Hotel Reception Performance. Intercontinental Hotel

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
SERVQUAL Model
Qualitative research
Research Methodology
Research challenges
Research findings
Conclusion
References

Introduction

Background information of intercontinental hotel

Intercontinental hotel is a leading brand of high class hotels globally. Initially, it was founded by Pan African World Airways and is currently owned by intercontinental hotel groups. It remains the largest world hotel operator in terms of rooms. The company operates over 4500 hotels globally and has leading global brands like Counts Holiday Inn, and Crown Plaza within its basket. Its operations spread across 75 nations and in literally all the continents. The company’s broad economic growth is attributed to quality services it offers to its clients. Reception forms the pillar of service provision to hotel clients (Brendan, 2005). The kind of reception accorded to ancient determines whether or not the client will or will not use the same service provider in future. Often good reception results into increased customer base and hence increased revenues within the hotel while vice-versa is true.

Quality is often based on both customer and management perception within the hotel industry. Customers perceive overall hotel quality on basis of the kind of reception they receive. Basically, it would not come as a surprise if a client opted not to check into a given hotel upon arrival at the reception lobby. The reception personnel often represent the many aspects of a hotel ranging from hospitability, friendliness and even the hotel hygienic conditions (Brendan, 2005). Customer satisfaction is a rather complex area more especially considering the fact that there exists no measurement scale (Bapat, et al., 1999). Customers make quality decisions depending on how they perceive the services they are accorded within a hotel facility and reception is the face of these services. At the intercontinental hotels, quality is fundamental and a specific department is charged with responsibility of ensuring that quality is observed in al area of operation including reception. The hotel recognizes that customer satisfaction and quality of service are vital in customer retention and building of a competitive edge against the clientele (Bonham, 2008). Having been in business for a long duration, intercontinental group of hotel has been able to build a strong reputation globally with regard to the quality of services they offer. However, this is not enough as they still have to engage in continuous quality monitoring. This paper applies SERVQUAL mode to investigate quality provision at hotel intercontinental reception.

SERVQUAL Model

Service quality measurement is a rather cumbersome venture (Neely, 2002). Unlike measurement of product quality where measurable parameters exist, service quality measurement is characterized by intangibles qualitative aspects which lack relevant measurement parameters (Moore, 2008). Additionally, complications arise from the complicated nature of expectations displayed by customers which, considerably vary depending on a number of factors including customer experience, individual customer needs, and receptions arising from what other people say. SERVQUAL questionnaire provides an avenue for service quality measurement. It examines three aspects considered vital in management of quality which include service reliability, responsiveness, assurance, empathy and tangible which facilitate service provision.

For each of the mentioned dimensions, the customer’s expectations and service perceptions are measured with the help of a SERVQUAL questionnaire on a scale ranging from 1 to 7 rated as strongly disagree to strongly agree in that order (Nyeck et al., 2002). Te five dimensions weighting is performed depending on the importance of customers and the respective scores multiplied by the obtained weighting. This allows for calculation of gap scores of each expectation and perception score. The gap score is used as an indicator of the actual score and a negative vale shows that the actual service provided falls below the actual expected service (Zeithaml & Berry, 2005). The gap score is used to reliably indicate the quality level of the services provided and hence is useful in highlighting of the areas that might need improvement. It is important to note as the class of hotel rises, so does the level of quality expectations by the clients. SERVQUAL model can be best summarized by the diagrams below:

*Figure 1: General SERVQUAL presentation*

The diagrams describe the components that make up the important attributes of SERVQUAL model. This method basically involves translations of qualitative results into quantitative aspects which can be easily interpreted and conclusions drawn.

Although the model has been used in many instances, it has also been criticized as subjective, complex, subjective and unreliable statistically (Nyeck et al., 2002). critiques SERVQUAL on operational and theoretical ground. He pointed out that the dimensions of SERVQUAL have not been determined to be universal. Therefore its application would vary depending on particular environments. According to him the model has some limitations. Theoretically the model is not based on an attitudinal paradigm but rather a disconfirmation paradigm. However, quality that is perceived by the customer is best judged as an attitude. There is also no solid evidence that customers rate service quality depending on perceived service level and their expectations. In addition the model concentrates on service delivery rather than the results of the service experience. As the SERVQUAL dimensions are contextualized direct relation to the factors might not be what is expected. There is ample inter-correlation within the dimensions. In terms of operations customers use other standards and not just their expectations in the evaluation of quality of service they receive. SERVQUAL as a toll cannot measure in full the customers? Service quality expectations (Nyeck et al., 2002). Customers assessment of service quality is not static and as such not a dependable element in the assessment. The model use of scores leads to an unreliable proportion of item variances.

Qualitative research

Qualitative research is a common research tools used by various academic and research disciplines. Traditionally though, this tool is associated with social sciences and marketing research (Creswell, 2003). Qualitative research is often aimed at investigation human behavior/reactions to situations and the ensuing decisions resulting from this behavior. Qualitative research is basically concerned with individual attitudes, behaviors, system values, cultures and individual lifestyles (Leedy & Ormrod, 2005). Generally it involves interviews, analysis of contents, evaluations and unstructured materials analysis. Though at times messy and complex, ways have been developed with which such information can be converted into qualitative information for assessment e.g. use of Likert scales (Mason, 1996).

Research Methodology

Data was collected from ten clients who were presented with interview questions with regard to their views on SERVQUAL dimensions. Customer’s responses are used to analyze the SERVQUAL dimensions with respect to hotel reception. The interview schedules were presented to ten customers who were identified with the help of the hotel management at intercontinental. Additionally, 3 hotel managers were also presented engaged in interviews to establish their opinions regarding the 5 SERVQUAL dimensions in measurement of quality at the hotel reception.

Research challenges

Like any other research, SERVQUAL model is not without challenges. The interviewed persons may not give actual information that reflect their actual views regarding the case being investigate but instead provide information as they want them to be. Additionally, identifying a representative sample may be difficult considering that the management may maintain records of clients who were in deed satisfied only.

Research findings

The interview questions focused on the dimensions used in SERVQUAL model. Discussions in this section are based the how customers perceive the concept of SERVQUAL model in evaluation of hotel reception.

The findings based on the customer’s views are discussed below:

Tangibles

With reference to a hotel reception, customers view tangibles as the physical evidence present at the front desks of hotels including personnel appearance, tools and various physical equipment that facilitate reception’s service provision. Customers expect such facilities to conform to the global set standards globally. However, most interviewees put much emphasis on personnel appearance as an important tangible. They emphasize that any measurement of hotel reception tangibles must focus on this area. Major tangible areas mentioned by interviewees include appropriate dressing, cleanliness and attractive appearance. Overall customer satisfaction with regard to tangibility at intercontinental hotels reception is satisfactory. This is with regard to the aforementioned factors. Customers believe that when reception staff and other tangibles are excellent, they feel more confident and impressed with the perceived awaiting services. The findings of this research generally stressed that, tangibles in hotel’s reception related to behaviors that are tangible and the physical appearance of the reception’s staff. These findings are best summarized by the response of one interviewee who said that “I consider staff dressing, appearance and cleanliness as the most fundamental tangibles that would tell whether I book into a hotel or not.”

Reliability

One interviewee stated that reliability of reception staff is important to any client as it is the only way one can be assured of better and prompt services. The customer said “ if you order a cup of water and get it one hour later, then you can be sure that the super will be three hours late. However, this does not happen at intercontinental hotel” the customer’s remarks reflect confidence on the reception at hotel intercontinental. The response generalizes customer perception of reliability as being able to perform a service dependably and as earlier promised. Additionally, reliability reception staff is viewed as they being able keep time and maintain error free records. One interviewee mentions that reception staff who assigns you to a room that is already occupied is definitely unreliable. Further customers are sensitive to minor issues like having the reception staff promptly pick up their phone and making right reservations. The respondents believe that hotel InterContinental’s reception staffs are efficient in this area and often exhibit desirable reliability.

Responsiveness

Responsiveness in the context of hotel reception refers to the willingness of the reception staff to assist clients and offer prompt service. As most customers mention, when you walk into a hotel reception with lots of luggage and nobody comes to your aid, then you can as well expected rough times ahead. Customers view responsiveness as fundamental and indicative of the services ahead. Quick service, willingness to acknowledge and correct mistakes, and professionalism top the list of responsive factors that client’s value. Most respondents gauge InterContinental’s responsiveness as up to standards and meeting their ideal expectation. A client indicated that responsiveness of a hotel is best viewed when a customer finds all rooms booked up and is offered accommodation at its sister hotel for the night. This, the customers indicates the hotels responsiveness to the needs of the client.

Assurance

Assurance is gauged by the receptions competency levels, courtesy, staff credibility and feeling of security. Most clients gauge reception staffs competency by how efficiently they respond to questions asked. Courtesy also assures client of better services. Security is a fundamental component of assurance the client need at the hotels. Assurance of security makes clients feel more comfortable. One respondent mentioned that if you lose your luggage at reception, then definitely your security is not guaranteed at that hotel. Security can be best summarized by the statement of one interviewee who said that “I’d feel more comfortable in a hotel where my security and that of my belongings is assured,” “additionally, I’d be more assured of a nice stay at the reception are able to promptly and accurately respond to my queries,” he added.

Empathy

Ease of access to the reception and understanding displayed are important components of empathy that are fundamental to customers. Most customers view empathy from an individualized perspective. While most customers mention that they would appreciate personalized attention from the hotel reception, they don’t think of it as being very fundamental to service provision by the hotel.

The findings based on the manager’s point of view are summarized below:

On tangibles, the managers reinforced the stand of clients on tangibles. One manager mentioned that they view staff appearance and dressing with much concern. Anther stated that “we value staff and general appearance other tangibles at our reception and I believe it is an important measurement of quality. The manager’s opinion about reliability as a dimension can best be summarized by a statement by one major in which he stated that “unreliable staff at the reception is just anther way of accelerating the fall of a hotel business.” The statement stresses the emphasis that managers put on having reliable staff at the reception and hence the need for measurement of this dimension.

On responsiveness, a manager indicated that at the intercontinental the value of responsiveness is valued highly and special staffs are availed at the reception specifically for this purpose. In a statement another managers said that, “The value of being responsive to the clients is an important measure of our reception staffs performance and that must be heavily invested in.” Further on assurance, managers mention that this is an area that they mostly strive to address at interview levels of staff and further through constant training and access to information for the staff. One manager stated that, “our reception staffs deal with a variety of clients and the need to keep them informed cannot be overstated.” Lastly, unlike most customers who seemed not to attach much value on empathy, managers insist that this is a fundamental measure of hotel staff reception quality provision.

Conclusion

The interview with both managers and the hotel staff seem to converge at one point. Both parties agree that SERVQUAL dimensions reflect key aspects that can be used in quality assessment of hotel reception. The managers acknowledge that SERVQUAL dimensions reflect the key areas that affect customer satisfaction at reception. The clients interviewed also are in agreement that SERVQUAL dimensions largely represent the aspect they use to gauge quality of a hotel via reception. Generally, both parties are in agreement that quality of hotel reception is best reflected by the SERVQUAL model dimensions. Generally, all the parties interviewed agree that SERVQUAL dimensions are best in describing hotel reception quality. Tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, and assurance all play an important role in measurement of hotel reception quality.

References

Bapat, V. et al. (1999). Performance Enhancement in Hotel reception: Simulation and Modeling Approach. Chicago: CUP.

Bonham, S. (2008). Strategies through Integrated Performance: A Look into Hotel reception. New York: Artech House.

Brendan, R. (2005). Designing Effective Hotel reception for Business: Outsourcing, Services and Staffing. London: Focal Press.

Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (2^nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 11-69

Leedy, P. & Ormrod, J. (2005). Practical Research: Planning and Design. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, pp. 34-57

Mason, J. (1996). Linking qualitative and quantitative data analysis. In Bryman, A. & Burgess, R. G (eds) Analyzing Qualitative Data, Routledge: London, pp. 56-101

Moore, R. (2008). Benchmarking 100 Success Secrets – The Basics, The Guide on how to Measure, Manage and Improve Performance based on Industry Best Practices. Emereo Pty Ltd

Neely, A. (2002). Business Performance Measurement: Theory and practice, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England

Nyeck, S. et al. (2002). “10 years of service quality measurement: Reviewing the use of the SERVQUAL instrument.” Cuadernos de Difusion, 7(13), 101-107.

Zeithaml, V. A. & Berry, L. L. (2005). Reassessment of expectations as a comparison standard in measuring service quality: Implications for future research, Journal of Marketing, 58, 111-124.

Zeithaml, V. A. & Berry, L. L. (2005). SERVQUAL: A multiple item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality, Journal of Retailing, 64, (1), 14-40.

Click Here To Order Now!