The Power of Persona in Destination Marketing

Survey respondents were segmented into four generational cohorts based on their reported age:

Each respondent’s age was extracted and assigned to the appropriate generational category, allowing for an aggregate count of participants in each cohort.

After classification, the total number of respondents in each generational cohort was computed. To better understand the relative distribution of age groups within the dataset, the proportion of respondents in each category was calculated by dividing the number of respondents in a given age group by the total number of survey respondents, then multiplying the result by 100 to express it as a percentage. This step ensured a clear representation of how different age segments contributed to the overall dataset.

The analysis computed three central tendency measures for travel frequency:

These metrics provide a concise summary of typical travel behavior in the sample.

Respondents were classified into three segments based on their reported number of trips:

For each segment, the analysis determined the percentage of respondents, offering insights into how travel frequency is distributed within the overall sample.

To explore differences in travel behavior among various generational cohorts, respondents were grouped according to their age group codes (e.g., Generation Z, Millennials, Generation X, and Baby Boomers). For each age group, the average number of trips per year was calculated. This step helps to identify whether travel frequency varies with demographic factors.

Each box plot consists of five key markers:

Survey responses are systematically processed to determine the number of individuals familiar with destination brand campaigns. The methodology follows these steps:

To examine awareness patterns, respondents are categorized based on key demographic and behavioral factors:

Each bar represents a different age group, showing the distribution of responses as follows:

The chart is normalized to 100%, making it easy to compare relative proportions across age groups rather than absolute counts. This allows for a clear visual comparison of awareness levels between generations.

Each bar represents a different travel frequency group, showing the distribution of responses as follows:

The chart is normalized to 100%, making it easy to compare relative proportions across travel frequency groups rather than absolute counts. This allows for a clear visual comparison of awareness levels between people who travel more or less frequently.

The analysis shows that age does not play a significant role in determining awareness of destination marketing campaigns. While there are slight variations in awareness percentages across generations, the statistical testing reveals that these differences are not meaningful enough to suggest that any particular age group is more engaged with DMOs than others.

One might assume that individuals who travel more frequently would have greater awareness of destination marketing campaigns, given their increased exposure to tourism-related content. However, the survey findings contradict this assumption.

Given that neither age nor travel frequency significantly impacts awareness, these findings raise important questions about how DMOs communicate their value to the public. If decades of promotional work have not translated into widespread awareness, it may indicate that current marketing strategies are failing to effectively engage audiences.

To improve public recognition and engagement, DMOs should consider the following:

The results of this portion of the study highlight a critical gap in public understanding of destination marketing efforts. If DMOs aim to increase awareness and engagement, they must go beyond traditional advertising and embrace modern, consumer-driven marketing approaches.

By shifting toward personalized engagement, digital storytelling, and experiential campaigns, DMOs have an opportunity to reshape how travelers perceive and interact with destination branding—transforming public perception from passive awareness to active participation.

Survey respondents were asked to indicate whether specific factors influenced their travel decisions. These factors included recommendations from friends, social media, destination marketing campaigns, online review platforms, cost considerations, personal interests, and past experiences. Each respondent could select multiple influence factors, allowing for an assessment of the most and least prominent decision drivers.

To evaluate the impact of demographic variables, responses were grouped into three primary segmentation categories:

The segmentation approach was chosen to capture key demographic differences in travel decision-making. By breaking down responses by age, travel frequency, and campaign awareness, the study provides a more nuanced understanding of which factors drive travel choices among different groups.

This methodology ensures that the reported findings are not only descriptive but also supported by various factors that could potentially impact travel decision-making, offering a reliable foundation for interpreting the travel influence landscape.

Each bar represents a different age group, with segments showing the number of respondents who selected a particular travel influence factor:

This chart allows for a clear comparison of influence factors across generations, showing which factors are more or less significant to each age group.

Each bar represents a different travel frequency group, with segments showing the number of respondents who selected a particular travel influence factor:

This visualization allows for a clear comparison of influence factors across low, medium, and high-frequency travelers, highlighting how travel habits correlate with different decision-making influences.

Each bar represents a different campaign awareness category, with segments showing the number of respondents who selected a particular travel influence factor:

This visualization allows for a clear comparison of influence factors across those who are aware, unaware, or unsure of travel marketing campaigns, highlighting how marketing exposure impacts travel decisions.

Across all respondents, personal interests (81.7%) and recommendations from friends and family (67.14%) were the most frequently cited factors influencing travel decisions. Cost considerations also played a significant role (61.96%), reinforcing the importance of financial constraints in trip planning. Online review platforms such as Yelp influenced 43% of respondents, while social media had a more limited effect (29.66%). Destination marketing campaigns (13.01%) were among the least selected factors, indicating that organic and peer-driven influences were more impactful than formal marketing efforts.

Generational differences were evident in how respondents weighed various travel influences. Gen Y and Gen Z exhibited the strongest reliance on recommendations from friends (69.32% and 74.48%, respectively) and personal interests (80.56% and 80.73%). Social media was a major factor for Gen Z (43.75%) but had a reduced impact on older generations, particularly Baby Boomers (7.46%). Cost considerations were most influential for Gen X (67.42%), while Baby Boomers leaned more on past experiences (71.64%) rather than digital or peer-driven sources.

Frequent travelers exhibited distinct decision-making patterns. High-frequency travelers (8-12 trips annually) were the most likely to cite personal interests (85.71%) and cost (65.71%) as key influences. Medium-frequency travelers (4-7 trips) showed a similarly high reliance on personal interests (84.97%) but were more influenced by online reviews (51.3%) than their high-frequency counterparts (37.14%). Low-frequency travelers (1-3 trips) were more likely to rely on word-of-mouth recommendations from friends and family (64.06%) and cost factors (61.56%), suggesting a greater hesitancy in independent trip planning.

Exposure to destination marketing campaigns was correlated with increased influence from formal marketing channels and digital sources. Campaign-aware respondents were more likely to cite destination marketing organizations (DMOs) as an influence (32.34%) compared to unaware respondents (6.77%). Additionally, those aware of campaigns were more influenced by online review platforms such as Yelp (54.73%) and social media (46.77%), indicating that marketing exposure may amplify engagement with digital platforms. Conversely, campaign-unaware respondents relied more heavily on personal interests (82.23%) and past experiences (59.39%), suggesting a more self-directed approach to trip planning.

These findings emphasize the importance of tailored marketing strategies that align with demographic-specific preferences:

By aligning travel marketing strategies with these insights, destination marketers can optimize their outreach efforts, ensuring that messaging resonates with the right audience segments and drives higher engagement.

To analyze destination type preferences, responses from the survey were structured and categorized systematically. The following steps outline how the data was processed:

Each category was independently analyzed to determine how different respondent groups preferred specific destination types.

Once responses were categorized, calculations were performed to determine destination type preferences:

Each of these calculations was structured into tables with percentages reflecting how each demographic segment or influencing factor correlated with destination preferences.

Through the outlined methodology, the analysis provided a robust framework to quantify and validate destination type preferences. The combination of frequency analysis and statistical testing allowed for:

These results provide actionable insights for travel marketers, allowing them to tailor promotional efforts toward different demographic groups with a data-driven approach.

The most striking trend is the gradual shift from urban to rural travel across generations:

This pattern suggests that as travelers age, their preferences shift toward quieter, nature-focused destinations. Marketing strategies should reflect this by targeting younger travelers with city-based content and older travelers with rural and nature-driven experiences.

The analysis of how often respondents travel highlights an unexpected shift toward rural destinations among high-frequency travelers:

This suggests that frequent travelers actively seek varied experiences, with many prioritizing nature, adventure, or retreat-style travel options over repeated urban visits.

Marketing exposure plays a strong role in destination choice, but not in the way one might expect:

This indicates that marketing campaigns effectively promote alternative travel options, encouraging travelers to consider suburban and rural destinations over urban ones.

Based on these findings, destination marketing organizations (DMOs) and travel businesses should tailor their strategies as follows:

These insights reveal a clear, generationally driven shift from urban to rural travel, supported by travel frequency and campaign awareness trends. While urban destinations remain dominant, their preference gradually declines across generations, with rural destinations steadily rising.

This suggests that the future of travel marketing will require a more balanced approach, where urban, suburban, and rural destinations are promoted based on traveler demographics and behaviors. By understanding these shifts, destinations can optimize their marketing strategies, ensuring they align with evolving traveler preferences.

The Springfield, MO test market revealed nearly a 10% higher favorability toward the persona-based brand compared to the overall persona preference rate—63.62% in Springfield versus 54.34% overall. This striking increase reinforces the potential of persona-based destination branding, especially for communities with ordinary, generic, or less memorable names. By crafting a compelling emotional narrative that focuses on the kind of experience a traveler might have rather than relying on name recognition alone, destinations like Springfield can more effectively capture interest and inspire visits despite lacking built-in name appeal.

The across-the-board increase in persona brand preference within the Springfield, MO test market was both expected and consistent with the uplift observed in the overall Springfield results compared to the full dataset. Notably, Generation X respondents in the Springfield group showed a higher proportion favoring the persona brand over the place-based brand, while Baby Boomers responded with the highest share of persona preference when considering the entire study. Because Gen X had a significantly larger sample size than the Baby Boomer cohort, this helps dispel earlier assumptions that the strong Boomer preference for persona branding might have been a fluke of smaller sample representation. Instead, the pattern suggests that persona-based destination branding can resonate meaningfully across older demographics, especially when reinforced by a solid narrative fit.

The trend of increased persona brand favorability in the Springfield, MO test market continues across all travel frequency cohorts, reinforcing the broader pattern seen in the overall results. However, one modest anomaly stands out: high-frequency travelers in the Springfield group reported nearly identical persona brand preference levels as those in the overall study, while both low- and medium-frequency travelers showed noticeably higher persona favorability in the Springfield example. This could be attributed to the significantly smaller sample size of high-frequency travelers, which may limit the representativeness of the data. Additionally, it’s plausible that high-frequency travelers—due to their extensive destination knowledge and accumulated travel experiences—rely less on aspirational branding and more on tangible memories or expectations when evaluating destinations.

While the Springfield data continued to show across-the-board increases in persona brand preference across all travel influence factors, a similar trend persisted when compared to the overall study: the differences in persona preference between each influence factor group remained relatively narrow and consistent. This reinforces the idea that no single influence factor—whether it’s personal interests, social media, cost, or past experiences—is a strong predictor of whether a traveler will ultimately favor a persona-style brand or a traditional place-based one. Instead, the consistency across these segments suggests that persona branding has broad, general appeal, but that the decision to prefer one brand type over another is likely shaped by a combination of personal context, destination resonance, and emotional response rather than any single influence channel.

The increase in persona brand preference across all campaign awareness groups in the Springfield segment continues the overall trend of elevated persona favorability seen throughout the test market. Much like the broader study, the margins of difference between respondents who were aware, unaware, or unsure about tourism campaigns remained relatively narrow. This suggests that while campaign awareness may slightly enhance receptiveness to persona-based branding, it is not a strong standalone predictor of brand preference. The consistent uplift across all awareness levels reinforces the idea that the persona brand resonated broadly with Springfield respondents, regardless of their prior exposure to tourism marketing.

Persona brand preference for Springfield continued to show elevated levels across all destination type preference cohorts when compared to the overall study results. Consistent with the broader findings, Springfield respondents demonstrated a progressively increasing preference for the persona brand when moving from urban to suburban to rural destination types. This pattern further reinforces the idea that individuals who prefer rural and suburban destinations are more responsive to destination brands that evoke emotion, lifestyle, and activities rather than relying solely on the name or geographic identity of a place. The fact that this trend held true even in a test market like Springfield suggests that persona branding may be particularly effective for destinations aiming to attract travelers who seek a sense of belonging or imaginative experience.

Here are several key takeaways from the Springfield, MO test market that offer new insights beyond those highlighted in the overall study results, especially for destinations with ordinary or generic place names:

Persona Branding Performs Especially Well for Generic Place Names

Springfield’s nearly 10% higher favorability toward the persona-based brand compared to the overall study suggests that persona branding is particularly effective for destinations with common or forgettable names. For cities like Springfield—of which there are many across the U.S.—a name alone may not be sufficient to generate interest. However, a compelling persona-based identity like Whispering Pines helps reframe the destination in the mind of the traveler, transforming familiarity into intrigue.

High Persona Preference Across Demographics Validates Broad Appeal

The consistent uplift in persona brand preference across age groups in Springfield—especially among Gen X and Baby Boomers—shows that this branding strategy isn’t just appealing to younger audiences. Despite Baby Boomers having the highest share of persona preference in the full study, Gen X respondents in Springfield showed the most significant shift in brand favorability, reinforcing that emotional or lifestyle-driven branding resonates strongly across generational lines.

Low and Medium Travel Frequency Groups Responded Most Strongly

While all travel frequency groups in Springfield leaned toward the persona brand, the most significant increases came from low and medium-frequency travelers. This may indicate that these groups are more receptive to aspirational branding when deciding where to travel, whereas high-frequency travelers, with more experience and destination familiarity, may rely on practical factors or existing knowledge when evaluating a place.

Emotional Framing Overrides Influence Channel Differences

In Springfield, persona brand preference rose across all travel influence factors—social media, word of mouth, cost, interests, and past travel experience—mirroring the overall study’s pattern of narrow variation between these groups. This suggests that how a destination is framed emotionally may matter more than how a person heard about it, making persona branding a versatile strategy that transcends the influence channel.

Suburban and Rural Audiences Show Strongest Persona Alignment

Respondents who preferred rural or suburban destinations showed the highest gains in persona brand preference in the Springfield test. This supports the idea that persona branding—by focusing on emotional appeal, imagined lifestyle, or thematic identity—offers a competitive edge to places that lack iconic landmarks or global recognition. It helps them be remembered not for where they are, but for how they feel.

These insights offer actionable value for destination marketers working with average or under-the-radar towns: a strong persona-based brand can shift perception, engage wider audiences, and elevate even the most ordinary-sounding places into aspirational experiences.

The Roanoke, VA test market revealed a persona brand preference that was nearly identical to the overall study results, with less than a 1% difference between the two. In Roanoke, 55.02% of respondents favored the persona-based brand, compared to 54.34% in the overall sample. This minimal variance reinforces the consistency of persona-based brand appeal across diverse markets, while also continuing the trend of a modest but meaningful edge over place-based branding.

Despite Roanoke’s stronger regional identity and more evocative geography than some other test markets, the persona-based approach still edged out the traditional place name, indicating that emotional resonance and thematic storytelling hold persuasive power even in locations that already benefit from recognizable natural assets.

In the Roanoke, VA test market, Baby Boomers showed a significantly higher preference for the persona-based destination brand than in the overall study, with over three-quarters of respondents in that age group favoring the persona option. This stands in contrast to the Millennial and Gen X cohorts in Roanoke, who each reported slightly lower persona brand preference rates compared to the overall dataset.

This outcome is particularly interesting when compared to the Springfield, Missouri portion of the study, where Gen X exhibited the strongest lean toward persona branding. Together, these results suggest that generational responses to persona-based branding are not monolithic; instead, the effectiveness of a persona brand may vary depending on how well its emotional tone, lifestyle framing, or thematic identity aligns with the values and aspirations of each age group.

The Roanoke test market revealed a noticeably higher preference for the persona-based destination brand among high-frequency travelers, while medium- and low-frequency travelers showed virtually identical levels of persona preference to those in the overall study. This reinforces a pattern observed across the broader dataset, where high-frequency travelers exhibited a slightly stronger inclination toward persona branding.

However, as also seen in the Springfield, MO test, the degree of this preference shift isn’t always substantial. These fluctuations suggest that while frequent travelers may be more responsive to emotionally framed, experience-driven branding, the impact can vary depending on how well the specific persona narrative resonates. In Roanoke’s case, the "Timber Ridge" persona likely struck a stronger chord with high-frequency travelers by tapping into their familiarity with outdoor adventure and regional nuance.

As with the overall study results and the Springfield, MO example, the Roanoke, VA test market further confirms that individual influence factors—such as friends and family, social media, destination marketing campaigns, or online reviews—do not appear to correlate meaningfully with a respondent’s preference for persona versus place-based destination brands.

Across all influence categories, the Roanoke data showed only minimal variation in brand preference, mirroring the consistent distribution seen elsewhere in the study. This reinforces the conclusion that the source of travel inspiration does not significantly predict whether a person will gravitate toward a traditional geographic brand or an emotionally framed persona brand. Instead, the appeal of persona branding appears to operate independently of how or where a traveler first encounters a destination.

In the Roanoke, VA test market, destination brand preference remained nearly identical across all levels of campaign awareness, aligning closely with the results of the overall study. However, a unique aspect of the Roanoke responses was that individuals who indicated they were either unfamiliar with or unsure about tourism marketing campaigns showed a slightly higher preference for persona-based destination brands compared to those who reported being aware of such campaigns.

This finding is particularly noteworthy because it suggests that awareness of tourism marketing alone does not strongly influence the type of brand a person prefers. In fact, those outside the reach of conventional campaign messaging may be even more receptive to emotionally resonant persona brands, highlighting the importance of brand content and tone over exposure alone.

While respondents who preferred urban destinations showed identical persona vs. place brand preferences for Roanoke, VA as they did in the overall study, those who favored rural and suburban destinations leaned slightly more toward the persona brand in the Roanoke test market. This is particularly compelling given that Roanoke is a relatively urban destination.

The data suggests that travelers who typically gravitate toward rural and suburban settings have more finely tuned preferences when it comes to destination branding, showing stronger alignment with emotionally resonant, lifestyle-oriented persona brands. This insight presents an opportunity for urban destinations: by adopting persona-based branding strategies, they can more effectively appeal to traveler segments that traditionally prefer quieter, more bucolic settings—bridging the gap between setting and sentiment.

Here are key takeaways from the Roanoke, VA test market that offer distinct insights beyond those revealed in the overall study or the Springfield, MO example:

Strong Persona Preference Among Baby Boomers

Roanoke saw a strikingly high level of persona brand preference among Baby Boomers (76.12%), significantly above the overall average for this generation (61.44%). This contrasts with Millennials and Gen X, who actually showed slightly lower persona preference in Roanoke compared to the overall study. This suggests that different persona brand styles resonate differently with each generation—Timber Ridge may have evoked nostalgic or lifestyle imagery that connected more deeply with older travelers.

High-Frequency Travelers Responded More Strongly to Persona Branding

Unlike in Springfield, where low and medium-frequency travelers showed the biggest jumps, Roanoke’s most frequent travelers had the highest relative boost in persona brand preference (68.57%). This reinforces a trend from the overall study suggesting that seasoned travelers may gravitate more toward emotional, experience-driven branding—but only when the specific persona theme aligns well with their travel values.

Suburban and Rural Travelers Showed Increased Persona Preference for an Urban Destination

Although Roanoke is inherently more urban, respondents who preferred suburban and rural travel experiences leaned more heavily toward the persona brand in this test market. This suggests that persona branding can help urban destinations tap into emotional or lifestyle narratives that appeal to travelers who typically avoid cities—reframing the destination in terms of atmosphere and activity rather than geography alone.

Unfamiliarity with Campaigns May Actually Boost Persona Preference

In Roanoke, those who said they were unaware or unsure about tourism campaigns reported slightly higher persona brand preference than those who were aware. This implies that a lack of marketing exposure doesn’t hinder receptiveness to persona branding—and may even enhance it. For marketers, this is a reminder that brand style and narrative matter more than campaign awareness alone.

Influence Channels Still Not Predictive of Brand Type Preference

As with the overall study and Springfield test, Roanoke’s data confirms that a person’s primary source of travel inspiration—whether social media, friends and family, or cost—does not predict whether they’ll favor a place-based or persona-based brand. This reinforces the robustness of persona branding as a broadly resonant tool, effective regardless of how people find destinations.

Persona Branding Maintains a Slight but Consistent Edge in Regions with Familiar Natural Assets

Roanoke’s persona brand preference was almost identical to the overall study average (55.02% vs. 54.34%), indicating that even in destinations with strong natural appeal and name recognition, persona branding can hold its own or slightly outperform traditional branding. This supports the broader notion that persona strategies aren’t just useful for obscure towns—they’re equally valuable in regions with well-known features that need emotional reframing.

These findings reinforce the adaptability and strategic versatility of persona-based branding—capable of engaging diverse audiences, even in places that aren’t anonymous or geographically vague. For destinations looking to transcend literal geography and resonate with emotional desire, Roanoke’s test results offer compelling evidence of success.

In the Athens, GA test market, the place-based brand Discover Athens outperformed the persona-based alternative Scholar Haven by a wide margin. This result underscores that consumers do not prefer persona branding universally; rather, their preferences depend significantly on the type of persona being presented in comparison to the place brand. At face value, Scholar Haven may seem like a natural fit for a college town such as Athens, GA, evoking themes of intellectual vibrancy and academic charm. However, the data reveals that this approach may be too narrowly targeted for the broader travel audience.

While such branding could resonate with prospective students or academic affiliates, it fails to generate strong interest among general leisure travelers who are unlikely to be seeking a collegiate experience—especially at a university they do not personally identify with. The key takeaway from this test is that persona branding, while often effective, is not inherently superior. When the persona concept is too niche or exclusive, as it appears to be in this case, traditional place-based branding may offer broader appeal and stronger performance.