The organization of the practice of tourist itineraries in receptive tourism

Abstract

This research aimed to understand the organization of the practice of tourist itineraries based on Theodore Schatzki’s epistemology of practice. For data collection, this qualitative research used documentary research, informal interviews, and participant observations. Data treatment occurred from themes defined a posteriori through spiral analysis. The findings indicate that the dynamics of the tourist itineraries should be considered throughout its practice. This dynamic is a result of interactions between humans and materials that, from organizational elements, can be transformed from non-tourist to tourist and promote changes throughout the configuration of the tourism network of practices. Tourist itineraries involve humans and materials organizing themselves and becoming tourist elements, creating a relationship that only exists while going through the itinerary. In addition, the tourist route presents sharing that addresses non-sharing, while allowing it to occur.

Keywords:
Practice theory; Epistemology of Schatzki; Tourism as practice; Tourist itineraries

Resumo

Nesta pesquisa, objetivou-se compreender o organizar da prática de roteiros turísticos a partir da epistemologia da prática de Theodore Schatzki. O estudo se baseou na epistemologia das práticas segundo Schatzki. Realizou-se uma pesquisa qualitativa que utilizou como procedimentos de coleta de dados: pesquisa documental, entrevistas informais e observações participantes. O tratamento dos dados ocorreu a partir de temas definidos a posteriori por meio da análise em espiral. Os resultados indicaram que a dinâmica do roteiro deve ser considerada durante toda a sua prática. Tal dinâmica é resultado de interações entre humanos e elementos materiais que, a partir da organização das práticas, podem ser transformadas de não turísticos a turísticos e promover alterações em toda a configuração da rede de práticas do turismo. Durante a prática do roteiro, humanos e materiais se organizaram e se transformaram em elementos turísticos, surgindo uma relação que só existe durante a prática do roteiro. Ademais, a prática do roteiro apresenta compartilhamentos que permitem lidar com o não compartilhamento, ao mesmo tempo que propicia que ele ocorra.

Palavras-chave:
Teoria da prática; Epistemologia de Schatzki; Turismo como prática; Roteiros turísticos

Resumen

El objetivo de esta investigación fue comprender la organización de la práctica de itinerarios turísticos desde la epistemología de la práctica de Schatzki. Se realizó una investigación cualitativa que utilizó como procedimientos de recolección de datos: investigación documental, entrevistas informales y observaciones participantes. Los datos se trataron a partir de temas definidos a posteriori por medio del análisis en espiral. Los resultados indican que la dinámica del itinerario debe ser considerada durante toda su práctica. Esta dinámica es el resultado de las interacciones entre humanos y elementos materiales que, a partir de la organización de las prácticas, pueden pasar de no turísticos a turísticos y promover cambios en toda la configuración de la red de prácticas del turismo. Durante la práctica del itinerario, humanos y materiales se organizaron y transformaron en elementos turísticos, surgiendo una relación que solo existe durante la práctica del itinerario. Además, la práctica del itinerario presenta comparticiones que permiten lidiar con el no compartir, al mismo tiempo que propicia que se lleve a cabo.

Palabras clave:
Teoría de la práctica; Epistemología de Schatzki; Turismo como práctica; Itinerarios turísticos

INTRODUCTION

Discussions in the fields of tourism (E. Cohen & S. A. Cohen, 2012) and organizational studies (F. B. Meira & M. B. V. Meira, 2007) have recognized the impacts of contemporary changes in the world and in the organizing process. The articulation of mutual contributions between the two fields has been advocated. Such articulation is considered a means to deal with the complexity that arises from impacts on tourism-related organizations (Tomazzoni, Dorion & Zottis, 2008). In this article, we shall approach the two fields in order to appraise tour itineraries.

Tour itineraries have been studied in two major approaches. In the first approach, these routes are prescribed maps to be followed, and the studies seek to understand relationships between certain variables with influences on routes (Li, Zhou & Zhao, 2016; Stone, 2016). In the second, the routes are treated as experiential routes, in studies with a greater focus on the epistemological character of tourism (Cisne & Gastal, 2011). In this last approach, there are issues related to everyday interactions as part of the itinerary. Accepting the relevance of these issues, this study follows the second approach adopting a path that was not identified in previous studies on the subject.

The proposal developed here is based on contributions from an approach that is part of the theories of social practice (Schatzki, 2001, 2006), the field of tourism (Bispo, 2016) and the field of organizational studies (Czarniawska, 2008). These contributions developed the emphasis on organizing with a focus on practices - herein several actors and material aspects are elements in interaction, in an unstable process, always in progress, in an organizational practice.

Therefore, in addition to being part of organizational studies, this article is also part of tourism studies. According to Tribe (2010), this field is formed by two major study networks. One is the tourism business and the social science of tourism; the other are networks with different approaches focused on critical theory, for example. The author made it clear that the field of tourism study does not follow a unified paradigm. However, along its trajectory, F. B. Meira and M. B. V. Meira (2007) approximated tourism, economy and administration. For the authors, the first one relates to aspects dealt with the other two, such as quality, competition, supply, demand, among others. The authors also emphasize that tourism production can be partly understood from the forces that organize it around these aspects.

To seek this understanding, focusing on the itineraries, this article brings together tourism and organizational studies. Like Tomazzoni et al. (2008), we approach organizational studies to address tourism, understanding organizations as complexities involving people and relationships between different organizations. For these authors, this organizational phenomenon expands in organizations that operate in tourism. Basically, this occurs because they are a complex set of interactions between multiple organizations and different people, in an unstable and temporary way, with the direct involvement of the tourist himself during the production aimed at offering him something.

This view is opposed to studies that treat organizational processes related to tourism as something predictable (Li et al., 2016; Stone, 2016), ignoring relevant aspects of its dynamics - for example, the extent to which, even when planned in advance, “[...] the package or tour itinerary has numerous unpredictable situations, as preferences and consumption decisions are manifested as the trip develops [...]” (Tomazzoni et al., 2008, p. 145).

The act of ignoring these situations is explained by F. B. Meira and M. B. V. Meira (2007), revealing that the organization of the tourism industry assumes the predictability to offer security realized in predefined travel itineraries, based on time discipline and guide directions. The purpose of this article is to penetrate the practice of these predefined, safe and disciplined itineraries and, through practice, to reveal a dynamic of organization, which goes beyond this discipline.

Thus, this article is part of the movement from which the field of tourism is consolidated as flexible and permeable, whence different approaches have a basis to coexist (Tribe, 2010). The current plurality of the field is influenced by contemporary changes, such as technological development, the dissemination of communication and globalization, which provide constant and intense transformations and fragmentations, involving objects, people, time, space, among many others (E. Cohen & S. A. Cohen, 2012).

According to E. Cohen and S. A. Cohen, 2012 (2012), these movements were related to the emergence of three new approaches in tourism studies: that of mobility - focused on continuous contemporary mobility, voluntary or not, such as migration, absence of fixed residence, multiple nationalities in its relations with tourism; that of performativities - focused on the intertwining of recurring performative acts, such as admiration or sanctification that are part of tourist attractions, with a focus on their (re)production, transformation and/or criticism; and the actor-network theory - it treats the social as something unstable, in which society is always an incomplete process and the agency is distributed between humans and non-humans.

Despite the differences between the three approaches, we agree with Bispo (2016) assumptions about the so-called approach to practice-based studies - PBS, being part of the practice turn in tourism studies. Both in tourism (Bispo, 2016; Lamers, Duim & Spaargaren, 2017) and in organizational studies (Júlio & Tureta, 2018; Pimentel & Nogueira, 2018; Sandberg & Dall’Alba, 2009), this turn is related to the development of a diversity of proposals marked by an epistemology of practice, in which the social is situated in practice (Reckwitz, 2002).

Within this diversity, we assume henceforth the proposals of Schatzki (2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006) and the conception that Bispo (2016) calls tourism as a practice. In this approach, mobility and performance are part of a set of organizing practices - tourism itself - as it is continuously being produced by them. This is because there is no definitive boundary between the tourist and the non-tourist; these two make up a whole, always dynamic and unfinished. The organization of this practice is based on studies about understandings - skills belonging to the actions in a practice -, rules - definitions that indicate how to proceed - tele-affectivity - purpose indication, the purpose, combining emotions, humor and intentions -, forming the organization of practice according to Schatzki (2002).

By this dynamic vision we consider the potential practices to organize and allow the practice understanding of tour itineraries. This view distances us from studies concerned with itineraries as something concrete, planned by an organization that defines a sequence of physical locations to be visited (Li et al., 2016).

The approach adopted here allowed accessing and contributing to other aspects of itineraries by using Schatzki’s epistemology, which collaborates to investigate its organizing, that is, its continuous process of construction and reconstruction in the organization of and in practice (Czarniawska, 2008; Schatzki, 2006). In organizational studies, this epistemology has already revealed this potential, favoring the understanding of unforeseen situations of human activities and the material arrangement related, for example, to the search for luxury and the limits of the scarcity of resources in samba school parades (Júlio & Tureta, 2018). In tour itinerary debate, this epistemology offers a way for researchers to develop new studies that explore this potential and for organizational members, related to the formulation and execution of itineraries, to reflect on their actions in the unpredictability in the itinerary practice.

These contributions are made possible by the justification for the adoption of the epistemology of Schatzki’s practice (2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006): the potential for understanding obtained when treating the practice of the tour itinerary within the understanding of practice, as organized human activities, sustained in material arrangements and permeated by unforeseen events. In this study, epistemology allows us to propose that the tour itinerary is a practice, always in (re)construction, organized in the rules, skills and tele-affection that make up the practice and refer to the production of a set of tourist experiences considered by practitioners as interconnected with each other in time. Based on this proposition, we must access our practice to enlarge our understanding about tour itineraries, as we carry out in this study to investigate the following research problem: how to organize the practice of tour itineraries from the epistemology of Schatzki’ practice?

Based on this question, the aim of this study is to understand the organization of the practice of tour itineraries from the epistemology of Schatzki’s practice. The developed proposal allowed us to deal with elements of organizing little studied in the field of tourism and organizational studies, contributing to both. They manifested themselves in the production of the itinerary through practice, involving tourists, organizational members focused on meeting the demands of the tourism market, among other actors, in interactions with material elements. The demands were turned to surprise, to the unexpected, to the rupture of organizational patterns, as part of their (re) production, highlighting aspects of organizing that are not exclusive to the field of tourism, being also part of the organizational studies.

These contributions were evidenced empirically by qualitative research. Data collection was carried out through documentary research, informal interviews and participant observations. Data treatment was based on themes defined a posteriori by the spiral analysis procedure.

To develop the discussion, we deal with the study of tour itineraries, then we present the PBS in the field of tourism and the epistemology of Schatzki’s practice. So, we present the methodological path and data on the travel agency and the investigated itinerary practice. Finally, we analyze the results based on the theoretical articulation and present the final considerations of the article.

THE TOUR ITINERARY STUDY FIELD

Within the diversity of approaches in the field of studies on tour itineraries, two major perspectives are identified: the first that conceives tour itineraries as prescribed maps (Fageda, Jiménez, Perdiguero & Marrero, 2017; Li et al., 2016; Stone, 2016; Sudiarta & Suardana, 2016). And the second for which tour itineraries are experiential routes, according to the works of Cisne and Gastal (2011), Cutler, Carmichael and Doherty (2014), Jiang and Xu (2016).

In the first perspective, the authors approach the prescriptive character of itineraries and the causal relationships with the variables that define it in different ways. In this perspective, Li et al. (2016) present a tool with the purpose of minimizing the costs of itineraries for tourists, treating the itinerary as a set of physical places to pass by. Similarly, Fageda et al. (2017) treat the route as a passage between visited places, focusing the itinerary study to analyze influences of the types of airlines, highlighting the operations characterized as low cost. This causal relationship with certain variables is also evident in the study by Stone (2016), with a focus on the implications of delays and cancellations at small airports; and in Peng, Zhang, Liu and Yang (2016), focused on tourist flowing. In a more prescriptive example, Moraes and Emmendoerfer (2015) propose the definition of strategies in tourism nuclei in communities based on diagnoses similar to consumer satisfaction surveys, with the itinerary as part of consumption.

These studies commonly prioritize quantitative diagnoses, which serve both for specific issues, such as ranking tourist attractions (Dantas & Melo, 2011), as well as for wider planning of tourist destinations (Sudiarta & Suardana, 2016). In this perspective, the assembly of itineraries is related to the ability to predict movement patterns and the time invested by tourists (Xia, Zeephongsekul & Arrowsmith, 2009). Such studies contribute to the objectification of tour itineraries, based on the understanding of certain variables that involve them.

Despite this contribution, there is a certain limitation in the lack of potential for understanding the more complex dynamics of tour itineraries, as something more than travel itineraries (Cisne & Gastal, 2011). The studies inserted in the second great approach on the itineraries, which treats them as experiential routes, are more focused on this potential and move away from the referred objectification. From this perspective, Cisne and Gastal (2011) are based on the theory of complexity to discuss tourism in terms of its epistemological dimension, seeking a reflective social contribution on activities.

Criticize another point on prescriptive approach, Cutler et al. (2014) disagree with the focus given on the destination and not on the trip. For the authors, it is necessary to recognize the meaning related to the person’s self-identity in the tourist experience and in the perception of and about the trip, in an epistemological emphasis of tourism that recognizes the production of knowledge related to it.

With a certain approximation with this last approach, Jiang and Xu (2016) are part of the so-called literary geographic perspective, which combines the study of the experience before and after the itinerary with the relations with the reading of texts linked to the tourist experience. Here we have this analogy: just as the reader reads the text written by an author and interprets it in different ways, the tourist, in his social interactions, interprets the previously planned itinerary in different ways.

This last study and the others, inserted here in the approach of itineraries as experiences, highlight the daily interactions and the epistemological character of tourism. Such aspects indicate a closer approximation of this study with the latter approach. However, studies on the itinerary practice were not identified in its ontological character, in social and material interactions that produce the organization of the itinerary practice and are produced by it. We propose to bring these contributions to the field of tour itinerary study based on articulations with the PBS and the focus on organizing.

PBS IN THE FIELD OF TOURISM AND SCHATZKI’S EPISTEMOLOGY IN THE STUDY OF TOUR ITINERARIES

Over the years, specific contributions from practice theories (Reckwitz, 2002) have been encompassed by the field of tourism. Among them, materiality stands out in the tourist practice (Rantala, Valtonen & Markuksela, 2011). Edensor (2001), for example, articulates it directly with other elements of practice, when he considered tourism as a set of activities intertwined in a daily improvisation.

The author deals with tourism in terms of performance negotiations influenced by social and cultural power. This performativity occurs in a reflexive way, in a process of knowing, the so-called knowing. The verb replaces the use of the noun knowledge and removes the idea of a defined and static knowledge to recognize its continuous process of (re)constitution in practices (Nicolini, Gherardi & Yanow, 2003). From this perspective, several studies deal with organizing the tourist practice as spaces for the construction of meanings, meanings and knowing (Bispo, 2012, 2016; Bispo & Godoy, 2012; Roper & Hodari, 2015). In this understanding, based on Schatzki’s influences (2001, 2006), among other authors, Bispo (2016, p. 174) presents tourism as a practice in which tourism is “a set of continuous organizational practices”, the comprehension based on knowing, doing and saying, through which we know how to carry out the actions we want in tourism, that is, in its space of continuous construction.

In this article, we argue that the organization of the tour itinerary is also an important element of this continuous construction. For this, within the diversity of approaches in PBS, we also assume influences from the epistemology of Schatzki’s practice (2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006). The author offers applicable contributions in studies on tour itineraries when dealing with the so-called organizing. The term indicates the dynamic and always incomplete nature of the process of organizing, an understanding illustrated by the replacement of the noun organization by the verb organizing. To investigate organizations based on the idea of organizing, it is necessary to consider them as they occur - from a dynamic perspective (Schatzki, 2006). The author delves into two basic questions with regard to organizing, which contribute to the understanding of the organization of the itinerary practice: the performance of the actions, and the practices that constitute it; and the occurrence of events in material arrangements that support these activities.

Based on this perspective, tour itineraries are considered as a (re)organization, in real time, around material practices and arrangements that include forms that last and have the previous planning of the itinerary as just a part of other interactions in tour itinerary practices. By proposing this concept, we contribute to the recognition that there is the production of a tour itinerary when tourist experiences are associated with each other and at a given time and space by practitioners. This process does not cease when a person arrives at his residence. The interactions that reconstruct it may or may not continue in action, as in the case of material arrangements marked by a souvenir - a replica of a monument displayed in the room or forgotten and thrown in the trash, or a strip made of toilet paper by tourists to reward the most lively tourist during a bus journey. The award with the paper banner can be forgotten on the same day, or be remembered throughout a lifetime by those who gave it and/or received it.

These material arrangements are immersed in the practice networks. According to the epistemology adopted here, they are composed of the actions of various entities, not just those of people (Schatzki, 2002). Therefore, we understand the practice as organized human activities, “an organized nexus of actions” or, still, a “package” of actions composed of doings, sayings and material arrangements (Schatzki, 2002, p. 71). For the author, not doing and not saying are part of these practices, as well as saying without speech, as it occurs in gestures. In addition, the same action can be part of more than one practice, which means that there is no dividing line between them. In this multiplicity of practices, there is a recursion that alters them, since their activities are also not always the same. However, they have similarities, building a social order composed of an arrangement of people, artifacts and things around which actions and their meanings are situated in time and space (Schatzki, 2001).

In this social order, practices are governed by practical intelligibility, which is what makes sense to a person when performing a certain activity (Schatzki, 2002). It is necessary, in order to understand the intentionality in this accomplishment, to understand three elements around which the practices are organized, which are linked to the doings and sayings of practice and form its organization (Schatzki, 2002, 2005): understandings; rules; and tele-affectivity.

The understandings refer to the know-how, that is, certain skills pertaining to the actions that make up a practice, and, like the practice, they are repeated at the same time that they change and are shared by individuals immersed in a practice (Schatzki, 2002). Rules emerge in the socialization of individuals, when they learn which rules organize the practices in which they are immersed - for example, norms and instructions on how to proceed, social conventions and prescriptions -, in addition to socially shared principles (Schatzki, 2002). For Santos and Silveira (2015), the rules can represent a codification of past actions that direct an orientation of how future actions should be carried out. Tele-affectivity indicates a purpose, a sense of purpose characterized by a complex combination of emotions, humor and intentions. The tele-affective structure that organizes a practice is socially shared and composed of a series of standardized, hierarchically ordered projects, tasks and objectives (Schatzki, 2002).

Santos and Silveira (2015) show that the rules organize the practices and activities carried out by individuals, while understanding and tele-affection organize what makes sense for practitioners to do. The general understanding of practice is social, with a structure shared by these three elements, called by Schatzki (2005) mental states, which is dynamic and organizes practices.

In this conception of organizational practice, Schatzki (2001, 2005) addresses context ontology (site ontology), according to which social life is related to a context of which it is more a part. The author positions the context as a social arena, in which social practices and phenomena occur, at the same time that this arena itself is constituted by social, material entities and the entire mesh and arrangement of practices. This social context can be, for example, a tour itinerary composed of human activities, materials, in addition to the mesh and the arrangement of practices that constitute the itinerary practice. We argue that the understanding of how this composition occurs offers relevant elements, herein explained, capable of broadening the understanding of tour itineraries dynamics. This proposition was empirically legitimized, when applied in an investigation produced from the methodological aspects presented below.

METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS

The method adopted was qualitative, with observation as the main data collection instrument, a choice considered adequate to identify performance in practice (Bispo, 2016). In order to understand past situations and specific aspects in itinerary practices, interviews and documentary research were also carried out.

The observation was participant (Cavedon, 1999) and occurred between June and November 2017, when one of the authors of the article participated in the daily life of a travel agency and the itineraries offered by it. There were two days of observation at the agency, following internal activities related to the itineraries; a day at a famtour - an activity for tour operators to get to know the itineraries; a day at the reception of a cruise ship; three days in Vitória/Vila Velha city tour itinerary; three days on the beach itinerary for Guarapari; two days on the beach itinerary for Manguinhos; a day on the itinerary in Domingos Martins; a day on the agrotourism itinerary in Venda Nova do Imigrante.

During the observation, field notes were recorded with the OneNote application on the cell phone, synchronized with the Microsoft Word software. The use of the cell phone for registration proved to be adequate because it went unnoticed, considering it is something common. The notes allowed the generation of field diaries containing the description of what happened each day, the mood and expressions of the group, among other aspects (Cavedon, 1999).

In the documentary research (Cellard, 2008), records of incentives related to tourism in the state of Espírito Santo were collected, in addition to internal documents of the tourism agency referring to the itineraries and service to tourists.

The interviews took place during the observations and their data were included in the field diary, as they were of an informal, unstructured nature, providing freedom for the interviewee and the researcher (Fontana & Frey, 2005). They occurred at different times, such as during work breaks at the agency, commuting on the bus, meals and staying at tourist attractions because they were related to something specific to the itinerary practice, the following interviewees were chosen: two agency managers; five guides; three drivers; 47 tourists practicing the itineraries; ten establishment attendants; three tourism agents; and four non-tourists present in the network of itinerary practices.

Data treatment took place from themes defined a posteriori using the spiral analysis procedure proposed by Creswell (2012), which consisted of sketching ideas, making notes, summarizing the field notes, working with words, identifying the codes, reduce the codes to smaller themes, count the frequency of the codes, relate the themes, create a point of view and present the data. The most frequent codes served to organize the others, being assumed as basic themes. They were characterized in the form of the following actions and sayings: how much time do you have?; kindness generates kindness; what does it taste like?; I want it too; throwback thursday; know the Espírito Santo; Miss sympathy; service; outsider; in motion.

In order to make the theoretical and empirical articulations clearer, we have produced a conceptual scheme in order to demonstrate the theoretical paths taken for empirical research and their relations with the categories defined a posteriori and, therefore, with the empirical data from which they emerged.

CONCEPTUAL SCHEME

In the conception proposed here (Figure 1), we start from the articulation between the theory of practice according to Schatzki’s epistemology (2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006) and the understanding of tourism as a Bishop’s practice (2016). Based on these contributions, the investigation of tourism practices turns to its material arrangements, actions and sayings. Such arrangements comprise the elements that organize the practices, that is, the understandings, rules and tele-affection. From the focus proposed here, which is investigating the itinerary practice, such elements were investigated within the understanding that the doings and sayings allow an analysis of the organization of the itinerary practice, which comprises understandings, rules and tele-affectivity.

Figure 1
Conceptual Scheme

To support it empirically, this conceptual scheme was applied to the investigation of itinerary practice in a tourism agency. As a result, we obtained the doings and sayings of the practice of the tour itinerary presented in Figure 1, from which the following analysis was developed. It deals with these doings and sayings and the understandings, rules and tele-affection related to them.

THE AGENCY AND THE ITINERARIES

The tourism agency from which the data was collected is located in Espírito Santo and offers receptive tourism services in the state, such as transfers, airport services and tours to the main tourist destinations in the region, with emphasis on visits to the beaches and mountains in different cities, as well as atypical activities (as we will see later). Below, we list the activities that were followed during this study.

In relation to the beaches, Guarapari has as its attractions the beaches of Castanheiras, Namorados and Areia Preta. In addition to the extra option of the schooner ride, the agency has as a support point a kiosk with a beach menu and a visit to a cachaçaria. The tour to Manguinhos takes place on a beach located in a fishing village, with several gastronomic opportunities, in addition to the visit to Galpão das Paneleiras, where traditional clay pots are produced. The city tour Vitória/Vila Velha, in addition to the panoramic tour of the main beaches of the cities and the center of Vitória, includes the trip to Convento da Penha, the shop of Fábrica de Chocolates Garoto and Ilha do Boi.

As mountain destinations, the agency offered agritourism with tasting of regional products, in Venda Nova do Imigrante, and a visit to the main tourist spots in Domingos Martins. These tours were merged and are now included in a single itinerary.

As an atypical activity, we have the reception of a cruise ship. It is the reception of tourists who disembark, with instructions on taxi locations and the departure from the port.

THE ITINERARY PRACTICE

The description of the itinerary practice is organized from the set of categories developed a posteriori, which are the identified actions and sayings. After that, they were presented separately or in pairs, but virtually there is no fixed sequence or separation - several appear simultaneously. The separation occurs only for the purpose of organizing the text, in order to make the argument more clear

“HOW LONG IS IT?”

In the itinerary practice, several themes indicated the tension between the formal itinerary and its practice. One of them was time, related to periods of commuting, interaction with elements of the itinerary and operation of the attractions.

For example, during one of the itineraries, the stores closed on a street became the scene of a commute time and not a stop, as predicted. The tourist space, previously planned, became a crossing street due to the movement in time. Another example was when we arrived very early at Galpão das Paneleiras de Goiabeiras. The potters were still arriving and did not seem ready to work anytime soon. Tourists entered the shed, heard the guide about the artisanal production of the pots, quickly looked at the work of a single lady and gathered outside. The relationship with time has led to mutual disinterest, hampering the planned interaction with the potters, who should have taken a much longer time.

On the other hand, it was also common to worry about a possible lack of time, with the question: “How much time do we have?”. Time demanded haste from those who were left behind, while others waited to see the next attraction.

Another theme, kindness, was socially related to time. The kindness of those who waited for the arrears is sustained by the certainty of reciprocity in future, because in the itinerary practice observed, “kindness generates kindness”.

“KINDNESS GENERATES KINDNESS”

Several rules of kindness, established tacitly, were shared by the itinerary’s practitioners. These rules organized practice activities (Schatzki, 2002). For example, there was no sign on the minibus with the phrase “when you get in, say good morning”, but people came in to greet whoever was inside. Or when tourists took pictures: when a group was photographing, the others waited and even helped with the photographs.

However, the lack of kindness generated a lack of kindness, such as exclusion on the part of the group. One episode made this relationship very clear:

[One] of the ladies used a crutch, but when she got on the bus the front seats were already reserved and a [third] lady commented: ‘Have you taken your seat yet?’ [...]. One of the tourists came up with the idea of isolating the lady who kept the seats, so they counted the seats and everyone started to occupy the bus backward. People who were already on the bus changed their things backward and everyone who arrived was warned about the ‘riot’! [...]. After all the tourists were on the bus, the guide and I also got on, and the lady who had kept the seats and a friend who was with her were isolated and separated by two rows of empty seats. For a few moment they leaned on the back of the chair to look back and try to understand what was going on. I realized that later they realized that the separation from other people was purposeful and that the fact that the chairs were reserved did not please the rest of the group (Field Journal).

Here we have two rules in question: do not keep a place; and reserve front seats for the elderly and the disabled (a formal and explicit rule on bus signage). Since almost everyone was elderly, they could sit in any seat, but the group shared the idea that whoever arrived could sit in the seat of their choice, without “reservation” for those who were not present, and that people with disabilities would have priority. By not obeying these rules, the two women produce, together with the other practitioners, unexpected effects in the itinerary practice, making it unique, despite being an itinerary that has occurred hundreds of times. The itinerary practice went beyond the agency’s guide and guidelines - it included the interaction of human tourist and material tourist elements, such as photos, buses and seats.

Still regarding the rules, one stood out from the others: experimenting with everything possible, followed by the question “what does it taste like?”.

“WHAT DOES IT TASTE LIKE?”; “I WANT IT TOO”

In the experimentation during the itinerary, an itinerary practitioner took the initiative to try something, and then several of them asked: “what does it taste like?”. So, everyone tasted it. This has been recorded several times:

[...] the woman had a small fruit in her hand. Then she stopped me and asked ‘Can I eat? “What does it taste like?” I replied that she could eat [...] and that it tasted like I didn’t know how to explain it [...], finally, the woman tried the fruit and said it wasn’t very sweet, but she ate it all! [...] After the guide explained about the jacu’s coffee [the bird eats the fruit of the coffee and expels the lump altered by digestion] [...] one of the girls who were talking to me got excited to try it and said: ‘Although I don’t I really like coffee, I want to try this different one. ‘Then she took a sip of unsweetened coffee and did not seem pleased, her father drank another; she sweetened the coffee and drank the rest - another couple and I also ordered a cup (Field Journal).

The experimentation rule leads to the acceptance of the unknown tourist material element. This is expected by practitioners, as they share this organizing rule of activities in the itinerary practice. There is even a clash between experimentation and personal preferences built up over a lifetime. This occurred when those who did not like coffee very much tried it, and, at other times, when “people who did not like liquor tasted all the available flavors, those who do not eat onion tried the ‘drunken onion’ (cebola bêbada) [...]” (Field Journal).

In this dynamic, when observing others making or buying something, tourists expressed “I want to do it”. This refers to the purpose of acting as and with others when knowing what others have known; photograph what others have photographed, even with the same poses; stop at the same stores; buy what others bought etc.

The understanding of “I also want” reveals how the commercialized material, when transformed into tourism, goes beyond the trade of a product. It is also a production that is part of the itinerary practice in its relations with and among the tourists themselves, in which a tourist is qualified to be an attraction to the other. Among all the “I also want”, the photos took on such a characteristic contour that they stood out as a specific category of doing and saying, within what was called throwback thursday.

THROWBACK THURSDAY, “MEET ESPÍRITO SANTO”

The term throwback thursday refers to a namesake hashtag used on social networks during Thursdays to post photos that refer to countless memories. The construction of souvenirs in photos was the most observed theme, being evident in several examples of elements of the itinerary practice discussed so far. There is a social sharing around feelings and the objective of producing memories and other feelings when viewing and sending photos to friends and family, during the itinerary practice, something remarkable in the tele-affective structure that organizes it.

The practitioner portrayed himself, friends and family together with beauties from the state of Espírito Santo, where the itineraries took place, as if he says “know Espírito Santo”. In their comments, it was evident that feelings about the natural beauty of the state marked the tele-affective structure of the itinerary practice when taking and sending photos, with practitioners indicating the sharing of the objective of seeking proximity to nature and people.

This purpose of proximity to people has already been outlined when we reveal that one tourist serves as an attraction to the other. At the limit, they seek an ideal that here we call the search for “miss sympathy”.

“MISS SYMPATHY”

Miss sympathy can materialize in one person, but it is more than that - it is indicative of a purpose around which the itinerary is organized. Sympathy involves the interaction between the practice agents, moods and affections between them. In the observations, these manifestations were recurrent. For example:

[...] in Vitória, the guide said that the next day she would do another tour, so she wouldn’t transfer them out. The coordinator of the group thanked the guide and passed the word to another lady, who also thanked the affection and patience on behalf of the group and said they would sing an elderly serenade (seresta da terceira idade) to honor the guide. The guide thanked and cried, even I cried. The guide said ‘each group is a group and I am very happy to have met you’. [...] all the ladies hugged the guide, took pictures with her and, finally, she was presented with a shirt from the group. [...] a lady was taking selfies and asked me to photograph her. I took pictures from one angle, from another, adjusted her sarong (canga), took some panoramic photos [...]. Finally, she said she was loving it because the city is very beautiful, very clean and the people are very friendly (Field Journal).

The above excerpt shows teleo-affectivity by organizing the practice in the sense of interaction between practitioners, seeing in others a potential “miss sympathy”.

The transformative character of the itinerary practice on humans and materials is evident. For example, when a human turns into “miss sympathy”, or when a coffee, even though it is not enjoyed by some humans, is drunk by them in the itinerary. The human and the material alter their relationship during the itinerary, the tourist becomes a tourist human and the coffee into tourist material, that is, the tourist coffee.

This transformation involves several activities within the practice, with emphasis on service.

THE “SERVICE”.

Throughout the itinerary practice, the material elements already mentioned, such as the Jacu’s coffee and the “drunken onion”, become tourist material also due to the service provided, when they are offered in the itinerary practice, in the guide’s actions and other agents. Coffee and onions, for example, cease to be common, starting from the service, when they are presented, respectively, as “do Jacu” and “drunk”, becoming “tourist” coffee and onion.

The aforementioned rules organize this transformation within the service activity, just as this activity takes on meaning due to tele-affectivity with specific implications. It gives meaning to the dynamics of the practice for the practitioner (Schatzki, 2002). Feelings related to happiness and sympathy, among others, involved the purpose of the search for satisfaction in the itinerary practice, giving meaning to it and a type of service linked to satisfaction, when the practitioners perceive the need of the agents to please them.

For example, when the researcher accompanied a group of tourists, the same waiters, who only attended the groups on previous itineraries, this time took them to visit the little church in the region. The waiters were always very friendly and seemed at ease. That day’s practice was different; the visit to the church is not part of the formal definition of the itinerary. The relationship created between the practitioners and the waiters, in the itinerary practice, led to the insertion of another material tourist element. The positive feelings involving satisfaction, sympathy and the quest to please were evident, marking tele-affection in the reorganization of the itinerary practice,

The material element becomes a tourist material offered to tourists. The church is transformed by a relationship that goes beyond the materiality of a religious temple. It also occurs due to the relationships between guide, tourists and other agents in practice. There is a common understanding in which they are able to do this around practice (Schatzki, 2002).

But not every itinerary practitioner absolutely shared understanding in practice, positioning himself as an outsider.

THE OUTSIDER “ON THE MOVE”

In relation to a few practitioners, and at specific times, there was no consensus on what made sense or not to do or say. They were identified here as an outsider. An example occurred when visiting the Goiabeiras potters.

[...] the couple spoke to me ‘wow, this way of burning shouldn’t be like that, it releases a lot of smoke, it’s done outdoors. Look how people are in the sun, they have their skin ruined and breathe all that smoke ‘. I justified and reminded them that the guide had said it is a tradition passed from mother to daughter and they didn’t even let me complete the sentence, saying ‘I know, but they should evolve. If it is to improve, everything has to change ‘(Field Diary).

The non-sharing of some understandings between tourists sometimes occurred in the itinerary practice. In order to deal with this phenomenon, we have evidenced in the organizational practice an understanding that enables the use of time involving continuous changes, an “in motion” care maintained by the guides. Herein non-shares appear and are left behind, as the practitioner continually moves the focus of their interactions (as the couple, indignant with the production process of the potters, who no longer dealt with it in another space-time of the itinerary).

In turn, this “on the move” was often related to other actions and sayings, such as: how much time do you have?; What does it taste like?; I want it too. In other words, the actions and sayings were not presented in an isolated way in the itinerary practice, quite the contrary. In practice, the doings and sayings organized around rules, tele-affections and understandings discussed here are interconnected. They were presented separately from the analysis categories only for the purpose of organizing the text. The rules, understandings and teleo-affectivity presented separately are immersed in the same network of practices and influence and are influenced by each other in the organization of the itinerary practice.

RESULT ANALYSIS: SCHATZKI’S EPISTEMOLOGY IN ITINERARY PRACTICE

In the data, it was evident that material arrangements are a relevant aspect of the approach to tourism practices, already identified in the study by Rantala et al. (2011). In the present study, such arrangements proved to be producers of the itinerary practice, such as the relationships between the practitioners and the cafe, the photos, the chairs on the bus, among others.

Another aspect of the materiality in the itinerary is its historical and informative character about a locality. The guides showed in the itinerary practice mastery of information acquired during the tour guide course. But the skills of the guides were not restricted to this course - they were just part of a knowing (Gherardi, 2009) that continues to establish itself throughout the itinerary practice.

In other words, as observed in the studies by Bispo (2012), Bispo and Godoy (2012) and Roper and Hodari (2015) on the tourist practice, in the itinerary practice we also identify the processes of knowing in a practice and learning in that practice, thus building knowledge. The sharing of this knowledge refers to the embodiment of the subjects in a practice, as evidenced in the discussion of the theme “in movement”, when the tourist humans revealed the need to explore all the places that belong to the itinerary practice.

The individuals also understood, from that knowing, that the itinerary practice needed movement and exploration of the places in order to understand the context, and were attentive to the possible places of visitation and the experiences they could have. This knowing marks how the movement of the bodies of individuals occurs that, through learning, is produced by itinerary practice (Reckwitz, 2002; Schatzki, 2001, 2002). Consequently, walking was established as one of the body movements guided by practice, as well as listening and speaking were some forms of performance in the itinerary practice.

Despite the embodiment and performativity being conveyed by the subjects, the approach adopted made it evident that everyone (embodiment, performativity, subjects) belongs to the itinerary practice. Regarding the organizing described by Schatzki (2006), the approach articulated here turns to the importance of recognizing the interaction of human and material elements, tourist and non-tourist, capable of altering the itinerary practice, which (re)constantly organizes.

In this way, the performance of the subjects’ actions and practices changes (Schatzki, 2006), even with the material arrangements that support an itinerary being composed of several of the same objects (buses, signs, restaurants) and places of visitation. This occurs because there are a multitude of possible variations, with emphasis on human elements, which in the itinerary are different on a daily basis. These human elements carry different practices that make them unique when interacting with other humans and with the material arrangements in the (re)organization in the practice of the tour itinerary.

As explained by Schatzki (2002), this dynamic arises because the actions in practice are situated in time and space, and in different times and spaces, the actions of practice do not necessarily have the same meaning (as in the case where you kept your place in one of the seats at the front of the bus, even though she knew that a member of the group had a type of physical disability, but she didn’t want to lose her place). This action may have as meanings the search for the best view that the bus can provide to the practitioner who wants to enjoy the itinerary; a simple distribution of seats; or self-centeredness that ignores the needs of others and must be punished.

The different meanings are part of the dynamics of changing practices. In some cases, previous and external interactions to the itinerary already marked changes in its practice - for example, when familiar problems of the guides or drivers interfered with the dynamics of the itinerary. In addition, although the map prescribed for carrying out the itinerary was the same, the existing interactions in practice altered it, even though there were similarities. This occurs due to the existence of a practical intelligibility (Schatzki, 2002), manifested in the itinerary practice - from the need to be in constant movement, to take many pictures, to try all flavors and the guide to introduce information about the materiality of the itinerary, for example.

This became clear when we analyzed, based on Schatzki’s epistemology (2002, 2005), the doings and sayings, exposing understandings, rules and tele-affection that organize the itinerary practice. Although these elements appeared separately in the categories described in the presentation of the itinerary practice, they can understand the same actions and guide activities around the same practice. Similar to what was evidenced by Schatzki (2002), we identified organizing rules of practice shared during the socialization of individuals. As revealed by the author in relation to other practices, although the rules and instructions that guide the itinerary practice are the same, the social conventions and shared principles may be different because they involve the intelligibility of the practice. This seems to be related to the fact that these individuals are from different regions. In this way, the sharing of rules begins to be more homogeneous, as the subjects socialize and interact. The same occurs with the understandings shared by individuals immersed in the same practice.

Both the understandings and the rules that guide the itinerary practice are related to the tele-affection shown in moments such as the interactions generated from the sympathy, the feelings and the emotions when they know part of the state of Espírito Santo, and the need to register such feelings through photos.

The interaction of all these elements interferes, in different ways, in the itinerary practice and are useful for its study. In this article, we seek to reveal this path as a contribution to understanding the dynamics of the organization of a tour itinerary, which allows discussing its implications for practitioners interested in working in this organization.

FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

This article aims to understand the organization of the practice of tour itineraries from Schatzki’s practice epistemology. Thus, it was possible to highlight the potential of PBS to investigate the organizational practice of tour itineraries toward understandings, rules and tele-affectivity.

The analysis demonstrated the ability of the itinerary practice to transform people’s tastes. The transforming character in the practice of tour itinerary on humans and materials arises when these different elements are related to it. This is driven by an intense diversity between humans and materials that have never been related before. They come into contact for the first time during this practice and do not fully share the same understandings and rules. In order to deal with this, the itinerary practice proved to be composed of shares that allow dealing with non-sharing, with the difference, at the same time that they allow the difference to manifest itself. Among these shares, the most outstanding is the understanding of the constant movement, in search of exploring new flavors, spaces and experiences, enabling the transformation of human and material, tourist and non-tourist.

In this movement, the tour itinerary was, at the same time, organized and organizational, just as Cavalcante and Bispo (2018) identified in the tourist space. The tour itineraries analyzed organize tourist spaces at the same time that they are organized, in a movement in which non-tourist spaces become tourist and vice versa - as when the bus passed through a series of shops that should be open for visiting tourists, as planned. However, as they were closed, there was no tourist space at that time, just a street where the bus passed.

It is clear that this itinerary relationship, between the touristic and non-touristic space, as it happens between the material elements and the actors, touristic or not, is not dichotomous, as well as in any relationship between elements in tourism as a practice (Bispo, 2016). They are not separate; both are part of a whole and are always there, being performed according to the practices at stake, when they are transformed. By revealing this organizing, this article contributes to the understanding of the transformational dynamics of what is or is not tourist based on itineraries.

In addition, when analyzing the practice of the tour itinerary, it was possible to reveal a type of organization in which temporary engagements in specific activities predominate. This is part of the greater complexity of organizing tourism, when compared to the so-called traditional companies, because “[...] the tourism production and consumption process is essentially a complex system of relationships between people and multiple organizations”, in which choices related to consumption are manifested throughout the production itself and become part of it (Tomazzoni et al., 2008, p. 138).

It should be clear that the itinerary practice has similarities to any other organizational practice, which includes practices within or outside a company. In the approach adopted here, practice is a recurrence in which the person becomes a practitioner. It is not a simple repetition, but a (re)production that includes a different production, the unexpected (Schatzki, 2002).

In the case of this study, those who have practiced previous itinerary (re)produce several elements of this practice and a large part of them refer to ways to seek the unexpected. This leads to a constant (re)organization of what involves the itinerary practice when the unexpected occurs with different results. For example, the protest among tourists for places on the bus, complaints about the unsanitary conditions of the traditional way of producing clay pots, tourists accepting the invitation of waiters to visit a church with them or the temptation to try a strange fruit.

Part of this surprise, or unexpected, is sought by tourists. It is part of the daily recurrence of the itinerary practice and may have been previously planned. But another part, like the aforementioned protest, simply comes out, enhanced for that search, expanding the constant (re)organizations in practice. In this way, we highlight the opportunity to study organizing in a dynamic in which the insertion of new elements is intense for most practitioners.

In studies in the organizational field, from the perspective of organizing based on practice, it is necessary to recognize that something new can always be (re)produced (Júlio & Tureta, 2018). This is not exclusive to the tour itinerary. It does offer the opportunity to study the organization that occurs as a result of this new, in an everyday intensity. It is an organization in which the new, the unexpected, occurs within the (re)production of other elements of practice, which, regardless of this movement, could already include the new, but, in this case, it is also an of the purposes of the practice.

The tour itinerary offered the opportunity to study this organizational phenomenon little investigated, but present in society, including in other processes of organizing, such as, for example, in the practice of moviegoers, when looking for films with surprising scenes or even in the practice of online players, looking for unimaginable challenges. This often causes films and games to be changed before, during and even after the release, as the consumers interact with the production process. A dynamic typical of some contemporary organizations that offer a product with different possibilities of use and that allow customers to choose the way they will consume the products.

Therefore, the tour itinerary is not just a practice in the field of tourism that had its organization highlighted here. It is also the manifestation of a peculiar type of organizing, in which the search for a strange experience occurs, at the same time as the (re)production of elements of practice. In this article, the tour itinerary was the way to reveal part of the dynamics of the process in organizational studies.

In addition to this contribution to the field of organizational studies, this article contributes to the field of tourism, by removing the discussion on the itineraries of traditional optics and bringing it closer to the postmodern perspective. A movement advocated by Oppliger et al. (2016), as it offers reflections more aligned with the demands of contemporary society when rethinking tour itineraries. While in the traditional view they are treated as a prior, static definition of a tourist offer, in the postmodern itineraries are treated as part of multiple productions in which tourism, tourists and society are mutually produced.

In this article, we insert in this discussion the question of organizing practices based on Schatzki’s epistemology, offering a different look at tour itineraries, in which he is considered as a practice related to organizational processes, allowing to reveal these processes. Thus, just as tourism as a practice focuses on the production of knowledge about tourism (Bispo, 2016), the approach offered here focuses on the production of this knowledge with a focus on roadmaps.

We have proposed and empirically evidenced a way to treat tour itineraries under a certain perspective that deals with new approaches to tourism research focused on the issue of mobility, performativity and actor-network theory (E. Cohen & S. A. Cohen, 2012), converging with the PBS (Bispo, 2016). When adopting the epistemology of Schatzki’s practice, we dealt with the three approaches to assess itineraries, with the proviso that, instead of the symmetry between human agency and material from the actor-network theory (Latour, 2005), Schatzki’s approach (2002) it allowed us to recognize the uses that humans make of material arrangements, giving relevance to the latter, but not in a symmetrical way to humans.

By adopting this approach, we recognize an ontology in which practice is the constituent of the tour itinerary phenomenon and the basis of epistemology to investigate it. This is also a contribution to boost the multiplicity of voices that characterize the field of study of tourism and its continuous transformation (Ren, Pritchard & Morgan, 2010). Within this field, we suggest that researchers, in their future studies, and professionals of the sector, should think about organizing the itineraries as continuous and fragmented, understanding that standardization and presetting are only part of their organization. This is an approach that helps to recognize and take advantage of the involvement of tourists and other practitioners in this organization.

REFERÊNCIAS

• Bispo, M. S. (2012). Aprendizaje colectivo en el uso de la tecnología como práctica en las agencias de viajes: Un abordaje etnometodológico. Estudios y perspectivas em Turismo, 21(6), 1541-1557.
• Bispo, M. S. (2016, novembro). Tourism as practice. Annals of Tourism Research, 61, 170-179.
• Bispo, M. S., & Godoy, A. S. (2012). The learning process of the use of technologies as practice: an ethnomethodological approach in travel agencies. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Turismo, 6(2), 160-180.
• Cavalcante, E. D. C., & Bispo, M. S. (2018). A análise etnometodológica do turismo como prática numa orla marítima no Nordeste brasileiro. Organizações & Sociedade, 25(85), 247-263.
• Cavedon, N. R. (1999). O método etnográfico em estudos sobre a cultura organizacional: implicações positivas e negativas. In Anais do 23º Encontro Nacional de Programas de Pós-Graduação em Administração, Foz do Iguaçu, PR.
• Cellard, A. (2008). A análise documental. In J. Poupart, J. J. P. Deslauries, L. H. Groulx, A. Laperrièrre, R. Mayer, A. P. Pires (Eds.), A pesquisa qualitativa: enfoques epistemológicos e metodológicos Petrópolis, RJ: Vozes.
• Cisne, R., & Gastal, S. (2011). Nueva visión sobre los itinerarios turísticos: una contribución a partir de la complejidad. Estudios y Perspectivas en Turismo, 20(6), 1449-1463.
• Cohen, E., & Cohen, S. A. (2012). Current sociological theories and issues in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(4), 2177-2202.
• Creswell, J. W. (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five approaches London, UK: SAGE.
• Cutler, S. Q., Carmichael, B., & Doherty, S. (2014). The Inca Trail experience: does the journey matter?Annals of Tourism Research, 45, 152-166.
• Czarniawska, B. (2008). Organizing: how to study it and how to write about it. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 3(1), 4-20.
• Dantas, N. G., & Melo, R. S. (2011). Análise da metodologia de hierarquização de atrativos turísticos como instrumento para elaboração de roteiros turísticos no município de Itabaiana (PB). Caderno Virtual de Turismo, 11(1), 147-163.
• Edensor, T. (2001). Performing tourism, staging tourism (re) producing tourist space and practice. Tourist studies, 1(1), 59-81.
• Fageda, X., Jiménez, J. L., Perdiguero, J., & Marrero, K. (2017, agosto). Does market exit of a network airline affect airline prices and frequencies on tourist routes? Tourism Management, 61, 465-471.
• Fontana, A., & Frey, J. H. (2005). The interview: from neutral stance to political involvement. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Orgs.). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research(3a. ed., pp. 695-727). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
• Gherardi, S. (2009). Introduction: the critical power of the “practice lens”. Management Learning, 40(2), 115-128.
• Jiang, L., & Xu, H. (2016). Reading, tourism, and geography consumption in literary places. Tourism Geographies, 18(5), 1-20.
• Júlio, A. C., & Tureta, C. (2018). Transformando lixo em luxo: a materialidade nas práticas da produção carnavalesca. Brazilian Business Review, 15(5), 427-443.
• Lamers, M., Duim, R., & Spaargaren, G. (2017). The relevance of practice theories for tourism research. Annals of Tourism Research, 62, 54-63.
• Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: an introduction to actor-network-theory Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
• Li, X., Zhou, J., & Zhao, X. (2016). Travel itinerary problem. Transportation Research Part B, 91, 332-343.
• Meira, F. B., & Meira, M. B. V. (2007). Considerações sobre um campo científico em formação: Bourdieu e a “nova ciência” do turismo. Cadernos EBAPE.BR, 5(4), 1-18, 2007.
• Moraes, W. V., & Emmendoerfer, W. L. (2015). Turismo comunitário e inclusão social: análise do roteiro turístico de base comunitária do Projeto Boas Práticas na Serra do Brigadeiro - MG/Brasil. Anais Brasileiros de Estudos Turísticos, 5(3), 26-35.
• Nicolini, D., Gherardi, S., & Yanow, D. (2003). Introduction: toward a practice-based view of knowing and learning in organizations, In D. Nicolini, S. Gherardi, & D. Yanow (Orgs.), Knowing in organizations: a practice-based approach (pp. 3-31). London, UK: M. E. Sharpe.
• Oppliger, E. A., Fountoura, F. M., Oliveira, A. K. M., Toledo, M. C. B., Silva, M. H. S., & Guedes, N. M. R. (2016). O potencial turístico para a observação da avifauna em três áreas verdes na cidade de Campo Grande, MS. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Turismo, 10(2), 274-292.
• Peng, H., Zhang, J., Liu, Z., & Yang, L. (2016). Network analysis of tourist flows: a cross-provincial boundary perspective. Tourism Geographies, 18(5), 561-586.
• Pimentel, R., & Nogueira, E. E. S. (2018). Estudos baseados na prática: possibilidades metodológicas para pesquisas em estudos organizacionais. Organizações & Sociedade, 25(86), 350-370.
• Rantala, O., Valtonen, A., & Markuksela, V. (2011). Materializing tourist weather: ethnography on weather-wise wilderness guiding practices. Journal of Material Culture, 16(3), 285-300.
• Reckwitz, A. (2002). Toward a theory of social practices: a development in culturalist theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory, 5(2), 243-263.
• Ren, C., Pritchard, A., & Morgan, N. (2010). Constructing tourism research: a critical inquiry. Annals of Tourism Research, 37(4), 885-904.
• Roper, A., & Hodari, D. (2015, dezembro). Strategy tools: contextual factors impacting use and usefulness. Tourism Management, 51, 1-12.
• Sandberg, J., & Dall’Alba, G. (2009). Returning to practice anew: a life-world perspective. Organization Studies, 30(12), 1349-1368.
• Santos, L. L. S., & Silveira, R. (2015). Por uma epistemologia das práticas organizacionais: a contribuição de Theodore Schatzki. Organizações & Sociedade, 22(72), 79-98.
• Schatzki, T. R. (2001). Introduction: practice theory. In T. R. Schatzki, K. Knorr-Cetina, & E. Von Savigny (Orgs.), The practice turn in contemporary theory(pp. 10-23). London, UK: Routledge.
• Schatzki, T. R. (2002). What is a social practice? In T. R. Schatzki (Ed.), The site of the social: a philosophical account of the constitution of social life and change (pp. 70-88). Pennsylvania, Philadelphia: Pennsylvania State University.
• Schatzki, T. R. (2003). A new societist social ontology. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 33(2), 174-202.
• Schatzki, T. R. (2005). The sites of organizations. Organization Studies, 26(3), 465-484.
• Schatzki, T. R. (2006). On organizations as they happen.Organization Studies, 27(12), 1863-1873.
• Stone, M. J. (2016). Impact of delays and cancellations on travel from small community airports. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 18(2), 214-228.
• Sudiarta, I. N., & Suardana, I. W. (2016). Tourism destination planning strategy: analysis and implementation of marketing city tour in Bali. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 227, 664-670.
• Tomazzoni, E. L., Dorion, E., & Zottis, A. (2008). Análise organizacional de destinos turísticos com base nos conceitos de mudança, de incerteza e na teoria do caos: estudo dos exemplos de Gramado e Canela, na Serra Gaúcha. Organizações & Sociedade, 15(47), 137-154.
• Tribe, J. (2010). Tribe, territories and networks in the tourism academy. Annals of Tourism Research, 37(1), 7-33.
• Xia, J., Zeephongsekul, P., & Arrowsmith, C. (2009). Modelling spatio-temporal movement of tourists using finite Markov chains. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 79(5), 1544-1553.

• [Translated version] Note: All quotes in English translated by this article’s translator.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  24 Jan 2022
• Date of issue
  Oct-Dec 2021

History

• Received
  21 Oct 2019
• Accepted
  11 June 2020