FACTORS AFFECTING TRAVELLERS CHOICE IN THE SELECTION OF HOTELS

A study conducted in Hotel Green Park Chennai (As part of the internship training from 12th December 2011 to 10th January 2012)

By TOBIN MICHAEL Roll No.129 Semester One

Guided by Rev.Dr.Fr. Roy Submitted in partial fulfilment of the degree of Master of Management in Hospitality Mahatma Gandhi University, Kottayam

FACTORS AFFECTING TRAVELLERS CHOICE IN THE SELECTION OF HOTELS

INTRODUCTION

When we compare the hotel selections factors of business and leisure travellers, it is important to mention about their perception and perceived importance of eight hotel selection factors in the selection of hotels such as service quality of staff, provided facilities, value for money, restaurant service, menu diversity factors, hygiene factors, atmospherics factors and satisfaction factors (Brymer, 1998). Research studies have shown that satisfaction with hotel properties, including services, facilities and price, appears to be one of the major factors leading to the success and repeat support of the destination (Soriano, 2002). In a competitive market, while comparing with other hotel strategies the quality provided by each hotel is the key to their success. From the part of hoteliers first they should find the needs of the guests and also the way how they can exceed the expectations of the guests. When in the case of Green Park hotel, it is a world which is built around the guest experience; service and care which helps the hotel to satisfy the needs of the guests. Hotel offer world class conveniences and comforts providing the discerning business as well as leisure travellers a home away from home. The great attention which is given by hotel to every detail has given rise to clientele that has forged strong bonds with guests and made Green Park their preferred choice. Purpose of the study

Hotel attribute importance studies have a long tradition in hospitality research. To be able to deliver consistent quality to hospitality customers, it is necessary to be able to identify those aspects of the service encounter that bring about satisfaction or dissatisfaction. Explores a simple technique for recording success and failure in service situations, this will allow organizations to identify areas for quality improvement and enable decisions to be made about the key priorities for action. This study investigates the hotel selection factors in hotel

industry among business and leisure travellers by asking the respondents to state their expectations and disappointments /dissatisfaction in an open question format.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Customers are people with individual needs, however segmenting them into groups with similarity in needs of products and service is necessary in the hotel industry. Travellers perception towards hotel selection varies according to their needs so most hotels segment their guest in to business and leisure travellers (Gunasekeran, 1992). Achieving loyalty amongst customers is one of the main strategies used by hotels to face increasing competition, with quality of service being the key factor for achieving loyalty. Researchers tend to agree that service encounters, or moments of truth, have a critical role to play in developing customer loyalty (Raymond, K.S. & Chu,T.C., 2000). Now a days most hotels compete satisfy the needs of both types of customers through their service (Naseem, Ejaz, & Malik, 2011). Previous studies have found that in attracting customers service quality has a direct impact. Most hotels consider service quality as their bench mark to attract business as well as leisure travellers. When in the case of business travellers their perception about the service is entirely different from leisure travellers, so most hotels advertise their facilities to attract both type of customers. There are some important factors which affect the selection of hotel is that guests high expectations for both courtesy and overall performance of the hotel. Efficiency; Guests expect speed and the filling of requests accurately despite any difficulties an operation may be having at particular time. Timeliness; Guests want convenient operating hours, quick service, and appropriate delivery (Wilkins, 2010). How guests perceived timing is what counts. Quick service of an entre immediately after the appetizer is finished may be desirable to some guests, but annoying to those who want to relax between courses (Naseem, Ejaz, & Malik, 2011). Friendly staff; Guests expect employees to have positive behaviour, be knowledgeable about products and services, and be helpful. Most travellers are very conscious about their food; how they prepare and also about the cleanliness of the food. Cleanliness was rated as the most highly valued aspect of

restaurant selection among almost all respondents (Melih, 2004). In short, certain facilities like hygiene, value, atmospheric factors are some of the most important keys that cause a restaurant to be selected while dining out (Knutson, 1988). Hotels that serve healthful, nutritious foods could focus their efforts on improving those factors that were listed as most important when choosing a restaurant for a family. Restaurants utilizing this information might not only attract more customers, but they may also be able to help their guest eat healthier. Hygiene is used to infer the maintenance of healthful practices. Children's food preferences are strongly influenced by their parents' eating habits and behaviors. In particular, parents usually determine which restaurants the family will frequently choose. In modern terminology, this is usually regarded as a particular reference to cleanliness (Rana, 2010). It is not, according to their findings, considered hygiene as making a positive contribution to quality and is unlikely to be viewed in the same terms as other variables. Zeithaml et al. (1990) found that if any eating place failed to meet the standards of food hygiene and cleanliness of the surrounding, expected by customers (including both tangible and service issues), that customers would assess the eating place as offering them poor quality of service and being of low quality (Rana, 2010). The ambiance of the restaurant which includes atmosphere, prestige, location, and taste of food are never the less critical in the selection or rejection process (Smith, 1998). According to a customer attitude profile, food quality was the most important choice variable in the fine dining category addition to that customers also expect silence in the restaurant, light music which enriches the moment. Setting prices is a complex issue, with a number of strategic and tactical implications. Pricing is customer-based and customer-driven. It is also a tangible aspect of the product or service offered, and can be used to change and manipulate customer perception (Melih, 2004). However, to be effective, the process must be well understood. One way to determine an optimum price for a product is to assess what the customer is willing to pay, and then set production methods and costs to achieve a profit, based on that price. The matter of appropriate pricing is complicated by the fact that consumers use price as an indicator of quality (Naseem, Ejaz, & Malik, 2011). So, it is possible to set a price too high, and price an item out of the market, as well as set it too low, giving it a perception of unacceptably low quality. The only sound way to price is to start out with what the market is willing to pay.

The worship of high profit margins and of 'premium pricing' always creates a market for the competitor. METHODOLOGY

The research tool used for this study was the questionnaire. The questionnaire was framed in such a way that it will cover all factors which influences the traveller in their selection of hotel. 44 questions related to the factors affecting hotel selection were asked to the travellers to get filled. They answered their own perception and expectation in each question. Universe of the study was travellers those who visited during 26th December 2011 to 10th January 2012 in the Green Park hotel Chennai. The questions were measured by using 7 point scale ranging from very poor to very good. The sample for this study was chosen through convenience sampling. The sample is selected irrespective of gender, age and nationality. The sample size of the study was 30. SPSS was used as statistical software and statistical tool used were crosstab, correlation, Regression, ANOVA etc. The specific objective of this study was to examine the factors affecting traveller choice in the selection of hotels. Based on the previous studies the researcher assumes that the following hypothesises are true.

OBJECTIVE

To find how service quality of staff affect the satisfaction of the travellers. To find how travellers age influence the perception of atmospheric factors of the hotels. To understand how hoteliers cleanliness satisfy the hygiene perceptions of travellers. To recognize the role of value addition factors of the hotel in the satisfaction level of travellers.

HYPOTHESIS

There is a strong relation between service quality of staff and satisfaction level of travellers. There is a strong relation between age and perception of atmospheric factors of the hotel. The satisfaction level of customers also depends on the cleanliness of the hotel. There is a close relation between value addition factor of hotel and travellers satisfaction.

Analysis and Interpretations

The study was conducted by using Questionnaire given to the travellers those who visited the hotel Green Park during the month of December 2011 to January 2012. Respondents of the study were taken by convenience sampling method.

The table below shows the statistic analysis of the respondents. From the table it is clear that average age of respondents is 37.60. The median of the respondents is 33 and mode is 27. Here the std. deviation is 11.370 which mean that 68% of the population falls between around 26 to 48 age group.

Table 1 Descriptive Analysis

Statistics AGE N Valid Missing Mean Median Mode Std. Deviation 30 0 37.60 33.00 27 11.370

The table explain regarding the age of the respondents. It is clear from the table that 26.7% of respondents are belongs to 25 age and below 36.7% of them are belongs to 25 to 35 age category. The age categories 35 to 45 show a percentage

Frequency 25 and below 25 to 35 35 to 45 45 to 55 Total 8 11 9 2 30

Percent 26.7 36.7 30.0 6.7 100.0

Table 2 Correlation - Service quality of staff * Satisfaction factors

Correlations Satisfaction Service Quality of Staff Service Quality of Staff Satisfaction Factors *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). 1 .433
*

Factors

The table above shows the correlations between service quality of staff and satisfaction factor of the travellers. Correlation analysis shows that there is significant correlation between two variables. The relationship is significant at 0.05 levels. This means that 95% of the times people believe that service quality is directly linked to satisfaction factor. From these it is clear that when service quality of staff increases satisfaction level will also increases.

Table 3 Regression - Service quality of staff * Satisfaction factors

Independent variable Service quality of staff

R Square
.188

Beta
.433

Sig
.017
a

Table above show the regression analysis between service quality and guest satisfaction, on the basis of R Square the value is .188 that means 18% so possibility of relation is very less.

By analysing the value of B we can understand that 1 unit change in service quality of staff will result in .679 change in satisfaction level of the travellers. Though differences were observed in the correlation when regression analysis was done it is clear that the differences in % was significant because the p value is lesser than 0.05.

Table 4 Cross tabulation - Age * Atmospheric factors Atmospheric Factors Average Good Very Good 50.0% 3.3% Total

Age

25 and below 25 to 35

% within age % of Total % within age % of Total

.0% .0%

50.0% 3.3%

100.0% 6.7%

6.3% 3.3%

62.5% 33.3%

31.3% 16.7%

100.0% 53.3%

35 to 45

% within age % of Total

45 to 55

% within age % of Total

.0% .0%

80.0% 13.3%

20.0% 3.3%

100.0% 16.7%

55 and above

% within age % of Total .0% 80.0% 20.0% 100.0%

Table above shows the cross tabulation of atmospheric factors with respect to age. Responds from travellers were shuffled through different scales, even though from the table it is clear that when age increases perception level of the travellers about atmospheric factors will also increase. And also elderly people are most satisfied than youngsters about the facilities of the hotels.

Table 5 ANOVA - Age * Atmospheric factors ANOVA AtmosphericsFactors Sum of Squares Between Groups Within Groups Total 3.700 df Mean Square F Sig.

20

.185

.454

.932

3.667

.407

7.367

29

Though differences were observed in the cross tabs when ANOVA was done it is clear that the differences in % was not significant because the p value is .932 which is bigger than 0.05. But it does not mean that there is no relation between age and perception of travellers on atmospheric factors of the hotel. Here the relation is not that much strong to prove that there is strong influence of age on the perception of travellers on the atmospheric factors of the hotel.

Table 6 Correlation - Hygiene factors * Travellers satisfaction

Relation between Hygiene factors of hotel and travellers satisfaction

Cleanliness of restaurant staff Cleanliness of restaurant utensils Tidiness of restaurant

-.305

.258

.429

SatisfactionFactors

.061

.219

.280

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

The correlation analysis shows that there is significant correlation between two variable. They are cleanliness of restaurant staff and tidiness of restaurant. The relationship is significant at 0.05 levels. This means that 95% of the times when people perceived that when cleanliness of restaurant staff increases the tidiness of restaurant will also increase. The significant values in this table indicate that the travellers are more conscious about cleanliness of restaurant staff addition with tidiness of restaurant. It means that hoteliers should assure that the restaurant and restaurant staff should be hygienic.

Table 7 Regression - Hygiene factors * Travellers satisfaction

Relation between Hotel hygiene factor and customer satisfaction Independent variable Hygiene Factors R Square Beta Sig

.085

.292

.117

Though differences were observed in the correlation when regression analysis was done it is clear that the differences in % was not significant because the p value is bigger than 0.05. But it does not mean that there is no relation between hoteliers hygiene and customer satisfaction. Here the relation is not that much strong to prove that there is strong influence of hotel hygiene factors on customer satisfaction. Normally hotel hygiene factor has a direct influence on customer satisfaction here in this case it is not significant it may happen due to some sampling error. Table 8 Regression - Value addition factor * customer satisfaction

Relation between Value addition factor and customer satisfaction Independent variable R Square Beta Value for money .047 .216

Sig .251a

Here significance cannot be established between value addition factors and customer satisfaction because the p value is bigger than 0.05. But it does not mean that there is no relation between value addition factor of hotel and customer satisfaction. Here the relation is not that much strong to prove that there is strong influence of value addition factor on customer satisfaction.

Findings

Hotel attribute importance studies have a long tradition in hospitality research. To be able to deliver consistent quality to hospitality customers, it is necessary to be able to identify those aspects of the service encounter that bring about satisfaction or dissatisfaction. When new studies were conducted result of such studies help the hotels to improve their customer expectations. By subdividing the factors which influences the traveller hotel selection factors many new findings were able to find out. There is a strong relation could establish between service quality of staff and satisfaction level of the traveller. This finding indicates that the there is direct relation between service quality of staff and satisfaction level of the traveller, that means when service quality increases satisfaction level of traveller will also increases. Hoteliers can successes in their business if they increase their service quality. Secondly, the examining on the atmospheric factors of hotel and satisfaction level of traveller indicate that the travellers are not much conscious about the atmospheric factors of hotel. And also it is found that age has a direct influence in the perception of travellers towards atmospheric factors. Traveller perception on the hygiene factors of a hotel varies according to their perception about the hygiene. In this research it is found that there is no much relation between hygiene factor of hotel and satisfaction level of traveller, it happened only due to difference in the perception of traveller towards hygiene of a hotel. Similarly in this research it is found that there is no much relation between value addition factors of a hotel and satisfaction level of traveller it happened only due to difference in the perception of traveller towards value addition factor of a hotel.

CONCLUSION

The findings indicated that the dimensions of factors affecting the traveller choice in the selection of hotels were successfully validated using crosstab, correlation, regression and ANOVA. Although the study did not detect a perfect fit between many variables, the study bring out some finding about the perception of traveller towards the hotel selection factors. From all the findings under each objective it is found that there are no such differences in the

perception on hotel selections factors among business and leisure travellers. It is found that hoteliers can improve their business through exceeding the expectation of the guest through their service. so hoteliers should be more concerned about satisfying the needs and expectation of their guest. The findings also shows a clear indication on the influence of traveller age on the perception of atmospheric factors of a hotel, so it is clear that if a hotel can gain trust from traveller they can attain their satisfaction. Even though there is no much relations were shown in other analysis it is clear that hoteliers should follow a standard pattern to maintain customer satisfaction.

Works Cited
Brymer, R. (1998). An introduction to the industry. Hospitality and tourism , 8 (1), 12-38. Gunasekeran, R. (1992). Choice of Up-market (Fine Dining) Restaurants by Young Professional and Business People. National University of Singapore, School of Business Management. Singapore: Unpublished. Knutson, B. J. (1988). Frequent Travellers:Making them Happy and Bringing them Back. The Cornell Hotel and Reaturant Administration Quarterly. , 29 (1), 83-87. Le Blanc, G. & Nguyen,N. (1996). An Examination of the Factors that Signal Hotel Image to Travelllers. Journal of Vacation Marketing , 3 (1), 32-42. Melih, M. (2004). Validating Restaurant Service Quality Dimensions. Journal of Foodservice Business Research , 7 (4), 127-144. Naseem, A., Ejaz, S., & Malik, K. p. (2011). Improvement of hotel service quality: An emperical research in pakistan. International journal of multidisciplinary sciences and engineering , 2 (5). Rana, S. (2010). Feasibility Study of opening a Maggi Restaurant at Jalandhar. Department of management. Phagwara: Lovely Proffesional University. Raymond, K.S. & Chu,T.C. (2000). An Importance-Performance Analysis of Hotel Selection Factors: A comparison Between Business and Leisure Lravellers. Tourism Management , 21 (1), 363-377. Smith, D. (1998). Service: Managing the Guest Experience. New york: Chain Store Publishing. Soriano, D. R. (2002). Customer's Expectation Factors in Restaurants: The Situation in Spain. International Journal of quality and Reliability Management , 19 (8/9), 1055-1067. Tyrrell,T J & Okant, M J. (1998). Importance Performance Analysis: Some Recommendations from an Economic Planning Perspective. Tourism Analysis , 9 (2), 346356. Wilkins, H. (2010). Using Importance Performance Analysis to Appreciate Satisfaction in Hotels. Journal of Hospitality Marketing &Management , 19 (8), 866-888.

ANALYSIS OF HOTEL SERVICE FACTORS Please rate the following factors. Very good Very poor

Service Quality of Staff Efficiency of services Neat appearance Multi-lingual skills Understanding of your request Staff are polite and friendly Staff are helpful Facilities Availability of business centre Fax services Internet services in the room Internet facility in the hotel Laundry services Foreign exchange services Availability of ATMs Value Hotel room is value for money Hotel food is value for money Hotel beverages are value for money Room ambiance is value for money Room is clean Bed/mattress/ pillow are comfortable In room temperature adjustment facility Hotel has comfortable ambiance Restaurant services Food portions Food tastiness Food temperature Food presentation

7 7 7 7 7 7 7

6 6 6 6 6 6 6

5 5 5 5 5 5 5

4 4 4 4 4 4 4

3 3 3 3 3 3 3

2 2 2 2 2 2 2

1 1 1 1 1 1 1

7 7 7 7 7 7 7

6 6 6 6 6 6 6

5 5 5 5 5 5 5

4 4 4 4 4 4 4

3 3 3 3 3 3 3

2 2 2 2 2 2 2

1 1 1 1 1 1 1

7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7

6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Food preparation consistency Non-greasy food Food spice Menu Diversity Factors Menu variety Availability of dishes liked Availability of local dishes Possibility to choose healthy food Hygiene Factors Cleanliness of restaurant staff Cleanliness of restaurant utensils Tidiness of restaurant Atmospherics Factors The dcor in the restaurant is well coordinated Location of the restaurant Crowd in the restaurant Quietness of the restaurant Music if any Facilities for children Satisfaction Factors I have enjoyed my stay and services in the hotel I will certainly visit the hotel again if possible I will certainly recommend the restaurant to friends

7 7 7

6 6 6

5 5 5

4 4 4

3 3 3

2 2 2

1 1 1

7 7 7 7

6 6 6 6

5 5 5 5

4 4 4 4

3 3 3 3

2 2 2 2

1 1 1 1

7 7 7

6 6 6

5 5 5

4 4 4

3 3 3

2 2 2

1 1 1

7 7 7 7 7 7

6 6 6 6 6 6

5 5 5 5 5 5

4 4 4 4 4 4

3 3 3 3 3 3

2 2 2 2 2 2

1 1 1 1 1 1

7 7 7

6 6 6

5 5 5

4 4 4

3 3 3

2 2 2

1 1 1

Age___________ Gender__________ Occupation____________ Nationality_______________ Number of days stayed in the hotel_________ Purpose of visit: Leisure / Business