خوشه کیفیت: ابعاد پاسخ ایمیل های هتل های لوکس

A growing body of research investigates hospitality Internet use, but usually focuses on websites rather than the most popular Internet application, email. This study uses cluster analysis and the SERVQUAL-P service quality (SQ) model to help address gaps in both academic and applied research of email use in the hospitality industry. The cluster analysis of email responses to a mystery guest survey by luxury hotels identified four hotel clusters. The clusters showed significant differences across all 24 email response variables and support four dimensions of email SQ corresponding to SERVQUAL-P's four dimensions.

While it may have been possible last century, it is nigh impossible for hospitality operators to ignore the Internet this century. Although operators seem to emphasize websites, they should also consider the most popular Internet application, email. Email provides a unique opportunity for personalized and intimate interactions with guests, thus enhancing customer relationships. In particular, when current or potential customers email the hotel, the hotel should respond properly. Just as hotels should respond professionally to telephone calls, surface mail and faxes, hotels should treat email as business communication. Yet a review of five hospitality email studies showed non-response rates from 18% to 55%, replies within a day from 26% to 81% and other shortcomings in replying professionally (Schegg et al., 2006). A review of dozens of website evaluation studies concludes that hospitality website evaluation is in its early stages (Morrison et al., 2004). Given the dearth of email studies, email evaluation is similarly nascent. Unlike previous studies that test hypotheses on the presence of quality email response features, this Research Note uses cluster analysis to examine underlying dimensions of hotel email responses by clustering hotels on their email response quality.

SERVQUAL assumes people-delivered services and with few exceptions, online applications of SERVQUAL assume that websites deliver customer service (Parasuraman et al., 2005). Yet the pendulum is inching back towards including humans, such as the e-recovery SQ scale (Parasuraman et al., 2005). This Research Note continues the swing towards people-delivered services, applying the SERVQUAL-P dimensions to email customer service. An early step in developing a scale and corresponding framework for electronic SQ is identifying antecedent cues (Parasuraman et al., 2005). This study takes a preliminary and exploratory step towards identifying antecedent cues as well as dimensions of email SQ. Future research should continue this process. Replicating the study with additional email response features would help generalize these results and explore other cues related to the four dimensions. For practitioners, the 24 features serve as a guide for assessing and improving email SQ. For example, most tangible elements are easy to automate in outgoing email replies via standardized signature files. Strategically, hoteliers should discuss at least two issues with their management. What cluster most resembles their hotel and what cluster should the hotel emulate? The first cluster seems a good model, but customers may prefer fewer tangible cues and a slower reply in exchange for the more personalized and polite reply by hotels in the third cluster. Answering the first question is a simple process of reviewing past email replies to customers. Answering the second question necessitates asking customers how these dimensions relate to outcomes such as satisfaction and purchase intentions—another future research avenue.