Robots vs. Human Service in the Hotel Industry

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.

Abstract

Although robots are more effective, human service is still preferred in hotel service. They can work under dangerous conditions, provide standardized services and work more than human beings. The inability of robots to interact, show and understand emotions effectively makes consumers prefer human service. Humans ability to provide personalized service and influence consumer emotions creates trust in consumers and increases the chances of winning their loyalty. The current studies show consumers improved preference for robotic service in hotels. The shift is attributed to the recent global pandemic, which required people to avoid social contact to stay safe. However, the hotel service is expected to resume its operations after the pandemic.

Introduction

Robots are eliminating the need for human labor in industries. They are preferred for their standardized output quality and quantity and improved competency. The robots are practical for use, especially where the tasks place human life in danger. They are known to be free of errors in their operations. There is a similar rapid shift of operations and management dependence on human interventions to artificial intelligence in the tourism and hotel industry. There is fear that the perfection portrayed by robots may render human labor useless.

Robots might set the bar too high for skilled human beings to reach and limit their entry into the job market. The technology combines face recognition technology, robots, voice, and wearable technology to deliver hotel services (Kim et al., 2021). During the global pandemic COVID-19, between 2019 and 2020, the hotel and tourism industry went dormant due to the nature of the illness. The industry relies more on human contact than machine use, thus making it a primary sector to focus on to mitigate the virus spread. After reopening operations in the industry, outlets opted for alternatives that included implementing artificial intelligence in hotel operations. Although robots have enhanced continuous operations and helped reduce infection rates, there exist limits to the full acceptance of the technology in hotels.

There have been several studies regarding customer satisfaction, hotel performance, and trends in the shift from fully human-operated hotels to partially or fully robot-operated hotels. The counter-argumentative researchers focus mainly on customer preference, management and employees views, and hotel benefits. Customers still need humans in the industry, while some management thinks the technologys effectiveness over human operations is overrated. These arguments create a dilemma as owners must decide whether to embrace the use of robots or not in hotels. This research paper will explore past studies relating to the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of robots used in hotel operations, discuss why robots are effective or ineffective compared to human operations, and conclude with a personal view of the research.

Literature Review

In 1961, the first robot, the Ultimate robot, was tasked to pick hot metallic objects from a paint pool and place them in a stack. However, the word robot was first mentioned in 1921 in Karel Capeks play Rossums Universal Robots . Robots are used in hotels limitedly. In 1983, Collier predicted the automation of services such as hotel services. The first hotel to use robots, Henn na Hotel in Nagasaki, Japan, was opened in 2015 and dismissed half of the robots in 2019 due to increased workload for employees and guest complaints (Ivanov et al., 2020). Despite the latter move, companies used knowledge gained from the hotel use of robots to develop more effective robot use in the industry.

Another study found that consumers were satisfied with using robots in hotels if they had human traits and habits and were sure that the robots would do the right thing and not endanger them (Belias & Varelas, 2019). The effectiveness of the robots is achieved when operating costs are reduced while output is increased. Artificial intelligence use is both preferred and not preferred for not entirely having human traits. Robots are convenient as they can work for a long time without having limits such as fatigue and errors as portrayed by humans and inconvenient as they show less or no emotions than humans.

Today, robots can perform dangerous tasks alongside other manageable human roles. In hotels, they are used alongside other artificial intelligence technologies to perform tasks such as welcoming and checking in guests, supervising rooms, making presentations, discussing menus, and making and receiving automated calls. According to research, a hotels use of robots is mainly necessitated by two factors; the level of technological advancements acceptance among consumers and the internal capacity of the hotel to afford and maintain the innovation (Stylos et al., 2021). In a study conducted in Russia, consumers who view robot use in hotels positively mainly included young men living in towns who generally perceived using new technologies positively.

As far as the global context is perceived, many consumers associate human-like robots with high levels of discomfort. Thus, in a study conducted by Yu (2019), the author concluded that many people reviewing their hotel experiences on YouTube mentioned the discomfort, intimidation, and lack of connection related to anthropomorphic robots functioning on the hotels premises. Another study by Rosete et al. (2020) demonstrates that the hospitality industry is therefore considered closely related to empathic intelligence, as the integration of service robots has not yet reached the desired stage of service delivery (p. 174). This statement implies that the shift is inevitable despite many obstacles associated with robots integrated into the hospitality industry. Hence, while consumers give preference to human employees, the external context of rapid digitalization and the ongoing pandemic requires a higher level of customer tolerance to the change. In order to realize the robots efficiency in the hotel industry, it is crucial to consider both positive and negative aspects of hospitality automatization.

Discussion

Robot Service Preference in Hotel Operations (Main Statement)

The rapid shift toward digitalization expects employers and industry leaders to adapt and embrace technology to remain relevant in the market and seem more professional. Meanwhile, after the recent global pandemic, consumers have changed their attitude toward robot service in hotels. Efficiency, functionality, convenience, and ease of use are the driving factors for the change. Several consumers consider robotic services since they involve no human contact (Grewal et at., 2020). Consumers willingly accept robot concierges as they are easy to use and effective while preserving Covid-19 protective social distance measures. However, it is estimated that the negative attitude towards robot service will resume after the pandemic fear is over.

Advancement in robot anthropomorphism has also influenced consumers attitudes toward robot service. Although past studies have shown improved acceptance of robot anthropomorphism, there is a shift to prefer non-human-like robots (Thomsen, 2020). According to research, consumers are more comfortable knowing that robots are not humans than robots that behave more like humans. The awareness of robots creates psychological questioning of reality among people services because, at times, they are better at providing quality services (Lu et ai., 2020). It is hard for people to develop a mutual relationship with non-humans. It is hard for customers to develop trust with robots that only act like humans.

They are fast, free of errors, and ensure efficiency in service delivery. In addition, the robots provide low operation costs by eliminating the need for many workers and cutting down losses associated with the perishability of food items in the hotel. These benefits provide the hotel with a competitive advantage that helps it perform better through substantial profit margins and increased sales. The robots can provide quality standardized hotel service; thus, guests will have the same experience repeatedly.

Human Preference in Hotel Operations (Counter-Arguments)

Many studies whose results termed robots as ineffective in hotel operations focused on social skills and low emotion quotient traits of robots. According to research, guests need personalization alongside the hotel service quality (Kim et al., 2021). A client will feel more satisfied if an attendant calls them by name and maybe smiles at them, compared to a robot is dictated to repeat a set of words after a client does or says a word or set of words. Some of the hotel managers argue that robots would not personally contact with the customers, thus reducing the quality of services. Well-trained and experienced employees are less likely to have errors while performing their roles.

Quality service includes a good experience. Although there are efforts to incorporate customer satisfaction in robotic services, the effectiveness may never match the human service due to the inability to sufficiently show and influence emotions. According to Chan and Tung (2019), human staff services were better than robotic services as humans created an emotional connection and enriched experience compared to robots.

Human service will win return guests and referrals for the business future, while robots will serve to increase sales at the current moment. Interaction of staff with their guests creates trust between guests to the hotel and they will feel comfortable coming back to it in the future (Gupta et al., 2019). In addition, employees can further reinforce guests loyalty by influencing guest emotions with a smile, kind gestures, and personalized services. These acts make guests feel valued and may feel the urge to keep coming to the hotel.

Human preference is acquainted with several flaws. Human employees can negatively influence the guest experience, as their mood and attitude may tamper with the experience. In addition, human service quality standard is bound to change as often as each time a certain guest visit. The outcome may vary from excellent customer experience to poor. Humans are fallible. Their mistakes can cause significant financial losses to the hotel or damage its reputation.

Personal Argument

Whether a hotel should adopt robotic service or stick with human operations is still a dilemma due to limited research on consumer preferences and recent events due to COVID-19. Customer needs are always on the lead when making any business decision. Hospitality is a human character trait. Although humans have already tapped into artificial intelligence, they cannot assume the need for human contact, especially in industries where the human effect is vital, like hotel industries (Grundner & Neuhofer, 2021). The rapid change to accept anthropomorphism in robot service and prefer non-anthropomorphism is a sign that humans can only relate to themselves. The emotional touch is unique to humans. Though humans can read the robots facial expressions, robots are unable to read to process human emotions as they are unable to capture human facial expressions (Chuah & Yu, 2021). The incapability leaves incomplete conversations as consumers may not get a personalized experience.

Robots are fast, efficient, cost-friendly, and convenient as they are not affected by human nature limits such as fatigue. However, primary services such as meals and shelter should be provided in a positive environment founded on human interaction and emotions. It is hard to maintain loyalty between customers and a hotel when robots provide the services. Clients want to feel valued through personalized service and clear communication via facial interactions and understanding. Robots are likely to serve more clients who might never return to the hotel, while human service is likely to capture customer trust, which will make them return.

Robots are likely to attract guests to a hotel establishment but not retain them. The guests will be looking forward to experimenting with the service feel. In addition, human employees, unlike robots, can judge a situation and implement viable alternative solutions (Jimenez-Ramirez et al., 2019). In case of an unusual occurrence, robots are likely to give negative reactions or no reactions, as the program did not create room for the exceptional occurrence. In case of a breakdown of systems, it may need to keep the business running as there are no experienced employees for the task. In the case of human employees, one employee is replaced by another if they get an emergency. Employees can comfortably shift to operating manually if any system breaks down.

Conclusion

Robots have increased efficiency in the hotel industry. They are quick, cost-saving, and efficient, with improved output quantity and quality. The robots can work under adverse conditions and exhibit no limitations, such as fatigue, compared to human nature. There is an increased use of robots in hotel services, and it is estimated to increase with improved customer attitudes and advancements. The current robotic services cannot provide social interaction during service delivery. Over the years, customers have preferred human service, including emotional interaction and genuine feelings. Although scientists are putting efforts into improving robotic appearance and service to match human service, consumers still feel indifferent to the robotic service.

There has been a change in consumer perception of robotic services in hotels after the Covid-19 pandemic hit. The laid down protective measures caused close of hotel and entertainment outlets leaving consumer needs unattended. As the pandemic spread, robot service increased as it became the least risky way of accessing goods and products. However, it is estimated that after the pandemic, consumer preference for hotel service will resume with human service as they chose robots under pressure and fear of getting infected through human contact.

Human service is perceived to be slow and erroneous, with varying standards but the ability to interact and create trust for the company. The ability of humans to judge and act as per events creates confidence in clients and confirms their loyalty to the hotel. Humans will bring repeated guests compared to robots, who do not create a long-lasting impression. In addition, well-trained and experienced human employees do not commit mistakes and may match the robotic service output quality.

References

Belias, D., & Varelas, S. (2019). To be or not to be? Which is the case with robots in the hotel industry? Strategic Innovative Marketing and Tourism, 935-941.

Chan, A. P., & Tung, V. W. (2019). Examining the effects of robotic service on brand experience: The moderating role of hotel segment. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 36(4), 458-468.

Chuah, S. H., & Yu, J. (2021). The future of service: The power of emotion in human-robot interaction. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 61.

Grewal, D., Kroschke, M., Mende, M., Roggeveen, A. L., & Scott, M. L. (2020). Frontline cyborgs at your service: How human enhancement technologies affect customer experiences in retail, sales, and service settings. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 51, 9-25.

Grundner, L., & Neuhofer, B. (2021). The bright and dark sides of artificial intelligence: A futures perspective on tourist destination experiences. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 19.

Gupta, A., Dash, S., & Mishra, A. (2019). All that glitters is not green: Creating trustworthy ecofriendly services at green hotels. Tourism Management, 70, 155-169.

Jimenez-Ramirez, A., Reijers, H. A., Barba, I., & Valle, C. D. (2019). A method to improve the early stages of the robotic process automation lifecycle. In International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (pp. 446-461). Springer, Cham.

Kim, S. (., Kim, J., Badu-Baiden, F., Giroux, M., & Choi, Y. (2021). Preference for robot service or human service in hotels? Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 93, 102795.

Lu, V. N., Wirtz, J., Kunz, W. H., Paluch, S., Gruber, T., Martins, A., & Patterson, P. G. (2020). Service robots, customers and service employees: what can we learn from the academic literature and where are the gaps? Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 30(3), 361-391.

Rosete, A., Soares, B., Salvadorinho, J., Reis, J., & Amorim, M. (2020). Service robots in the hospitality industry: An exploratory literature review. In International conference on exploring services science (pp. 174-186). Springer, Cham.

Stylos, N., Fotiadis, A. K., Shin, D. D., & Huan, T. C. T. (2021). Beyond smart systems adoption: Enabling diffusion and assimilation of smartness in hospitality. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 98.

Thomsen, C. (2020). The Impact of Hotel Service Robot Appearance and Service Attributes on Customer Experience [Doctoral dissertation].

Yu, C. E. (2020). Humanlike robots as employees in the hotel industry: Thematic content analysis of online reviews. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 29(1), 22-38.

Click Here To Order Now!