 4. 51 Khaeh du lieh ed trinh dd hpc \an ao i5S.5'"<- ed trinh dd dai hpe va ^au dai hoc). Nghe nghiep chu yeu la nha quan ly ciia cac cdng t\ \a edng nhan vien ehffe (6l.5''f i
'Tinh trang hdn nhan va thu nhdp(?rinh6. 7) Phan Idn khaeh du lieh lap gia dinh 161.2*71.
Thu nhap khdch du ljch tff 5 - 10 trieu dong/ihdng.
ehiem chu \eu (54.6'r),
Hinh 4: Trinh do hoc va'n (%}
- Dia phu'dng CU'iru ciJa du klu- Khach du lieh tff nhieu ndi
l i S )
,,i nffde den
• ^•iu.,1] Mil iivii i u i i i i i c u m'l V kl - -
Vie'ng tham TP. Phan Thiet. ehu >cu tff Dong Nam bd (22.77c). Nam Trung bd (17.(^ ^ i ^'"i '^'^nj? bbg sdng Cffu Long (14.S' ().
4.2. Ke't qud phdn tich rfy tin cdy (Bang 2) Ke't qua the hien trong Bang 2 cho tha'y. ta't cii cac bie'n quan sat deu thda man cac dieu ki6n trong phan tich dp tin cay eua thang do thdng qua
Hinh 5: Nghe nghiep cua khach hang (%)
10 t
» ^'
0 -f - - , Tmng Tr hoc Cff cipy
s6 a\
3 9
ng Da Cao
10 " ,
hoc Sau dai hoc
Khac
Khac , Chuyen wen/ kinh doanh Noi t r g C5ng, nhan vien chi/c Cong nhan Sinh vISn
Hinh 6: Tinh ttgng hon nhdn (%}
Khac, 6.7
Hinh 7: Thu nhgp (Trieu dSng/thdng)
> 15,13.3
11-15,17.6
< 5 trieu, / 14.5
Hinh 8: Dia phi/dng of tru cua khach du lich (%)
Khac Tay nam bp
Odng nam bp Nam trung Bp Cong bang sdng CLTU LongBae trung bd
Tdvnguyen Trung du. mien ui pnia bae144 S o 9 - T h o n g o / ^ u ^ u
QUANTRI-QUANLY
h§sd \lpli.i > " . 6 \a tifdng quan bien - ldng > 0.3 lNunnall> and Burnstein. 1994).
4.3. Ket qud phan tich nhan tdkhdm phd (Bdng 3)
Kel qua dffdc trinh bay Irong Bang 3 cho tha'y, cdc yeu id' tac dpng den sff hai Idng dffdc Irich thiinh 05 \ e u td' tffdng ffng vdi uie bien do Iffdng cua md hinh lv thu\et \('h phifdng sai trich la (I'i^JSI'i lai Eigenvalue la l.SSS EFA cua Hinh iinh dffdc trich thinh 04 bie'n quan sat vdi
B d n g 2. Tin c d y t h a n g d o v d b i e n q u a n sai bj loqi STT
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Thang dc SSER VSH1 TCL ACB EVC IMA SAT RIN
B
1
T
1 en quan sat
Khong Khong Khdng Khdng Khdng Khong Khong Khdng
H$ so Alpha 0,803 0,867 0,841 0,836 0.806 0 862 0,830 0,839
Kelqua Chat luong tdt Chat luong tdt Chat luong tot Chat li/ong lot Chat iuong td'i Chat luong td't ' Chat lupng tot Chat IUdng lot
Bang 3. M a trdn ntidn t o
1 1
VSH5 VSH2 VSH3 VSH1 VSH4 TCL3 TCL4
1 TCL1
TCL2 ACB2 ACB3 ACB4 ACB1 EVC4 EVC2
1 0,844 0,832 0,830 0,784 0.743
^
E
0.842 0,840 0.804 0.789
—-
EVC3 j EVC1
3
0.840 0.833 0.832 0,766
Component (Nhan to)
4 5 6 j 7
0,811 1
0,810 0,783 0,769
—
e
1 j
^
SSERJ SSER2 SSER3 SSER1
0.820
0.784 0.757
So 9 - Thang 5/2020 145
TAPCIICQNETII^dNe
Component (Nhin t5) 1 2 3
IMA3 IMA4 lll<A2 IMA1 SATI SAT3 SAT2 RIN2 RIN3 RIN1
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure (Tiiuclc do KMO)
^^n
5Bartlett's Test (Sig) (Kiem dinii Bartlett) Eigenvalues (Gia tr] Eigen)
% of Vanance (PhUOng sai trich)
0,841 0.000 1888 65.981
6 0.861 0.853 0.840 0,811
0,824 0,000 2,833 70,813
0.876 0.873 0.844
0,719 0.000 2.242 74.725
e
0.894 0.864 0.851 0,717 0,000 2,271 75,683 Glii chli: Theo Hair vd cdng .sif (2006). 0.5 < KMO < 1: kiem clinh Bartlett ed niifey nghTa nhd hem 0.05; h^ so tdi
nhdn tficiui cdc bien quan .sail Facior Uiculing) > 0.5. plnfciiig sai trich > 50% vd Eigenvcihie > I.
phffdng sai trich la 70.813 lai Eigenvalue la 2.S3.^
EFA cua Hai Idng du"dc Irich thanh 03 bien quan sal \di phffdng sai U-ich la 74.725'; tai Eigenvalue Ui 2.242 EFA ciia V dinh \ieng Iham lai dffdc Irieh thanh 03 bie'n quan sat \ di phifdng sai trich la 7.'^.6S3'< tai Eigen\alue Id 2.271. Ket qua EFA du'de su'dung bang phu'dng phiipvoay Proma.\.
4.3. Ke't qud phdn tich nhdn td khdng dpih (Hinh 9. Bdng 4)
Phan tich nhan td' khang dinh (Confirmatory Factor Analysis, CFA) dffdc sff dung nham kiem dinh md hinh do Iffdng (Measurement model) phii hdp vdi dff lieu thffc te (Browm, 2006). Theo Smith vd McMilan (2001), md hinh do Iffdng phu hdp vtSi
Bang 4. Ket qua gid trj c d c thffdc d o
Gia tr| tieu chuan
Chi binh phuong dieu chinh theo bae tu do (Cmin/df) Chi so TLI (Tucker-Lewis Index) Chi so thich hop so sanh CFI (Comparalive Fu Indexl,
Ctiisd RMSEA RcotMsan Square Error i\ppi j . \ malioni
x2/df <= 5(BenIlervaBonelL1980) TLI > 0 90 [Carver va Mentzer, 1999;
Hair va cdng su 2006),
CFi > 0 90 0< CFK 1, Cang lien ve 1 cang phu hop.
iBentier va Bonert 1980, Hu va Bentler, 1995j.
RMSEA<0U3 Mdhinh phu hop tot, RMScA < 0.08. Chap nhan, Gang nho cang i,Q! iGarver va Mentzer. 1999. Hu va Bentler, 1995)
Giatn
mo hinh KStquS >
Phii hop
Phil hpp
Phii hop
Phil hop I
146 So 9 - Thang 5'za2u
QUAN TRj-QUANLY
Hinh 9: Mo hinh do IUdng
C M I N / d f e 1 2 1 8 ; T L I = . 9 7 9 ; C F I = . 9 8 1 i R M S E A = . 0 2 6
dc lieu thtfc le phai dam bao phu hdp vdi 4 thffdc do:(i)Cmin/df: ( l i ) T L I . iiii) CFI. ( i \ ) R.MSEA
KCM qua dffdc trinh bay trong Hinh 9 eho tha'y.
nio hinh cd Cmin/df = 1.218; T L I = 0.979. CFI = 0.981 \ a R M S E A = 0.026.
Bang 4 cho thay. md hinh do Iffdng phii hdp vdi dff lieu thffc te.
4.4. Kit qud phdn tich cd'u trdc tuyen tinh (H'mh 10. Bdng 5, Bdng 6)
Theo Hinh 3. md hinh cd gia tri Cmin/df = 1.831:
T L F = 0.919: CFI = 0.926
\ a RMSEA = 0.050. Kct qua cho tha'y. md hinh tich hdp phii hdp vdi dff lieu thffc te.
Ke't qua du'de trinh bay trong Bang 5 cho tha'y.
ngoai U-ff H I I , cde gia thuyel khac deu dirdc chap nhan d mffc tin eay tff tren 9 5 ' . .
Cae yeu Id' Idc ddng de'n "Hai I d n g " iheo Ihff nr anh hffdng tff manh nha'l de'n yeu nha't: I M A . V S H . ACB. T C L . SSER. EVC.
Cac yeu Id' idc dpng de'n
" Y dinh vie'ng Ihdm l a i "
theo Ihff Iff anh hifdng:
TCL. SSER, ACB. VSH. ^ 4.5. Thdo luan ket qua nghien cifu
Mdl td. "Slf hai Idng eua du khdeh" chiu tae ddng trffc lie'p bdi 06 thanh phan: Hinh anh thffdng hieu diem den: Djch vu da dang va hieu khach: Chd d. thife pham vd dd ud'ng, Giao Ihdng \ a sach se, Dich vu hd trd; Su' kien va an loan. Nhff vay, cac gia thuye't H6, H3, H4, H2.
H I . H5 dffdc chap nhan.
Dieu nay cd nghTa la. khi khdch du lich ddnh gid tot cac ye'u to'nay se l a m e h o h p c a m tha'y hai Idng vdi diem den du lich - TP Phan Thie't.
Hai lit. ""Y dinh vie'ng tham iai TP. Phan T h i e l Clia du khdch"" chiu idc ddng trffc tiep bdi 04 thanh phan: Giao thdng \ a sach se: Dich vu hd trd: Cho d . thffc pham \'d do ud'ng: Dich vu da dang \ a hieu khdch. Nhif \ : i \ . giii ihuyel H8. H7.
So 9-Thang 5/2020 147
TAPCRJCONeTmrilNG
Hinh 10: Ke't qua cua phdn hch cd'u true hjyen hnh
CMIN/df=1 831;TLI=.919;CFI=.926, RMSEA^.050
Bang 5. Ke't qua gia ttiuyet 1
i
SAT SAT SAT SAT SAT SAT RIN RIN RIN RIN RIN RIN
<—
<—
<—
<—
<—
<—
<—
VSH TCL ACB EVC SSER IMA VSH TCL ACB EVC SSER
SAT Estimate (H§ so hoi quy)
0.293 0,222 0,234 0,183 0,203 0 351 0,138 0,206 0,178 0 085 0187 0 540
S.E.
(La tieu chuan) 0,051 ' 0,055 0,057 0,055 0,053 0,051 0.051 0.055 0 056 0 053 0.052 0.081
C.R.
(Khoang tin c$y) 5,752 4,019 4,108 3,315
Rvalues (Mlic y nghTa)
...
...
3,849 ' 6,826 2,698 3,766 3,166 1,605 3,554 6,653
0.007
ma
0.108
KetquagiSthuySt H3 chap nhan H2 chap nhan H4chapnh|n H5 chap nhSn HI chap nhan H6chapnhan H9 ,:hap nhan H8 chap nhSn
^ ' 0 chap nhan
• ^"jng chap nhan
•'•.D n h a n '^ "ispnhan
148 So 9 - mang ^/^u^u
miANIIII'IIUAJIIiy
Bang 6. MOc do tde dong
SAT'f (VSH.
SAT SAT SAT SAT SAT SAT Tiing
M i t do tac dOng den SAT TCL
^
ACB, EVC. SSER. IMA)
<—
1- ^" -
t
<-
<-
<-
VSH TCL ACB EVC SSER IMA
H$ so hoj quy
0.293 0.222 0.234 0.183 0,203 0,351 1,486
%
19.7 14.9 15.7 12 3 13.7 23.6 100
V|trf
2 4 3 6 5 1
MiJIcdOtacdOngiaenRiN j j RIN-f (VSH.
RIN RIN RIN RIN long RIN=f(SAT) RIN
TCL,
-
ACB. SSER. SAT)
<—
<—
<—
<—
<—
~
VSHTCL ACB SSER
SAT
0,138 0,206 0,178 0,187 0,709
0,540
19.5 29.1 25.1 26.4 100
4 1 3 2
HIO. H9 dffdc chd'p nhan. Dieu nay cd nghia la, khi khaeh du Iich danh gia td't cdc ye'u Id' niiy se liim cho ho cd v dinh \ i e n i ; tham Iai TP. Phan Thiet.
Ba Id. md'i quan he " H a i Idng diem d e n " \ a " Y (linh vieng thdm lai TP. Phan Thie't" cd tffdng quan \ d i nhau theo hi/dng: hai ldng tac ddng den
< dinh vieng tham lai. Nhff vay. gia thuyet H I 2 iKfdeeh.ipnhdn.
5. K e l luSn va ham y chinh sach
Mue lieu ctia nghien cffu la xdc dinh md'i quan iie giffa sir hai Idng \a y dinh vie'ng tham lai ciia du khaeh tai TP. Phan Thiet. Ddc biet trong bd'i canh sff canh tranh manh me de giff vffng va md rang thi phan. hai long \ a y djnh viena tham Iai
Clia du khaeh la chia khda cho si/ phat irien du Iich ben vffng.
Dffa tren khao sdt 330 khdch hang va ap dung md hinh ca'u triic tuye'n tinh. nghien cffu cho Iha'y cd md'i quan he tuye'n tinh dffdng giffa hai Idng va y dinh vieng tham lai cua du khdch. Cac ye'u to' anh hffdng den sff hai ldng bao gdm: Hinh anh ihffdng hieu diem de'n: Dich vu da dang va hieu khaeh: Chd d . ihffc pbam va do ud'ng; Giao thdng
\ a sach se; Dich MJ hd trd: Sff kien \ a an toan. Ddc biet la. vai trd quan trpng ciia "Hinh anh ihffdng hieu diem de'n". Ke't qua nghien cffu cung cap ed sd khoa hoc cho cae nha chinh sach vd quan Iy du hch irong viec hoaeh dinh chinh saeh phat trien du hch dia phtfdng •
So 9 - T h a n g 5/2020 149
TAP cii CONG TIIONG
T.-MLIEl I H W I K H V O :
1. Abubakar. A . Gashua. M.M.. and Bahjgana. M. (2016). Assessment of water quality of some lable water companies in Kano meu^>po]l^ NiLicria. Scholars.Academic Journal ol Bio'.ciences. 4(3B), 233-236.
2. All. F.. and -Amm. M i2ii!4i The inOuence of ph>siejl enMronnient on emotions, cusiomer Naiisfaetion and behaMordlinientionsmChinesereMTlhotel industr>.7<iuni£i//(j;-G/(>/>u/BH5/'i(">^ Aihaiucmeni. 7(3). 24'-)-26(i 3. Anderson and Gerbing (t9S8i Slruclural Equation Modeling in Practice A Review and Recommended Two- Step Approach. JoumalofPsyehologiccdBulletin. 103 l3). 411 -423
4. Bender. P M . and Boneil. D, G (1980). Significance le.sis and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariunce Mllulures. Ps>,chological Bulleiin. 88(3), 3HS-606
5 Blain. C . Stuart E.. Lc\y. J. R . and Riiehic. B. (2005). Dcstinaiion Branding: hi.sights and Practices from Destination Man.igcmeni Organizations. JmiA7i(;/(j/Trar[7flt'.\raR7i, 4.i(4l, 32S-33S
6 Bncm. ^* (2013). Differences betsveen place branding and clestinudon branding few local brand .sirotcgy (/('vW<)/JHitW, Bulletin of the Tra iisii\aniaLiii\ cr>il> of Bra 50\. Series VII: Social Sciences, 6(.^5). 9-14 7, Browm.T.A. (2006). CoiijirmaioryFuetcu-.-\nah.si.s for applied research. New ^'ork. NY, Guilford Press, 8, Cai. L. (20021 Cooperative branding for rural desiinaiicm. Annals ofTourism Research, 29(3). 720-742 9, CCIL--IC. E.. and \ leira. A L (2011) Desiinauon Aiinbule.s' Evaluation. Satisfaction and Behavioural Intentions: A Stniclural Modeling Approach. IniemalionalJourncil of Tourism Research, I5( I). 66-80.
10 Chen, C F , and T^JI. D.C. (2007) Ho\^ brand Image and evaluative factors affcet behavioral Intentions'?
TouriMU Miuiagemenl. 28(4). 11 15-1122.
11, Chew. T,E Y , and Jahary, A.S. |20I4). Destinalion images a.s a mediator between perceived risks and revisit inieniion: The case of post disaster Japan. Tourism Management, 24(9). 624 - 636.
12, Cohan. S. (2012) The Effects of the Image of Destination on Tounsi Satisfaction and Loyally: The Case of Cappadocia European Journal of Social Sciences. 29(2). 222-232
13, Croiiipuin. J. (19791 An assessnicni of the image of Mexico us a vacation destination and the inHuenee of geographical location upon that image. Journal ofTro\ el Research. 17, 18-23,
14 Echmer. C . and RitL-hie. B. (2003). The meaning and measuremenl of destination invdgc. Journal of Toun'.m Studv. I4|1).47-4S.
15. Gartner. W C . and Hum. J.D, (19S7) .\n dnal\Ms of stale image change over a Iwelvc-year period 91971- 198.1) Journal oj Travel Research. 26(2). 15-19.
16. Gar\ei. \ S.. and Mentzer. J. T. (1999). Logistics research methods employing structural equation modeling 10 test for consiruet \ alidily. Jcmmal of Business Logistics. 20( 1}, 33-57.
17. Han. H .and Kim. \V. (2009). Ouiconies of relauonal bcneHts: Restaurant customer's perspective. yc)wnia/«/
travel and Tourism Marketing. 26(8). 820-S35
18. Hair. J.. Aderson. R . Talham. P.. and Black. \V. (2006|. Muliivciricue Data Anah.sis. 6ed, Prentice- Hall. Upper Saddle River NJ
19- Herle. F.A. (20!8|. The impaei of di.-^[malion image on tourists' saiislaclion and loyalty in the context of domestic lounsm. MuiL iiu:; uom Infomuuuin to Decisitm Journal, l(2|. 14-26.
20. Hu. L.T . and Bender. F M i lyySi Exaluuuim model fit In Hoyle. R H. (Ed.). Structural ec/uaiio,i modeling:
Ci'ihept\. issues, amiuppluoitoiu ThousjndOaks. CA: Sage.
2! Kao. "I'r.. Huang, i >. ,UKI W LI C" H (20(IS.I Effecisof theatrical clemenison experieniia! qualu- and loyally imenlionsforihemep.irk-- .Asuii'onlh loiimol ot Tounsm Reseat ch. 13(2), [63-174.
150 So 9-Thang 5/2020
QUAN l l ! • qUAN IV
22. Khuong Mai Ngoc and Nguyen Thao Trinh (20l5i Factors affecHne lounsi's return inieniion towards \'uiig Tau cil\. \ leinam - .A mediation analysis of destination satisfaction. Joumal of Advanced Munugeinent Sc lence 3(4). 292-298
23. Leiper, N, (1995). Tourism Management. Melbourne: R MIT Press.
24 Lvnch. P.. and Tinsley. R. (2001). Small lourism business neisvorks and destination development. Hospitality SLinageiiient. 20(4). 367-378.
25 Mi-'dlik, S. (2012). Diciionaiy of travel, tourism and hospitality. Third edition. Oxford- Roulledge.
26. Mohammad. M., Alsadat, R. and Hoda. T. (2016). The Effect of Destination Image on Tourist Salisfaelicm.
Intention lo Revisit and WOM: Au Empirical Research in Fcmrscpiare Social Medio In lOlJi Inlemational Conference on e-Commeree wilh focus on e-Tourism. Isfahan. Iran.
27 Moisescu.. O. (2009), The Impacl of Brand - Consumer Personality Congruence on Brand Loyally Inienialioiuil Journal of Business Research.%A). 175-179,
28. Moisescu. O. (2014) Assessing Cuslomer Loyalty: .A Literature Rexieu: [n Mullidisciplinary Academic Conference on Economics. Management and Marketing m Prague (MAC-EMM)
29, Morgan. N,. Priiehard, A , and Pride, R. (2011). Destination Branding: Managing Place Reputation.
Medilerranean Journal ot Social Scienc es. 8|41. 129-142
3(1 Mi>nison. A„ and Anderson, D. (2002). Deslincuicm branding. Missouri Asswialion of Convention and Visitor Bureaus .Annual Meeting,
31. N;jii\cn Thi Le Hu'dng (2019), Anh hifdng ciia cUein den du heh Hue ldi y dmh quay trd leu eiia du khdeh. DH Hue-Tnfffng DH Kinh te. Luan an Tien sT.
.12. Nunnally. J. C , and Burnstein. 1. H, (1994). P.syelioineirie Theoiy. New York- McGrau - Hill,
33, Oliver, R L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions. Journal of Marketing Research. 17(4). 460-469.
.14. Oliver, R. (1999). Whence consumer loyalty? 7('"r/w/ of •Marketing. 63.33-44
15. Prebensen, N. (2007). Exploring Tourists' Image of a Distant Destination. Tourism Management. 28{3).
747-756,
.16. Qu, H,. Kini. L, and Im. H. (2011), A model ofdesUnaUon branding: Iniegraiing die concepts of lhe branding and destination image. Tourism Management. 32(3), 465-476.
37. Rajesh, R. (2013) Impact of Tourist Percepiicms. Destinalion Image and Tourist Satisfaction on Desliiuition Loyciln-: A Ccmceptucil Model. Revisia de Turismo\ Pairimonio Cultural. 11(31.67-78.
38. Schaar, R, (2013). Destination Branding- A Snapshot. Joumal of Undergraduate Research. 16. I -10.
39. Smith. T.D , and McMilan. B.F, (2001). A priinei of model fit indices in structural equcuion modeling. Paper pre.senieil al the annual meeting of Southwest Educational Association, New Orieans.
40. Tapachai. T . and \Var\ szak. R. (2000). An examination of the role of benetieial image in tourist destination ''t:\caKm. Journal of travel Research, 39. .17-44
41. Trosi. K . Klaric. S„ and Dropulie Ruzie. M. {20\2}.Events as a Framewcn-k for Tourist Deslmcitiou Branding:
Ca.seSludies of nvo cultural events in Croatia. T\JR\ZAM. 16(2), 65-77.
42 W .ilms|c\. D.J.. and Jenkins. J.M. (1993). Appraisive images of lourisi areas: .Application of personal ccmstruct.
Ausinilian Geographer. 24. 1-13.
4.V Wu. H C. (2013). An empirical sludy of the effects sen iee quality, perceived value, corporate image and cusiomer satisfaction on behavioral intention in the Taiwan quick ser\'ice restaurant indusin,' Journal ofQuolitv Assurance in Hospitality and Tourism. 14(4). 364-390,
So 9 - T h a n g 5/2020 151
TAP c i i CONE TlltfdNE
.4 Wu {-.-1 ^^-i; U ' t - V diid HMJO. C-R • 2l) 111. The effect of More image and serv u ^ on tirantl inia!;i.-.ind jiurJi.i-f inicnuon lor pnvaie label brands..4H.«m/flj/fln A/oficnHpJoH/TK;/. 19.30-3''
45 \'dng. L G S . and W u. H C J . l2ni3)--\/i empirical .study of .synthesizing the effects of sen u. '"'''• E:inoliuii- iorporuif iinoi;e uiid cuslomer soiisfattion on revisit inienlions in lhe Iwt spring indiisny P.i]''.' pre.sented al International S\ mposium of Quaiit> Management Kaohsiung Taiwan.
46, Zeidiaml. V A and Bimer. M.J. (1996), Sen-ice .Marketing. New York, N 1' Mcgi aw -Hill.
Nga> nhan bai: 1/4/2020
Nga> phiin bien danh gia \a sffa chffa: 11/4/2020 Ngaj chap nhan dang bai: 21/4/2020
Thdng lin uic gid:
1. PGS.TS. DINH PHI HO Trffffng ttai hoc Phan Thiet 2.TS.1)SNG r R W C V l E N N G O C Irffffng Dai hpc Tay Do
THE INFLUENCE OF DESTINATION IMAGES ON TOURIST SATISFACTION AND RETURN INTENTION
OF VISITORS AT PHAN THIET CITY:
A STRUCTURAL MODELING APPROACH
• AssocProf. Ph.D DINH PHI HO Phan Thiet University
• Ph.D DANG TRANG VIEN NGOC Toy Do University
.ABSTRACT:
Most lourist destinations are facing challenges of retaining guests and expanding market share. Researches on Ihe relationship between destination image, satisfaction and the return intention of \isiiors have not been gi\en adequate attention, especially researchs on brand image of the destination. This issue is challenging tourism researchers and managers. This sludy was conducted b\ using sur\e\ data of 330 domestic tourists and applying i .imctural modeling approach. The study's results show that there is a positive linear relationship among the destination image, the visitor satisfaction and Ihe return intention of visitors m Phan Thiet Cii\ Haeiors al feeling die \ isitor satisfaction include: (i) Destination brand image* MM Variety olsciMccs and hospitalii), (iii) .Accommodation, food and beverage; (iv)Tran- , ,,,,i,„f, ^j^^j i.icanhnes-..(\ i Support services: and (\i)E\ ents and safety.
Ke^MOrds: Destinaiinn images, satisfaction, visit intention, a struc! Icline
appr.vivli,i"'|-,.in l l ] n - i L u \ Vietnam.152 So 9 - T h a n g £ 2 J
