Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism

ISSN: 1502-2250 (Print) 1502-2269 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/sjht20

The professional relationship between tour guides

and tour operators

Gurel Cetin & Sukru Yarcan

To cite this article: Gurel Cetin & Sukru Yarcan (2017): The professional relationship between
tour guides and tour operators, Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, DOI:
10.1080/15022250.2017.1330844

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15022250.2017.1330844

Published online: 19 Jun 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 63

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=sjht20

Download by: [Istanbul Universitesi Kutuphane ve Dok] Date: 18 July 2017, At: 12:59
SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY AND TOURISM, 2017
https://doi.org/10.1080/15022250.2017.1330844

The professional relationship between tour guides and tour

operators
a,b
Gurel Cetin and Sukru Yarcanc
a
European Tourism Research Institute (ETOUR), Mid Sweden University, Sundsvall, Sweden; bFaculty of
Economics, Tourism Management Department, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey; cFaculty of Economics
and Administrative Sciences, Tourism Management Department, Nisantasi University, Istanbul, Turkey

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Tour operators and tour guides are major stakeholders during Received 1 February 2016
production and operation of organized package tours. However, Accepted 12 May 2017
the relationship between them received little attention in tourism
KEYWORDS
literature. This study intends to identify the dimensions of the Tour guides; guiding roles;
relationship between the two parties and importance attained to tour operators; travel
different guiding roles both by tour operators and guides. It also industry; tourism industry
explores the attitude gaps between tour operators and guides on
various guiding attributes. The analyzed data were collected from
110 professional tour guides and 56 inbound tour operators.
Numerous differences in perceptions were identified regarding
importance attained to foreign language skills, group cohesion,
holiday experience creation, entertainment, representation skills,
contract compliance, image creation, itinerary compliance and
identification with tour operators.

Introduction
The tourist experience includes a bundle of services and products consumed at the desti-
nation and interactions with the host community. The main tourism services are accom-
modation, travel, tour operating, tour guide services, transportation, catering, recreation
and tourist attractions. Package tours, composed of various components of these services,
form a significant segment of the organized travel market. Tour operators and tour guides
are important stakeholders in the production and consumption of organized trips, respect-
ively. However, although tour guides have been a part of the travel industry since the days
of the “Grand Tour” (Ap & Wong, 2001; Black & Ham, 2005), the guides (Zillinger, Jonasson,
& Adolfsson, 2012) and their relationships with tour operators have received less attention
(Valkonen, Huilaja, & Koikkalainen, 2013), compared to other components of organized
package tours.
The tour guide is usually a local who leads visitors to tourist spaces and interprets the
sites visited. In organized cultural tourism, the guide is accountable for a favorable holiday
experience. The tour guide ensures the provision of multiple tourism services, coordinates
different package tour components and services in a safe environment by acting on behalf

CONTACT Gurel Cetin gurelc@istanbul.edu.tr Faculty of Economics, Tourism Management Department, Istanbul
University, Beyazit, Fatih, 34452 Istanbul, Turkey
© 2017 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
2 G. CETIN AND S. YARCAN

of both the foreign outbound tour operator (OTO) in the tourist-generating country and
the domestic inbound tour operator (ITO) at the destination (Dahles, 2002; Pond, 1993;
Yarcan, 2007).
The tour guide reproduces the destination environment through conveyed knowledge
of the culture, history, meanings, narratives and images of the area (Wynn, 2005). A guided
tour is a convenient product that enables tourists to visit and comprehend the destination
characteristics with relative ease in a short time at low cost (Cohen, Ifergan, & Cohen,
2002). The organized tour is a means to manage tourism through locals (e.g. guides)
and thus a guided tour prevents visitors from encountering problems an individual trave-
ler might face and reduces any frustration that might arise in an unfamiliar environment
(Schmidt, 1979).
When leading a tour, the guide acts as a culture broker and helps tourists to acquire
different meanings by interpreting what they view (Williams, 2013). Nevertheless, there
is a lack of knowledge concerning the guide’s role in tourism system (Jonasson &
Scherle, 2012). Empirical research on guiding concentrates on roles of the guide and
the quality of their services. Few studies have discussed guides as employees of tour oper-
ators (Valkonen et al., 2013). The quality of a tour guide’s services can successfully make or
break a tour. Yet, there is scant research about the tour operators’ view on guiding and also
on the guides’ perceptions of the travel industry (Salazar, 2006). However, it is likely that
these two interdependent stakeholders of organized cultural package tours may perceive
different attributes of the profession as important. Therefore, this study aims to analyze the
qualities of guides and guiding services from the tour operators’ and guides’ perspectives
and explore the differences in respective perceptions of these two interdependent
stakeholders.

Roles of the tour guides in travel industry

A common tour guide definition implies that the guide is a professional employee who
leads, communicates with and informs visitors about the destination in an efficient and
interesting way in the language of their choice. A guide is usually a resident who holds
a license issued by local authorities and works on behalf of travel firms for a fee, wage
or salary (European Federation of Tourist Guide Associations, 2014; World Federation of
Tourist Guide Associations, 2014). A guide is an interpreter, educator, ambassador of the
host society, and an interaction facilitator between the local culture, locals and tourists,
either foreign or domestic. A guide is also a knowledge holder and provider, instructor,
culture broker, translator, entertainer, actor, storyteller, missionary, mentor, pathfinder,
middleman, intermediary, buffer, care taker, organizer, salesperson, shepherd and
decision-maker (Cohen, 1985; Dahles, 2002; Hansen & Mossberg, 2016; Holloway, 1981;
Yarcan, 2007; Yu, Weiler, & Ham, 2001; Zhang & Chow, 2004). A guide as a leader takes
the responsibility for the smooth operation of a tour and wellbeing of clients (Larsen &
Meged, 2013; Pond, 1993).
Thus, a guide has variety of professional roles that depend on the characteristics of their
audience. However as these numerous guiding roles conflict, it is hard for tour guides to
maintain a balanced relationship between the visitors, tour operators, travel agencies,
service suppliers, regularity bodies and locals (Weiler & Ham, 2002). The power relations
between different stakeholders in tourism industry influence the roles of guides (Table 1).
 SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY AND TOURISM 3

Table 1. Tour stakeholders and tour guide roles.

Tour stakeholders Tour guide roles
Visitors, tourists Interpreter, instructor, leader, educator, entertainer, etc.
Tour operators, travel companies Employee, representative, organizer, manager, etc.
Tourism service suppliers Coordinator, entrepreneur, salesperson, intermediary, etc.
Destination, locals Representative, ambassador, facilitator, middleman, etc.

Cohen (1985) identifies four main types of guiding roles: instrumental, interactional,
social and communicative (Table 2). Other researchers have also adopted these roles
(e.g. Mak, Wong, & Chang, 2011).
A tour guide is responsible for conducting the tour itinerary smoothly on behalf of the
tour operator (Mak et al., 2011). Following Cohen (1985), orienting, directing and conduct-
ing the tour, setting its schedule and pace, leading visitors to tourist spaces, maintaining
tourists’ comfort and safety, and keeping tour group members together (Cohen, 1985) are
instrumental guiding roles. The management of relationships with locals, representation
and cultural mediation (Geva & Goldman, 1991) are interactional roles that refer to the
guide as a middleman between tourists, hosts, tour operators and other parties involved.
A guide introduces the destination and hosts to the clients (Schmidt, 1979; Zhang & Chow,
2004), coordinates the tour and handles potential problems.
A tour guide as a leader, initiates social interaction and minimizes conflicts within a tour
group. The leadership role requires emotional intelligence, conflict resolution capability
and skills in managing group dynamics (Cohen, 1985; Holloway, 1981), which are all
social guiding roles. Ensuring entertainment, humor, animation, group cohesion, discipline
and morale is also a crucial component of the social guiding role (Cohen, 1985). Conveying
information and knowledge is a significant communicative role (Cohen, 1985; Holloway,
1981) that requires a high level of acquired knowledge (Mak et al., 2011). Guides need
to interpret sites for a variety of individual tourists and tour groups (Gelbman & Maoz,
2012). An interesting site presentation creates an enjoyable experience for visitors
(Bryon, 2012) that printed media cannot.
The determinants of tour guide performance in the context of an organized package
tour have been discussed in several studies. Heung (2007) emphasizes presentation and
communication skills, professional attitude, knowledge and personal integrity as desirable
guiding attributes. Reisinger and Waryszak (1994) explored guiding quality based on visi-
tors’ perspectives and found that the important factors are being professional, friendly,
informative, helpful, fulfilling tourists’ needs and problem-solving, proficiency in foreign
languages, knowledge of the destination and of visitors’ culture. According to Salazar
(2006), knowledge competency and foreign language proficiency are primary qualities
required for performing the profession.

Table 2. Relationship between guiding roles and guide’s functional responsibilities.

Instrumental Interactional Social Communicative
Management Mediation Group cohesion Information provision
Organization Relationship facilitation Entertainment Interpretation
Leadership Representation Socialization Presentation
Source: Adopted from Cohen (1985).
4 G. CETIN AND S. YARCAN

The tour guide also informs visitors on and involves them in appropriate cultural and
environmental behavior (Randall & Rollins, 2009; Weiler & Ham, 2002). Hence, guides
play a key role in attaining sustainable tourism, modifying tourist behavior and improving
fair trade in the travel industry. However, there are concerns about guides’ attitudes,
knowledge, skills and behavior. In commercialized destinations, there is a gap between
the guides’ responsibilities and their actual portrayed behavior (Overend, 2012).

Professional relationship between tour guides and tour operators

In order to design and produce an organized packaged tour for a destination, a foreign
OTO cooperates with a domestic ITO. The ITO realizes pre-tour arrangements, gathers
prices and rates, reserves guides and other services based on the developed and pro-
posed itineraries. The ITO coordinates different suppliers at the destination on behalf
of the OTO (Figure 1). A tour guide takes care of intangible tour components ensuring
that the tour operators’ promises are realized (Geva & Goldman, 1991). In conducting
organized tours, a professional tour guide is the main contact with clients and a valuable
asset for tour operators (Howard, Thwaites, & Smith, 2001). A guide’s performance is
closely associated with the quality of various complementing tour package components
(Wang, Hsieh, & Huan, 2000) and the reputation of tour companies they represent
(Heung, 2007).
Tour group members satisfied with the guiding services trust and build an emotional
connection with the guide accepting the guide’s leadership (Geva & Goldman, 1991).
Therefore, tour operators are very much dependent on guides for the creation of an
enriching holiday experience (Jonasson & Scherle, 2012). However, a guide works within
a power relationship between the tour operator and visitors while on duty. The perform-
ance of a guide is influenced by tour operator’s policies and requirements, which are
beyond the control of the guide (Ap & Wong, 2001). While consuming the package tour
services, clients are beyond the reach of tour operators. Thus, it is hard for a tour operator
to control guiding quality and how the guide represents the company.
In Turkey, most package tours offered to foreign markets are either sold at a very low
profit or below the actual tour cost due to fierce price competition. The ITOs operate tours
at sunk cost expecting to generate future revenues, income and profit. Such market con-
ditions prevail in other destinations too (Ap & Wong, 2001). Consequently, additional
income is generated through optional tour sales and by encouraging shopping, which
become indispensable constituents of most tour itineraries. Volume in optional tour

Figure 1. Package tour production and distribution system.

 SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY AND TOURISM 5

sales and shopping are among the criteria in the evaluation of tour guide performance in
Turkey (Yarcan, 2007), assigning the guide an entrepreneurial role. However, as a guide
transforms into a salesperson, the guiding roles clash with sales orientation efforts
leading to conflicts and deterioration in guiding quality (Mak et al., 2011). Aiming to coun-
terbalance the loss by urging the tour groups to shop, a guide takes financial risks by
accepting to conduct negative fare tours (Wang et al., 2000). The same applies for the
tour operators that urge the guides to generate optional tour sales volume and shopping.
A serious structural problem in the Turkish travel industry is the remuneration of guides.
Although fees for different travel and tourism services rendered by guides are specified
annually, in a harsh competitive environment, they are subject to negotiation. During
low season, tour guides work for fees well below minimum level or without any
payment at all. Only a few guides would survive without the additional income from
optional tour sales and shopping (Ap & Wong, 2001).
Moreover, there are unfavorable aspects of guiding that are imposed by the structure of
the travel industry. Mak et al. (2011) propose that tour guide performance is adversely
affected by the operational policies of the industry. Therefore, by adopting the multiple
stakeholder approach, the present empirical study aims to identify the key guiding roles
and performance criteria from the tour guides’ and tour operators’ perspectives and con-
sequently compare the attitudes of these two interdependent stakeholders of travel
industry.

Methodology
The aim of this study is to examine the qualities assigned to different guiding roles by tour
guides and ITOs. It also explores the perspective differences of tour guides and ITOs
regarding main guiding roles. In order to ensure comparative conclusions, data were col-
lected both from tour guides and ITOs in Istanbul. As of 31 December 2014, there were
more than 4200 licensed guides and 2600 ITOs in Istanbul. A convenience sampling
method was employed for the field survey. A total of 172 questionnaires were distributed
between February and June 2014 (115 to guides and 57 to ITOs). Of the returned question-
naires, 166 were used (110 from guides and 56 from ITOs), representing a 97% response
rate. Six questionnaires were excluded due to missing values and a tendency of providing
“yes” responses.
The study employed a mixed method to frame and measure the qualities of tour guides
in an organized package tour environment using both quantitative and qualitative
approaches. The questionnaires employed to collect the research data were prepared in
three phases. During the first phase, a pool of guiding attributes representing different
guiding roles was generated, based on the literature (Cohen, 1985; Geva & Goldman,
1991; Heung, 2007; Huang, Hsu, & Chan, 2010; Mossberg, 1995; Reisinger & Waryszak,
1994; Wang et al., 2000; Wong, 2001; Yarcan, 2007; Zhang & Chow, 2004). During the
second stage, a total of 21 in-depth interviews were conducted; 12 with tour guides
and 9 with ITO managers, to identify the essential qualities of tour guides. The qualitative
exploratory stage continued until the data saturation was reached. Several grounded
characteristics and attributes for tour guides were identified through interviews by
content analysis. This inductive process revealed a total of 30 guiding attributes.
6 G. CETIN AND S. YARCAN

During the last stage, a pre-test for validity was administered on 16 guides and 5 tour
operator executives. These triangulation processes were employed to enhance the trust-
worthiness of the research. The outcomes were compared and an agreement on the fina-
lized version of the guiding dimensions was reached. A few adjustments were made; a
couple of questions were re-worded and some attributes were either removed or
merged. For example, promptness and timing attributes were grouped under compliance
with the itinerary. Finally, 20 attributes were specified to design 2 questionnaires; one
for tour guides and another for ITOs. The final set of attributes is displayed in Table 3.
The dimensions used to measure guide characteristics in both questionnaires were
derived from the same attribute pool. The first section of the questionnaires included
statements about the characteristics of guides. Respondents were asked to rate (using a
5-point Likert scale) 20 items based on their relative importance. The second section

Table 3. Comparison of ratings by guides and tour operators on guiding characteristics (t-test results).
Item N M SD SEM t df P
Education level Guide 110 4.64 .52 .05 1.777 164 .08
TO 56 4.48 .60 .08
Communication skills Guide 110 4.83 .37 .04 0.549 164 .58
TO 56 4.80 .40 .05
Foreign language Guide 110 4.60 .49 .05 −2.746 164 .007**
TO 56 4.80 .40 .05
Personality Guide 110 4.49 .64 .06 −1.045 164 .30
TO 56 4.58 .49 .07
Leadership Guide 110 4.47 .53 .05 −0.462 164 .64
TO 56 4.51 .54 .07
Group cohesion Guide 110 4.53 .60 .06 −2.315 164 .02*
TO 56 4.73 .45 .06
Knowledge interpretation Guide 110 4.60 .49 .05 −1.884 164 .06
TO 56 4.74 .43 .06
Representation skills Guide 110 4.41 .64 .06 −3.356 164 .00**
TO 56 4.71 .49 .07
Experience creation Guide 110 4.30 .71 .07 −2.386 164 .02*
TO 56 4.56 .53 .07
Image building Guide 110 4.40 .64 .06 −2.306 164 .02*
TO 56 4.62 .55 .07
Physical appearance Guide 110 4.22 .60 .06 −0.974 164 .33
TO 56 4.31 .53 .07
Contract compliance Guide 110 4.41 .53 .05 −6.429 164 .00**
TO 56 4.85 .36 .05
Itinerary compliance Guide 110 4.43 .58 .06 −5.608 164 .00**
TO 56 4.84 .36 .05
Sophistication Guide 110 4.65 .48 .05 −1.521 164 .13
TO 56 4.76 .43 .06
Problem-solving Guide 110 4.60 .53 .05 −1.910 164 .06
TO 56 4.74 .44 .06
Group harmony Guide 110 4.10 .87 .08 −1.689 164 .09
TO 56 4.33 .66 .09
Identification with tour operator Guide 110 4.00 .75 .07 −6.445 164 .00**
TO 56 4.72 .49 .07
Information dissemination Guide 110 4.73 .44 .04 −0,925 164 .36
TO 56 4.80 .40 .05
Entertainment Guide 110 3.96 .92 .09 −2.150 164 .03*
TO 56 4.26 .64 .09
Extra revenue provision Guide 110 3.60 .91 .09 −0.278 164 .78
TO 56 3.56 .89 .12
*Significant at p ≤ .05 level.
**Significant at p ≤ .01 level.
 SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY AND TOURISM 7

gathered demographics and professional information. Open-ended questions were asked

in the third and final section.
The survey for guides was mainly conducted face to face at the Istanbul Chamber of
Tour Guides (IRO) office. Tour operator managers were either visited or the respondents
were informed about the research and after receiving their consent, they were sent the
questionnaire by email. The same approach was used in collecting data from guides as
well. The data were collected anonymously and the respondents were assured that per-
sonal and company information would not be shared with third parties.
Initially, descriptive statistics were measured to identify the participants’ profiles. Mean
values and standard deviations for the attributes were calculated. A comparison was made
based on mean scores of individual items based on the tour guide and tour operator
respondents’ ratings. Group means differences on item ratings were measured to deter-
mine the significant disagreements in perceptions. A bar graph, with the horizontal axis
representing different guiding characteristics and the vertical axis representing guides’
and tour operators’ ratings for each item, was prepared to identify meaningful gaps
between their respective perceptions (Figure 2).

Findings
First, descriptive statistics concerning the profile of the guides and tour operators were
analyzed. The professional experience duration of 110 guides was 22 years on average.
A total of 83 guides stated that they worked at least 75 days during the year and 36 of
these guides stated that they were employed at least 151 days annually. Consequently,
most guide respondents are experienced professionals whose main occupation is

Figure 2. Differences between guides’ and tour operators’ ratings on guiding characteristics.
8 G. CETIN AND S. YARCAN

guiding. A total of 68 guides stated that English is the main language they speak in con-
ducting tours. French (18) and Spanish (9) were the other guiding languages. Most guides
(90) work with at least two ITOs; hence the majority of guides are freelancers. Most guides
(95) work in the cultural tourism market in line with the cultural resources of Istanbul and
Turkey. However, meetings, and incentive organizations (13) and other leisure markets (12)
were also mentioned. The main inbound markets guides lead visitors for are North
America (42), Europe (38) and Southeast Asia (12).
Similar to the guides’ level of professional experience, among 56 ITO respondents the
duration of tourism industry experience on average was 21 years. Concerning professional
status, tour operator respondents identified themselves as managers (38), owners (15) and
operations staff (3), indicating multiple professional positions. Due to their managerial
duties and professional standings, the tour operator respondents would be expected to
have a good view on the ideal qualities of guides and their roles in package tour oper-
ations. The ITOs participating in the research mainly serve cultural travelers (43), function
in meetings and incentive organizations (10), and other leisure markets (3). The tour oper-
ators’ main inbound tourism markets are Europe (25), North America (24), CIS (3), South-
east Asia (2) and Australia (2). Thus, the inbound markets of the guides and tour
operators are a close match.
As stated earlier, the objective of the study is to explore the perspectives of and differ-
ences in guides’ and tour operators’ views on tour guide qualities. Among 20 attributes,
communication skills (
x = 4.82), information dissemination (
x = 4.76), sophisticated knowl-
edge (
x = 4.69) and foreign language (
x = 4.67) received the highest ratings from the
whole sample. The item ranked the lowest by both tour operators (
x = 3.56) and guides
(
x = 3.60) was extra revenue generation.
Since the number of guide respondents was almost twice of tour operator respondents,
the mean values of the same attributes were calculated and it was found that the ratings
by the guides displayed a similar pattern. Communication skills (
x = 4.83), information dis-
semination (
x = 4.73), sophisticated knowledge (
x = 4.65) and education (
x = 4.64) received
the highest scores from guides. Tour operators rated representation skills (
x = 4.85), con-
tract compliance (
x = 4.73), information dissemination (
x = 4.8), sophisticated knowledge
(
x = 4.8) and identification with the tour operator (
x = 4.8) as the most important items.
Consequently, there are differences between the perceptions of guides and tour operators
concerning the professional guiding roles. In order to identify the significance of these
mean differences, t-test analysis was employed. The results are provided in Table 3.
As observed from Table 3, a significant difference was found between guide and tour
operator respondents for foreign language (t = −2.746, p ≤ .01), group cohesion
(t = −2315, p ≤ .05), representation skills (t = −3.356, p ≤ .01), holiday experience creation
(t = −2.386, p ≤ .05), image building (t = −2.306, p ≤ .05), contract compliance (t = −6.429,
p ≤ .01), itinerary compliance (t = −5.608, p ≤ .01), identification with tour operator
(t = −6.445, p ≤ .01) and entertainment (t = −2.150, p ≤ 0.05). Compared to the guides,
tour operators rated all of these dimensions as significantly more important. For
example, tour operators considered the foreign language knowledge level more important
(
x = 4.80) than guides did (
x = 4.60). The guides also perceived group cohesion skills as less
important (
x = 4.53) than tour operator respondents did (
x = 4.73). Holiday experience cre-
ation also deemed significantly more important by tour operators (
x = 4.56) than by guides
 SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY AND TOURISM 9

(
x = 4.30). Tour operators also expected guides to be more entertaining (
x = 4.26) than the
guides did themselves (
x = 3.96).
The largest gaps in perception are observed with respect to the identification with
tour operators, representation skills, image building, contract compliance and itinerary
compliance dimensions (Figure 2). These items are considered as the main themes
that describe the professional relationship between tour guides and tour operators.
The tour operator respondents viewed identification with the tour operator (
x = 4.72 /

x = 4.00), company representation (
x = 4.71 /
x = 4.41), image building for the company
(
x = 4.62 /
x = 4.40), compliance with the guiding agreement (
x = 4.85 /
x = 4.41) and
adhering strictly to the itinerary (
x = 4.84 /
x = 4.43) as significantly more important
than the guides. However, as guides work on a freelance basis by majority and with
different tour operators (82% for this sample), the guides’ ratings on company represen-
tation, loyalty and adhering to the rules of the tour operator as less important than the
tour operators would be expected.

Conclusions and discussion

This study attempted to determine the significance of various professional tour guide
characteristics and attributes from the perspectives of guides and ITOs. The differences
in the perceptions of guides and tour operators on these characteristics were also explored
and discussed. The research revealed that guides and tour operators agreed on the impor-
tance of items that are mostly related to personal qualities. Communication skills, infor-
mation dissemination and sophisticated knowledge received the highest ratings from
both groups of respondents. Such an outcome is in line with studies acknowledging infor-
mation and knowledge communication as the main roles of the guides. However, guides
and tour operators ascribed different ratings to items relating to tour participant and guest
satisfaction and tour operators’ image.

Theoretical contributions
Significant rating differences were identified between guides and tour operator pro-
fessionals in foreign language level, creation of group cohesion, representation skills,
holiday experience creation, tour operator image building, contract compliance, itinerary
compliance, identification with tour operator, and entertainment. As already noted, these
dimensions were all rated higher by tour operator respondents. The attitude gaps
between guides and ITOs can be categorized in two major groups: (1) factors affecting par-
ticipant satisfaction and (2) factors affecting tour operators’ image. Items affecting partici-
pant satisfaction are foreign language level, holiday experience creation, entertainment,
and group cohesion. ITOs rely on their foreign counterparts (OTOs) to promote and sell
the destination’s tourist products as a package. Although individual clients rarely buy
the same package tour twice, the B2B relationship between ITOs and OTOs depends on
creating satisfied clients who return with favorable holiday experiences. Factors affecting
tour operators’ image are representation skills, image building, contract and itinerary com-
pliance, and identification with tour operator. The guide creates an image both for the des-
tination and the tour operator. These images are related and affect each other. Client
satisfaction and favorable brand image creation are necessary for the tour operators to
10 G. CETIN AND S. YARCAN

survive. However, most guides work freelance on a contractual basis and serve different
ITOs for various groups. Hence, they did not rate items related to company commitment
and adherence as highly important as the ITOs did.
Selling optional tours and facilitation of shopping were found as the least important
items both for guides and tour operators. The average rating of the tour operators on
extra revenue generation attribute was lower than the guides. Thus, tour operators
also presume that the salesperson characteristic is not an important dimension for
guiding quality. The majority of the guides (76) stated their employment duration as
less than 151 days per annum. Due to the seasonal nature of inbound tourism
demand in Istanbul, and the concentration of tourist demand during summer (April–
November), tour guides are employed seasonally. Guiding fees neither coincide with
the education level required for the profession nor with the guides’ functional role in
tourism ecosystem. Although additional income in the form of gratitude and commis-
sion is earned, the ability to generate such income is still not considered an important
guiding attribute.

Practical implications
Identification of the gaps between guides and tour operators on professional dimen-
sions has important practical implications on tour guiding profession, guide training,
employee motivation, remuneration and performance assessment. Based on the
present findings, structural problems such as seasonal employment, freelance employ-
ment, lack of social security and short profession duration affect the guides’ identifi-
cation with tour operators and their dedication to provide tour participant
satisfaction. The guides do not view themselves as employees of tour operators and
are not usually affiliated with any single tour operator. Similarly, tour operators perceive
guides as external service suppliers.
The two major reasons the guides do not willingly comply with tour itineraries are the
selection of the sites and the predicted tour timings, both of which are sometimes planned
completely disregarding the needs of clients and guides (Dahles, 2002). Package tours are
usually sold to tourists with different backgrounds and motivations. Therefore, the attrac-
tions to be visited as well as visit durations are regular sources of conflict (Wang et al.,
2000). Tour guides are rarely involved in the tour design process (Karamustafa &
Çeşmeci, 2006). It would be ideal if the guide and tour operator collaborated in itinerary
design and tour operation processes and shared information including the profile of
tour groups (Yarcan, 2007). Also, guides should be able to customize the particulars of
the itinerary based on the interests of the audience (e.g. shops, optional tours). Yet,
since OTOs prepare and send itineraries to ITOs for organization, quotation and operation,
it is likely that the tour guides would not be involved in the itinerary preparation process
and would not have flexibility in tour operation.
Tour operating practices and representation skills could be included in official guide
training programs to improve guides’ commitment to tour operators and the level of
co-operation between these two parties. This may result in improving guide remuneration
and providing full-time employment opportunity, thereby creating a mutual co-operation
for increasing income levels of both tour operators and guides during pre- and post-
season activities.
 SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY AND TOURISM 11

Tour guides’ and ITOs’ continued existence depends on each other’s mutual success.
Guides should not be evaluated only by their professional guiding services, but by the
clients’ overall rating for the tour company. The guide’s success should be assessed
based on tour operators’ overall image, the clients’ intention to repurchase, recommend
the tour and tour operator to others. The guide’s motivation to represent the tour operator
is critically important (Jonasson & Scherle, 2012), as the guide has the power to manipulate
events and failures at the expense of the tour operator’s reputation (Geva & Goldman,
1991). A motivated guide would also supply valuable feedback on the itineraries, suppliers
and customers that could improve tour operator’s future services. A guide might also
garner future business by briefing tourists about alternative tours and cross-sell other ser-
vices offered by the tour operator.
Illegal guiding is a major drawback both for the licensed guides and the ITOs. Nonoffi-
cial unlicensed guiding activity affects official guides’ employment and their fees. Guiding
is a seasonal freelance occupation without any social security net. While their role in
making or breaking the tour is well known, the value of guiding has not been recognized
fully by the travel industry. The guides do not have the power to control their professional
future. They depend on the goodwill of other stakeholders, such as the tour operators and
governmental bodies for the solution of the problems they face in performing their pro-
fession (Ap & Wong, 2001).

Limitations and implications for further studies

Istanbul is a world-class city that currently hosts approximately 12 million foreign visitors
with different motivations (Istanbul Directorate of Culture and Tourism, 2015). The city pro-
vides a good source of evidence for the relationships between tour guides and tour oper-
ators, especially for cultural tours. Istanbul was also chosen as it is the arrival and departure
port and a hub for most mainland cultural package tours in Turkey. Though so, there are a
few limitations concerning the research site and sample. First, the guiding qualities and
relationships between the stakeholders might differ across destinations and according
to the structure of the industry. Second, tour guides and tour operator professionals ana-
lyzed in the sample work within a legal framework. They are both bound to licenses and
professional travel industry associations in Turkey (Cetin & Kizilirmak, 2012). Thus, travel
companies and guides operating in a laissez faire environment might have different
expectations from guides.
Moreover, despite most organized package tours include cultural elements, the pro-
fessionals working in different tourism market segments (e.g. adventure tourism) might
ascribe different value levels to guiding attributes (e.g. pathfinder) (Rokenes, Schumann,
& Rose, 2015). Nevertheless, it is expected that the findings presented in this paper to
offer thought-provoking suggestions that could benefit tour guides, the travel industry
and tourism industry in general. Future studies that concentrate on different destinations
and different market segments might offer valuable findings using the attributes offered in
this study.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
12 G. CETIN AND S. YARCAN

ORCID
Gurel Cetin http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3568-6527

References
Ap, J., & Wong, K. K. (2001). Case study on tour guiding: Professionalism, issues and problems. Tourism
Management, 22, 551–563. doi:10.1016/S0261-5177(01)00013-9
Black, R., & Ham, S. (2005). Improving the quality of tour guiding: Towards a model for tour guide
certification. Journal of Ecotourism, 4(3), 178–195. doi:10.1080/14724040608668442
Bryon, J. (2012). Tour guides as storytellers – From selling to sharing. Scandinavian Journal of
Hospitality and Tourism, 12(1), 27–43. doi:10.1080/15022250.2012.656922
Cetin, G., & Kizilirmak, I. (2012). Türk turizminde kokartli turist rehberlerin mevcut durumunun analizi.
Journal of Economics & Administrative Sciences/Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi Iktisadi ve Idari Bilimler
Fakültesi Dergisi, 14(2), 307–318.
Cohen, E. (1985). The tourist guide: The origins, structure and dynamics of a role. Annals of Tourism
Research, 12(1), 5–29. doi:10.1080/15022250.2012.656922
Cohen, E. H., Ifergan, M., & Cohen, E. (2002). A new paradigm in guiding: The Madrich role model.
Annals of Tourism Research, 22(4), 818–932. doi:10.1016/S0160-7383(01)00082-2
Dahles, H. (2002). The politics of tour guiding: Image management in Indonesia. Annals of Tourism
Research, 29(3), 783–800. doi:10.1016/S0160-7383(01)00083-4
European Federation of Tourist Guide Associations. (2014, August 14). Cen definitions. Retrieved from
http://www.feg-touristguides.com/cen-definitions.html.
Gelbman, A., & Maoz, D. (2012). Island of peace or island of war: Tourist guiding. Annals of Tourism
Research, 39(1), 108–133. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2011.05.008
Geva, A., & Goldman, A. (1991). Satisfaction measurement in guided tours. Annals of Tourism Research,
18(2), 177–185. doi:10.1016/0160-7383(91)90002-S
Hansen, A. H., & Mossberg, L. (2016). Tour guides’ performance and tourists’ immersion: Facilitating
consumer immersion by performing a guide plus role. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and
Tourism, 1–20. (in press).
Heung, V. C. S. (2007). Effects of tour leader’s service quality on agency’s reputation and customers’
word of mouth. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 14(4), 305–315. doi:10.1177/1356766708094752
Holloway, J. C. (1981). The guided tour: A sociological approach. Annals of Tourism Research, 8(3),
377–402. doi:10.1016/0160-7383(81)90005-0
Howard, J., Thwaites, R., & Smith, B. (2001). Investigating the roles of the indigenous tour guide. The
Journal of Tourism Studies, 12(2), 32–39.
Huang, S., Hsu, C. H. C., & Chan, A. (2010). Tour guide performance and tourist satisfaction: A study of
the package tours in Shanghai. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 34(1), 3–33. doi:10.
1177/1096348009349815
Istanbul Directorate of Culture and Tourism. (2015). Tourism statistics [In Turkish, Monthly Bulletin],
January 2015. Istanbul: Il Kultur ve Turizm Mudurlugu.
Jonasson, M., & Scherle, N. (2012). Performing co-produced guided tours. Scandinavian Journal of
Hospitality and Tourism, 12(1), 55–73. doi:10.1080/15022250.2012.655078
Karamustafa, K., & Çeşmeci, N. (2006). Paket Tur Operasyonunda Turist Rehberlerinin Karşılaştıkları
Yönetsel Sorunlar Üzerine Bir Araştırma. Anatolia: Turizm Arastirmalari Dergisi, 17(1), 87–97.
Larsen, J., & Meged, J. W. (2013). Tourists co-producing guided tours. Scandinavian Journal of
Hospitality and Tourism, 13(2), 88–102. doi:10.1080/15022250.2013.796227
Mak, A. H. N., Wong, K. K. F., & Chang, C. Y. (2011). Critical issues affecting the service quality and pro-
fessionalism of the tour guides in Hong Kong and Macau. Tourism Management, 32, 1442–1452.
doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2011.01.003
Mossberg, L. L. (1995). Tour leaders and their importance on charter tours. Tourism Management, 16
(6), 437–445. doi:10.1016/0261-5177(95)00052-P
Overend, D. (2012). Performing sites: Illusion and authenticity in the spatial stories of the guided tour.
Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 12(1), 44–54. doi:10.1080/15022250.2012.678070
 SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY AND TOURISM 13

Pond, K. (1993). The professional guide: Dynamics of tour guiding. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Randall, C., & Rollins, R. B. (2009). Visitor perceptions of the role of tour guides in natural areas. Journal
of Sustainable Tourism, 17(3), 357–374. doi:10.1080/09669580802159727
Reisinger, Y., & Waryszak, R. (1994). Japanese tourists’ perceptions of their tour guides: Australian
experience. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 1, 28–40. doi:10.1177/135676679400100103
Rokenes, A., Schumann, S., & Rose, J. (2015). The art of guiding in nature-based adventure tourism–
how guides can create client value and positive experiences on mountain bike and backcountry
ski tours. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 15(1), 62–82.
Salazar, N.B. (2006). Touristifying Tanzania: Local guides, global discourse. Annals of Tourism Research,
33(3), 833–852. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2006.03.017
Schmidt, C. J. (1979). The guided tour: Insulated adventure. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography,
7(4), 441–467.
Valkonen, J., Huilaja, H., & Koikkalainen, S. (2013). Looking for the right kind of person: Recruitment in
nature tourism guiding. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 13(3), 228–241. doi:10.
1080/15022250.2013.837602
Wang, K., Hsieh, A., & Huan, T. (2000). Critical service features in group package tour: An exploratory
research. Tourism Management, 21(2), 177–189. doi:10.1016/S0261-5177(99)00047-3
Weiler, B., & Ham, S. H. (2002). Tour guide training: A model for sustainable capacity building in devel-
oping countries. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 10(1), 52–69. doi:10.1080/09669580208667152
Williams, P. (2013). Performing interpretation. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 13(2),
115–126. doi:10.1080/15022250.2013.796228
Wong, A. (2001). Satisfaction with local tour guides in Hong Kong. Pacific Tourism Review, 5(1), 59–67.
World Federation of Tourist Guide Associations. (2014, August 14). What is a tourist guide? Retrieved
from http://www.wftga.org/tourist-guiding/what-tourist-guide.
Wynn, J. R. (2005). Guiding practices: Story telling tricks for reproducing the urban landscape.
Qualitative Sociology, 28(4), 399–417. doi:10.1007/s11133-005-8365-2
Yarcan, S. (2007). A conceptual evaluation of code of ethics for professional tourist guides (In Turkish).
Anatolia: Turizm Arastirmalari Dergisi, 18(1), 33–44.
Yu, X., Weiler, B., & Ham, S. (2001). Intercultural communication and mediation: A framework for ana-
lyzing the intercultural competence of Chinese tour guides. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 8(1),
75–87. doi:10.1177/135676670200800108
Zhang, H. Q., & Chow, I. (2004). Application of importance-performance model in tour guides’ per-
formance: Evidence from mainland Chinese outbound visitors in Hong Kong. Tourism
Management, 25(1), 81–91. doi:10.1016/S0261-5177(03)00064-5
Zillinger, M., Jonasson, M., & Adolfsson, P. (2012). Guided tours and tourism. Scandinavian Journal of
Hospitality and Tourism, 12(1), 1–7. doi:10.1080/15022250.2012.660314