customer satisfaction research proposal

Customer Satisfaction in a Social Media World A Research Proposal on the Impact of Social Media Review Sites on Hotel Customer Satisfaction

By Richard Lewis - 620022101

BEM3010 Assignment 1 (Individual Research Proposal) 1

CONTENTS

1. ABSTRACT3 2. TOPIC IMPORTANCE..3 3. CONCEPTUAL BACKGROUND..3 4. RESEARCH QUESTION..4

4.1 Objectives..4

5. METHODOLOGY.4 5.1 Research Design.4

5.2 Appropriateness of Design.4

5.3 Research Setting and Participants..5

5.4 Research Plan, Data Collection5

5.5 Data Collection Method Validation.6

5.6 Questionnaire6

5.7 Possible Complications..6

6. CONCLUSIONS..7 6.1 Research Justification7

6.2 Adding to Knowledge7

6.3 Significance of Research to Practice and Policy7

6.4 Informing Marketing Practice.8

6.5 Reflection on Sustainability and Theory of Marketing Concept8

7. REFERENCES...9 8. APPENDICES 1,2,3,4.(11,12,13,14)


1. ABSTRACT

Customer satisfaction (CS) in the UK is declining (UKCSI, 2014). This qualitative, interpretive research aims to gain insights into this phenomenon by investigating commercial review site CS ratings and comments of hotel guests online reviews. The research also attempts to gain insights into how these sites affect expectations. This research does not attempt to establish causal links between review site affects on guests expectations and the fall in customer satisfaction.

2. TOPIC IMPORTANCE

Tourism contributes 10.5% of UK GDP (WTTC, 2013). Revenues from hotels are an important contributor to this figure. Better informed consumers are more demanding and selective; when they are dissatisfied they are likely to express it through social media (UKCSI, 2014). Hotel guests are able to communicate both positively and negatively through a plethora of social media review sites, and a fall in their CS would negatively affect hotel occupancy, adversely affect hotels ROIs and consequently UKs GDP.

3. CONCEPTUAL BACKGROUND

Research suggests that CS is the gap between a consumers expectation and their perceived experience (Anderson et al, 2004). Expectations are vague and very difficult to investigate (Melian-Gonzalez et al, 2013) and research has tended to focus on CS experience and its effect on ROI/stakeholder value (Anderson et al, 2004), on loyalty (Olsen and Johnson, 2003), on the primacy of customer service and CS (Hodgson, D., 2002; Coulter and Ligas, 2000).

Consumers use of customer satisfaction reviews sites in the hospitality industry has also been extensively researched but mainly focuses on investigating drivers of experience of satisfaction or dissatisfaction, on the impact of negative reviews, on its effect on ROI, on insights from reviews to improve service and customer loyalty and on how reviews can inform marketing strategy (Xiang and Gretsel, 2010; Davidow and Lee, 1998).

Melian-Gonzalez et als (2013) quantitative research claims to show that higher numbers of reviews help balance hotel customer satisfaction ratings, suggesting that changes in expectation and less surprises might explain the results.


4. RESEARCH QUESTION

How have driver/attributes of CS changed in hotel review customer service ratings, and pursuant to this, can any insights be gained into the influence of prior reading of consumer reviews on guest expectations?

4.1 Objectives:

1. To determine hotel chains overall review site customer ratings and compare 2013 and 2014 ratings.

2. To determine review writers opinions of satisfaction or dissatisfaction of hotels in which they stayed.

3. To identify and categorise which attributes are implicated in these ratings changes.

4. To determine the importance of each driver by simple tallying.

5. To use the findings of this qualitative research as a basis for investigating hotel guests memories of their prior expectations and eventual satisfaction of the hotels in which they stayed.

5. METHODOLOGY

5.1 Research Design

The research adopts a qualitative, interpretative, inductive design with a subjective quantitative element.

5.2 Appropriateness of Design

CS is a complex human construct with many variables and qualitative research is concerned with developing explanations of social phenomena such as this (Holliday, A., 2007). It is concerned with finding the answers to questions like Why has UK Customer Satisfaction Index (UKCSI) fallen?.

The questionnaire serves to gain insights into the relationship between reviews and CS and help generalisability by suggesting future statistically verifiable surveys of higher numbers of review writers.


5.3 Research Setting and Participants

1. Ethnographical netnography will be undertaken. Review sites Booking.com and TripAdvisor will be used to research historical and recent opinions of review writers (guests) of hotel chain hotels.

2. Questionnaire: Recent hotel guests who are prior-to-stay readers and after-stay writers of reviews.

5.4 Research Plan, Data Collection

Researching backwards (Wells, 1993) produced the following plan:

I. From the two sites overall CS ratings are recorded from 100 recent (9/2014-11/2014) reviews and 100 archived (9/2013-11/2013) reviews of mid-range city centre hotel-chain hotels.

II. Informal dialogue with hotel reviewers through social media is undertaken prior to research.

III. Pre-research interpretative analysis and thematic attribute categorisation is carried out on 20 reviews to determine categories of attributes. The 2 sites own categories and academic categories are considered. Different rating measurements are rationalised into percentages. The researchers categorisation decisions are validated by another researcher.

IV. Interpretative analysis data (attributes, emergent themes and comments on expectations) and rating data are recorded (Appendix 1). Critical incidents (Coulter & Ligas, 2000) are discarded if not relevant to research objectives. The location attribute is not included as it is not variable. Parameters are adapted as research progresses.

V. Results of data collection and its analysis are presented graphically (Appendix 2;3).

VI. After screening hotels and guests, informed consent is obtained from hotels and participants, Likert scale questionnaires (Appendix 4) are emailed to recent hotel guests who are both readers and writers of reviews and reviewers with expectation comments are prioritised.

VII. Data results will be presented in tabular and stacked Likert graphs (Appendix 5), identifying patterns of guests opinions on drivers of satisfiers and dissatisfiers.

VIII. Confirmation checks with respondents are done.


5.5 Data Collection Method Validation

The nature of participants use of review sites means that real world and real time open-ended interviews and observations of Phenomenology and Ethnography are not possible. Netnography was developed for investigating patterns of behaviour in online cultures (Kozinets, 2011).

Commercial site reviews provide a rich vein of data for researching CS, but they do not elicit the thick description of open-ended interviews (Holliday, A., 2007). As well as being a stranger (Holliday, A., 2007) and hidden observer (Kozinets, 2006), this researchers immersion in and deeper understanding of the culture through online dialogue with reviewers means that interpretation is carried out with more cultural awareness avoiding the research being merely a coding exercise (Kozinets, 2006).

Reviews on the sites are archived so comparisons can be made of CS over time. They are written soon after staying so there is less time for the memory to gloss over negatives or exaggerate positives (Melin-Gonzlez et al, 2013). It also allows a way of comparing CS opinions and attribute dimensions over a period of time.

The two sites are top in search engine listings and provide sufficient numbers of reviews. Investigating reviews from different review sites gives a richer variety of opinions. Some review writers may specifically mention expectations being exceeded or not being met. Reviews are anonymous, gender, sex, age, race details are not given which helps in avoiding researcher assumptions about the reviewers (Denzin, 2001).

Review site reviews are considered anonymous so consent will not be sought, however Kozinets (2011) warns that modern search engines have the potential to identify the participants. Reviews are not elicited by the researcher, but are elicited by hotels and review site marketing encourages the review writing behaviour.

5.6 Questionnaire

(Appendix 4)

5.7 Possible Complications

Despite analysis validation by a second researcher, the researchers beliefs and values (self) may mean that some assumptions about meanings are made during thematic analysis (Denzin, 2001).


The review sites have also made assumptions about which CS attributes are important, other attributes may not emerge - if they do they will be significant.

Trust issues regarding review sites is debated, but consumers in huge numbers trust them (Kozinets, 2011). Hotels may not allow access to reviewers, but screened reviewers can be approached through social media.

6. CONCLUSIONS

6.1 Research Justification

CSs potential to negatively impact occupancy levels and thus hotels revenues, employment levels, destination spending and UK GDP make this an important topic for research. Customers expectations of service are rising. When customers are dissatisfied they are increasingly likely to express or escalate it through social media (UKCSI, 2014).

Melin-Gonzlez et al (2013) point out that improvements in facilities and customer service are costly ways of raising CS. CS expectations research investigates ways hotels can better manage guest expectations thus raising CS. Customer service is still an important contributor to CS however, and poor service should not be ignored (Melin-Gonzlez et al, 2013).

6.2 Adding to Knowledge

Expectations generated by online reviews and WOM are little understood, this research will demonstrate that there is value in understanding it, that cross-discipline qualitative and quantitative research is needed to provide new models for expectation and experience concepts of CS.

6.3 Informing Marketing Practice

In economic downturns strategic focus swings from using customer service to keep customers to aggressive marketing campaigns to grow market share (UKCSI, 2014). There is an alternative. Managing review site relationships and guests expectations can improve CS ratings and increase occupancy levels and revenue (Melin-Gonzlez et al, 2013). The practices of viral marketing, social media marketing and value creation through relationship marketing can be adapted (Grnroos, 2004).


Hotel advertising and communications through these channels can be more subtly nuanced so that expectations are realistic while at the same time highlighting intangible (and less costly) experiences. Responding to dissatisfied guest reviews is also debated (Park and Allen, 2013) this research will help in that decision.

6.4 Significance of Research to Practice and Policy

CS review ratings are not the same as UKCS Index, but this research will provide insights into the relationship between review sites, expectations, experience and CS, and thus it is significant. UK government policy makers may start commissioning UKCEI!

While not generalisable, the results may encourage research institutes to use data mining technology to produce statistically verifiable answers to questions about the expectation-experience-customer satisfaction relationship particularly in view of reviewers increasing awareness of the concept of expectation. The research may also discover significant emergent drivers of satisfaction.

6.5 Reflection on Sustainability and Theory of Marketing Concept

Marketing concepts and models of CS are evolving to embrace global communication of consumers through social media sites. New models and better measures of the pre-purchase expectation construct are needed (Huang and Dubinksy, 2013).

CS ratings on commercial review sites are important influencers of business sustainability. Sustainability in global e-commerce depends on how well a hotel understands, co-creates and interconnects with the online cultures of its guests, especially with regard to review sites where increasing numbers of consumers go to make decisions about which hotel to choose. Will review sites replace the need for marketing? Probably not, but marketing must adapt and marketing concepts of customer satisfaction must evolve, review sites are changing consumer behaviour. That review site CS ratings (probably) affect expectations and perception of experience already is and will be an increasingly important ingredient in sustainability of the UK hospitality industry and GDP.


7. REFERENCES:

Anderson et al (2004) Customer satisfaction and Shareholder value. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 68, No. 4 (Oct., 2004), pp. 172-185.

Coulter and Ligas (2000) The Long Good-Bye: The Dissolution of Customer- Service Provider Relationships. Psychology & Marketing. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Vol. 17(8):669695 (August 2000)

Davidow, M., and J. Leigh. (1998) The effects of organizational complaint responses on consumer satisfaction, word of mouth activity and repurchase intentions. Journal of Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior.

Denzin (2001) The seventh moment: Qualitative inquiry and the practices of a more radical consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research; Sep 2001; 28, 2; ABI/INFORM Global pg. 324

Grnroos (2004) "The relationship marketing process: communication, interaction, dialogue, value", Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 19 Iss 2 pp. 99 - 113

Hodgson, D. (2002), Know your customer, Management Decision, Vol. 40, pp. 318-28.

Holliday, A. (2007) Doing and Writing Qualitative Research (Second Edition). London: Sage Publications, xiv+200 pages, ISBN 978 1 4129 1130 6

Huang, W. and Dubinsky, A. (2014), Measuring customer pre-purchase satisfaction in a retail setting, Services Industries Journal, Vol. 34, pp. 212-29.

Kozinets, R. (2006) Netnography and tribal advertising. Journal of Advertising Research, Sept., 279-88.

Kozinets, R. (2011) Netnography 2.0. Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods [Online] Accessed from: http://vle.exeter.ac.uk/course/view.php?id=2196

Melin-Gonzlez et al (2013) Online Customer Reviews of Hotels: As Participation Increases, Better Evaluation Is Obtained. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, first published on March 29, 2013

Olsen, L. and Johnson, M. (2003), Service equity, satisfaction, and loyalty, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 5, pp. 184-95.

Park S., Allen J. P. (2013). Responding to online reviews: Problem solving and engagement in hotels. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 54, 64-73.


UKCSI (2014) Customer satisfaction. Institute of Customer Service [Online] Accessed from: http://www.instituteofcustomerservice.com/1848-4125/Customer-satisfaction.html

Wells (1993) Discovery-oriented consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research; Mar 1993; 19, 4; ABI/INFORM Global pg. 489

WTTC (2013) Travel & Tourism Economic Impact, 2014. UNITED KINGDOM. World Travel & Tourism Council. [ONLINE] Accessed from http://www.wttc.org/focus/research-for-action/economic-impact-analysis/

Xiang Z., Gretzel U. (2010). Role of social media in online travel information search. Tourism Management, 31, 179-188


Appe

ndix

1

A.Exa

mple

of Re

sults

Table

book

ing.co

m - 2

013,

2014

B.

Examp

le of

Resu

lts Ta

ble Tri

pAdv

isor -

2013

, 201

4

Revi

ewer

Re

fOv

eral

l Ra

ting

Com

men

t Va

lue

Com

fort

Clea

nlin

ess

Faci

litie

s Se

rvic

e Se

curit

yEm

erge

ntTh

eme

Emer

gent

Them

eEx

pect

atio

n

Num

ber o

f M

entio

ns

Attri

bute

s/Dr

iver

s

Appe

ndix

2 A.

Presen

tation

of Re

sults

(hyp

otheti

cal):

TripAdvisor & booking.com Average Customer Ratings %

8485858686

Year

2012

2013

2014

2015

book

ing.co

mTrip

Advis

or

Appe

ndix

3 A.

Presen

tation

of Re

sults

(hyp

otheti

cal):

Total Number of Mentions

010203040

Atribu

tes/Dr

ivers

Value

Co

mfo

rtCl

eanli

ness

Facil

ities

Serv

ice

Emer

gent

The

me

2013

2014

Appendix 4Appendix 4Appendix 4Appendix 4

1. What was your overall customer satisfaction of this hotel?

2. Reading reviews on TripAdvisor/booking.com influenced my overall expectation and thus my satisfaction about the hotel.

Howdidlookingatthehotelsreviewspriortoyourstayaffectyourexpectationsandhowdiditaffectyoursatisfactionexperience? Thinking

aboutyourstaysinthehotelandwhetherreviewsitecommentsandratingsinfluencedyourexpectationsandconsequentcustomer

satisfaction,choosewhetheryouagreeordisagreewiththefollowingstatements:

3. TripAdvisor/booking.com raised my expectations, my experience was less than my expectation and my customer satisfaction was negatively affected.

4. TripAdvisor/booking.com DID NOTraise my expectations and the experience was as expected, my customer satisfaction was not affected.

Questionnaire to Hotel Guest Recent Reviewers

Verysatisfiednmlkj

Satisfiednmlkj

Neutralnmlkj

Dissatisfiednmlkj

Verydissatisfiednmlkj

Stronglyagreenmlkj

Agreesomewhatnmlkj

Neutralnmlkj

Disagreenmlkj

Stronglydisagreenmlkj

Stronglyagreenmlkj

Agreesomewhatnmlkj

Neutralnmlkj

Disagreenmlkj


Stronglyagreenmlkj

Agreesomwhatnmlkj

Neutralnmlkj

Disagreenmlkj


Appendix 4Appendix 4Appendix 4Appendix 45. TripAdvisor/booking.com gave me low expectations and the experience exceeded expectations and my customer satisfaction was positively affected.

Ifthereviewsdidinfluenceyourexpectations,whatspecificallydidtheyinfluence? Ifyouhaveansweredagreeorstronglyagreetoany

questionsexcept4pleasegoontoquestion6:

6. The value of the hotel?

7. The Comfort of the hotel?

Repeats through all attributes/drivers..

Stronglyagreenmlkj

Agreesomewhatnmlkj

Neutralnmlkj

Disagreenmlkj


Exceededexpectationsnmlkj

Wasasexpectednmlkj

Waslessthanexpectednmlkj

"nmlkj

"nmlkj

"nmlkj

Appe

ndix

5 A.

Examp

le of

result

s pres

entat

ion (5

point

Likert

scale

):

input_738138688_10_0_0:

input_738139050_10_0_0:

input_738139680_10_0_0:

input_738140242_10_0_0:

input_738140933_10_0_0:

input_738144841_10_0_0:

input_738145527_10_0_0:

customer satisfaction research proposal

Documents