Measuring and Managing the Quality of Service in Hotels in Cyprus. Professor Christine Hope and Leontios Filotheou

Transcription

1 Measuring and Managing the Quality of Service in Hotels in Cyprus Professor Christine Hope and Leontios Filotheou

2 Introduction Objectives Background/Rationale Methodology Results Analysis Discussion Summary

3 Objectives To identify shortcomings in the service provided in three 4* hotels in Cyprus To identify any discrepancies between management and guest perceptions of quality of the service provided. To compare expectations and perceptions of service of Russian and British guests in one of the hotels studied.

4 Background/Rationale Hotels and restaurants in Cyprus: contributed 7.3% of GDP in 2005 accounts for 9.9% of employment Fierce competition for other destinations Cypriot Govt strategic plan Raise quality levels of tourist accommodation Limits any new development to 3* - 5* categories

5 AREA Hotel Units and Beds in Operation in Cyprus as at 31 December * 4* 3* 2* 1* Total Units Beds Units Beds Units Beds Units Beds Units Beds Units Beds LEFKOSIA LEMESOS LARNAKA AGIA NAPA PARALIMNI PAFOS HILL RESORTS TOTAL

6 Tourist Arrivals Top 10 Countries in 2006 Country United Kingdom Germany Greece Russia Sweden Norway Ireland Switzerland France Israel Tourist Arrivals 1,360, , , ,763 94,028 50,664 47,463 41,559 37,779 34,197

7 Service Quality CUSTOMER Word-of-Mouth Communications Personal Needs Past Experience Expected Service Gap 5 Perceived Service PROVIDER Gap 1 Gap 3 Service Delivery Gap 4 External Communications to Customers Gap 2 Service Quality Specifications Management Perceptions of Customer Expectations

8 National Culture and Service Quality The differences in indicators between cultures emphasize the Importance of using multiple-item measures in comparative Research. Similar concepts can be perceived quite differently In terms of actual behaviours Good service is indicated by different behaviours in different countries. Because of this, it is difficult to find a generalisable set of measures that will apply across both cultures and also provide the level of specificity that will make it managerially useful. Winsted, 1997

9 Methodology Gaps 5 and 1 of the PZB model of service quality measured using a modified version of the SERVQUAL instrument 22 items 6 dimensions: Tangibles, Reliability, Responsiveness, Assurance, Courtesy and Competence, Communication Administered to guests and managers 4* Hotels: Pafos, Lemesos (Limassol), Agia Napa One-tailed T-Tests to identify statistically significant differences between responses of guests and managers, and in Hotel L, British and Russian guests

10 Results: Hotel Performance Hotel P n = 101 Hotel A n = 112 Hotel L n = 78 E P Gap (P-E) E P Gap (P-E) E P Gap (P-E) Tangibles Reliability Responsiveness Assurance Courtesy and Competence Communication Overall Average

11 Service Quality Scores Perceptions - Expectations P A L Tangibles Reliability Responsiveness Assurance Courtesy and Competence Communication Overall Average

12 Managers and Guests Expectation Scores Hotel P Hotel A Hotel L Mgrs Guests Mgrs Guests Mgrs British Guests Russians Guests All Guests Tangibles Reliability Responsiveness Assurance Courtesy and Competence Communication

13 Differences in Expectation Scores P A LB LR ** ** *** *** ** *** ** *** *** *** ** ** Tangibles Reliability Responsiveness Assurance Courtesy and Competence Communication

14 Managers and Guests Perception Scores Hotel P Hotel A Hotel L Mgrs Guests Mgrs Guests Mgrs British Guests Russians Guests All Guests Tangibles Reliability Responsiveness Assurance Courtesy and Competence Communication

15 Differences Between Perception Scores P A LB LR Tangibles Reliability Responsiveness Assurance Courtesy and Competence Communication ** *** ** ** **

16 Comparison of Expectation Scores: British vs Russian Guests British Russian 6.8 *** *** Expectation Scores 5.8 Tangibles Reliability Responsiveness Assurance Courtesy and Competence Communication

17 Comparison of Perception Scores: British vs Russian Guests ** *** *** ** *** Perception Scores British Russian Tangibles Reliability Responsiveness Assurance Courtesy and Competence Communication

18 Comparison of Gap Scores: British vs Russian Guests *** ** *** ** *** British Russian Tangibles Reliability Responsiveness Assurance Courtesy and Competence Communication Perception - Expectation Scores

19 Analysis: Hotel Performance Hotel A best performer weakest areas Responsiveness and Courtesy/Competence Hotel P worst performer weakest areas: Reliability and Courtesy/Competence Hotel L Russians: need to improve Tangibles and Assurance British: weakest performance on Reliability and Responsiveness

20 Managers Understanding of Customers Expectations and Perceptions of Service Received Hotel A best ratings No statistically significant differences between guests and managers scores on expectations or perceptions i.e. no significant Gap 1 Hotels P and L guest expectations not met Statistically significant differences between guests and managers scores on expectations and perceptions

21 Hotel L: Comparison of British and Russian Guests Expectations statistically significant differences on Tangibles and Assurance dimensions Perceptions Russians statistically significantly higher scores on five dimensions Gap scores statistically significant differences on six dimensions British more disappointed than Russians on all but Tangibles dimension

22 Discussion Empirical evidence re importance of closing Gap 1 Some difference between expectations of British and Russian guests Same service perceived differently by British and Russian guests Implications for management

23 Summary Study of three 4* hotels in Cyprus SERVQUAL type questionnaire Guests and Managers Importance of clearly understanding guests perspective Potential difficulties of service British and Russian guests in the same hotel