Optimization P2TP2A role in protecting women from violence in the District Buleleng, Bali Province

Type of research: Policy research

By : Putu Indah Rahmawati, Putu Agus Mayuni, Desak Made Oka

Symposium Proceeding.doc
In Indonesia, the Republic of Indonesia Law No. 23, 2004 on the elimination of domestic
violence provides legal guarantees for women’s protection. At the national level there is a
National Action Plan for the Elimination of Violence Against Women, which provides for the
development of integrated crisis centers in hospitals, special service room in the regional
and central police stations, integrated services for women’s empowerment (P2TP2A) and
the dissemination of information and campaign against violence against women and
children. Yet the level of violence against women and children remains high. The Regional
Regulation No. 6, 2009 (relating to the Bali’s Regional Long Term Development Plan) clearly states that gender gaps persist in the economic, political, and legal sectors. Levels of sexual violence and trafficking against women and children continue to increase. This suggests that the protection of women and children remains low. In Buleleng Regency, Bali, the prevention and treatment of women victims of violence has been undertaken by
government by establishing P2TP2A since August 2007. However, there are still many
obstacles that prevent P2TP2A from functioning at an optimal level. Considering the strong patrilineal culture in Bali, law enforcement alone is not enough.

Research aims/objectives:
This research aims to

(1) determine the quality of services to women victims of violence;

(2) identify opportunities for service improvement

(3) identify strategies to optimize the role ofP2TP2A in protecting women from violence and

(4) identify strategies for P2TP2A to help
empower women in Bali, so that they are not oppressed by patrilineal culture in Bali.

Method/Research methodology:
This study used a qualitative research methodology. 16 women victims of violence were
interviewed, 7 were reported to the police and 9 never reported to the police. Interviews
with victims were conducted in residential locations of victims lying scattered in Buleleng
Regency. Determination of informants in the research conducted with snowball sampling
technique that begins with the determination of key informants. Interviews and
documentation was carried out in several offices: P2TP2A, family planning and women
empowerment agency, Police, Hospitals, Social Service Offices.
A focus group discussion was held with head of P2TP2A, head of women and children
protection unit of Buleleng Police, head of family planning and women empowerment
agency, representative of Buleleng public hospital, staff of social services, in order to
discuss the research finding and find out strategies for solution.

Key research findings:
Issue 1:
There are weaknesses in the Regent Decree No. 563, 2007, especially in relation to the
organizational structure which is too big, make it the long and tiring bureaucracy.
Futhermore, inclusion of organizations involved in it, is without a clear name and position
so that it is difficult to do coordination in providing services for the victims;
Issue 2:
Some women victims of violence said that services did not meet the Ministry of Women
Empowerment and Child Protection’s regulation on Minimum Service Standards;
Issue 3:
Given the strong patrilineal culture in Bali, law enforcement alone is not enough.
Cooperation with religious organizations and indigenous organizations to push for the
understanding of regulations and services cannot be ignored;
Issue 4:
The lack of sex disaggregated data and inadequate budget allocations severely affected the
ability of P2TP2A to work at an optimal level;
Issue 5:

There are three main reasons why some women did not report violence committed against
them. First, Balinese culture which sees divorce as a burden on the women’s family
Issue 6:
discourages women from reporting violence. Second, women who did not report cases of
violence mentioned that they did not know about P2TP2A. Finally the government’s ability
to provide guarantees of protection against violence made women feel that there was no
need to report their cases, because the government will not be able to provide a better life

Issue 7:
There are no safe houses, therefore police officers often asked the victim to stay at home
as they could not stay in the police station. This increased women’s vulnerability.
Issue 8:
There has been no special staff to handle cases of violence against women. Buleleng district
hospital staff have not been trained to provide special services for victims of violence. Some
staff have attended an information sessions on domestic violence, gender awareness and
trafficking, but have never received training on procedures on cases treatment or minimum service standard.

Policy options/recommendations
The Buleleng district hospital should explore the possibility of providing free hospital
service to women victims of violence.
There is a need to align data and information collected by the Police and the
Regional Hospital of Buleleng.
Social Affair Agency and Women Empowerment Agency need to jointly lobby for
government budget allocation to enable provision of rehabilitation services for victims of domestic violence in accordance with Law No. 23, 2004.
Head of District’s Decree No. 563 of 2007 on the organizational structure of P2TP2A
needs revision, the name of members must be clearly listed, thus reducing the
number of personnel, select new members who more active and more responsive to
coordination. That Decree needs to be revised every year following frequent rotation
of staff within the agencies which manage P2TP2A.
There is a need to supervise the implementation of the Regulation of the Minister of
Women Empowerment and Child Protection of the Republic of Indonesia number 01
in 2010 at the provincial and district level.

The center for women’s studies in Ganesha Education University should collaborate
with P2TP2A to lobby the Department of Education a budget to hold seminars in
schools on violence against women.
The Center for Women’s Studies should also assist P2TP2A in preparing proposal to hold
training about how to provide better services to the victims. The proposal could be
proposed to the national and international agencies for funding.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Destination Benchmarking as an Effective Tool for Sustainable Tourism Development

This Articles written by Putu Indah Rahmawati

Published in Jurnal Kepariwisataan, Vol 9 no 1 March 2009, pages 59-64, Sekolah Tinggi Pariwisata Bali. ISSN 1412 5498.


Sustainable tourism which can help destinations in order to increase the benefit and minimize the risk of tourism industry is still becoming the challenge for tourism authorities in some countries.  Destination benchmarking is one of the programmes that give further knowledge and skill about how to develop sustainable tourism. Therefore, this essay will discuss the benefits of destination benchmarking as an effective tool for sustainable tourism in terms of; chance to learn from other, maintain competitive performances and increase tourist destination profitability. Hence, it is suggested that destination authorities in Indonesia joined destination benchmarking program in order to improve tourist destination performances and also to develop sustainable tourism in Indonesia.

key words: Destination, Benchmarking, Sustainable Tourism

The tourism industry is one of the worthwhile industries which can support country’s income. To begin with, based on data of International Labour Organization & the World Tourism Organization, tourism is a multi-billion dollar industry which attracted 1.6 billion of tourists in 1999, produced around US$ 455 billion and involved 200 million workers. (www.ilo.org, cited on 5th July 2006). Tourism industry brings many advantages for many people such as; local communities, workers, government, private company owners, tourist. However, it is crucial to manage the natural resources and preserve environment for future generation. So, in order to maintain the resources for the tourism purposes, the concept of sustainable tourism was created. According to World Tourism Organization (WTO:2005) in Herremans (2006:3) the definition of sustainable tourism is effective balance between profit, environment, social, cultural aspect for long term advantages to local people.

However, implementation of this concept is not an easy job. As pointed out by Kozak (2004:41) the development of sustainable tourism destinations in recent years seem more complex because destination cope many aspects such as hotel, airline, transport system, tourist object, tourist facilities, sanitation, environment and social aspects. It means that all of those elements must work together to develop sustainable tourism in their destination. They need more knowledge and skill about the implementation of sustainable tourism. And this is where destination benchmarking becomes the answer to above issues. It was established to give opportunity for destination authorities to learn how to develop sustainable tourism in their area.  Based on Kozak definition (2004:41) destination benchmarking is a regular measurement of a destination’s performance by its operators compared with other destinations in order to win the competition.

Furthermore, destination authorities need periodic evaluation to give overview about their performances and to decide what aspects needs to learn from other countries. There are many evaluations and measurements need to be done by destination authorities before joined benchmarking programme, such as; SWOT analysis (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threat), guest satisfaction index, guest loyalty profile, analysis of complaining behaviour and complaint handling, environment performances analysis (Pyo, 2001). Whole of the findings give destination profile about their position in global market compared with other destination. This also gives information about who is the best destination in what aspect and which destination has sustainable tourism development. So that, destination authorities can decide from whom they should learn in order to develop sustainable tourism.

Next important point in destination benchmarking is the learning method that destination authorities have to choose depend on their conditions. There are many types of destination benchmarking, such as; competitive benchmarking (learning from the competitor), cooperative benchmarking (learning from best destination) and collaborative benchmarking (learning from the third party as coordinator) (Kozak, 2004). Each type of destination benchmarking has advantages and disadvantages, destination authorities can select one type which is suitable with their recent situations based on the evaluation findings.

The type of destination benchmarking influenced by the aspects that destination authorities want to focus on. According to Lislie in Pyo (2001;4) there are three aspects of sustainable tourism as a learning focus during destination benchmarking programme, such as: local economy, environment, and the community. It means that they can learn about how to earn profit from tourism and preserve natural resources at the same time. They also can learn about how to educate human resources to respect social system and cultural heritage.

Green Globe 21 organization is third party who is organizes destination benchmarking to develop sustainable tourism all over the world. This organization established by The World Travel and Tourism Council in 1993. It measures the destination performances, organizes training, seminar, and consortium. It has 500 members from all over the world. It also gives certification of sustainable tourism to destination and tourist organization which is already success developed sustainable tourism through benchmarking. This program focussed on nine key areas, such as;(1) waste minimisation, recycle and reuse, (2) management of conservation and energy efficiency, (3) the protection of ambient air quality, (4) the management of freshwater resources, (5) the management of waste water (6) the management of social and culture issue, (6) greenhouse gas emissions, (7) economic, social and cultural impact, in particular respecting local culture and generating maximum local employment, (8) the management of ecosystem conservation (including biodiversity impact, particularly on habitats), (9)Environmental and land use planning, particularly in areas of high social and environmental value (www. greenglobe.org.cited on 5 July 2006).

First of all, destination benchmarking is a chance to learn from the best practices in the same field. The best destination must have high score of the nine aspects of sustainable tourism and also have good results in their regular evaluation. So that, destination authorities (government or private company) can learn from other destination which has sustainable tourism and better performances.

Furthermore, in term of environmental aspects, destination benchmarking can open the destination authority’s insight about the implementation of nine key aspects in the best destination. This can be done by learning directly to other destination but also can be done by joined third party who organize destination benchmarking programme. Through this programme, destination authorities observe other destination strategic, plan and application of sustainable tourism. After observing other destination, the destination authorities find out the gap between their performances and other destination performances in term of environment. And then, they discuss new formula to improve their environmental performances.

For example, the Caribbean Alliance for Sustainable Tourism (CAST) has undertaken collaborative environmental activities with Green Globe 21 Benchmarking programme. CAST learn from Green Globe 21 organization about how to manage their natural resources in their destination in order to gain more benefit and preserve natural resources. In this case, Green Globe 21 help CAST to evaluate their environment performances based on nine criteria. After that, CAST and Green Globe 21 discuss the results and find out the solution of each problem. Green Globe 21 organization help CAST implement the strategies that they already made before until CAST achieve high score in the final evaluation. (Pyo, 2001:152-157). Another example, Kaikoura Destination in New Zealandalso joined destination benchmarking held by Green Globe 21 organization. These attempts also succeed in helping Kaikoura Destination in New Zealandevaluate and improve their environmental performances by the same method with CAST.(www.sustainale.org.nz. Cited on 13 July 2006).

The second benefit of destination benchmarking is it helps destination authorities improve their competitive performances. Competitiveness is crucial for destination in order to win the competition. Kozak (2004:53) emphasized that it is essential for tourist destinations analyse their potency and powerlessness in order improve and maintain destination performances. The regular analysis (seasonal reports and annual report) gives chance to destination authorities to monitor the performances of their tourist products and services with what of the previous years. It is also the way to learn how to control and coordinate a variety of activities in tourist destinations to achieve high standards. Destination benchmarking teaches the destination authorities the way to research their policy applications and review their positioning in global market.

Improving competitive performances has close relationship with respecting social and cultural values. Due to destination performances profile determined by guest satisfaction index and guest loyalty profile and influenced by seven aspects (safety, friendliness, cleanliness, orderliness, comfort, beauty, hospitality and enchanting memories). By respecting social and cultural value, destination authorities would be able to inspire and motivate local communities to act as good hosts and increase tourist satisfaction index at the same time. From benchmarking, destination authorities can learn how to build cross culture understanding between  local people and foreigners as well as  learning how manage human resources to improve destination performances.

The following example gives an overview about how destination benchmarking helps destination authorities improve their performances by cooperative benchmarking (learning directly to other destination). Irelandbecame one of the best examples of tourist destination which was success in implementing destination benchmarking concept. At first, the number of tourism in Irelanddeclined from 1992-1997 caused by many factors such as: politic, market image, low tourist satisfaction index, etc. In order to increase tourist satisfaction index and reach it goals to be a leader of responsible tourism, Irelandbuild mutual collaboration with German. Then, Irelandcompared their performances with German. The performances analysis result found that the image of Irelandas expensive destination made many tourist moves to other destination. After that, Irelanddesigned new campaign programme to change their image and improve their positioning in the global market. Finally, after worked hard implementing destination benchmarking concepts, the number of tourist who visited Irelandhas increased significantly in 2000. And this performances remain stable since the Irelandauthorities maintain their destination performances (www.scotexchange.net, cited 12July 2006).

Another good example of destination benchmarking is fromTurkeytourist destination. There are several factors caused destination authorities inTurkeyjoined benchmarking programme, such as; tourism industry growth slowly, low tourist satisfaction index, inconvenient airport regulation. Those evaluations stimulate them to learn from Mallorca tourist destination inSpainthrough cooperative benchmarking programme. From this programme,Turkey’s destination authorities became aware that they should revise the law related to tourism industry and airport regulations in order to improve their destination performances. Those efforts have stimulated the tourism industry growth faster through increasing tourist satisfaction. After thatTurkeykeep maintain their destination performances in order to be a competitive destination in global market (Kozak, 2004)

Last but not least, another advantage of destination benchmarking that it is increases destination profitability by encouraging organizations to be efficient. According to Godfrey in Herremans (2006:138) “economically and socially sustainable tourism depends on the sustainability of its surrounding ecology”. It means that destination which is managing their resources efficiently; preserve the ecosystem can get more profit that who does not apply it. Awareness of efficiency programme must be spread out by seminars, symposiums, trainings, workshops. So that everyone who involves in tourism industry can apply the efficiency concept as their daily habit. There are two ways to be efficient, (1) minimize the waste by reuse and recycle (2) manage the natural resources

 In term of destination profitability can be increased by minimize the waste in tourist destination. Benchmarking programme can give an opportunity for destination authorities broaden their insight about how to minimize waste. It also gives information about what things can be reuse and recycle how to process the waste become new things that useful for human and environment. Moreover, in terms of managing natural resources, destination authorities can learn about how to manage fresh water, energy, and electricity. From the environmental evaluation tools, destination authorities can get the review of their previous cost. Then, destination authorities can find out the new way to be more efficient or they can copy from other organization about how to cut operational cost.

There is good example fromFairmontdestination inCanadawhich conduct collaborative benchmarking and success in its implementation. In this case,Fairmontdestination authorities hired Green Globe 21 Organization as third party who became consultant of destination benchmarking programme. This collaboration found thatFairmontdestination authorities need to work hard with their stakeholder (supplier, staff, and partners) to reserve energy and minimize the effect greenhouse emission on the ecosystem. This effort brings positive impact to the environment as well as brings more profit for destination. Green Globe 21 organization gives two advices for  Fairmont destination authorities such as;(1) switch the old form lighting to the new one (light emitting diodes). This can upgrade lighting quality, reduces the bill and minimize the replacement cost. This action  reduced power consumption by 90%, each bulb will long lasting until 10 years and saving money annually $11.04 each bulb. (2) change the types of energy power which is usually they use with the new one and as a result, greenhouse emissions between 1999 and 2004 were reduced by approximately 10,000 tonnes per year. This also reduced energy consumption 10% from 1998 to 2000 and resulted in $ 1 million annual savings. (quoted from Dawn Ringrose and Associates inc, 2005)

In conclusion, tourism industry is multi-billion dollar industry which brings prosperity for the local communities. Developing sustainable tourism is very pivotal to raise the profit and minimize the risk of tourism industry. Due to managing tourism destination seem more complex; destination authorities need more knowledge and skill to develop sustainable tourism. Therefore, destination benchmarking becomes an answer of the above issue. It was established to give opportunity for destination authorities to learn how to develop sustainable tourism in their area. There are three advantages of destination benchmarking discuss in this essay.

 Firstly, destination benchmarking gives an opportunity for destination authorities to learn from other destination which is has better performances. It also can open the destination authority’s insight about the implementation of nine key aspects of environmental management. Moreover, destination benchmarking can be done by learning directly to other destination but also can be done by joined third party who organize destination benchmarking programme. Secondly, it can improve destination performances. Destination benchmarking stimulates destination authorities to evaluate their performances regularly and improve their performances to achieve high standard.  Finally, destination benchmarking can increase destination profitability. Through benchmarking, destination authorities can learn how to manage natural resources and minimize waste. This effort can cut operational cost and increase destination ability to earn more profit.

Overall, in my opinion destination benchmarking is an effective tool to develop sustainable tourism. There are many success stories about the implementation of destination benchmarking concepts, such as;Irelandtourist destination,Turkeytourist destination, CAST that inspire other destination to conduct the same programme. And I am strongly believe that implementation of this concept will give positive impact to the tourism development inIndonesia. Destination authorities inIndonesianeed to learn about how to measure their former performances, how to increase tourist satisfaction index and how to achieve better market share. Lastly, destination authorities inIndonesiacan learn from other tourist destinations how to preserve environment and earn more profit at the same time. All in all, I suggest destination authorities inIndonesiajoined destination benchmarking to improve tourist destination performances inIndonesiaand also to develop sustainable tourism inIndonesia.


 Boxwell. Robert J. (1994), Benchmarking for competitive advantage, Mc.Graw-Hill.Inc,USA.

 Cano, et al. (2001), Learning from others: Benchmarking in diverse tourism enterprises, Total quality management. Vol 12 no 7 & 8, 2001, 974-980, Taylor & Francis Ltd.UK.

 Catty Parsons, no date, Green Globe 21, available online:    http://www.sustainability.dpc.wa.gov.au/CaseStudies/Green%20Globe/greenglobe.htm

 Kozak, Metin. (2004), Destination Benchmarking concepts, practices &operations, CABI pub,New York.

 Pyo, Sungsoo. (2001), Benchmarks in hospitality and tourism, The Haworth Hospitality Press,New York.

 United Nations Environement Programme, 2005, Integrating Sustainability into business, a management guide for responsible tour operations, UNEP organization,France.

 Anonymous, 2001, available online: (http://www.ilo.org/public/english/bureau/inf/magazine/39/tourism.htm. (cited on 5 July 2006)

 Anonymous,  2003, available online: http://www.scotexchange.net/research_and_statistics/benchmarking_scotland/the_big_picture_intro.htm (cited on 5 July 2006)

 Anonymous,  no date, available online: (http:www.sustainable.org.nz.cited on 13 July 2006)


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Managing Diversity: The Gap between theories and practices in the hospitality industry

This articles written by Putu Indah Rahmawati

Published at : Jurnal Kepariwisataan, Vol 8 no 1 halaman 1-9, Maret 2009, Sekolah Tinggi Pariwisata Bali

Journal Cover


Managing diversity becomes one of the most important factors in ensuring company competitiveness. This paper explores the theory about diversity management and compares it with the practices in organizations and then examines the organizations’ diversity programs through their employees’ perceptions. The findings illustrate that there is a gap between managing diversity theories and practices in organizations and some barriers in implementing diversity program, especially in the hospitality industry.

Therefore, it is suggested for human resources practices to make one consensus about the precise definition of workforce diversity as a guideline in developing diversity training programs. Organizations also need to change their approach from a reactive approach to a proactive approach toward workforce diversity. Communication and openness to dissimilarity can reduce the barriers in implementing diversity programs.

  1. 1.      INTRODUCTION

Operating business in the era of globalization forces a company to learn how to deal with workforce diversity. Companies have been forced to deal with diversity for several reasons, such as: the growing number of women at work, raising the range of ages in the workplace and increasing interaction with other companies or people across national boundaries (Johnson & Redmond, 2000;1). Another fact is the shortages of employees in the hospitality industry makes the firms hire people from different countries so that the workforce becomes culturally diverse. As an illustration, at the Four Seasons hotel inDublinthere were 400 staff from 43 countries to serve the guests from all over the world (Vela, 2006). Although the workforce diversity becomes fact, the ways organizations manage workforce diversity are still evolving.

The term of diversity can be interpreted in many ways. The term diversity refers to the presence in one population of a (wide) variety of cultures, ethnic groups, languages, races, socio-economic backgrounds, opinions, religious beliefs, sexualities, gender identities, particularly in a social context (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity, 2006).

There are many issues related to workforce diversity. According to Sonnenschein (1997) workforce diversity issues can be related to race, culture, gender, sexual harassment, age, sexual orientation, physical disabilities. Given the variety of issues covered in the area of workforce diversity it therefore becomes the question of this paper as to which issues becomes the main concern in the organization? To what degree is the managing diversity theory applied in the firm’s practices? What are the challenges and barriers in implementing management diversity strategies?

This paper assumes that there is a gap between managing diversity theories and practices in the reality. In addressing this assumption, this paper will explore the diversity programs held by organizations in comparison to the employees’ perceptions about these programs. Since, there is a limitation of resources this paper particularly focuses on cultural issues and disability recruitment issues.

 In presenting the idea, this paper will at first give a brief overview of definitions and benefits of managing diversity in organizations.  After that, this paper will present the findings of the review report and the implications for human resources managers and organizations.


In general, workforce diversity has been widely studied for many years. A lot of literature and case studies discuss about diversity in the workplace (Bartz, in Maxwell, et al, 2001; Jenner in Friday, 2003; Ruffino, 1999; Nankervis, 1995, Sonnenschein’s,1997; Iverson 2002; Carrel, 2006; Vela, 2006). Therefore, the literature reviewed here was summarized and categorized under the following sections: definitions and advantages of managing diversity, workforce diversity issues, legislation and policies related to workforce diversity, discrepancy between theories and practices, challenges and barriers in implementing management diversity strategies.

3.1      Definition and Advantages of Managing Diversity

According to Bartz, in Maxwell, et al (2001) “managing diversity involves understanding that there are differences among employees that these differences, if properly managed, are an asset to work being done more efficiently and effectively”. Furthermore, Jenner in Friday (2003) argue that managing diversity should be considered an active phenomenon, which involves supervising or coordinating and directing the diversity or differences individuals bring to the organization to ensure the organization’s strategic goals are being fully and effectively met.

Numbers of studies have provided evidence that managing diversity brings a lot of benefits for the company ((Bartz, in Maxwell, et al, 2001; Jenner in Friday, 2003; Ruffino, 1999; Nankervis, 1995). According to Ruffino (1999;9), “the variety benefits of managing diversity include: attracting and retaining the best available human talent, increasing organizational flexibility, gaining and keeping greater market share, reducing cost, improving the quality of management, creating and innovative more powerfully, solving problems more effectively, increasing productivity, contributing to social responsibility, increase profit”.

Nankervis (1995) alleged that “in labor intensive industry such as hospitality, the effective utilization of human resources can give hotel a competitive advantage”.


3.2      Workforce Diversity Issues

Awareness of diversity is becoming more widespread. The success of  organizations is influenced by how well they deal with the diversity of people (Swanson, 2002; Bartz, in Maxwell, et al, 2001; Jenner in Friday, 2003; Ruffino, 1999; Nankervis, 1995). In Sonnenschein’s book (1997: 2),” diversity in workplace defined as the differences on the workplace based on race, culture, gender, sexual orientation, age and physical abilities”.

In order to find out issues of greatest concern to the employees in the organization, Iverson (2000) interviewed 74 hotel managers inUSAby conducted semi-structured interview. The interviewees were asked to answer the open-ended questions related to their perception about the diversity policies and practices in their organizations. The research found the issues becoming the main concern in their company, such as: effective communication between management and all employees, respect for the diverse cultural belief and valuing diversity. Conversely,  the issues least discussed by the managers are: sexual-orientation bias, bilingual skills for employees, personal sense of fair compensation and personal sense of belonging.

Similar research conducted by Carrell, et al (2006) found that there is no exact meaning of the term workforce diversity.  This longitudinal study compared the current employee’s perception of the characteristics of diversity with a similar study published by Labor Law Journal (1994). This survey asked the decision makers in organizations to choose ten characteristics (culture, race, gender, age, national origin, language, physical ability, regional origin, sexual orientation) that might be included in working definition of diversity. The findings of this survey said that in 1994, race/color was the top-ranked issue of concern to the decision makers in organizations, followed by gender and age, while issues of least concern to managers were regional origin and religion. Sexual orientation and language were even not mentioned in the diversity definitions in the managers’ perceptions. This feature changes slightly. In 2004, culture/ethnicity became the greatest concern of the managers in the organization, followed by color and gender. Furthermore, there are two additional diversity characteristics included in diversity definitions, such as regional origin and sexual orientation.

3.3      Legislations and Policies Related to Workforce Diversity

Despite the increasing research discussing about diversity, the level of research related to workforce diversity legislation is quite limited. This may be partly due to the lack of awareness toward diversity legislation.

According to R. McInnes, “legislation is one of predominant factors that forces company to utilize management workforce diversity.  Many companies are under legislative mandates to be non-discriminatory in their employment practices. Non-compliance with Equal Employment Opportunity or Affirmative Action legislation can result in fines and/or loss of contracts with government agencies”  (www.diversityworld.com).

 Legislation ensures the employees get fair treatment regardless of their background (HREOC, 2006; BSR, 2006).  In order to minimize discrimination toward the minority groups inAustralia, The human rights and equal opportunity commission (HREOC) administers federal laws. There are five specific legislations related to workforce diversity in this law, such as: Age Discrimination Act 2004, Disability Discrimination Act 1992, Racial Discrimination Act 1975, Sex Discrimination Act 1984, Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986 (HREOC, 2006). Those legislations ensures that everyone get fair treatment regardless of sex, nationality, race, age, physical ability, medical record, criminal record, impairment, trade, marital status, mental, sexual preference, union activity, nationality, religion.

In another country like inUK, discrimination legislation covers a broad range of protected grounds and most types of workers. The specified grounds covered by discrimination legislation are: age, disability, gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, general equalities legislation (www.scotland.gov.uk).

Although different countries have different legislation related to workforce diversity, overall at legislation have similar purposes to protect people against discrimination and harassment in the workplace.


3.4      Discrepancy between Managing Diversity Policies and Practices

Every company has a different strategy to deal with workforce diversity (Swanson, 2002). Various research methods are applied in the area of managing diversity in order to find out the most effective way to deal with differences in workplaces. Iverson (2000) exhibits one model of diversity-management strategy, about how a company can manage diversity in the office. This model contains three themes that correlate with valuing diversity such as: culture, opportunity and leadership. In brief, this model shows that a company can generate managing diversity by conducting diversity training programs, respecting the differences, improving company’s concern for equality (equal pay, reward and respect for minority and majority groups), active recruitment and raising the number of multicultural employees, and communicating effectively with all employees.

  Other studies report that in order to generate the maximum advantages from diversity, the company diversity strategy needs to be evaluated to confirm the strategy linkages between  a company’s culture, policies, procedures, systems and its diversity initiatives ( Friday, 2003; Vela, 2006).

Although numerous studies have provided evidence that managing differences in the workplace plays a significant role in ensuring profitable and competitive business (Maxwell, 2000; Nankervis, 1995; Ruffino, 1999; Cox & Stacy, 1991; Friday, 2003). However, not all the organizations show concern about diversity issues. (Swanson, 2002; Carrell,et al 2006; Groschl, 2004; Unger& Kregel, 2003; D’Netto & Sohal, 1999)

A survey conducted by Carrell, et al (2006) found surprising findings. From the 169 member of the Society for Human Resources Management (SHRM) chosen as respondents, 53% reported that their organizations do not have a written policy or program related to workforce diversity. Furthermore, a survey inCanada(Miller & Rowney, 1999) also found that only 50% organizations have diversity programs and only a few organizations perceive any need for diversity programs.

 Similarly, Swanson (2002) found that most managers lack familiarity with terminology related to diversity and most of them believe that diversity theories are difficult to implement in reality. In addition, Swanson (2002) also reported that although during the interview managers could explain their perceptions about workforce diversity, there is an obvious dearth of implementation of the theories in their daily activities.

Along with the studies which are focused on current human resources practices related to workforce diversity, the case study conducted by Groschl (2004) found that there is a gap between human resources theory and the reality.  The majority of large hotels inTorontoutilized a re-active recruitment approach toward people with disabilities. Other interesting findings from this research are: “none of the hotel in city centerTorontocould explain of how many disability employees work in their company, they do not target disabled people and modification in hotels is focused on the customer’s need not the employees’.

Furthermore, Unger & Kreger (2003) indicated that although a number of organizations have diversity programs, they have very limited awareness of workplace supports for disability workers. The majority of the organizations interviewed in this research have a program to manage disability but they can not utilize these programs in providing facilities to workers with disabilities.

      A similar situation also occurs inAustralia. Wilson & Weiler (2000) evaluate a pilot cross-cultural training program conducted for hospitality staff inMelbournein 1998. In this paper Mallinson & Weiler reported that the staffs who joined the cross-culture awareness training from the first meeting until the training program ended, were very enthusiastic and highly recommend that this program continue in the future. However, the majority of  staff and managers inMelbournedid not realize the importance of cultural awareness in hotels. Most of the hotel staff are unmotivated to take cross-cultural training program because they feel less likely need the cross-cultural awareness.

  In addition, D’Netto & Sohal (1999) also argued that “overall, management of workforce diversity is only mediocre”. This research found inadequacy of diversity programs in the areas of recruitment, selection and training.

Although managing diversity programs have been studied and executed in some organizations, however, the case studies above showed that the result of the programs are not as good as expected.

3.5     Challenges and Barriers in Implementing Management Diversity Strategies

There were many challenges met by the organizations when managing diversity (Groshl,2004; Mallinson & Weiler, 2000; Vela, 2006; Smith, 2002). Groschl (2004) in his study case in Toronto argued   “ that the complexity of Canada’s legal framework and the limited awareness, understanding, and communication between person without a disability people with a disability within the case study organizations seem to enforce a reactive  approach”.

Furthermore, a paper written by Mallinson & Weiler (2000) indicated the challenge in building cross-cultural awareness is to motivate hotel staff to undertake the multicultural training. In addition, several obstacles that cause to organizations use the reactive approach in managing diversity were: bigger training expenditure, rising unpleasant conflicts, mismanaged diversity, need to provide a various need and expectations, reverse discrimination,   how to influence stakeholders funding the diversity program and how to handle the conflict of interest between stakeholders (Vela, 2006).

Another research about vision impaired people in the workplace in Australiaconducted by Smith (2002) reported that with certain facilities the vision impaired workers can do their job as well as others; however they still faced negative attitudes and misperceptions of their colleagues and employers.


From the literature review and study cases mentioned above, there are three main findings can be generated in this paper. Firstly, the cultural, race and gender issues were becoming the main concern in organization were. From those main issues, culture most frequently became the main concern of the organizations. Conversely, national origin, religion, language, physical ability, regional origin and sexual orientation have been ignored by the decision makers in organizations (Smith, 2002; Groschl, 2004).  Disability and sexual orientation might be not a priority for Human Resources directors and teams. This might be the causes of prejudice, misconception and negative attitudes (Iverson, 2000; Smith, 2002).

Moreover, although there are many academic articles and study cases discussing about cultural diversity, only a small number discuss the other characteristics. Using a broad keyword “managing diversity” to search a search academic literature available in this area, it is found that generally the findings can be categorized into: managing cultural diversity (Vela, 2006; Hartel, 2004; Yamashita, 2004; Cox and Stacy, 1991; Mallinson & Weiler, 2000; Spillane, no date) and the strategies to deal with diversity (Friday, 2003; Iverson, 2000; Carrell, et, 2006). This demonstrates that culture/ ethnicity is becoming the main issue concerned by managers and employees in the organizations. Moreover, it is difficult to find the articles about managing diversity which are related to people with disabilities and sexual orientation in the hospitality industry. For example, in Indonesiaonly one article discussed managing cultural diversity and there were no other articles discuss about other characteristics of diversity (http://iajbs.org/Images/AEImages/spillane.doc, 2006)

The second finding underlines the assertion that there is a gap between managing diversity theories and practices in the reality (Swanson, 2002; Carrell,et al 2006; Groschl, 2004; Unger& Kregel, 2003; D’Netto & Sohal, 1999). Although workforce diversity has been a fact for many years and numerous experts said that managing diversity brings lot of benefits for the organizations, however, a lot of organizations are still not concerned about diversity. The following study cases will confirm that the managing diversity program is still “middling”.

An obvious example of the gap between theories and practices in organization can be seen in the article written by Carrell, et al (2006)  which  found that from 169 member of the Society for Human Resources Management (SHRM) interviewed in this survey, only 47% organization have diversity policies and program. It means that more than 50% organizations from the sample research ignored about diversity issues. Similarly, inAustralia, cultural diversity training programs which were organized by many organizations still could not encourage staffs to undertake the programs by the own initiative (Mallinson & Weiler, 1998).

In term of disability recruitment, employers also fail to utilize the diversity program in providing facilities for workers with disabilities (Unger & Kreger, 2003; Groshl, 2004; Smith, 2002). Survey conducted by Groshl in 2004 found that majority hotels inTorontouse re-active approach toward disability recruitment as most of the hotels not give a chance for disability person to be an employee. Moreover, Unger & Kreger (2003) indicated that although a number of organizations have diversity programs but they have very limited awareness of workplace supports for disability worker.

Last but not least, it can be seen from the literature review that the challenges of managing diversity could come from inside organization and the outside organization. From inside organization, the barriers might be including cost of the training, how to communicate effectively toward whole stakeholders, and encouraging awareness of employees to respect diversity and to undertake the training program. Barrier from outside organizations include complexity of legal framework related to workforce diversity and no consensus about the definition of workforce diversity might be lead to confusing the organizations in planning the diversity policy and program in organizations.


In the fierce competition of global market, organizations ability to manage diversity effectively will become the most important factors in ensuring the organizations competitiveness. Therefore, this paper suggest several changes in order to minimize the gap between managing diversity theories and practices and also to improve the human resources managers ability to face the challenges in implementing diversity policies.

First, considering that human resources manager more concern about the cultural issues and almost ignore other characteristics of diversity, this paper give suggestion for the manager to change the training approach from reactive approach to proactive approach. Managers need to listen effectively what is the demand of their employees exactly and how the managers can encourage them to participate actively in valuing diversity in the workplace and motivate them to respect each other. If the managers can change the content of the training program from only focus on the cultural issues to broaden content which include all aspects of diversity, for sure the company will gain competitive advantages in the future.

 Secondly, since the complexity of the workforce diversity definition  as the main reason there is a gap in implementing diversity policies, the term of workforce diversity should be defined precisely. Precise definition and clear legal framework will minimize bias perception among the human resources managers and staff. This can achieved if the Society for Human Resources Management (SHRM) work together and make some consensus related to workforce diversity definition. The society generates rules that can be adopted by every organization all over the world. Although every organizations and every country has different situations and barriers in managing diversity, at least there is the same guideline can be followed by the organizations in making the diversity policies and programs.

Finally, Human Resource managers should foster openness to dissimilarity of stakeholders in organization. Respecting the dissimilarity and open communication hopefully can minimize barriers in implementing diversity program and reducing bias and prejudice in organizations. As stated by Hartel & Fujimoto in Hartel (2000), “at the dissimilarity openness end of the continuum, difference is viewed positively and as an opportunity for learning”.


Carr & Ruffino 1999, Diversity Success Strategies, Butterworth Heinemann,Boston.

 Diversity world 2006, Diversity World, viewed 8 October 2006, <http://www.diversityworld.com/Diversity/workforce_diversity.htm&gt;

 D’Netto, B. & Sohal, A. S. 1999, ‘Human Resource Practices and Workforce Diversity: an empirical assessment’, International Journal of Manpower, Volume 20 no 8, pp.530-547, viewed 20 August 2006 retrieved from Emerald Database.

 Groschl, S. 2004, ‘Current Human Resources Practices Affecting the Employment of Persons with Disabilites in Selected Toronto Hotels-A Case Study’,  International Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Administration, volume 5, no 3, pp. 15-29.

 Hartel, C. E. J. 2000, ‘Towards a Multicultural World: Identifying Work Systems, Practices and Employee Attitudes that Embrace Diversity’, Australian Journal of Management, volume 29, no 2, pp. 189-200.

 Human Right and Equal Opportunity Commission 2006, Human Right and Equal Opportunity Commission, Australia, viewed 4 October 2006, <http://www.hreoc.gov.au/complaints_information/index.html>.

 Iverson, K. 2000, ‘Managing for Effective Workforce Diversity-Identifying issue that is of concern to employees’, The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, volume 41, issue 2, April 2000, page 31-38, viewed 20 August 2006 retrieved from Science Direct Database.

 Johnson, R & David, R. 2000, Diversity Incorporated-Managing People for Success in  Diverse World, Prentice Hall,London.

 Kim, B. 2006, ‘Managing Workforce Diversity: Developing a Learning Organization’, Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & Tourism 5, no. 2, pp. 69-90.

 Lundberg, D. 1992, Management of People in Hotels and Restaurant, fifth edition, Wm C Brown Publishers,USA.

 Miller, G. E. & Rowney, J. I. A. 1999, ‘Workplace Diversity Management in Multicultural Society’, Women in Management Review, volume 14 no 8 pp 307-315, viewed 20 September 2006, retrieved from Emerald Database.

 Scotland Government 2006, Diversity Taskforce, viewed 8 October 2006, <http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Health/NHS-Scotland /Diversity Task Force/GeneralLegislation#top>

 Smith, T. 2002, ‘Diversity and Disability: Exploring the Experience of Vision Impaired People in Workplace’, Equal Opportunities International, volume 21 no 8 pp.59-72, viewed 3 October 2006, retrieved from Emerald Database.

 Sonnenschein 1997, Practical Executive  and Workfoce Diversity, NTC publishing group,Lincolnwood,Illinois,USA.

 Spillane. S. J. J. J., n.d, Managing Diversity in the Hotel Industry, The Case of Jogyakarta-Indonesia, viewed 20 August 2006, http://iajbs.org/Images/AEImages/spillane.doc

  Sturman, M. C. 2001, ‘The Compensation Conundrum, does the hospitality Industry Shortchange Its Employees and Itself?’ The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Volume 42, Issue 4, August-September 2001, Pages 70-76, viewed 20 August 2006 retrieved from Science Direct Database.

 Swanson, D. R. 2002, ‘Diversity Programs: Attitude and Realities in the Contemporary Corporate Environment’, Corporate Communication: An International Journal, volume 7 no 4 pp 257-268, viewed 20 September 2006, retrieved from Emerald Database.

 Tanke, M. L. 1990, Human Resources Management for Hospitality Industry, Delmar Publisher Inc,New York.

 Unger, D., Kregel, J, Koch, L. C., Rumill, Jr., Phillip, D  2003, ‘Employer’s Knowledge and Utilization of Accomodations’, Work, 2003, Vol. 21 Issue 1, p5-15, viewed 20 September 2006, retrieved from Business Sources Complete Database.

  Vela, F. 2006, Managing Cultural Diversity in Hospitality Industry- The Role of Eastern European Worker in the Western European Hospitality Sector, Hellenic Open University, Greece, viewed 20 August 2006, http://tourism-conference.eap.gr/pdf%20files/Vela,%20F.pdf#search=%22workforce%20diversity%20in%20hotel%20and%20vela%20fioralba%20and%20hellenic%20open%20university%22

 Wilborn, L., Weaver, P. 2002, ‘Diversity Management Training Initiatives: A Profile of Current Practices within the Lodging Industry’, Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & Tourism 1, no. 4, pp. 79-96.

 Wikipedia 2006, wikipedia-diversity, viewed 20 September 2006, <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity, 2006>.

 Yamashita, K. 2004, Importance of developing multicultural diversity training program in hotel industry in Minneapolis area, The Graduate School University of Winconsin-Stout, Mennomonie, viewed 20 September 2006. <http://www.uwstout.edu/lib/thesis/2004/2004yamashitak.pdf#search=%22workforce%20diversity%20in%20hotel%20and%20yamashita%20and%20minneapolis%22 August 2006>

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Evaluasi Tingkat Kepuasan Wisatawan Sebagai Pondasi Pengukuran Destination Competitiveness : Studi Empiris Dari Kawasan Wisata Lovina

Artikel ini di tulis oleh

Putu Indah Rahmawati, S.St.Par.M.Bis &  A.A Sri Barustyawati, S.Pd

Telah di publikasikan pada Jurnal Pariwisata .Vol. 14, No.1, Maret 2009. Halaman : 54 – 65. Diterbitkan oleh Pusat Penelitian Diterbitkan oleh Pusat Penelitian dan Pengabdian kepada Masyarakat Sekolah Tinggi Pariwisata Trisakti. Akreditasi Dikti No: 55a/Dikti/Kep/2006. ISSN 1411-1527.



Penelitian yang dilakukan bertujuan untuk mengetahui tingkat kepuasan wisatawan selama berkunjung di kawasan wisata Lovina. Data diambil dengan menyebarkan kuesioner dengan teknik sampling expose facto. Subjek penelitiannya adalah wisatawan dan objek penelitiannya adalah fasilitas, askesibilitas dan pelayanan wisata. Teknik yang digunakan adalah teknik analisis kuantitatif dan kualitatif. Hasil penelitian menyatakan bahwa secara umum wisatawan puas dengan kunjungannya ke Lovina, namun tidak puas dengan toilet umum, papan informasi dan pusat pelayanan informasi yang ada di Lovina. Secara kualitatif, wisatawan memberikan saran agar pantai Lovina bersih dari pedagang acung, sampah dan keamanan di jalan raya perlu ditingkatkan. Selain itu, wisatawan memerlukan fasilitas penitipan anak dan taman bermain untuk anak-anak. Akhirnya, penelitian ini menyarankan bahwa semua stakeholder berkolaborasi untuk menyikapi opini dan saran dari wisatawan.



The objective of the research is to find out the tourist’s satisfaction level during their visit in Lovina. Data were collected by questionaire using expose facto technique. Subject of the research is tourists and object of the research is facilities, accessibilities, and services in Lovina. The research results show that generally tourist satisfied with their visit in Lovina, however tourist not satisfied with the  public toilet, tourist board and tourist information center. Moreover, tourist hope that the beach clean from ilegal fendor, rubish and road safety need to be improved. Furthermore, tourist need child care and playground for their kids. Finally, this research suggest that entire stakeholder collaborate to follow up tourist opinion and suggestions from tourists.




Strategi pemasaran suatu daerah tujuan wisata yang efektif memerlukan pemahaman yang detail mengenai proses pembuatan keputusan dari wisatawan untuk berkunjung. Image sebelum berkunjung, pengalaman selama berkunjung dan evaluasi setelah berkunjung merupakan hal kompleks yang mempengaruhi proses pembuatan keputusan bagi wisatawan untuk berkunjung ke suatu kawasan wisata (Hanlan, dkk, 2006).

Keputusan wisatawan dalam memilih daerah tujuan wisata dipengaruhi oleh berbagai faktor antara lain: ekonomi, politik, sosial, budaya dan tehnologi (Lewis et al. 1995). Faktor-faktor ini diciptakan oleh opini publik maupun pemberitaaan baik secara positif maupun negatif. Image positif diciptakan untuk mempromosikan suatu daerah tujuan wisata sedangkan image negatif tercipta karena pemberitaan-pemberitaan negatif baik karena perang sipil, bencana alam, dan bencana buatan manusia seperti bom (Kotler et al. 2006).

Selanjutnya, proses pembuatan pembuatan keputusan tidak selesai hanya sampai selama wisatawan berkunjung karena wisatawan dipastikan memiliki pengalaman berbeda-beda selama berkunjung. Sehingga kemudian tingkat kepuasan wisatawan akan berbeda sesuai dengan pengalamannya masing-masing. Membuat wisatawan puas atas pengalaman yang diperolehnya selama berkunjung merupakan hal esensial dalam upaya pemasaran suatu kawasan wisata. Oleh karena itu upaya mengukur tingkat kepuasan wisatawan adalah hal yang mutlak dilakukan sebagai upaya redesign strategi pemasaran serta sebagai pondasi untuk mengukur destination competitiveness.

Pulau Bali sudah terkenal di mancanegara dengan keindahan alamnya dan keunikan budayanya. Wisatawan dari berbagai dunia datang berkunjung untuk menyaksikan keajaiban keindahan dari “Island of thousand temples” atau pulau seribu pura. Kedatangan wisatawan memberikan kontribusi positif terhadap peningkatan kesejahteraan masyarakat lokal.

Pengembangan pariwisata yang sejak tahun 1978 yang dipusatkan di kabupaten Badung memberi dampak terjadinya ketimpangan jumlah kunjungan wisatawan ke Bali, bahkan juga mengakibatkan perbedaan jumlah PAD yang sangat besar. Sejak adanya otonomi daerah, kabupaten lain di Bali mulai berusaha keras untuk mendongkrak PADnya. Dan adanya tren global “back to nature” memberi harapan kepada Daerah Tingkat II Buleleng. Bagus Sudibya (2003) mengatakan bahwa trend ekowisata ini harus dimanfaatkan Kabupaten Buleleng untuk menggarap niche market yang selama ini belum digarap. Ada relung-relung pasar yang tergolong minat khusus yang sampai saat ini belum digarap dengan baik, padahal pangsa pasar tersebut mempunyai potensi besar  baik dari segi kualitas dan kuantitas.

Salah satu potensi wisata  yang dimiliki oleh Kabupaten Buleleng adalah kawasan wisata Lovina. Terkenal dengan atraksi wisata lumba-lumba dan suasana kehidupan yang jauh berbeda dengan daerah Bali selatan membuat kawasan wisata ini cukup terkenal di mancanegara. Akan tetapi, jumlah kunjungan wisatawan ke kawasan wisata Lovina juga menurun seiring musibah berturut-turut yang menimpa Pulau Bali seperti : Bom Bali 1, Bom Bali 2, isu tsunami, dan beberapa musibah yang menimpa daerah-daerah lain diluar propinsi Bali.

Berbagai musibah alam dan buatan tersebut menjadikan alasan beberapa negara seperti Australia untuk mengeluarkan travel warning. (http://www.smartraveller.gov.au/zw-cgi/view/Advice/Indonesia, 2007). Sekali lagi, travel warning dapat mempengaruhi image dari pulau Bali termasuk kawasan wisata Lovina di mancanegara. Berkat kerja keras pemerintah dan semua stakeholder pariwisata, jumlah kunjungan wisatawan di tahun 2007 mengalami peningkatan dari tahun sebelumnya.

Meskipun telah terjadi peningkatan jumlah kunjungan wisatawan akan tetapi evaluasi terhadap tingkat kepuasan wisatawan setelah berkunjung ke kawasan wisata Lovina tetap perlu dilakukan. Terlebih lagi belum pernah ada instansi ataupun individu yang melaksanakan evaluasi terkait. Sehingga upaya untuk mengukur destination competitiveness dan mendesain strategi pemasaran kawasan wisata yang lebih efektif sangat mendesak untuk dilaksanakan.

Evaluasi terhadap competitiveness suatu kawasan wisata merupakan hal yang signifikan untuk dilakukan sebagai alat penting dalam strategi positioning dan pemasaran suatu kawasan wisata (Pearce,1997; Faulkner et al, 1999). Berbagai studi mengenai metode pengukuran destination competitiveness telah dilakukan oleh beberapa ahli pariwisata international (Chon & Mayer, 1995; Pearce, 1997; Hassan, 2000; Crouch & Ritchie, 2003). Meskipun demikian belum ada penelitian yang khusus menilai kawasan wisata Lovina yang menjadi andalan bagi Kabupaten Buleleng. Oleh karena itu, maka dalam penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui (1)  tingkat kepuasan wisatawan  terhadap fasilitas, aksesibilitas dan pelayanan wisata selama berkunjung di kawasan Lovina, (2) tingkat kepuasan wisatawan  secara umum berdasarkan pengalamannya berkunjung di kawasan wisata Lovina (3) hubungan antara tingkat kepuasan wisatawan dengan keinginan untuk merekomendasikan Lovina kepada orang lain (4) opini dan harapan wisatawan terhadap perkembangan kepariwisataan di Lovina.

Produk wisata adalah serangkaian komponen yang dinikmati wisatawan sejak dia meninggalkan rumahnya sampai kembali lagi ke rumahnya yang berupa atraksi, fasilitas-fasilitas wisata dan aksesibilitas. Definisi  Destination Competitiveness menurut d’Hauteserre (2000, p.23), adalah kemampuan suatu daerah tujuan wisata untuk memelihara positioningnya di pasar dan kemampuan untuk meningkatkannya secara terus menerus. Sedangkan menurut  Goeldner dan Ritchie (2003, p. 417)  kemampuan suatu daerah tujuan wisata untuk bersaing dengan efektif dan menguntungkan. Hasan (2000, p.240) menyatakan bahwa Destination Competitiveness adalah kemampuan suatu daerah tujuan wisata untuk menciptakan nilai tambah dalam suatu produk  serta memelihara positioningnya di tengah-tengah para persaingan yang sangat ketat. Dari berbagai definisi para ahli tersebut dapat diambil kesimpulan bahwa Destination Competitiveness adalah kemampuan suatu daerah tujuan wisata untuk menjaga kualitasnya sehingga mampu bersaing dengan berbagai kompetitor dan memelihara positioningnya di pasar.

Disamping berbagai definisi diatas, beberapa model telah diciptakan untuk mengukur destination competitiveness. Pada tahun 1995, Chon dan mayer dalam Faulkner et al (1999) berhasil mengadopsi “Porter’s generic competitiveness model” ke dalam industri pariwisata. Model ini menyangkut lima dimensi pengukuran yaitu pendekatan, management, organisasi, informasi, dan effisiensi. Pearce (1997) kemudian memperkenalkan metode yang diberi nama CDA (Competitiveness Destination Analysis) yaitu suatu alat sistematik yang mengukur dan membandingkan berbagai atribut suatu daerah tujuan wisata dalam konteks perencanaan. Beliau meyakinkan bahwa metode ini lebih objektif dalam melakukan penilaian beberapa atribut pariwisata terutama mengenai kelebihan dan kekurangan suatu daerah tujuan wisata dan kemudian memberi kontribusi yang lebih efektif untuk memformulasi kebijakan perencanaan (planning policies).

Pada tahun 2000 kemudian Hasan memperkenalkan model lain yag menilai hubungan antara stakeholder pariwisata yang terkait dalam menciptakan nilai tambah suatu kawasan wisata untuk menjaga positioningnya di tengah-tengah persaingan pasar. Model ini mengkritik model pertama yang diadposi dari Porter model yang dinyatakan terlalu simpel dan tidak cukup untuk mengukur kemampuan suatu daerah tujuan wisata. Hasan kemudian mengacu bahwa pariwisata di pengaruhi oleh berbagai ragam industri pariwisata yang berperan dalam menjaga sustainability suatu daerah tujuan wisata. Oleh karena itu model ini menambahkan bahwa keberadaan kerjasama antara stakeholder pariwisata termasuk para pengusaha di industri pawisata adalah sanagt penting untuk kemampuan bersaing di masa mendatang.

Model terbaru kemudian di ciptakan oleh Crouch dan Ritchie (2003) yang mengangkat lima dimensi utama penilaian, antara lain: (1) qualifying and amplifying determinants (2) destination policy (3) planning and development (4) destination management (5) supporting factors and resources.  Tujuan dari model ini adalah untuk mencapai keberlanjutan suatu daerah tujuan wisata dengan meningkatkan kesejahteraan masyarakat lokal dalam suatu daerah baik dalam bentuk kesejahteraan ekonomi, pemeliharaan lingkungan dan peningkatan kualitas hidup. Skema model Crouch and Ritchie dapat dilihat pada gambar dibawah ini:

Dari berbagai model yang telah diciptakan, peneliti kemudian mengambil sebagian kecil aspek dari “Destination Competitiveness Model” yang dirancang oleh Crouch and Ritchie yaitu mengukur tingkat kepuasan wisatawan di kawasan wisata Lovina. Diharapkan pada nantinya hasil penelitian ini dapat dijadikan pondasi untuk penelitian selanjutnya untuk mengukur kemampuan kompetitif kawasan Lovina di masa mendatang.


Rancangan penelitian ini adalah expose pacto dengan menggunakan teknik survai. Penelitian di rancang selama 8 bulan di kawasan wisata Lovina Kabupaten Buleleng Propinsi Bali. Subjek penelitian ini adalah wisatawan yang berkunjung ke kawasan wisata Lovina. Teknik sampling yang digunakan adalah accidental sampling yaitu dengan menyasar wisatawan yang telah tinggal di Lovina dalam jangka waktu tertentu sehingga setiap wisatawan punya hak yang sama untuk menyampaikan opininya mengenai kawasan wisata Lovina. Objek penelitian ini adalah tingkat kepuasan wisatawan terhadap fasilitas wisata dan faktor pendukung lainnya di kawasan wisata Lovina. Variabel yang akan dicari antara lain: infrastruktur, aksesibilitas, fasilitas wisata, keramahtamahan dan keberadaan industri pariwisata di kawasan Lovina. Pengumpulan data dilakukan melalui survai lapangan dengan menggunakan kuesioner. Data kemudian dianalisis dengan analisis kuantitatif dan kualitatif.

  1. HASIL

3.1   Profil demografi respondent

Ada 127 responden yang berhasil di peroleh dari 150 kuesioner yang disebar di kawasan Lovina. Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa respond rate nya cukup  tinggi yaitu (85%). Dari hasil analisis deskriptif untuk profil responden menunjukkan bahwa sebagian besar responden berasal dari Eropa, terutama Belanda  dengan persentase 41,7% hanya sebagian kecilsaja tamu berasal dari Asia dan Australia.  Sebagian besar wisatawan adalah karyawan dan pensiunan dengan komposisi sebaran umur wisatawan cukup merata.Detail persentase profil data responden dapat dilihat pada tabel1.

Tabel 1. Profil data responden




Age group



Valid denmark 8 6.3 Valid 16-19 8 6.3
polish 3 2.4 20-29 24 18.9
dutch 53 41.7 30-39 30 23.6
australia 8 6.3 40-49 26 20.5
british 8 6.3 50-59 29 22.8
germany 13 10.2 60 or over 10 7.9
italian 4 3.1 Total 127 100
belgian 2 1.6
austria 1 0.8  current position



french 8 6.3 Valid employee 70 55.1
swiss 5 3.9 self employee 21 16.5
swedish 1 0.8 retired 13 10.2
malaysian 6 4.7 housewife/man 12 9.4
singapore 3 2.4 student 8 6.3
japanese 2 1.6 unemployed 2 1.6
Total 125 98.4 Total 126 99.2
Missing System 2 1.6 Missing System 1 0.8
Total 127 100 Total 127 100

3.2   Tingkat kepuasan wisatawan terhadap fasilitas, aksesibilitas dan pelayanan wisata selama berkunjung di kawasan wisata Lovina.

Hasil survei menunjukkan bahwa wisatawan hanya merasa puas terhadap kualitas hotel dan keramahtamahan penduduk lokal di Lovina. Sedangkan,  terhadap fasilitas toilet umum, tourist information board dan tourist information center, wisatawan jelas menunjukkan ketidak puasan. Selanjutnya, wisatawan sebagian besar memberikan nilai netral untuk fasilitas-fasilitas seperti restaurant di dalam dan diluar hotel, money changer, communication services, shopping facilities, guide services, kualitas jalan, arus lalu lintas, jarak ke Lovina.



Tabel 02

Tingkat kepuasan wisatawan terhadap fasilitas, aksesibilitas dan pelayanan di Lovina

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
road quality 125 1.00 5.00 2.9600 1.05800
traffic flow 124 1.00 5.00 2.9597 .94910
distance to lovina 116 1.00 5.00 3.2069 .89944
hotel quality 124 1.00 5.00 4.0000 .91064
restaurant inside hotel 122 1.00 5.00 3.7213 1.04654
cafe/restaurant outside hotel 115 1.00 5.00 3.5478 .84025
money changer 103 1.00 5.00 3.0097 .93405
public toilet 109 1.00 5.00 2.4404 1.10077
tourist information board 109 1.00 5.00 2.6514 1.06611
tourist information center 108 1.00 5.00 2.7870 1.08560
communication facilities 118 1.00 5.00 3.2881 .90678
shopping facilities 121 1.00 5.00 3.2975 .91874
guide services 116 1.00 5.00 3.5948 1.15705
local government bureaucracy 105 1.00 5.00 2.9524 .96457
local friendliness to tourist 124 1.00 5.00 4.1935 .87120
cleanliness 126 1.00 5.00 3.2540 1.01143
Valid N (listwise) 77


3.3   Tingkat kepuasan wisatawan  secara umum berdasarkan pengalamannya berkunjung di kawasan wisata Lovina

Akan tetapi, penilaian wisatawan terhadap Kawasan wisata Lovina secara umum hasilnya agak berbeda.  Berdasarkan tabel dibawah dapat dilihat bahwa 68, 3% wisatawan merasa puas terhadap pengalamannya berkunjung secara umum, 20,6 % merasa netral dan hanya 0,8% yang menyatakan tidak puas.

Tabel 03

Tingkat kepuasan wisatawan secara umum

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid not satisfied 1 .8 .8 .8
neutral 25 19.7 19.8 20.6
satisfied 60 47.2 47.6 68.3
very satisfied 40 31.5 31.7 100.0
Total 126 99.2 100.0
Missing System 1 .8
Total 127 100.0


Data dari tabel 2 dan tabel 3 menunjukkan bahwa walaupun wisatawan sangat  tidak puas terhadap fasilitas toilet toilet umum, tourist information board dan tourist information center, wisatawan memiliki toleransi yang tinggi dengan menerima sebagai kekurangan yang wajar di negara-negara yang sedang berkembang.  Toleransi yang tinggi inilah yang menyebabkan wisatawan melupakan ketidakpuasannya dan mengingat semua keindahan pengalamannya selama berkunjung di kawasan wisata Lovina.


3.4   Hubungan antara tingkat kepuasan wisatawan dengan keinginan untuk merekomendasikan Lovina kepada orang lain

Walaupun tidak ada wisatawan yang menyatakan dirinya tidak puas dengan kunjungannya atau pengalamannya selama berkunjung di Lovina, hasil survey menunjukkan bahwa ada 9 orang dari 125 respondent yang menyatakan keberatan untuk merekomendasikan Lovina kepada orang lain. Hasil cross tabulasi mengarah pada informasi bahwa tidak ada hubungan yang signifikan antara tingkat kepuasan selama berkunjung dan keinginan untuk merekomendasikan Lovina kepada orang lain.

Hasil analisis dengan menggunakan korelasi nonparametrik kendalls dan spearman menegaskan hasil crosstabulasi diatas. Pada tabel 04 dapat dilihat bahwa:

  • terjadi korelasi negatif antara tingkat kepuasan  wisatawan dengan keinginan untuk merekomendasikan Lovina kepada orang lain. Maka semakin puas wisatawan semakin tidak ingin merekomendasikan Lovina kepada orang lain. Namun, angka -0.082 menunjukkan bahwa hubungan kedua variabel sangat lemah.
  • Dilihat dari signifikansi hasil korelasi, dapat diketahui bahwa korelasi antara tingkat kepuasan wisatawan dengan keinginan untuk merekomendasikan Lovina adalah tidak signifikan. Angka probabilitas 0.336 yang jauh diatas 0.05 berarti bahwa tingkat kepuasan wisatawan selama berkunjung ke Lovina tidak ada hubungan dengan keinginannya untuk merekomendasikan Lovina kepada orang lain.



Tabel 04 . Korelasi

level of satisfaction do you intend to recommend lovina to other
Kendall’s tau_b level of satisfaction Correlation Coefficient 1.000 -.082
Sig. (2-tailed) . .336
N 126 125
do you intend to recommend lovina to other Correlation Coefficient -.082 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .336 .
N 125 126
Spearman’s rho level of satisfaction Correlation Coefficient 1.000 -.086
Sig. (2-tailed) . .338
N 126 125
do you intend to recommend lovina to other Correlation Coefficient -.086 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .338 .
N 125 126

3.5   Opini dan harapan wisatawan terhadap perkembangan kepariwisataan di Lovina

Opini dan harapan wisatawan terhadap perkembangan kepariwisataan di Lovina dapat di peroleh dengan merangkum informasi dari respondent. Secara umum wisatawan memiliki opini bahwa Lovina adalah kawasan wisata yang indah, tenang, dengan penduduk lokal yang ramah dan menyambut baik kehadiran wisatawan asing. Akantetapi majoritas wisatawan menyatakan bahwa pantai Lovina terlihat kumuh, tidak terawat, sampah banyak berserakan dan terlalu banyak pedangan acong. Keberadaan pedagang acung sangat mengganggu wisatawan karena mereka memaksa-maksa wisatawan untuk membeli produk mereka. Selain itu, wisatawan juga kurang nyaman dengan lalulintas yang tidak teratur dan para pengemudi yang mengebut di jalan raya Lovina. Beberapa wisatawan memberikan masukan agar pengelola kawasan Lovina membersihkan pantai, memperbaiki trotoar agar aman untuk pejalan kaki, membuat taman bermain untuk anak-anak dan tempat penitipan anak. Rincian opini dan harapan mengenai kawasan wisata Lovina dapat dilihat pada lampiran


Keberadaan kawasan Lovina yang sudah terkenal di mancanegara membuat banyak investor datang untuk menanamkan modal dan berbisnis pariwisata di Lovina. Perkembangan kepariwisataan di Lovina menjamur dengan cepat sehingga pihak pemerintah tidak mampu lagi membendung tata ruang yang sekarang menjadi semakin tidak teratur. Tingkat abrasi yang tinggi menyebabkan Lovina kehilangan lahan pasir yang dulu sangat indah dan menjadi tempat wisatawan beraktifitas. Ditambah lagi beberapa fasilitas wisata yang tampak tidak terawat dengan baik. Beberapa isu dan hasil observasi sekilas tersebut kemudian di survei dengan menggunakan kuesioner untuk mendapatkan kejelasan mengenai isu yang berkembang dan untuk mendapat jawaban mengenai harapan wisatawan terhadap perkembangan kepariwisataan Lovina dimasa mendatang.

Isu penting yang terungkap dari hasil survei yaitu ketidakpuasan wisatawan terhadap kebersihan pantai Lovina dan kurang lengkapnya fasilitas-fasilitas wisata di kawasan wisata Lovina. Isu lain yang tidak kalah penting adalah keberadaan pedagang acung di sekitar pantai Lovina. Pedagang acung tersebut telah membuat wisatawan merasa tidak dapat menikmati liburannya di Lovina karena dipaksa dan dikejar-kejar untuk membeli dagangan mereka. Selanjutnya mengenai kondisi toilet umum yang kurang baik dan beberapa fasilitas pemerintah seperti TIC (tourist information center) yang kurang informatif dalam memberikan pelayanan. Keberadaan fasilitas-fasilitas wisata sangat penting namun seperti tidak mendapat perhatian oleh pemerintah maupun oleh masyarakat sekitarnya. Terakhir adalah isu mengenai tour dolphin yang menjadi daya tarik wisata  andalan di kawasan Lovina ternyata dianggap tidak ramah lingkungan karena terkesan memburu dolphin dan membuat dolphin ketakutan. Terlepas dari semua issu negatif yang diperoleh dari hasil survei, ternyata diketahui bahwa ternyata tingkat kepuasan wisatawan tetap tinggi. Bahkan sebagian besar menyatakan kesiapannya untuk merekomendasikan Lovina kepada wisatawan lain.

Ada perbedaaan antara teori yang diadopsi dengan kenyataan yang diperoleh dari hasil survei di Lovina. Untuk di bidang pariwisata, teori tingkah laku pelanggan Kotler diadopsi dengan menyatakan bahwa setiap wisatawan yang puas terhadap pengalamannya berkunjung ke suatu daerah tujuan wisata dipastikan akan memiliki keinginan untuk kembali lagi dan merekomendasikan pengalamannya kepada orang lain. Akantetapi, hasil survei membuktikan bahwa bahwa korelasi antara tingkat kepuasan wisatawan dengan keinginan untuk merekomendasikan Lovina adalah tidak signifikan karena hubungan antara dua variabel yang diukur sangat lemah. Ada banyak faktor yang menyebabkan ketidak cocokan antara teori dan praktek. Salah satu nya adalah ketidak seriusan responden dalam memberikan jawaban atau ada kemungkinan beberapa respoden yang sebenarnya tidak puas akan pengalamannya di Lovina tetapi menyatakan dirinya puas hanya karena ingin menjaga perasaan pemberi kuesioner.

Pembahasan selanjutnya adalah mengenai model yang diciptakan oleh Crouch dan Ritchie (2003) yang mengangkat lima dimensi utama penilaian, antara lain: (1) qualifying and amplifying determinants (2) destination policy (3) planning and development (4) destination management (5) supporting factors and resources.  Tujuan dari model ini adalah untuk mencapai keberlanjutan suatu daerah tujuan wisata dengan meningkatkan kesejahteraan masyarakat lokal dalam suatu daerah baik dalam bentuk kesejahteraan ekonomi, pemeliharaan lingkungan dan peningkatan kualitas hidup. Dari survai, secara tidak langsung diketahui bahwa destination management tidak terlaksana dengan baik. Terlihat dari koordinasi yang kurang antara pemerintah, masyarakat, expatriate, para pengusaha pariwisata dan wisatawan.

Terkait dengan temuan dari penelitian ini diharapkan menjadi pilot project terutama bagi pemerintah kabupaten Buleleng dalam pembentukan rambu-rambu atau referensi dalam merancang ulang strategi perencanaan dan manajemen pengelolaan kawasan wisata (destination strategic planning & management).  Dari hasil pembahasan diatas maka dapat ditegaskan bahwa hal paling urgen yang perlu dilakukan pemerintah dan pengelola pariwisata di kawasan Lovina adalah membersihkan pantai Lovina dari sampah maupun dari pedagang acung yang mengganggu wisatawan. Fasilitas wisata yang harus menjadi prioritas utama untuk diperbaiki adalah toilet umum, papan petunjuk atau papan informasi untuk wisatawan dan pusat informasi untuk wisatawan. Dalam hal promosi, image positif berupa pantai Lovina yang indah, tenang dan keramahtamahan penduduk lokal bisa dijadikan bahan promosi yang bagus untuk melakukan positioning dengan menggunakan dolphin sebagai maskot Lovina.


Berdasarkan hasil penelitian dan pembahasan diatas maka dapat ditarik kesimpulan wisatawan hanya merasa puas terhadap kualitas hotel dan keramahtamahan penduduk lokal di Lovina. Sedangkan,  terhadap fasilitas toilet umum, tourist information board dan tourist information center, wisatawan jelas menunjukkan ketidak puasan. Selanjutnya, wisatawan sebagian besar memberikan nilai netral untuk fasilitas-fasilitas seperti restaurant di dalam dan diluar hotel, money changer, communication services, shopping facilities, guide services, kualitas jalan, arus lalu lintas, jarak ke Lovina. Namun tingkat kepuasan wisatawan  secara umum berdasarkan keseluruhan pengalamannya berkunjung di kawasan wisata Lovina cukup tinggi. Ditinjau dari segi hubungan,ternyata tidak ada hubungan yang signifikan antara tingkat kepuasan wisatawan dengan keinginannya untuk merekomendasikan Lovina kepada orang lain. Pada akhir kuesioner, wisatawan menyatakan bahwa Lovina adalah kawasan wisata yang indah, tenang dan penduduknya sangat ramah.Harapan wisatawan agar pantai bersih dari pedagang acung dan sampah, selain itu toilet umum, trotoar dan papan informasi agar menjadi prioritas dalam pengelolaan kawasan wisata Lovina

Seluruh stakeholder kawasan wisata Lovina agar berkolaborasi untuk menjaga kebersihan pantai dari limbah padat maupun cair. Kolaborasi ini agar dilakukan secara berkelanjutan karena kebersihan pantai Lovina menyangkut image Lovina di mata wisatawan dan merupakan faktor penting dalam pemilihan daerah tujuan wisata. Keberadaan pedagang acung di pantai Lovina harus segera di tangani dengan baik untuk memberikan kenyamanan kepada wisatawan yang sedang berlibur dan disisi lain agar tidak menimbulkan konflik dengan masyarakat lokal. Keberadaan toilet, papan informasi dan pusat informasi agar lebih diperhatikan sehingga memberikan pelayanan lebih baik lagi di masa mendatang.



Chon, K. S & Mayer, K. J. 1995. Destination Competitiveness models in tourism and their application to Las Vegas, Journal of Tourism Systems and Quality Management, 1(2,3,4), pp. 227–46.

Crouch, G. I & Ritchie, B. J. R. 1999. Tourism, competitiveness, and societal prosperity, Journal of Business Research, 44(3), pp. 137–52.

d’Hauteserre, A. 2000. Lessons in managed destination competitiveness: the case of Foxwoods Casino Resort, Tourism Management, 21(1), pp. 23–32.

Faulkner, B., Opperman, M. and Fredline, E. 1999. Destination competitiveness: an exploratory examination of South Australia’s core attractions, Journal of Vacation Marketing, 5(2), pp. 125–39.

Goeldner, C. R. & Ritchie, J. R. B. 2003. Tourism: Principles, Practices, Philosophies. New York: Wiley.

Hanlan, Janet., Fuller, Don & Wilde, Simon. 2006. Destination Decision Making: The Need for a Strategic Planning and Management Approach, Tourism and Hospitality Planning and Development, vol 3, no 3, pp. 209-221.

Hassan, S. S. 2000. Determinants of market competitiveness in an environmentally sustainable tourism industry, Journal of Travel Research, 38(3), pp. 239–45.

Hoffman, Douglas. K & Bateson, John. E.G. 1997. Essensials of Services Marketing, NewYork: The Dryden Press.

Kotler, P & Bowen, J.T. & Makens J.C. 2006. Marketing for hospitality and tourism, Pearson Education, Inc., New Jersey.

Lewis, R.C. & Chambers, R.E. & Chacko, H.E. 1995. Marketing leadership in hospitality: foundations and practices, Van Nostrand Reinhold, USA.

Pearce, D. G. 1997. Competitive destination analysis in Southeast Asia, Journal of Travel Research, 35(4), pp.16–24.

Smart traveler website. 2007. http://www.smartraveller.gov.au/zw-cgi/view/Advice/Indonesia. Diakses pada tanggal 20 August 2007.

Sudibya, Bagus, 2003, Prospektif Agrowisata dan Ekowisata di Kabupaten Buleleng Propinsi Bali (Makalah ini disampaikan pada Seminar menjadikan Buleleng sebagai Daerah Tujuan Wisata Agrotourisme dan Ekotourisme pada tanggal 25 Agustus 2003).

Suwantoro, Gamal, 1997, Dasar-dasar Pariwisata, Yogyakarta: PT Andi.

Wahab, Salah, 1989, Pemasaran Pariwisata, Jakarta : PT Pradnya Paramita.

Zikmund, William G, 2003, Business Research Methods, Thompson Learning, USA.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Bali’s image as a tourist destination- a perspective of Australian tourists after bomb Bali

artikel ditulis oleh Putu Indah Rahmawati

Telah di publikasikan dalam Jurnal Pariwisata, Vol. 13, No.2, Juli 2008, Halaman : 106-116

Diterbitkan oleh Pusat Penelitian dan Pengabdian kepada Masyarakat Sekolah Tinggi Pariwisata Trisakti

Akreditasi Dikti No: 55a/Dikti/Kep/2006

executive summary

Tourist’s decision in choosing destinations has been influenced by several factors, such as economic, technology, politic, social and culture (Lewis et al. 1995). Any publication aboutBali, both positive and negative release will influence the images of the previous and potential tourists. This will be the big issues in redesigning an effective marketing and positioning strategy forBaliafter bomb. Therefore, the aim of this research is to assess the images of Bali as a tourist destination in the Australian tourist perspective. This study reveals that images of Bali were positively influenced by gender and types of respondents’ variables.  Visitors have more positive images rather than non-visitors. Similarly, male store more positive images than female. Non visitors and female respondents tend to think more about the risk to visit Bali while for visitors and male respondents travel warning only give little influence to their decision to travel. Positive images remain strong in Australian perspective despite the negative news about Bali. Finally, the study provides some recommendations for Bali tourism authority in redesigning promotion campaign.

1.0               INTRODUCTION


Tourist’s decision in choosing destinations has been influenced by several factors, such as economic, technology, politic, social and culture (Lewis et al. 1995). These factors can be significantly created public awareness and promoted positive images. On the other hand, negative images can also have profound impacts in destination marketing, in particular, civil war, natural disasters and men-made disasters (Kotler et al. 2006); as a consequence, negative images increase the challenge for destination marketers to promoting a country into international tourist market. The initially images of a destination is difficult to change, visitors make a destination choice based on a previously-held images of the destination.

According to Touhino in Henkel, et al, “ image can be either a mental image of a product created by a marketing department, or an associative image of a product that is developed by consumer”.  The images that stored by the travelers about the tourist destination would be extensively influenced by numerous information source as well as the travel agent or tour operator influencing destination image and choice, particularly for the international destinations (Baloglu & Mangaloglu, 2001:2). Therefore, the tourist destination has a strong dependence of the positive image spread by the media publication or promotion. The negative publication obviously will ruin the promotion effort and marketing strategy of the tourist destination.

Based on the several research findings, “Image has been proven to be a pivotal factor in travellers’ decision process and destination selection behavior (Gunn, 19972; Gartner, 1993; Goodrich, 1978; Woodside and Lysonski, 1989; Um and Crompton, 1990). Stabbler in Jenkins (1999) stated that there are many factors influencing the formation of a consumers’ destination image. This can be seen in the following diagram.

Bali island-Indonesia is well-known as the isle of God with its mystical charm, unique way of life and wonderful scenery. Tourists spent lot of money on this island and the community has benefited largely from tourism industry. However, Baliglorious time is immediately changed after a series of disasters; bomb blast in 2002 and 2005, serial of drug cases of Australian tourists, tsunami issues. Those occasions become the background reasons for the Australian government to establish new the travel warning to Indonesiainclude Baliisland in 18 July 2007. (http://www.smartraveller.gov.au/zw-cgi/view/Advice/Indonesia, 2007). Again, travel warning can influence the images of Bali island in the prospective tourists and also will impactIndonesia’s economic indirectly.

According to Suparwoko (2005; 148) “Tourism inBalihas been the primary contributor not only to the regional government income but also to the national income”. In addition, The United Nation Development Program (UNDP) reports that Bali attracted over one million foreign visitors flying directly toBalisince 1994. Tourism industry employed around 58,000 people and give contribution more than 60% ofBali’s economy and 20% resident highly depend on tourism industry (UNDP 2003).

Baliis a top tourist destination particularly for Australians. Moreover, TravelMole reported that Bali is nowAustralia’s fourth most popular holiday destination, behindNew Zealand,Thailandand theUSAand its share of the total Australian holiday market has grown by 44.5 per cent over the most recent half year (www.travelmole.com, 2007). Australian market has been becoming the second main market to Bali just afterJapansince 2001. Table about direct tourist arrival toBalifom 15 main market in 2001 to 2005 can be seen in appendix 1.

Unfortunately, the number of Australian tourists comes to visit Bali after the second bomb in Balidropped from 249,001 in 2005 to 117969 in 2006.  Apparently, numerous negative publications after bomb and Australian travel warning to Indonesiaespecially to Bali influenced prospective visitor decision to visit Bali. However, in 2007, after a series of promotions and recovery program, the Australian market to Baliis returning. It can be seen from table in appendix 1 that in the first half of 2007 was around 30,000 more than for the same time last year (www.travelmole.com, 2007).

Considering that Australian market is very important for the tourism in Bali, therefore it is essential to assessBaliimages in Australian perspective. The research result will be very useful in planning the marketing strategy for Australian market as well as improving tourism development inBali.

2.0                        METHODOLOGY

Since the purpose of this research is to find out aboutBaliimages in Australian visitors and non-visitors perceptions, therefore there are two types of respondent were surveyed. The respondents are; (1) Australian tourists who never been to Bali, (2) Australian tourists who already visitBali. Data collected inMelbourneutilized snowball random sampling. In this case, respondents help researcher to find other respondents. This will save time especially in finding respondents who ever been to Bali due to limited time that researcher has.

Data collected through questionnaire and in-depth interview regarding respondent socio-demographic and perceptions aboutBali. First section of the question list will indentify visitor and non-visitor respondent then continue with the list of question about Bali images in their perspective and ended by several questions related with respondent socio-demographic (complete list of question can be seen in the appendix 2).

Both survey instruments consisted of questions that asked the respondents to mentions the top three images ofBalias a tourist destination, as well as rating all images listed on a five-point Likert-type scale to determine the importance of each image to the respondents. Attributes selected similar to the images characteristic used by Echtner and Ritchie in Henkel, et al (2006)  and Chaudhary (2000) which focused on the images of  tourist destination. The questionnaire of the survey contained 27 questions; the highlights of the measurement are stated as below:

  1. Dependent variables will be measured by scaling.
  • Quality ofBalias a tourist destination, question No.7 was measured on 5-point scales

very low quality 1 2 3 4 5 very high quality 

  • Image ofBaliin respondent perspective, question No.9 was measured on 5-point scales

 strongly disagree 1 2 3 4 5 strongly agree

  1. Independent variables were measured by nominal scale where objects were labeled for respondents to choose from. This was applied to all questions except No. 8,10, 14, and 15.
  2. Open ended questions were analyzed by qualitative analysis method. This applied to questions No. 8,10, 14, and 15.

Finally, data which are gathered from the questionnaire were transferred into the statistical software package (SPSS). Afterward, a numerous of statistical methods utilized to asses the exploratory data collected; first, frequency distribution (descriptive analysis) – “a set data organised by summarising the number of times a particular value of a variable occurs” (Zikmund 2003, p403), was used for data the respondent profiles in the survey was identified through frequency analysis. In terms of the adequacy, the KMO value needs to be higher than 0.5 or close to 1. Moreover, the significance of Bartletts test of Sphericity is smaller than 0.05, meaning factor analysis is suitable procedure to analyse the data and the Cumulative % of Total variance must to be more than 60% where the variance can be explained by the factor. Third, the reliability coefficients with extracted domains were computed to measure the internal consistency among items and the value needs to be bigger than 0.6.

Then, multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) were utilised in order to assess the test the mean different between groups, made for two or more dependent variables (Zikmund 2003). If the significance is bigger than .000, its means that the Box’s Test indicates the Multivariate test is a appropriate methods and Multivariable tests are used to assess the differences between the groups. Hence, if the significance is less than 0.05, then a multivariate effect has occurred. With regard to other tests, Levene’s test is the pre-requisite for the Test of between Subjects Effects. To be qualified for the test the significance must be bigger than 0.05. Test of Between Subjects Effects shows which variables have significantly different means where means need to have a significance to show that means are significantly different.

3.0                        RESULTS

3.1                                                Demographic profile of visitors

There are 88 valid respondents generated from the survey. Majority of the respondent never been to Bali (69.3%) and only 30.7% have been toBali. However, most of them heard about Bali (96.6%), only 3.4% never heard aboutBali. This is reveals that Bali quite well known inAustraliaboth with positive and negative images. In term of age, majority of the respondents are between 20-29, while, other groups have quite similar proportion. Respondents tend to be relatively highly level of education, about 43% having finished their education at bachelor degree. Details of the figures can be seen in the table 1.0 below.

Table 1.0 Description of survey respondents

Gender Frequency (%) Occupational Group Frequency (%)
Male 46.6 Director 15.9
Female 53.4 Professional 4.5
Technical Profession 8


Clerical/ administrative 18.2
Age Frequency Service / sale personal 17
16-19 13.6 Others 36.4
20-29 36.4 Total


30-39 20.5 Annual Gross Income Group Frequency
40-49 15.9 A$8000 or less


50-59 11.4 A$8000 -A$16,500


60 or over 2.3 A$8000-A$33,000






Level of education qualification Frequency A$49,501-A$66,000


(%) A$66,001-A$82,500


Primary school 3.4 A$82,501-A$99,000


Secondary school 35.2 more than 99,001


Vocational education 9.1
Bachelor degree 43.2 Total


Master or Doctoral degree 9.1 Have been visited Bali Frequency




Marital Status Frequency no


Single 65.9 total


De facto 14.8 Have heard about Bali Frequency
Married without children 10.2 yes


Married with children 9.1 no




Current Position Frequency Total


Employee 61.4
Self employee 6.8
Housewife/ man 15.9
Student 14.8
Unemployed 1.1


Source : Data analysis (2007)

3.2                                                Factor analysis

After factor analysis process, there were some variables dropped. The remaining 13 variables were grouped into six factors which were named as follow: tourist attractions, poor environment, low quality public facilities and services, attractive leisure activities, good tourist facilities and unsafe from terrorism. The tourist attractions consist of: rich of cultural heritage, magnificent scenery and local people. Poor environment consist of unsafe drinking water, poor road quality, high level of beggar and cheater. Attractive leisure activities consist of beautiful beaches and exotic nightlife entertainment, good tourist facilities consist of good shopping facilities and good transportation.

Table 2.0 is the indications for the sampling adequacy, the accompanying KMO value (.646 bigger than 0.5) and Barletts test of Sphericity was .000 smaller than 0.05 which mean the factor analysis data could be considered as an appropriate technique to be used in the study. Further, the total variance showed that the total cumulative % was 72.391% which is over 60% which indicates the items contained in the data set are reliable. Hence, the identified factors can be utilised for further analysis in MANOVAS test.

Table 2.0 Factor analysis

KMO= .646



BT =.000123456Rich of cultural heritage.943     Magnificent scenery.587     Local people.454     Unsafe drinking water .798    Poor road quality .759    High level of beggar and cheater .426    Low quality of public service  .854   Low quality of public facilities  .814   Beautiful beaches   .909  Exotic nightlife entertainment   .491  Good shopping facilities    .767 Good transportation    .432 Unsafe from terrorism     .709Variance

Total variance=72.391%21.144%35.315%42.281%48.242%53.401%57.866%

Source : data analysis (2007)

3.3                                                MANOVA Analysis

The use of MANOVA test is to determine the different images of Bali in Australian perspective between visitors/non-visitors and different variables (gender, age, education, income groups). This is can be seen in Table 3.0.

Table 3.0 MANOVA test

  Visitor/non-visitor Gender Age Education Income
Box’s test: Sig>.000






Multivariate: sig<.05






Factor 1=.094 Factor 1=.871 Factor 1=.107 Factor 1=.007 Factor 1=.401
Factor 2=.351 Factor 2=.472 Factor 2=.514 Factor 2=.553 Factor 2=.356
Factor 3=.928 Factor 3=.610 Factor 3=.011 Factor 3=.355 Factor 3=.193
Levene’s test : sig>.05 Factor 4=.838 Factor 4=.823 Factor 4=.165 Factor 4=.006 Factor 4=.043
Factor 5=.512 Factor 5=.171 Factor 5=.192 Factor 5=.777 Factor 5=.694
Factor 6=.670 Factor 6=.085 Factor 6=.776 Factor 6=.440 Factor 6=.228
Factor 1=.011 Factor 1=.154 Factor 1=.220 Factor 1=.412 Factor 1=.416
Factor 2=.162 Factor 2=.001 Factor 2=.650 Factor 2=.250 Factor 2=.633
Test of between subjects Factor 3=.863 Factor 3=.809 Factor 3=.207 Factor 3=.047 Factor 3=.397
 effects : Sig<.05 Factor 4=.008 Factor 4=.980 Factor 4=.206 Factor 4=.467 Factor 4=.090
Factor 5=.113 Factor 5=.332 Factor 5=.554 Factor 5=.536 Factor 5=.854
Factor 6=.180 Factor 6=.048 Factor 6=.093 Factor 6=.685 Factor 6=.350

        Source : data analysis (2007)


  • Visitors/ non-visitors- the significance (0.529) of The Box’s test which was bigger than .000 therefore the test can be continued.  In relation to Multivariate test, it showed that the significance (.000) was smaller than 0.05, meaning there were significance differences between visitors/ non-visitors and images of Bali and confirms that the multivariate effect has occurred.
  • Gender variable – the significance (.913) of the Box’s test which was bigger than .000 thus, the test could be continued. However, the Multivariate test, it showed that the significance (.006) was smaller than 0.05, there were significance differences between visitors/ non-visitors and images of Bali and confirms that the multivariate effect has occurred.
  • Age variable – the significance (0.296) of The Box’s test which was bigger than .000 therefore the test can be continued.  In relation to Multivariate test, it showed that the significance (.071) was bigger than 0.05, meaning there were no differences between age groups and images of Bali and confirms that the multivariate effect has rejected.
  • Education variable – the Box’s test (Sig. = 0.461) was bigger than .000 which is accepted for using Multivariate test. The Multivariate test (Sig. = 0.089) was not meet the requirement. Its means that there were no differences between education variables and images of Bali and confirms that the multivariate effect has rejected.
  • Income variable – The Box’s test (Sig. = 0.315 greater than .000) and the Multivariate test (Sig. = 0.539) exhibited the study can not be proceeded to the next stage of data analysis.


3.3.1                                        Images of Bali in visitors and non-visitors perspective

The statistical analysis found out that Australian have more positive images than negatives images. This can be seen in table 4.0. The images of Bali were slightly different between visitors’ perspective and non-visitors perspective both for positive and negative images. Based on mean scores, positive images of visitors were 2.0788 higher than negative images. Similarly, positive images of non-visitors were 1.8329 higher than their negative images. Moreover, positive images of visitors 0.2459 higher than non-visitors positive images. This is means that Bali tourism authority still has chance to promote despite the negative images spread in the media because Australian especially for those who ever visited Bali already has positive images in their perspective. Positioning of Bali as a wonderful tourist destination remains strong in Australian tourist perspective.


Table 4.0 Images of Bali in visitors and non-visitors perspective

Images Visitors (mean) Non-visitors (mean)
Tourist attraction



Interesting leisure activities



Good tourist facilities



Total positive images



Low level safety



Low quality public facilities and services



Unsafe from terrorism



Total negative images



Source : data analysis (2007)

3.3.2                                            Images of Bali and Australian perspective based on gender

Based on mean score in table 5.0, it can be seen that male more concern about Bali’s tourist attraction and interesting leisure activities and only give little attention for the negative images. While female almost the same proportion of positive images as male but have more concern about negative images. Therefore, the female negative images higher than male have.

Table 5.0  Images of Bali and Australian perspective based on gender

Gender Male Female
tourist attraction



interesting leisure activities



good tourist facilities



total positive images



low level safety



low quality public facilities and services



Unsafe from terrorism



total negative images



Source : data analysis (2007)

3.4                              Qualitative Analysis

In the questionnaire, respondents were asked to mention 5 images that they have. Researcher adds this question in order to uncover the hidden images of Bali in Australian perspective. There were 37 images come up in the list. Then after the descriptive analysis, it can be seen clearly in the charts that beaches were the most popular images then continued by friendly local people and cheap holiday destination.

In regard of the level of satisfaction, from 27 respondents who ever been to Bali, there were 11 people very satisfied with their visit, 12 people satisfied and only 4 people said neutral.  Mostly, said that travel warning is irrelevant and terrorism can be happen everywhere anytime in the world. Visitors said that travel warning only give little influence to their decision. However, non-visitors mostly said that travel warning is good for the travelers and it will influence their decision to travel.

4.0                        DISCUSSION

This study sheds some valuable findings in regard of the images of Bali as a tourist destination in Australian perspective. Despite the bad images spread on the electronic and printed media in Australia, Bali’s positive images remain strong in Australian perspective. Beaches were the most popular images that come up as the highest score from first images to third images, and then continued by friendly local people and inexpensive holiday destination. In the open ended questions some interesting images come up which were not asked in the questionnaire, such as monkeys, banana leaves, palm trees, chickens, market, surf, Hindu population, colourful, motorbikes, frangipani, Australian in jails.



The result of the research indicates that images of Bali were positively influenced by gender and types of respondents’ variables.  Visitors have more positive images rather than non-visitors. Similarly, male store more positive images than female. Non visitors and female respondents tend to think more about the risk to visit Bali while for visitors and male respondents travel warning only give little influence to their decision to travel. Positive images remain strong in Australian perspective despite the negative news about Bali.

The findings of this research have several practical implications for the Bali’s tourism authority that Australian tourists remain prospective tourism market for Bali and there are some opportunities to repair the negatives images into positive images by conducting more intensive promotion campaign. Likewise, the promotion should be linear with government program to reduce poverty and increase safety, security, cleanliness, transport systems to increase the tourist satisfaction in visiting Bali.

6.0                        LIMITATIONS

Due to the limited time that researcher has in collecting the data therefore only less than 100 respondent were surveyed. Consequently, the generalization of this result can not applicable to the total population. However, despite the limitation, the findings found some valuable insights for Bali tourism authority in promoting Bali as a tourist destination.




Baloglu. Seyhmus & Mangaloglu. Mehmet (2001) “ tourism destination images ofTurkey,Egypt,Greece, andItalyas perceived by US-based operators and travel agents”, Tourism Management, vol.22, pp.1-9.

Chaudhary. Manjula (2000) “India’s image as a tourist destination – a perspective of foreign tourists”, Tourism Management, vol. 21, pp.293-297.

Henkel.Roy, Henkel.Pattaya, Agrusa. Wendy, Agrusa. Jerome, Tanner. John (2006) “Thailandas a tourist destination: Perceptions of international visitors and thai residents”, Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, vol.11, no.3. pp.269-284.

Jenkins. H. Olivia (1999) “Understanding and Measuring Tourist Destination Images”, International Journal of Tourism Research, vol. 1, pp. 1-15.

Kotler, P & Bowen, J.T. & Makens J.C. 2006, Marketing for hospitality and tourism, Pearson Education, Inc.,New Jersey.

Lewis, R.C. & Chambers, R.E. & Chacko, H.E. 1995, Marketing leadership in hospitality: foundations and practices, Van Nostrand Reinhold,USA.

McCarthy. John 1994, “Are sweet dreams made of this? Tourism in Bali and Eastern Indonesia”,The Indonesia resources and Information Program, Australia.

Pike. Steve (2002) “ Destination image analysis- a review of 142 papers from 1973 to 2000.

Smart traveler website, 2007, (http://www.smartraveller.gov.au/zw-cgi/view/Advice/Indonesia,  viewed in 20 August 2007)

The Age, 2007, (http://www.the age.com.au viewed 22 August 2007)

Zikmund, William G, 2003, Business Research Methods, ThompsonLearning,USA.

http://www.travelmole.com/stories/1121835.php?mpnlog=1, viewed 10 of September 2007.




8.0           APPENDIX




FROM 15 MAIN MARKET IN 2001-2005


NATIONALITY Rank 2001 Rank 2002 Rank 2003 Rank 2004 Rank 2005
JAPAN I 296,282 I 301,380 I 185,751 I 326,397 I 310,129
AUSTRALIA II 238,857 II 183,561 III 139,018 II 267,520 II 249,001
TAIWAN III 154,575 III 168,756 II 170,533 III 183,624 III 128,194
SOUTH OF KOREA IX 35,634 VIII 41,036 VI 46,365 IV 80,273 IV 78,146
UK IV 116,323 IV 96,806 V 50,043 VII 55,546 V 75,845
GERMANY V 84,028 V 72,599 IV 53,374 V 70,050 VI 73,998
MALAYSIA XIV 17,496 XIII 19,960 IX 34,820 VI 62,974 VII 66,568
USA VI 68,359 VI 50,007 VIII 35,937 VIII 50,516 VIII 51,739
FRANCE VII 42,944 VII 43,623 XI 29,628 X 40,441 IX 44,869
NETHERLAND VIII 40,633 IX 39,638 X 32,567 XI 32,805 X 41,998
SINGAPORE VIII 18,925 XI 27,919 VII 42,931 IX 43,113 XI 35,164
ITALY X 32,939 X 32,531 XIII 12,130 XIV 19,964 XII 19,388
NEW ZEALAND XI 26,018 XII 22,388 XII 15,624 XIII 20,231 XIII 17,182
SWITZERLAND 16,614 13,543 9,727 XV 16,035 XIV 17,155
PRC 1,898 4,232 7,524 XII 21,651 XV 17,137

Source:BaliTourism Board, 2007.

Jurnal Ilmiah PARIWISATA
Akreditasi Dikti No: 55a/Dikti/Kep/2006
ISSN 1411-1527
Vol. 13, No.2, Juli 2008
Halaman : 106-116
Diterbitkan oleh Pusat Penelitian
dan Pengabdian kepada Masyarakat
Sekolah Tinggi Pariwisata Trisakti
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment