ArticlePDF Available

Abstract and Figures

Technology is a critical determinant in hotel guest satisfaction. Hotels often utilize technology as a value-added amenity to help promote differentiation and enhance guest satisfaction. The purpose of this study was twofold: to measure and document the level of guest satisfaction with existing technology-based amenities, and to examine the scope of impact of such amenities on overall hotel guest satisfaction. A random sample of 3,000 American travelers was chosen from a national database for this study. A total of 534 usable responses were received. The results indicate that there is a significant positive relationship between three factors—“Business Essentials for Travelers,” “In-Room Technologies,” “Internet Access”—and hotel guest's overall satisfaction. “Comfort technologies” factor was found not significant in predicting hotel guest's overall satisfaction.
Content may be subject to copyright.
This article was downloaded by: [University of South Florida]
On: 17 October 2011, At: 12:09
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of Quality Assurance in
Hospitality & Tourism
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
The Impact of Technology Amenities on
Hotel Guest Overall Satisfaction
Cihan Cobanoglu
, Katerina Berezina
, Michael L. Kasavana
Mehmet Erdem
University of South Florida Sarasota-Manatee, Sarasota, Florida,
University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA
School of Hospitality Business, Michigan State University, East
Lansing, Michigan, USA
University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Available online: 14 Oct 2011
To cite this article: Cihan Cobanoglu, Katerina Berezina, Michael L. Kasavana & Mehmet Erdem
(2011): The Impact of Technology Amenities on Hotel Guest Overall Satisfaction, Journal of Quality
Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 12:4, 272-288
To link to this article:
Full terms and conditions of use:
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation
that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any
instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary
sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,
demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 12:272–288, 2011
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1528-008X print/1528-0098 online
DOI: 10.1080/1528008X.2011.541842
The Impact of Technology Amenities on Hotel
Guest Overall Satisfaction
University of South Florida Sarasota-Manatee, Sarasota, Florida, USA
University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA
School of Hospitality Business, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, USA
University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Technology is a critical determinant in hotel guest satisfaction.
Hotels often utilize technology as a value-added amenity to help
promote differentiation and enhance guest satisfaction. The pur-
pose of this study was twofold: to measure and document the
level of guest satisfaction with existing technology-based amenities,
and to examine the scope of impact of such amenities on over-
all hotel guest satisfaction. A random sample of 3,000 American
travelers was chosen from a national database for this study.
A total of 534 usable responses were received. The results indicate
that there is a significant positive relationship between three fac-
tors—“Business Essentials for Travelers,” “In-Room Technologies,”
“Internet Access”—and hotel guest’s overall satisfaction. “Comfort
technologies” factor was found not significant in predicting hotel
guest’s overall satisfaction.
KEYWORDS technology amenities, hotel, guest satisfaction
Address correspondence to Cihan Cobanoglu, PhD, Professor & Dean, University of
South Florida Sarasota-Manatee, School of Hotel and Restaurant Management, 8350 North
Tamiami Trail, Sarasota, FL 34243. E-mail:
Downloaded by [University of South Florida] at 12:09 17 October 2011
Technology Amenities and Overall Guest Satisfaction 273
The adoption of hospitality industry-specific technology began in the
early 1970s and has been continuously advancing ever since (Collins &
Cobanoglu, 2008; Kasavana & Cahill, 2007; Sammons, 2000). From its incep-
tion, industry practitioners and researchers expressed concern relative to
the value of technology and its possible consequences on guest satisfac-
tion (Collins & Cobanoglu, 2008; Piccoli, 2004). Despite such concerns,
hospitality technology applications are credited with providing a basis for
competitive advantage, productivity improvement, enhanced financial per-
formance, and guest service expansion (Collins & Cobanoglu, 2008; Kim,
Lee, & Law, 2008; Kasavana & Cahill, 2007; Siguaw, Enz, & Namasivayam,
2000). For over a decade, industry practitioners have advocated support for
the indispensible role of technology in managing hospitality transactions and
operations (Collins & Cobanoglu, 2008; Ham, Kim, & Jeong, 2005; Kasavana
& Cahill, 2007; Squires, 2008; Van Hoof, Combrink, & Verbeeten, 1997).
While David, Grabski, and Kasavana, (1996) suggested that technology
systems may not always provide a positive impact on financial performance,
such findings do not diminish the importance of front- and back-office
applications to lodging operations. It has been long established that tech-
nology is a critical determinant for hotel guest satisfaction (Singh and
Kasavana, 2005; Van Hoof et al., 1997) and hotel choice (Cobanoglu, 2001).
Hotels often utilize technology as a value-added amenity to help pro-
mote differentiation, enhance guest satisfaction, and build loyalty among
clientele (Cobanoglu, Ryan, & Beck, 1999). A recent American Hotel and
Lodging Association survey (Brewer, Kim, Schrier, & Farrish, 2008) iden-
tified both improved guest experience and enhanced guest satisfaction as
major advantages of hotel technology applications. A recent trade journal
article reported that incorrect or improper use of technology may produce
guest dissatisfaction (Cobanoglu, 2009a). Another related article documented
that in-house guests were highly dissatisfied with the implementation of a
“walking” alarm clock placed in a hotel guestroom despite the fact it was
easy to operate, sounded and looked attractive, and kept accurate time
(Cobanoglu, 2009b). A thorough r eview of related literature revealed no
empirical research studies that focused on the proper selection of hotel tech-
nology amenities that meet guest expectations or address the issue of guest
Having realized that potential guests place significant emphasis on
experience and satisfaction when selecting a hotel (Whitford, 1998), hotel
companies tend to direct significant resources to monitoring the guest expe-
rience. Given the interest of hotel companies on technology-based amenities
(Erdem, Schrier, & Brewer, 2009) and the aforementioned influence of
technology on guest satisfaction, the purpose of this study was twofold:
to measure and document the level of guest satisfaction with existing
Downloaded by [University of South Florida] at 12:09 17 October 2011
274 C. Cobanoglu et al.
technology-based amenities, and to examine the scope of impact of such
amenities on guest satisfaction.
Guest Satisfaction and Behavioral Intentions
Guest satisfaction is synonymous with customer or consumer satisfaction.
Satisfaction refers to a post-purchase evaluation of product quality given
pre-purchase expectations (Kotler, Bowen, & Makens, 2003). Customer
is satisfied when post-purchase evaluation reveals service quality higher
than guests’ expected service quality (Kotler, Bowen, & Makens, 2003).
This situation is the goal for all hospitality businesses. Zeithaml, Bitner,
and Gremler (2006) suggest that customer satisfaction has direct impact
on customer loyalty. Different studies have investigated the relationship
between service quality, satisfaction, and customer loyalty (Skogland &
Siguaw, 2004; Yee, Yeung, & Cheng, 2009). There is a debate in the literature
about the relationships among service quality, consumer satisfaction and
consumer loyalty (Zabkar, Brencic, & Dmitrovic, 2009). Even when high
service quality is provided and a customer is satisfied, it does not necessarily
mean that this customer will come back (Kotler et al., 2003; Reid & Bojanic,
2009; Zeithaml et al., 2006). There can be different reasons why a customer
would not come back to a property where he or she received high quality
service and was satisfied. One reason could be that a customer does not
want to travel to the same area, but prefers to explore something different.
Another possibility is the customer’s willingness to try something new even
if the customer returns to the area (he or she can intentionally look for a
different hotel); and finally, a customer can be influenced by a better deal
offered in another hotel. On the other hand, Yee et al. (2009) found that
service quality has a significant and direct impact on customer satisfaction
and that the relationship between customer satisfaction and loyalty is also
highly significant. These findings are consistent with the r esults of Skogland
and Siguaw (2004) who reported that satisfied stayers (satisfied returning
customers) have the greatest loyalty.
Given the research objective, this paper concentrates on the hotel
guest satisfaction with technology amenities, thus, the following sections
will present the review of technologies implemented in hotels and studies
which focused on guest satisfaction.
Technology in Hotels
The adoption of technology by the hospitality industry started in early
1970s and has been rapidly evolving ever since (Collins & Cobanoglu, 2008;
Erdem, Schrier, & Brewer, 2009, Kasavana & Cahill, 2007; Sammons, 2000).
Downloaded by [University of South Florida] at 12:09 17 October 2011
Technology Amenities and Overall Guest Satisfaction 275
As a general principle, the larger and more complex a hospitality facility
(i.e., overnight accommodations, food and beverage outlets, spa treatments,
recreational activities, etc.) the greater its reliance on automation (Piccoli &
Torchio, 2006; Siguaw et al., 2000).
Technology in hotels is often applied at two levels:
1. At the managerial and operational level; and
2. For in-room guest services (Lee, Barker, & Kandampully, 2003).
Guest oriented technological amenities are typically introduced to
enhance guest satisfaction as well as the performance and functionality
of hotel staff. In-room technology amenities, designed to provide a more
comfortable and safe environment, may include mini-bars, electronic locks
and safes, alarm clocks, desktop computers, entertainment systems, climate
control systems, fire annunciator and security systems, and others (Collins
& Cobanoglu, 2008). Select hotel technology amenities are presented in
the Table 1. Many hospitality industry experts emphasize the importance
of in-room technologies as the traveling public continues to become more
technologically savvy (Higley, 2007; Munyan, 2008; Squires, 2008).
TABLE 1 Definitions of Select Hotel Technology Amenities
Technology Description
Voice over IP (VoIP) Use of Internet protocols instead of analog media to
transfer voice data
In-room Pay-Per-View (PPV) Digital video, available over a television platform,
available on a payment basis
Voicemail/messaging Phone-based service that enables a caller to leave a
voice mailbox message
In-room accessible outlets Electrical outlets conveniently located for hotel guest
access and use room
High-speed Internet access (HSIA) Internet connectivity at speeds of 1 to 100 Megabits per
second (Mbps)
In-room safe Electronic safe that can be opened by electronic card
or personalized code
In-room control panel Console controls room amenities (e.g., lights,
temperature, curtains, blinds)
Universal battery charger Device capable of charging the batteries of various
equipment and mobile devices
Electronic locking system Access security by electronic media (e.g., magnetic
stripe, smart card, RFID, NFC)
In-room game system Entertainment system available in a hotel guest room
(e.g., Wii or PlayStation)
In-room fitness system Specialty devices for physical exercise in a hotel guest
room (e.g., treadmill unit)
In-room video checkout Television interface enabling express folio review,
account settlement, and checkout
Resource: Collins and Cobanoglu (2008).
Downloaded by [University of South Florida] at 12:09 17 October 2011
276 C. Cobanoglu et al.
According to recent related studies, various in-room technologies are
being employed to provide a more positive guest experience (Erdem,
Schrier, & Brewer, 2009). Coupled with improved front office automation
applications, and occasionally supported by a technology concierge, hotels
are realizing increased overall guest satisfaction (Kim et al., 2008).
Given the debate in the literature about the contribution of technol-
ogy to hotel guest satisfaction and implementation of numerous technology
amenities in hotels, the first purpose of the study is to measure the level
of guest satisfaction with different guest-oriented technology amenities. The
research question was formulated as follows:
What is the level of guest satisfaction with technology-based amenities
implemented by hotels?
Technology Amenity Guest Satisfaction
Product selection, based on need and expectation, are considered critical
in determining customer satisfaction. Many researchers have investigated
the nature of hotel guest satisfaction (Chathoth, 2007; Kandampully &
Suhartanto, 2000; Shanka & Taylor, 2003; Torres & Kline, 2006). Skogland
& Siguaw (2004) concluded hotel guest satisfaction is an essential compo-
nent of long-term success. Kandampully and Suhartanto (2000) cited the
influence of hotel image on customer loyalty and tied satisfaction to con-
geniality, service, cleanliness, and price. Torres and Kline (2006) postulated
a workplace model based on the assumption that employees and facilities
were the most influential factors contributing to guest satisfaction.
The role and adoption rate of hospitality technology has been a focal
point for several industry studies (Beldona & Cobanoglu, 2007; Ham et al.,
2005; Verma, Victorino, Karniouchina, & Feickert, 2007). Despite some
incongruent findings, research results support the evolving importance of
technology in property selection. In a study of upscale Korean hotels, for
example, guest-related interface applications (e.g., call accounting, elec-
tronic locks, energy management, in-room entertainment, in-room vending
and information services) were found to have no significant effect on over-
all satisfaction (Ham et al., 2005). A similar study, conducted in Thailand,
produced controversial findings as researcher’s acknowledged the dominant
influence of technology amenities (e.g. television, mini-bar, telephone ser-
vice, etc.) on customer satisfaction, without regard to socio-demographic
characteristics (Prayukvong, Sophon, Hongpukdee, & Charupas, 2007).
Chathoth (2007) concluded that an important feature of hotel informa-
tion technology is the delineation of significant components (i.e., reliability,
responsiveness, assurance, and empathy) involved in meeting and/or
exceeding guest needs. Recently, Cornell University Center for Hospitality
Research conducted research to determine hotel guest technology prefer-
ences (Verma et al., 2007). The study incorporated a web-based Technology
Downloaded by [University of South Florida] at 12:09 17 October 2011
Technology Amenities and Overall Guest Satisfaction 277
Readiness Index (TRI) tool. The researchers sought to separate those
favoring technology (i.e., higher TRI score) from those who appeared indif-
ferent or uninterested. Descriptive responder characteristics included: young,
highly educated, affluent, inclined to be frequent travelers, and willing to
pay higher room rates. The research centered on IT adoption of a web-
based hotel booking engine, self check-out service, and in-room Internet
access. The study confirmed that not all hotel guests embrace technology
innovation uniformly.
Further analysis by Beldona and Cobanoglu (2007) involved classi-
fication of guest oriented technologies into four quadrants according to
expectation of importance and satisfaction with per formance. The first
group, including express check-in/out, remote control TV, and in-room
high speed Internet access were ranked high on both dimensions (impor-
tance and performance). A second group, awarded high importance but low
performance ratings, included wireless Internet access, alarm clock, easily
accessible electrical outlets and on-line reservation capabilities. This group
included persons who considered these technologies important when select-
ing a hotel but judged performance low during occupancy. A third group,
rated technologies at a low importance level in hotel selection but recorded
high performance scores once in-house. Group three technologies included
web TV, Pay-Per-View movies, and in-room personal computers. The fourth
group indicated low ratings for both technology importance and perfor-
mance. Applications in this group included videoconferencing capabilities,
wireless access to hotel website, business center services, and plasma screen
In summary, various studies have been conducted to explore the role
and importance of hotel guest technology amenities over hotel guest satisfac-
tion. Additional research on this topic is intended to delineate technologies
that may be implemented to enhance guest satisfaction. Therefore, the
second purpose of this study is to explore the impact of technology ameni-
ties on hotel guest satisfaction. The research hypothesis was formulated as
: There is a relationship between hotel guest satisfaction with technology
amenities and overall accommodation-based satisfaction.
A random sample of 3,000 American travelers was chosen from a national
database ( for this study. Selected email addresses were strat-
ified by state population by the national database company. Each email
contained an invitation and a website link to the survey. Of the 3,000 emails
in the original population, 1,332 responses were received for a response
Downloaded by [University of South Florida] at 12:09 17 October 2011
278 C. Cobanoglu et al.
rate of 44.4%. The qualifying question for the study involved the respon-
dent having stayed in a hotel within the immediate past 12 months. Of the
1,332 respondents, 1,172 (88%) fulfilled the qualification of a hotel stay
within the last year. The remaining 160 respondents were eliminated from
the study. Of the 1,172 qualified responses, 638 were found to be incomplete
and therefore were also deleted. The remaining 534 responses composed the
population for this study (i.e., 17.8% net response rate).
A web-hosted survey instrument, composed of four sections, was
devised based on items identified in a review of relevant literature. The first
section of the survey focused on traveler behavior while the second sec-
tion investigated travelers’ technology behavior. Both sections were adopted
from the validated instrument used in the Beldona and Cobanoglu (2007)
study. The third section contained a list of select hotel technology ameni-
ties. The list of technology amenities in this section was adopted from the
following studies: Cobanoglu (2001), Ham et al., 2005, Verma et al., 2007
and Beldona & Cobanoglu (2007). The final section was concerned with
guest-hotel satisfaction and demographic characteristics of respondent.
A non-response bias analysis using wave analysis (early versus later
respondents) was conducted to determine: (1) whether non-respondents
and respondents differed significantly and (2) whether equivalent data
from those who did not respond would have significantly altered find-
ings. Rylander, Propst, and McMurtry (1995) suggested that late respondents
and non-respondents were alike and wave analysis and respondent/non-
respondent comparisons tended to yield similar results. As a result, an
independent t-test was conducted to evaluate variance in early responses
from late responses. The analysis indicated that there was no sig-
nificant difference, concluding that this survey did not suffer from
non-response bias.
Table 2 contains respondent demographic infor mation indicating that 67.9%
of the respondents were female travelers. Just over one-quarter of the
respondents (25.7%) were between the ages of 36 and 45 years; 22.2%
ranged between 46 and 55; 21% between 26 and 35; 12.6% were 25 or
younger, 12% were between 56 and 65, and 6.6% were older than 66 years.
About 17% were employed in professional, managerial, and related occupa-
tions; 13.7% worked in sales and office occupations, 10.4% were in service
industries, and 11.8% identified as students. About 30% of the respondents
had an annual income of $25,001 to $50,000; 27.9% earned $50,001 to
$75,000; and 10.1% reported earning $75,001 to $100,000. More than half
of the respondents reported being married (55.7%), 24% were single and
12% divorced.
Downloaded by [University of South Florida] at 12:09 17 October 2011
Technology Amenities and Overall Guest Satisfaction 279
TABLE 2 Respondent Demographics
Variable % Variable %
Gender Marital Status
Male 32.1 Married 55.7
Female 67.9 Single 24.0
Age (years) Divorced 12.0
25 or younger 12.6 Separated 3.6
26–35 21.0 Widowed 1.2
36–45 25.7 Prefer not to answer 0.6
46–55 22.2 Other 3.0
56–65 12.0
66 or older 6.6
Level of education Approximate annual income
High School 10.2 $25,000 or less 13.9
Associate degree (2 year) 12.6 $25,001–$50,000 30.8
Bachelor’s Degree (4 year) 29.3 $50,001–$75,000 27.9
Some college 32.9 $75,001–$100,000 10.1
Master’s Degree 10.8 $100,001–$150,000 7.2
Doctorate Degree 3.6 $150,001–$200,000 0.0
Other 0.6 $200,001–$250,000 0.5
Prefer not to answer 9.6
Management, professional,
and related occupations
Service occupations 10.4
Sales and office occupations 13.7
Farming, fishing, and forestry 1.9
Construction, extraction, and
maintenance occupations
Production, transportation,
and material moving
Government occupations 4.7
Technology Occupations 6.6
Student 11.8
Retired 8.5
Unemployed 5.7
Other 16.0
N = 534.
Travel Behavior
Table 3 lists the tools respondents reported using when searching for a hotel
and associated mean scores. The most frequently reported search technique
is the hotel’s own website (Mean = 2.5), followed by online travel agency
websites, e.g., Expedia, Orbitz, and Travelocity (Mean = 2.7) and third party
review sites such as,,, and
(Mean = 3.5). The least utilized tool was found to be social networking sites
such as Myspace and Facebook. About 41% of the respondents reported
being active members of a frequent traveler program.
Downloaded by [University of South Florida] at 12:09 17 October 2011
280 C. Cobanoglu et al.
TABLE 3 Search Tools for Hotel Selection
Tool Mean
Standard Deviation
Hotel website 2.5 1.3
Online travel agency websites 2.7 1.3
Third party review sites 3.5 1.3
Social networking sites 4.4 1.0
N = 534
where: 1 = Always; 5 = Never.
Table 4 summarizes self-reported respondent travel behavior. Slightly
more than one quarter of the respondents booked their last hotel stay
through an Internet travel agency such as Expedia, Orbitz, or Travelocity
(26.6%). The second most frequently reported booking method was phoning
the hotel directly (25.3%) followed by booking through the hotel’s affiliated
website (e.g.,,, or at 24.5%. Using a toll-
free central reservation system telephone number was cited as the next most
popular method (9.4%).
Nearly one-half of the respondents reported having stayed in a midscale
hotel such as Courtyard, Holiday Inn Express, or Comfort Inn, while 31.3%
stayed in an upscale property such as Hyatt, Hilton, or Marriott and 16.3%
stayed in an economy hotel such as Ramada, EconoLodge, or Super 8.
TABLE 4 Travel Behavior
Variable %
Means of Last Hotel Reservation
Book on-line through an Internet travel agency 26.6
Call the hotel directly 25.3
Book online with hotel affiliated website 24.5
Call a toll free (800) reservation number of the hotel 9.4
Other 9.0
Use a travel agent 3.4
Use my organization’s travel agent 1.7
Type of Last hotel
Luxury (e.g., Four Seasons, Ritz Carlton) 1.7
Upscale (e.g., Hyatt, Hilton, Marriott) 31.3
Midscale (e.g., Courtyard, Holiday Inn Express, Comfort Inn, 48.9
Economy (e.g., Ramada, Super 8, Motel 6, EconoLodge) 16.3
Other 1.7
Travel Scenario
Vacation 39.0
Visit friends, relatives 23.2
Travel to attend travel association meeting / convention / conference 16.1
Travel to attend company meeting / meet people within the company 13.5
Travel to meet people outside the company (but not to make a sales call) 3.4
Attending a sport event 3.0
Travel to make a sales call 1.9
N = 534.
Downloaded by [University of South Florida] at 12:09 17 October 2011
Technology Amenities and Overall Guest Satisfaction 281
A majority of the respondents traveled for leisure while about 35% traveled
for business associated purposes.
Factor Analysis
Exploratory factor analysis was applied to survey data to (a) create correlated
variable composites from the original attributes, and (b) apply the derived
factor scores in subsequent multiple regression analysis. Principal axis factor
analysis with a varimax rotation was used. The varimax, rather than quarti-
max rotation, was adopted because the researchers, based on the review of
similar studies, anticipated finding several dimensions of equal importance
among the data. Items with factor loadings of 0.30 or higher were clustered
together to form constructs, based on prior research studies (Tinsley & Kass,
1979; Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1998). The factors with Eigenvalues
greater than 1.0 were considered significant. The solution that accounted
for at least 60% of the total variance was considered a satisfactory solution
(Hair et al., 1998). Utilizing the Data reduction function of the Statistical
Package for Social Sciences (SPSS, 2000) a factor analysis was performed on
all nineteen technology amenities to determine possible underlying factors.
Initially, a Spearman rank-order, inter-item correlation matrix was cal-
culated for these items. Two statistics were used to test if the factor analysis
was appropriate for this study. First, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) statis-
tic was calculated as 0.932 which is meritorious (Kaiser, 1974). Since the
KMO was above 0.80, the variables were interrelated and shared common
factors. In addition, the communalities ranged from 0.64 to 0.87 with an
average value above 0.72, suggesting that the variance of the original val-
ues were fairly explained by the common factors. Bartlett’s test of sphericity
was applied and yielded a significant chi-square value in order to test the
significance of the correlation matrix (÷=2395.45, df=190, p =0.000). Both
tests indicated that factor analysis was appropriate for this study (Hair et al.,
The results of the factor analysis produced a clean factor structure with
relatively higher loadings on the appropriate factors. Most variables loaded
heavily on one factor and this reflected that there was minimal overlap
among factors and that all factors were independently structured. Four sta-
ble factors with Eigenvalues greater than 1.0, and explaining 72.79% of the
variance, were derived from the analysis. Reliability coefficients (Cronbach’s
alpha) were computed for the items that formed each factor. As Table 5
indicates, the reliability coefficients for the items in this study ranged from
0.81 to 0.90; well above the minimum value of 0.70 considered accept-
able as an indication of reliability for applied research (Nunnally, 1978).
The contents of the four factor dimensions were analyzed and labeled: In-
room Technologies, Comfort Technologies, Business Essentials, and Internet
Access (see Table 5).
Downloaded by [University of South Florida] at 12:09 17 October 2011
282 C. Cobanoglu et al.
TABLE 5 Results of Factor Analysis for Hotel Technology Amenities
Item Dimensions
In-room VoIP service 0.680106
In-room pay-per-view (PPV) movies 0.733287
In-room voice-mail / messaging 0.679025
In-room game system (e.g. Wii or
In-room fitness system 0.618179
In-room universal battery charger 0.580698
In-room electronic safe 0.568392
In-room guest control panel (e.g.,
lights, TV, temperature, blinds,
curtains, etc.)
In-room PC 0.674866
Mobile access to hotel website
(e.g., Blackberry)
Electronic wireless key card 0.797356
Flat panel HD Television 0.671673
Business center (e.g., computers,
fax and copier machinery, etc.)
Express check-in / check-out 0.744941
In-room Telephone 0.798396
In-room alarm clock 0.747690
Easily accessible electronic outlets 0.730601
In-room High-Speed Internet
Wireless Internet access in public
Eigenvalue 5.047 4.235 3.137 2.141
Variance Explained 25.23 21.17 15.68 10.70
Cronbach’s Alpha 0.907 0.894 0.814 0.875
N = 534.
Note: Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) statistic = 0.932; Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity =2395.45; df =190,
p = 0.000.
Research Question
What is the level of guest satisfaction with technology-based amenities
implemented by hotels?
To answer this research question, the descriptive statistics for nineteen
technology amenities are used as shown in Table 6. The five highest rated
technology amenities were: in-room telephone, express check-in/check-
out, in-room alarm clock, easily accessible electronic outlets, and in-room
high-speed internet access. Respondents were least satisfied with in-room
universal battery charger, video-conferencing capabilities, in-room fitness
system, in-room PC, and in-room game system (e.g., Wii or PlayStation).
Downloaded by [University of South Florida] at 12:09 17 October 2011
Technology Amenities and Overall Guest Satisfaction 283
TABLE 6 Level of Guest Satisfaction with Hotel Technology Amenities
Variable Mean
Standard Deviation
In-room Telephone 1.90 1.09
Express Check-in / Check-out 1.94 1.13
In-room Alarm Clock 1.98 1.13
Easily Accessible Electronic Outlets 2.05 1.11
In-room High-Speed Internet Access 2.19 1.28
In-room Guest Control Panel 2.23 1.23
Wireless Internet Access—Public Areas 2.31 1.24
In-room Voicemail / messaging 2.64 1.33
In-room Electronic Safe 2.64 1.36
Business Center 2.66 1.28
Flat panel HD Television 2.68 1.32
Electronic Wireless Key Card 2.77 1.36
In-room VoIP service 2.83 1.33
In-room Pay-Per-View (PPV) movies 2.83 1.31
Mobile Access to Hotel Website 2.85 1.32
In-room Universal Battery Charger 2.94 1.36
Video-Conferencing Capabilities 2.97 1.28
In-room Fitness System 3.10 1.36
In-room PC 3.11 1.38
In-room Game System 3.12 1.33
N = 534,
:1= Very satisfied, 5 = Very unsatisfied.
Hypothesis Testing
: There is a relationship between guest satisfaction with technology
amenities and overall accommodation-based satisfaction
To answer this question a regression analysis was conducted to esti-
mate a model with a hotel guest overall satisfaction score as the dependent
variable and the satisfaction scores on technology amenities’ factors as the
independent variables. The cutoff significant F value for retaining a vari-
able was selected at the α = 0.05 level. The purpose of estimating the
regression model was to identify technology amenities that have significantly
contributed to the overall satisfaction of hotel guests. The model yielded the
27.3% R
. Table 7 contains the coefficients for the significant model. The
regression model for the impact of technology amenities on the hotel guest
satisfaction is:
= β
+ β
+ β
+ β
= Overall guest satisfaction
= Constant (coefficient of the intercept)
= Regression Coefficients
Downloaded by [University of South Florida] at 12:09 17 October 2011
284 C. Cobanoglu et al.
TABLE 7 Coefficients
Model B SE Beta t p Value
Business Essentials for Travelers 0.291 0.074 0.392 3.932 0.000
In-room Technologies 0.217 0.050 0.396 4.363 0.000
Internet Access 0.102 0.051 0.164 2.001 0.046
Comfort Technologies 0.210 0.119 0.036 0.175 0.862
= 0.28.
= Significant at α=0.05 level. SE = standard error.
Note: a dependent variable: overall hotel satisfaction.
= Business Essentials for Travelers
= In-room Technologies
= Internet Access
The first significant variable is Business Essentials for Travelers
(p = 0.000), indicating that there is a positive relationship between the
variable’s satisfaction score and the overall satisfaction of the hotel guest.
In other words, one unit of increase in the Business Essentials for Travelers
factor would lead to a 0.291 unit increase in the overall satisfaction of
the hotel guest. The second significant variable is In-Room Technologies
(p = 0.000), indicating that there is a similar positive relationship between
the satisfaction score of this variable and the overall satisfaction of the hotel
guest. That means that one unit of increase in the In-Room Technologies fac-
tor would lead to a 0.217 unit increase in the overall satisfaction of the hotel
guest. The last significant variable is Internet Access (p = 0.046), indicating
that there is a positive relationship between satisfaction score of this variable
and the overall satisfaction of the hotel guest. One unit of increase in the
Internet Access factor leads to a 0.102 unit increase in the overall satisfaction
of the hotel guest. Interestingly, the Comfort technology variable was not
found to be a significant predictor of a hotel guest’s overall satisfaction.
One of the purposes of this study was to examine the impact of technology-
based amenities on hotel guest overall satisfaction. The results indicate that
technology amenities can significantly impact a hotel guest’s overall satis-
faction and since satisfaction is a direct determinant of future behavior, the
variety and the type of technology amenities will be considered as vital
factors in guest-hotel selection and return visit intention.
Downloaded by [University of South Florida] at 12:09 17 October 2011
Technology Amenities and Overall Guest Satisfaction 285
It is important to note that not all technology amenities impact guest
satisfaction equally. This study found that comfort technologies such as an
in-room electronic safe, guest control panel, in-room PC, mobile access to
hotel website, electronic lock, and flat screen HD television sets are not as
likely to impact guest satisfaction as other applications included in the study.
Perhaps, the impact of technology-based amenities is more closely r elated to
application familiarity as many popular devices can be found in the guest’s
home or office setting.
Business Essentials for Travelers were found to be strong factors impact-
ing guest satisfaction. This set of amenities included business center services,
express check-in/check-out, in-room telephone, in-room alarm clock, and
easily accessible electronic outlets. In-room technologies, such as VoIP tele-
phone services, pay-per-view movies, voicemail/messaging, game systems,
and universal battery chargers possess significant potential to positively
impact guest satisfaction. These findings are consistent with an earlier
research study conducted by Kistner, Dickinson, and Cobanoglu (2005).
The regression model revealed that comfort technologies appear to no
direct impact on hotel guest overall satisfaction. This finding indicates that
guests are not as satisfied with comfort technology items as with other vari-
ables contained in this study. Such comfort technologies as an in-room
electronic safe, in-room guest control panel, in-room PC, mobile access
to hotel website (e.g., Blackberry), electronic wireless key card, flat panel
HDTV, and the like, include several emerging technologies. Technologies
not considered mainstream may be categorized as disruptive technologies
(Christensen, 1997; Cobanoglu, 2001). Disruptive technologies have a ten-
dency to evolve into mainstream technologies and when this occurs, it may
lead to significant competitive advantage for the innovator. This may be an
important consideration for hoteliers contemplating near-future technology
investment. A technology deemed to be unpopular or disruptive should not
automatically be dismissed or ignored in strategic planning. It is critical to
differentiate technologies that impact guest satisfaction currently and those
projected to impact satisfaction in the future.
The findings of this study are consistent with the AHLA Technology
Use Study (2008) in which a nation-wide sample of hoteliers were surveyed.
According to the study, a majority of the hoteliers identified “enhancing
customer experiences” as an important near term IT goal. This is particu-
larly important because the findings of this study suggest that technology is
indeed a significant factor impacting guest satisfaction. This validated infor-
mation could prove to be helpful for hoteliers who are asked to justify
technology expenses and investments in their respective properties.
Hoteliers should review and evaluate current technology amenities and
related strategies and offerings. The technologies that impact guest satisfac-
tion may be used in advertising campaigns to attract new customers. Future
research in the areas of social networking and self-service guest technology
Downloaded by [University of South Florida] at 12:09 17 October 2011
286 C. Cobanoglu et al.
applications are expected to further support the findings of this study as
they present a platform enabling the promotion and extension of amenities
prior to and throughout the guest’s stay. The authors recommend further
examination of these particular applications in the near future.
American Hotel and Lodging Association Technology Use Survey. (2008). American
Hotel and Lodging Association. Retrieved from:
Beldona, S., & Cobanoglu, C. (2007). Importance-performance analysis of
guest technologies in the lodging industry. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant
Administration Quarterly, 48 (3), 299–312.
Brewer, P., Kim, J., Schrier, T., & Farrish, J. (2008). Current and future technology use
in the hospitality industry. American Hotel and Lodging Association. Retrieved
Chathoth, P. (2007). The impact of information technology on hotel operations,
service management and transaction costs: A conceptual framework for full-
service hotel firms. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 26(2),
Christensen, C. M. (1997). The innovator’s dilemma. Boston, MA: Harvard Business
School Press.
Cobanoglu, C. (2001). Analysis of business travelers’ hotel selection and satisfaction.
(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK.
Cobanoglu, C. (2009a). Guests’ top 7 technologies. Hospitality Technology,
13(2). Retrieved from
Cobanoglu, C. (2009b). In-room tech test. Hospitality Technology.
Retrieved from
Cobanoglu, C., Ryan, B., & Beck, J. (1999). The impact of technology in lodg-
ing properties. International Council on Hotel, Restaurant, and Institutional
Education Annual Convention Proceedings, 34–39.
Collins, G. R., & Cobanoglu, C. (2008). Hospitality information technology: Learning
how to use it (6th ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
David, S. J., Grabski, S., & Kasavana, M. (1996). The productivity paradox of hotel-
industry technology. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly,
37, 64–70.
Erdem, M., Schrier, T., & Brewer, P. (2009). Guest empowerment technologies.
Journal of Hospitality Finance and Technology Professionals, 24, (3), 17–19.
Downloaded by [University of South Florida] at 12:09 17 October 2011
Technology Amenities and Overall Guest Satisfaction 287
Hair, J. F. Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivadate data
analysis. (5th ed.). Upple Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Ham, S., Kim, W. G., & Jeong, S. (2005). Effect of information technology on per-
formance in upscale hotels. International Journal of Hospitality Management,
24(2), 281–294.
Higley, J. (2007). Keep technology working, make guests happy. Hotel & Motel
Management, 222(11), 6.
Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31–36.
Kandampully, J., & Suhartanto, D. (2000). Customer loyalty in the hotel industry: The
role of customer satisfaction and image. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, 12(6), 346–351.
Kasavana, M. L., & Cahill J. J. (2007). Managing technology in the hospitality industry
(5th ed.). Lansing, MI: Educational Institute of the American Hotel and Lodging
Kim, T.G., Lee, J.H., & Law, R. (2008). An empirical examination of the acceptance
behavior of hotel front office systems: An extended technology acceptance
model. Tourism Management, 29, 500–513.
Kistner, M., Dickinson, C., & Cobanoglu, C. (2005, November). What keeps the hos-
pitality industry from making the right technology investments—even when they
are staring us in the face. Paper presented at the International Hotel/Motel and
Restaurant Show, New York, NY.
Kotler, P., Bowen, J., & Makens, J. (2003). Marketing for hospitality and tourism (3rd
ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Munyan, R. (2008). Technology in the next generation of hotels. Lodging Hospitality,
64(16), 78–88.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Piccoli, G., & Torchio, P. (2006). The strategic value of information: A manager’s
guide to profiting from information. Cornel Hospitality Report, 7(6), 1–10.
Prayukvong, W., Sophon, J., Hongpukdee, S., & Charupas, T. (2007). Customers’
satisfaction with hotel guestrooms: A case study in Ubon Rachathani Province,
Thailand. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 12(2), 119–126.
Reid, R. D., & Bojanic, D. C. (2009). Hospitality marketing management (4th ed.).
New York, NY: Wiley.
Rylander, R. G., Propst, D. B., & McMurtry, T. R. (1995). Nonresponse and recall
biases in a survey of traveler spending. Journal of Travel Research,33(4),
Sammons, G. (2000). Technology: How hospitality sales managers use and view it!
Journal of Convention and Exhibition Management, 2(2), 83.
Shanka, T., & Taylor, R. (2003). An investigation into the perceived importance of
service and facility attributes of hotel satisfaction. Journal of Quality Assurance
in Hospitality and Tourism, 3/4(4), 119–134.
Siguaw, J., Enz, C., & Namasivayam, K. (2000). The adoption of information tech-
nology in U.S. hotels: Strategically driven objectives. Journal of Travel Research,
39, 192.
Singh, A. J., & Kasavana, M. L. (2005). The impact of information technology on
future management of lodging operations,
Journal of Tourism and Hospitality
Research, 6(1), 24–37.
Downloaded by [University of South Florida] at 12:09 17 October 2011
288 C. Cobanoglu et al.
Skogland, I., & Siguaw, J. A. (2004). Understanding switchers and stayers i n the
lodging industry. Cornell Hospitality Report, 1(4), 1–5.
Squires, M. (2008). Technology changes lodging workforce. Lodging Hospitality ,
64(16), 89–94.
Tinsley, H. E. A., & Kass, R. A. (1979). The latent structure of the need satisfying
properties of leisure activities. Journal of Leisure Research, 11(4), 278–291.
Torres, E. N. & Kline, S. F. (2006, January). An empirical study of customer delight
in the hotel industry: preliminary findings. Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual
Graduate Education and Graduate Student Research Conference in Hospitality
and Tourism, Seattle, WA, 101–104.
Van Hoof, B. V. H., Combrink, E. T., & Verbeeten, J. M . (1997). Technology vendors
and lodging managers view support they receive. FIU Hospitality Review, 15,
Verma, R., Victorino, L., Karniouchina, K., & Feickert, J. (2007). Segmenting
hotel customers based on technology readiness index. Cornell Hospitality
Report, 7(13), 1–16.
Whitford, M. (1998, May 10). Customer satisfaction slump. Hotel and Motel
Management, 213, 143.
Yee, R. W., Yeung, A., & Cheng, T. (2009). An empirical study of employee loyalty,
service quality and firm performance in the service industry. Inter n ational
Journal of Production Economics. Retrieved from
Zabkar, V., Brencic, M. M., & Dmitrovic, T. (2009). Modelling perceived quality,
visitor satisfaction and behavioral intentions at the destination level. Tourism
Management, 31(4), 537–546.
Zeithaml, V. A., Bitner, M. J., & Gremler, D. D. (2006). Services marketing:
Integrating customer focus across the firm. New York, NY: McGraw Hill/Irwin.
Downloaded by [University of South Florida] at 12:09 17 October 2011
... Although many studies have investigated the importance of technology adoption in the hotel sector, the research gap remains wide. First, existing studies have investigated the efficiency of technology adoption from the perspective of hotel guests (Bilgihan et al., 2016;Cobanoglu et al., 2011;M. Kim & Qu, 2014). ...
... According to Lee et al. (2003), technology in hotels is commonly applied at the managerial and operational levels and to in-room guest services. Cobanoglu et al. (2011) identified the four factors of hotel technology amenities as in-room technologies (e.g. in-room pay-per-view and in-room voicemail), comfort technologies (e.g. ...
... financial support for hardware and software purchase and training) as a part of their business investment. Regular reviews of current technology enable hotels to meet the latest technology trends and understand guest behaviors (Cobanoglu et al., 2011). For instance, cleaning robots become effective with the integration of real-time external information (Ahmad & Scott, 2019) and aid the implementation of safety and hygiene measures against virus transmission. ...
Full-text available
The unpredictable external environments, constraints of internal resources, and changes in the behaviors of hotel guests create a challenge for hoteliers to initiate the latest technology advancement. This study aims to explore how hotel executives consider external criteria and employ internal resources (e.g. employee engagement and organizational support) for technology adoption decision making and planning. This work further evaluates business outcomes after technology implementation. From the extension of task–technology fit theory, a qualitative research is conducted by interviewing 14 hotel executives about technology implementation in the front office and housekeeping departments. Results indicate the influences of cost reduction, cost effectiveness, competitors, customer feedback, management strategic planning, and latest industry trends on advanced technology initiatives. The outcomes of employee engagement vary according to age, education background, and self-learning attitude. Hotel support for trainings is necessary for employee productivity enhancement. Furthermore, technology adoption benefits the financial (e.g. cost reductions of labor and maintenance) and nonfinancial outcomes (e.g. customer satisfaction and employee satisfaction) of hotels. The theoretical development and managerial implications are further discussed.
... (Belanche et al. 2020) This brings many challenges for the hotels as new technology could significantly influence hotel guests' overall satisfaction. The guest reaction to technology will directly determine future behaviours, such as revisit intention (Cobanoglu et al., 2011). Travellers who are using a similar digital device to what they encounter in the hotel will be influenced by their perception of the device's technological value (Wang, 2019); if they know how to use it, they will accept it more. ...
... Generation Z customers prefer innovative solutions, high usefulness, reliable benefits and a fun experience. (Ng et al., 2019) As older generations look for more face-to-face encounters and are less technologically adapted (McCrindle, Wolfinger and Salt, 2014;Sima, 2016), they likely to react negatively to the new technology (Davis, 1989, Bagrationi andThurner, 2020;Cobanoglu et al., 2011), while the more tech-savvy generations (Wood, 2013) might recognise the new devices or find them similar to their own, having a more positive attitude towards the new devices. (Davis, 1989;Veiga et al. 2014;Jeong and Nagesvaran, 2016;Wang, 2019;Bagrationi and Thurner, 2020) H2a. ...
... Today's guests are becoming more technology-friendly and more receptive to change. Thus the current trend is for guests to demand higher standards of service quality via social media and information technology (Cobanoglu et al., 2011). This article also explores that social media and information technology could develop a strategic tool to improve market analysis and detect new markets for the hotel industry. ...
... The trend is for today's guests to become more technology-friendly and more receptive to changes in social media. These changes have also triggered them to desire higher standards of quality, and thus technology must step in to fill the gap (Cobanoglu et al., 2011). Another factor is the fact that today an average person carries around two to three devices when travelling, and thus hotels must provide a strong and easily available Wi-Fi connection. ...
... However, it is originally resulting from the Latin verb "innovate", denoting for converting a thought or a process into a novel product or service that can be marketable which is adding value to it Pikkemaat, 2015, Pirnar et al., 2012). Cobanoglu et al (2011) emphasize that it is a positive relationship between innovative technologies and customer satisfaction. The study identified comfort technologies influence guests' satisfaction. ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
This empirical study analyzes the relationship between high tech exports and unemployment. The study is conducted only thirteen years for the period of 2007 – 2019. The data set of high technology exports (% of manufactured exports) and unemployment total (labor force (percentage) – modeled International Labor Organization (ILO) estimate) was gathered from The World Bank. We use covariance analysis, correlation analysis, and cointegration to achieve the goals of this study. The Matrix form of Covariance analysis and Ellipse, Kernel fit of correlation analysis were used it. It was found there is no significant direction between high technology exports and unemployment total. The Augmented Dicky Fuller test has confirmed that those variables were stationary at logarithm first difference. At the same time, the residual series was non-stationary at level form. Therefore, the researcher concludes that there is no long-run relationship between high technology exports and unemployment and the changes in high-tech exports do not affect unemployment worldwide. So, researchers need to find other technical indicators for how to determinant unemployment. Future studies want to find short-run and causality between those two variables and want to include more.
... However, it is originally resulting from the Latin verb "innovate", denoting for converting a thought or a process into a novel product or service that can be marketable which is adding value to it Pikkemaat, 2015, Pirnar et al., 2012). Cobanoglu et al (2011) emphasize that it is a positive relationship between innovative technologies and customer satisfaction. The study identified comfort technologies influence guests' satisfaction. ...
... However, it is originally resulting from the Latin verb "innovate", denoting for converting a thought or a process into a novel product or service that can be marketable which is adding value to it Pikkemaat, 2015, Pirnar et al., 2012). Cobanoglu et al (2011) emphasize that it is a positive relationship between innovative technologies and customer satisfaction. The study identified comfort technologies influence guests' satisfaction. ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Assessment the availability of suitable non-metalize different packing materials of the Sri Lankan biscuit industry with respect to evaluate quality factors of the packing materials
Full-text available
This book is a collection of papers that are examining the future of tourism and hospitality industry.
Three separate studies were undertaken in this study. Study I is motivated to explore and redefine the in-room amenities and the underlying dimension structure of the in-room amenities for the post-pandemic era. Study II is mapped out to assess the customer evaluations of each in-room amenity in order to compare its importance and performance. Study III is designed to examine the role of the in-room amenities in regard to building a customer’s sense of well-being that in turn increases intentions to return. The findings captured a total of twenty-eight in-room amenities, which were categorized by six factors. Also, the results observed the significant effect of protective amenities, sensory amenities, and food & beverage amenities on the sense of well-being, which in turn improves intentions to return. The discussion and implications are made for the academic and industry practitioners to use in the post-pandemic world.
Full-text available
An assessment of how hotel guests view in-room technology compared the importance of those technologies to how they perform. Based on 265 responses, this importance-performance analysis indicates that important basic technologies like in-room temperature controls and alarm clocks fail to perform in the way guests want, while relatively new technologies like plasma screen TVs and in-room printers and faxes are less important but perform well when they are in place. In addition, the study finds that internet access is an integral part of the lodging product.
The need-satisfying characteristics of 10 popular leisure activities were examined by two independent factor analyses. The total domain of 45 need satisfiers was subjected to Rao's canonical factor analysis resulting in 10 replicable common factors. Subsequently, the total domain of need satisfiers was reduced to a subset of 27 “leisure activity specific” need satisfiers (i.e., needs characterized by differential satisfaction dependent on the specific leisure activity involved). A principal components factor analysis of the 27 specific need-satisfier dimensions resulted in eight replicable factors. The correspondence between the two sets of factors is discussed, and the 10 leisure activities are described in terms of their potential to satisfy each of the dimensions underlying the leisure activity specific needs.
The presence of technology in the hospitality industry is increasing at a rapid rate. Technology has had an effect on the efficiency of many facets of the hospitality industry. Despite the growing number of meetings, conventions, and conferences, there has not been a published needs assessment study of training needs-especially technology needs-of hospitality sales managers. This paper presents the results of the first part of a study that examined technology training needs for hospitality sales managers and meeting planners. The top three technology skills training needs that surfaced in the 1996 study included advertising/marketing on the Internet, developing request for proposals, and meeting planning/sales management systems.
In a complex service environment such as the hotel sector, assessing the perceived importance of services and facility attributes provides management with information not only to benchmark their service level provision, but also to retain and increase their customer base. The present study examines the perceived importance of the service and facilities attributes provided by a 3-star hotel. Results of the self-administered survey of 101 guests of three 3-star hotel properties in Perth (Western Australia) indicated that 13 of the 18 attributes were perceived as important. The 18 services and facility attributes were factor-analysed and three components emerged: physical facilitiesservice experienced and services provision. These three components were found to significantly contribute to the overall importance rating of the hotel attributes. Statistically significant differences were noted for age and residence on the physical facilities and services provided components. Results were discussed and implications with further research opportunities were suggested.
This research study is part of a comprehensive Delphi study conducted by the faculty of The School of Hospitality Business at Michigan State University. The purpose of the research was to enable expert panellists to project the likelihood of specific events in the future of the lodging industry. This paper presents a summary of the key prognostications of a select panel of experts relative to the impact of information technology on the management of operations in the lodging sector in years 2007 and 2027. In general, panellists agreed future IT applications are likely to rely on a wireless infrastructure that provides cost savings through improved efficiencies and effectiveness. As online purchasing, cashless payments, handheld devices and remote monitoring algorithms become more commonplace, the industry will be better able to exceed guest expectations through enhanced customer relationship management, comprehensive application software and streamlined property management systems.
This study assesses the extent of nonresponse and recall biases in a travel spending survey of 1,647 individuals. Detailed data from actual nonrespondents were collected. Although the response rate to the mailback survey was relatively high (79%), nonresponse bias in some key variables was detected. Additional findings cast doubt on the use of either wave analysis or late respondent comparisons as proxies for data from actual nonrespondents. Recall bias was also observed but was found to be related as much to trip complexity as to the passage of time. Findings support procedures that obtain complete responses either during or immediately upon the completion of a respondent's trip.
Despite immense investment by hotel operators in information technology, evidence of improved productivity is scant, leading to discussion of a "productivity paradox." Part of the problem with the analysis of productivity in the service sector as a whole and in hotels in particular is how to measure productivity. For this study, the authors established a number of possible productivity benchmarks, such as speed of check-ins, reservations per labor hour, and rooms cleaned per housekeeping hour. Just nine hotel chains responded to the survey, but those chains represent some 4,000 hotel properties. No single measurement or set of measurements was used by the nine respondents. The study also assessed the respondents' expectations for productivity improvements and whether those expectations were fulfilled. Ironically, respondents did not always expect productivity improvements from the technology installation and were sometimes pleasantly surprised. The authors suggest that productivity may not always be the motivating factor for installing information technology. Instead, hoteliers are installing technology to improve the guest experience.