22
TAN7
Equipment and facilities are generally clean
New
Tangibles
TAN8
Variety of food and beverages meet guests’ needs
New
Tangibles
TAN9
Services are operated at a convenient time
SERVQUAL
Tangibles
Source: Research And Concepts Analysing Service Quality In The Hospitality Industry; Amy
Wong Ooi Mei, Alison M.Dean and Christopher J. White
HOLSERV uses the rating seven-point scale (1 = very poor and 7 = excellent) that is easier for
customers to answer the questionnaire. This is useful to indentify the best predictor of overall
service. One column questionnaire combined with seven-point scale rating is the biggest
advantages of HOLSERV which make HOLSERV become easy to be applied in reality
An example of the one-column format questionnaire:
CRITERIA
LEVEL OF SATISFACTION
1. When Hotel X promises to provide a service, it does so
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2. Hotel X shows dependability in handling service
problems
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1= Very poor; completely failed to meet my expected service level
7= Excellent; far exceed my expected service level
While applying the HOLSERV scale, managers of hotels should pay attention on the
questionnaire. With different types of hotel, managers should use different questions based on
the range of facilities available. For example, with a four or five star hotel, questionnaire can
refer to the sauna service, service quality of restaurant inside the hotel, etc. But with an one or
two star hotel, managers should ask the question associated with the equipment such as
television, telephone and internet access. It means that, managers of hotels should consider
further modification or deletion of items in order to customize the questionnaire for their guests
and supplement the HOLSERV scale with additional qualitative research such as in-depth
interviews or focus group discussions. In this case, HOLSERV should be considered as a useful
starting point, not the final conclusion for assessing and improving service quality of the hotel.
23
2.3.2.2 LODGING QUALITY INDEX
LODGING QUALITY INDEX (LQI) was built based on SERVQUAL (Parasuraman, 1988).
From this main structure and eight-step procedure of Churchill (1979), Getty and Thompson
(1994a) developed the lodging quality scale.
At the beginning, the researchers interviewed travelers and executives of both luxury and
economic hotels. They based on the ten dimension of SERQUAL scale. In this way, the result
was a pool of 63 scale items (Appendix 2). Then the coefficient alpha which was is a measure of
reliability or internal consistency of items was computed (Cronbach, 1951). The higher alpha
was, the more significant or interested item was. After that the correspondence of each items and
the overall scale item pool was considered to eliminate the unimportant items. As a result, only
43 items were kept. With the appearance and appreciation of SERVQUAL scale of Parasuraman
in 1988 with five dimensions, researchers one more time collected data and computed again all
the items and coefficient based on the new SERVQUAL scale. In the end, the final lodging
quality index with 5 dimensions and 26 items was born and has been used until now. Five
dimensions are tangible, reliability (includes original reliability and credibility dimensions),
responsiveness, confidence (includes original competence, courtesy, security and access
dimensions) and communication (includes original communication and understanding
dimensions). They are different with the five dimension of SERVQUAL (include tangibles,
reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy) and they are considered more suitable to
evaluate some unique features of the hotel industry.
24
Table 5: Lodging quality index 26-items
Dimension
Scale item
Tangibility
The front desk was visually appealing
The employees had clean, neat uniforms
The restaurant’s atmosphere was inviting
The shops were pleasant and attractive
The outdoor surroundings were visually attractive
The hotel was bright and well lighted
The hotel’s interior and exterior were well maintained
The hotel was clean
Reliability
My reservation was handled efficiently
My guest room was ready as promised
TV, radio, A/C, lights, and other mechanical equipment worked properly
I got what I paid for
Responsiveness
Employees responded promptly to my requests
Informative literature about the hotel was provided
Employees were willing to answer my questions
Employees responded quickly to solve my problems
Room service was prompt
Confidence
Employees knew about local places of interest
Employees treated me with respect
Employees were polite when answering my questions
The hotel provided a safe environment
The facilities were conveniently located
Communication
Charges on my account were clearly explained
I received undivided attention at the front desk
Reservationists tried to find out my particular needs
Employees anticipated my needs
25
Source: “Lodging quality index (LQI): assessing customers’ perceptions of quality delivery”,
Juliet M. Getty and Robert L. Getty, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management 15/2 [2003]
After collecting statistic data, LQI score is calculated. It is low if 1/3 of answers are negative and
it is high if 2/3 of answers or more are positive.
While the validity and reliability of items were considered, the researchers discovered the good
correspondence between LQI and satisfy. To calculate the satisfaction, the questionnaire which
included three bellowed questions was given to customers:
1.
Would you recommend the property to a friend?
2.
Did you experience a problem during your stay?
3.
If yes, was it handled satisfactorily?
One index was constructed from responses of these questionnaires, and then it was translated
into “satisfy”.
Table 6: Measuring SATISFY based on recommendation of property, experiencing a
problem, and handling
Recommended + Experienced a problem + Problem handled
property well
Score Satisfaction
level
Yes No -
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes No
No No -
No Yes Yes
No Yes No
6
5
4
3
2
1
High
High
Moderate
Moderate
Low
Low
Source: “Lodging quality index (LQI): assessing customers’ perceptions of quality delivery”,
Juliet M. Getty and Robert L. Getty, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management 15/2 [2003]
Dostları ilə paylaş: |