Bibelheimer & Guerra Upload
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Bibelheimer & Guerra Master Thesis Abstract This paper investigates the Eurovision Song contest from a tourism perspective and presents a comparative analysis for the ESC 2001 and 2014. Copenhagen has recently hosted the ESC and many things were done differently than in 2001. Some of the most significant differences will be looked into in this research. The primary data collection for this research is extensive and consists of qualitative interviews with actors as well as personal observations done in relation to the ESC this year. Furthermore, secondary data was collected from both years, in order to gain an insight into the strategies behind the ESC 2001 and 2014. The main theoretical fields which this research is concerned with include literature on mega-events, co-creation, and strategies within branding and communication. This was necessary to gain knowledge of the topics and also understand previous research in this area. This research presents the differences in the events. The mindset has changed significantly in the last decade, and where it in 2001 was the goal to create the biggest show, this year it was to “stand out”. This mindset is visible in the set-up of the ESC in many ways, including the choice of the B&W venue for the show, which has created some controversy in the media. Even though the strategy behind the show was different in these two events, there are some similarities in the branding message in the ESC. Consistency is seen in the branding values of Denmark, however the way that these are shown has developed and is this year focused mainly on internet based marketing. Social media has played a vital role in the marketing of the ESC this year and the hashtag JoinUs was used as a coherent message throughout all platforms and allowing consumers to co-create their own experiences. Co-creation is a recent concepts and it developed along with the internet. Therefore this was not as known and used to the same extent in 2001. This year, Co-creation is used extensively on several levels and can also been seen in the organizational set-up, which is a cross-sectorial collaboration with many actors. This research aims to provide a comparative analysis in a relatively unexplored field in tourism and to understand, explain and analyze a highly complex topic. Keywords: Eurovision Song Contest, Tourism, Mega-events, Co-creation, Branding, Competition State 2 Bibelheimer & Guerra Master Thesis Table of Contents 1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 6 1.1 Eurovision Song Contest ............................................................................................................ 7 1.1.2 Eurovision Song Contest 2001 ............................................................................................ 7 1.1.3 Eurovision Song Contest 2014 ............................................................................................ 8 1.2 Research Question...................................................................................................................... 9 1.3 Aim............................................................................................................................................. 9 1.4 Overview of Companies........................................................................................................... 10 1.5 Chapter Outline ........................................................................................................................ 11 2. Methodology .................................................................................................................................. 13 2.1 Research Process ...................................................................................................................... 13 2.2 Research Philosophy ................................................................................................................ 13 2.2.1 Ontology............................................................................................................................ 14 2.2.2 Epistomology .................................................................................................................... 14 2.2.3 Interpretive Constructivism ............................................................................................... 15 2.3 Chosen Methods for Primary Data Collection ......................................................................... 15 2.3.1 Qualitative Interviews ....................................................................................................... 16 2.3.2 Field Research ................................................................................................................... 18 2.3.3 Extensive Desk Research .................................................................................................. 20 2.4 Limitations of the Interview Design ........................................................................................ 20 2.5 Comparative Analysis .............................................................................................................. 20 2.5.1 Our Comparative Method ................................................................................................. 21 2.5.2 Criticism of the Comparative Method .............................................................................. 23 2.6 Scope ........................................................................................................................................ 24 2.7 Limitations ............................................................................................................................... 24 3. Theory ............................................................................................................................................ 26 3.1 Mega-events ............................................................................................................................. 26 3.1.1 Event-classifications ......................................................................................................... 27 3.1.2 Mega-events in Destination Marketing ............................................................................. 27 3.1.3. Impacts from Mega-events ............................................................................................... 28 3 Bibelheimer & Guerra Master Thesis 3.1.4 Evaluating Mega-events .................................................................................................... 31 3.2 Societal Conditions Affecting Tourism ................................................................................... 33 3.2.1 Technology........................................................................................................................ 34 3.2.2 Co-creation ........................................................................................................................ 35 3.2.3 The Competition State ...................................................................................................... 39 3.3 Strategy .................................................................................................................................... 42 3.3.1 Destination marketing strategy ......................................................................................... 43 3.3.1 Communication Strategy................................................................................................... 44 3.3.2 Branding Strategy ............................................................................................................. 48 3.3.3 Event and Network Strategy ............................................................................................. 54 3.3.4 Comparison of the National Tourism Strategies for 2001 and 2014 ................................ 57 4. Analysis .......................................................................................................................................... 60 4.1 From “The biggest show” to “Standing out” ........................................................................... 61 4.1.1 Standing out ...................................................................................................................... 61 4.1.2 Venue ................................................................................................................................ 64 4.1.3 The Copenhagen Way ....................................................................................................... 67 4.1.4 Evaluating the ESC ........................................................................................................... 68 4.2 Branding strategy ..................................................................................................................... 71 4.2.1 Branding Denmark ............................................................................................................ 71 4.2.2 Communication ................................................................................................................. 77 4.2.3 Auto-communication ........................................................................................................ 79 4.3 Co-creation ................................................................................................................................... 81 4.3.1 #JoinUs.............................................................................................................................