عنوان مقاله [English]
Competition between locations is global. Competition for foreign investment and business, tourism income, skilled labor and attracting creative people to become new citizens who are driving the growth of the economy has intensified. In a global environment of intense competition and continuous change, cities must focus on improving service levels and increasing customer satisfaction to maintain competition and achieve long-term survival. Location marketing has been studied for decades. In the past, location marketing studies focused on foreign audiences or tourists, but now, studies have focused on urban residents. And they are recognized as an important target group of local customers who previously their satisfaction less considered, While they shape the location brand with their characteristics and behaviors. Citizens' satisfaction is an important tool for determining the citizen's perspective of the city in which they live, which is formed by the perceived nature or quality of relevant urban environments and people outside the city are always looking for an awareness of its level. Because they are naturally informal, valid , and credible sources of information about the place. Responding to the needs of citizens creates a sense of enjoyment and social welfare and positive behaviors from them. There has been a significant defect In consideration of the role of citizens in the place marketing process. Urban managers need to be aware of the role of citizens as a powerful tool in the local marketing process. The purpose of this paper is to improve policy through the satisfaction and attraction of residents. Accordingly, in this research, residents' perception of the quality of urban life in Mashhad city is firstly evaluated. Then, the relationship between perceived quality of urban life, satisfaction, attachment and citizenship behaviors such as intention to leave a place of life and positive speech in Mashhad city was investigated.
Materials and methods
Materials and methods
The city studied in this study is Mashhad. Due to the wide extent of the city and in order to generalize the results of the research into the community studied
the 3 regions of Mashhad 1, 6 and 9 were selected to complete the questionnaires. The sample size was 382 people. In order to assess perceived quality in Mashhad, 30 items in four dimensions of urban facilities and infrastructure, basic needs, social environment and environment were considered. Questionnaire with 5-options Likert scale was used from I fully agree with the continuum until I completely disagree. In which I totally agree with the score of 5, indicating the opinion, I agree with the score of 4, I do not have a score of 3, I disagree with the score of 2, and I totally disagree with the score of 1, and the respondents were asked to rate the city in 30 selected items. 3 items were developed to assess the overall citizens' satisfaction. Citizens' attachment was also evaluated with 3 items. Also, 2 items were considered for 5-point Likert scale in order to investigate the variables of intention to leave and 2 items in order to evaluate the positive speech variable.
Results and discussion
The results of descriptive statistics and t-test for dimension of urban facilities and infrastructures showed that overall average for this dimension is 2.61 and has significant differences with mean of 3. T-test results for basic needs dimension also showed that the overall average of this dimension is equal to 1.92 and has a significant difference with an average of 3. The social environment dimension also showed a significant difference with an average of 3 and, of course, less than this. Finally, the average for the environmental dimension was 2.76. Accordingly, the first hypothesis based on the desired level of perceived quality in Mashhad was rejected. The results of this study showed that in all four dimensions are considered perceived quality was lower than average of 3. In the next stage, the results of the model test and research hypotheses were as follows that the second hypothesis based on the positive effect of perceived quality on the overall satisfaction of citizens was confirmed with path coefficient (β = 0.43) . And it can be said that by increasing the level of perceived quality, the overall satisfaction of citizens will increase. The third hypothesis was confirmed that the citizens' satisfaction had a positive effect on the city's attachment (β = 0.68). The negative effects of citizens' satisfaction on the intention to quit (β = 0.31) and the negative impact of attachment on the intention to leave (β = -0.28) were confirmed. Existence of satisfaction and attachment in citizens has reduced the intention of leaving the city by citizens.The results of this section were also confirmed by the results of the research of (Zenker & Rütter, 2014). Finally, the hypothesis of positive effect of citizenship satisfaction on positive speech with path coefficient and significant number (β = 0.20), as well as the attachment effect hypothesis on positive speech with path coefficient (β = 0.33)) were confirmed.
No performance evaluation is possible without assessing citizens' expectations and perceptions. The important thing is that the services provided are efficient and that respond to the needs and requirements of the citizens in a desirable manner. In this regard, measurement is the first step for improvement, and satisfaction surveys should be carried out at regular intervals, the service area must be identified and needs to be estimated and ways of developing and improvement must be investigated. Location attachment is useful. Communities included of many people, try more to maintain their societies. This feeling of emotional attachment should be strengthened by developing meaningful relationships by urban executives. The quality of provided services is a key factor in this regard, since quality leads to satisfaction; something has a positive effect on the attachment and positive behaviors of citizens like positive speech. Therefore, city managers must implement a variety of programs to enrich, increase, maintain, modify, or create a desired level.
Keywords: Perceived Quality, Satisfaction, Attachment, Intention to Leave, Word-of-Mouth.
10. Diener, E. and Suh, E. (1997). Measuring quality of life: Economic, social, and subjective indicators, Social indicators research, 40(1): 189-216.
11. Firouzmakan, S. and Daneshpour, S.A. (2015). Promotion quality of life by increasing place attachment in public places, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 201: 418-428.
12. Florek, M. (2011). No place like home: Perspectives on place attachment and impacts on city management, Journal of Town & City Management, 1(4): 346-354.
13. Freire, J.R. (2009). ‘Local People’ a critical dimension for place brands. Brand Management, 16(7): 420-438. doi:10.1057/palgrave.bm.2550097
14. Goovaerts, P.; Van Biesbroeck, H. and Van Tilt, T. (2014). Measuring the effect and efficiency of city marketing, Procedia Economics and Finance, 12: 191-198.
15. Hennig-Thurau, T.; Gwinner, K.P. and Gremler, D.D. (2002). Understanding relationship marketing outcomes: an integration of relational benefits and relationship quality, Journal of service research, 4(3): 230-247.
16. Hernández, B.; Hidalgo, M.C.; Salazar-Laplace, M.E. and Hess, S. (2007). Place attachment and place identity in natives and non-natives, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(4): 310-319.
17. Higgins, P. and Campanera, J.M. (2011). (Sustainable) quality of life in English city locations, Cities, 28(4): 290-299. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2011.02.005
18. Hummon, D.M. (1992). Community attachment: local sentiment and sense of place, New York: Plenum.
19. Insch, A. and Florek, M. (2008). A great place to live, work and play: Conceptualising place satisfaction in the case of a city's residents, Journal of Place Management and Development, 1(2): 138-149.
20. Insch, A. and Sun, B. (2013). University students' needs and satisfaction with their host city, Journal of Place Management and Development, 6(3): 178-191.
21. Jaśkiewicz, M. (2015). Place attachment, place identity and aesthetic appraisal of urban landscape, Polish Psychological Bulletin, 46(4): 573-578.
22. Joaquim Araújo de Azevedo, A.; João Ferreira Custódio, M. and Pereira Antunes Perna, F. (2013). “Are you happy here?”: the relationship between quality of life and place attachment, Journal of Place Management and Development, 6(2): 102-119.
23. Kavaratzis, M. (2012). From “necessary evil” to necessity: stakeholders' involvement in place branding, Journal of Place Management and Development, 5(1): 7-19.
24. Kotler, P.; Haider, D.H. and Rein, I.J. (1993). Marketing places: attracting investment, industry, and tourism to cities, states, and nations, New York: Free Press.
25. Kyle, G.; Graefe, A. and Manning, R. (2005). Testing the dimensionality of place attachment in recreational settings, Environment and behavior, 37(2): 155-177.
26. Lam, S.Y.; Shankar, V.; Erramilli, M.K. and Murthy, B. (2004). Customer value, satisfaction, loyalty, and switching costs: an illustration from a business-to-business service context, Journal of the academy of marketing science, 32(3): 293-311.
27. Lepage, A. (2009). The quality of life as attribute of sustainability, The TQM Journal, 21(2): 105-115.
28. Luque-Martinez, T.; Del Barrio-García, S.; Ibáñez-Zapata, J.Á. and Molina, M.Á.R. (2007). Modeling a city’s image: The case of Granada, Cities, 24(5): 335-352.
29. Marans, R.W. (2015). Quality of urban life & environmental sustainability studies: Future linkage opportunities, Habitat International, 45: 47-52.
30. Martínez, L.; Short, J. and Ortíz, M. (2015). Citizen satisfaction with public goods and government services in the global urban south: A case study of Cali, Colombia, Habitat International, 49: 84-91.
31. Merrilees, B.; Miller, D. and Herington, C. (2012). Multiple stakeholders and multiple city brand meanings. European Journal of Marketing, 46(7/8): 1032-1047.
32. Nigro, H.O. and Císaro, S.E.G. (2016). The citizen satisfaction index: Adapting the model in Argentine cities, Cities, 56: 85-90.
33. Peterson, R.A. (1994). A meta-analysis of Cronbach's coefficient alpha, Journal of consumer research, 21(2): 381-391.
34. Pop, C.-M.; Băbuţ, R. and Dabija, D.-C. (2015). Citizens’ satisfaction with tariffs and methods of payment for services provided by local public authorities. Empirical evidence in Romaniam, Procedia Economics and Finance, 32: 1608-1621.
35. Qu, H.; Kim, L.H. and Im, H.H. (2011). A model of destination branding: Integrating the concepts of the branding and destination image, Tourism management, 32(3): 465-476.
36. Seik, F.T. (2000). Subjective assessment of urban quality of life in Singapore (1997–1998), Habitat International, 24(1): 31-49.
37. Smith, J.W. and Moore, R.L. (2012). Place attachment and recreation demand on the west branch of the Farmington River. Paper presented at the CL Fisher & CE Watts, Jr.(Chair), Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station: Symposium conducted at the meeting of the Northeastern Recreation Research Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS, Newtown Square, PA: US.
38. Taecharungroj, V. and Taecharungroj, V. (2016). City ambassadorship and citizenship behaviours: Modelling resident behaviours that help cities grow, Journal of Place Management and Development, 9(3): 331-350.
39. Twigger-Ross, C.L. and Uzzell, D.L. (1996). Place and identity processes, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 16(3): 205-220.
40. Ujang, N. and Zakariya, K. (2015). Place Attachment and the Value of Place in the Life of the Users, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 168: 373-380.
41. Vykoukalová, Z.; Pavlíčková, H.; Čeněk, J. and Smolík, J. (2016). Satisfaction with the quality of life in Brno: A perception survey, Kontakt, 18(3): e203-e209.
42. Węziak-Białowolska, D. (2016). Quality of life in cities–Empirical evidence in comparative European perspective, Cities, 58: 87-96.
43. Zenker, S. (2009). Who's your target? The creative class as a target group for place branding, Journal of Place Management and Development, 2(1): 23-32.
44. Zenker, S. (2011). How to catch a city? The concept and measurement of place brands, Place Management and Development, 4(1): 40-52.doi:10.1108/17538331111117151
45. Zenker, S. and Martin, N. (2011). Measuring success in place marketing and branding, Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 7(1): 32-41.
46. Zenker, S.; Petersen, S. and Aholt, A. (2013). The Citizen Satisfaction Index (CSI): Evidence for a four basic factor model in a German sample, Cities, 31: 156-164.
47. Zenker, S. and Rütter, N. (2014). Is satisfaction the key? The role of citizen satisfaction, place attachment and place brand attitude on positive citizenship behavior, Cities, 38: 11-17.