Konstantinos Marinakos

Tourism Business Management, TEI of Athens, Greece

Dimitrios Laloumis

Tourism Business Management, TEI of Athens, Greece




A number of studies have explored the satisfaction of tourists with mass tourism destinations, especially during the peak season (summer). However, there has been a limited survey of satisfying tourists with off-season destinations (Kozak and Rimmington, 2000). Quality of service is one of the critical success factors influencing the competitiveness of a business organization (Siddiqi, 2011).

The aim of this article is to study the hotels in the Peloponnese area in Greece by investigating the degree of customer satisfaction from the hotel business and the development of proposals for its support. The quality of service and therefore customer satisfaction have increasingly been recognized as key factors in the battle for competitive differentiation and retention of hotel business customers. The aim is therefore to determine the extent to which the quality of their services responds to customer needs and preferences in order to implement these results in order to improve the quality of services

Keywords: customer satisfaction, hotel business, quality of services



1.             INTRODUCTION

Tourism is the heavy industry for Greece with a significant contribution to income and employment and, at the same time, the hotel industry is the dominant tourist activity on which the tourist market is based (Giese and Cote, 2002). The dominant position of tourism in the national and regional economy is associated with the significant tourist resources it has, its very good geographic location, the rich natural and cultural environment, the excellent climate and the enormous contribution to the employment of the population mainly during the summer period.

The purpose of this paper is to highlight the degree and satisfaction of hotel customers as they are significantly related to their sustainability and consequently to their competitive advantage (Abdallat & Emam, 2014). In order for a business to be able to offer its services to its customers as well as to have satisfied customers and therefore to be profitable, the difference in Marketing of Services in relation to Product Marketing should be understood in the business (Tse & Wilton, 1988). Services are immaterial and there is interaction with the customer. The provision of services "obliges" all the employees of the company to try more, to emphasize their communication with the customer and to focus on the objectives of the company, having a good knowledge of the product-service provided (Kothari, 2004).



Confidence and customer satisfaction are important factors for customer loyalty (Akbar & Parvez, 2009; Ranaweera & Prabhu, 2003; Parasuraman, 1985). There is a significant number of typologies regarding the quality of services and the factors that depend on them (McDougall & Levesque, 2000; Tarn, 1999).

At the same time, customer satisfaction and business productivity can go hand in hand, as improvements in customer satisfaction reduce the cost of future transactions (Anderson et al., 1997; Galbreath & Rogers, 1999). Modern businesses should be able to maintain satisfied and therefore dedicated customers by introducing innovative products and services, but also to provide diversified added value to these products and services, and to be able to deliver long-term credit from their customers (Lewis & Mitchell , 1990; Szymanski & Henard, 2001). On the other hand, the value of a product is subjective, since different consumers receive a different value from the consumption of the same product (Eggert & Ulaga, 2002).

Based on international literature (Mont & Plepys, 2003; Xu & Chan,2010; Hom, 2000; Evanschitzky,2011) there are many customer satisfaction models (SERVQUAL model, Kano & Seraku satisfaction model, microeconomic and macroeconomic customer satisfaction model) used to measure service quality. It is widely accepted that the tourism market presents a huge heterogeneity (Yuksel and Yuksel, 2002) and therefore one of the biggest modern challenges of management in service companies is the high degree of customer satisfaction. Increased customer demand for quality services in recent years is becoming increasingly noticeable in hotel businesses and the tourism industry as a whole (Namkung & Jang, 2007).

Among all the requirements of the clients, the quality of services is increasingly recognized as a critical factor for the success of each business. On the one hand, customer satisfaction is a key factor that can lead the hospitality industry to success but also gain competitive advantages, on the other hand (Forozia et al., 2002), on the other hand, the high quality of employees causes an increasing flow of business customers, one of the key success factors (Evanschitzky et al., 2011). Quality is generally considered to be the attribute of product or service performance (Namkung & Jang, 2007).

The hospitality industry is one of the fastest growing sectors in the world that plays an important role in tourism, as tourists travel to distant destinations at a rising pace (Martinez & Bosque, 2013). The hotel industry is one of the most important factors in the tourism industry. It could provide the necessary infrastructure for tourism. As a result, the development of the tourism industry depends on the development of the hotel industry (Pizam & Ellis, 1999).

Research on quality of service has progressed considerably in recent years. However, little has been done to measure the quality of tourism experiences and how different quality factors have an impact on the global satisfaction of tourists (Chadee & Mattsson, 1996). Customer satisfaction assessment is a prime target for any service provider that would like to survive in the increasingly competitive market (Ramsaran-Fowdar, 2007).



3.1 Purpose of the survey, sampling method and data collection

The purpose of this research is to investigate the perceptions of high class hotel business customers, with reference to high-end hotel services, in terms of both service and service satisfaction, with the ultimate goal of drawing useful conclusions about models and methods that should be developed to enhance customer satisfaction.

This research is empirical and attempts to respond to exploratory queries based on primary data collected for research purposes.

As a survey population, high-service hotel customers were selected in the Peloponnese, Greece, while in the chosen sample, 300 customers from 5 different hotels participated in the July -September 2011 summer season. The questions are composed of closed-type questions of various forms and categories.

For the analysis of the data, the statistical package for social sciences SPSS was used, while the data processing used both descriptive and inductive statistics. In terms of the part of the survey applied descriptive statistics we have taken into account Frequency Distribution, Mean Time, Standard Deviation and Typical Data Error.

The nature of the subject of the survey was the basis for determining its nature. Therefore, this research is described as descriptive with quantitative and categorical variables, sampling in terms of the number of subjects examined and related, because it seeks to discover and interpret the correlations between the "independent and dependent" variables as these are set in exploratory questions.

The survey questionnaire is structured in three parts. The first part uses a set of questions related to customer satisfaction from staying in the hotel, the second group of questions concerns their satisfaction by the staff and the third category concerns customer satisfaction with the quality of its facilities and general services hotel. 

3.2 Analysis of research results

Initially, the demographic characteristics of the sample were recorded, with 35.8% of the sample being male and 64.2% female. In terms of nationality, 14.7% of the sample was of English nationality, 12.3% were of Norwegian origin, 11.7% were of Swedish origin, 18.3% of the sample was of German / Austrian origin, 14% were of Italian / Spanish origin, 16.3% of Greek origin, 5.30% of Turkish origin, 7.4% of Russian, Slovak and Lithuanian.

Regarding the age of interviewed tourists, 28% of the sample was 31-40, 31.70% of the sample was 41-50, 20.30% were 20-30, 15.70% of the sample were 51 and above and 4.30% of the sample were under 20. Also, 36.30% of the sample hold a university degree, 22.30% are secondary school graduates, 16.70% of the sample graduates vocational school, 14.70% of the sample were at postgraduate / doctoral level and 10.0 of the sample was in another level of education. Regarding the profession, 30,30% of the sample selected another, 33,70% of the sample said they were self-employed, 8,70% of the sample said they were entrepreneurs, 12% of the sample said they were executives, 8.30% were professionals and 7% said they were state officials. Finally, 46,30% of the sample stated that their vacation was less than 7 days, 44% said their vacation lasted from 7 to 14 days and 9,70% of the sample stated that the duration of the holidays they were over 14 days, and finally 100% of the sample said that the hotels they chose were of a high class of service.

Respondents are also asked to prioritize the factors for hotel choice. 42.26% of respondents said that the cleanliness of the hotel is the main factor, followed by the accessibility of the hotel with 18.46%, the luxury / stars of the hotel with 16, 13%, the quality of the hotel services by 16.09%, the additional benefits of 3.70% and the last of the environment with 3.36% of the service category.

At the same time, factor analysis was used which is usually used to draw conclusions from several variables. Its main purpose is to have common factors between a set of variables.In factorial analysis, it is important to have large correlations matrix (> 0.4 in absolute value). Also, the KMO value (Kaiser - Meyer - Olkin), which is a data reliability index, should be large (> 0.5) so that the data is suitable for factor analysis (Field, 2009).

In the present study, three factorial analyzes, one for each concept, were conducted to identify those factors that are most conducive to the satisfaction of tourists.

The first factor analysis was carried out for the concept of hotel satisfaction. As shown in Table 1, the data reliability was quite large (CMO = 0.922), while the first factor and the second factor account for 79.65% of the variance. Continuing, as shown (Table 1), the first factor has high prices in the joy of choosing the hotel, with the suggestion that the respondents did right to stay at that hotel that they are satisfied with their decision to stay at this hotel, that this hotel provides better quality of service and the best services than any other, that they feel better by staying at that hotel, that they would suggest the hotel to others and that they likes this hotel compared to other hotels in its category. Therefore, this particular factor can be called SURE and declares their pleasure from their stay at the hotel.

The second factor has high prices for the continuation of stay in that hotel, that this hotel is the first choice in comparison to others and that they choose this particular hotel even if it has a higher price. Therefore, this factor can be called PRIORITY which means whether the customer has been satisfied or not and intends to re-use the service or not. Finally, it is important to stress that Cronbach's a = 0.968 factor for first factor questions and 0.826 for second factor questions.

Table 1: Factor analysis  - the concept of hotel satisfaction (general data)


Table 2: Factor analysis -  hotel satisfaction (factors)





I'm happy with my choice to stay at this hotel



I think I did the right thing with my choice to stay at this hotel



Overall, I am satisfied with the decision to stay at this hotel



This particular hotel provides better quality of service compared to other hotels


No other hotel performs better than that






I like to stay at this hotel


I feel better when I stay at this hotel

I believe that this hotel offers more benefits than others in its class







I would recommend this hotel to others

I like this particular hotel in relation to others in its category





I intend to continue my stay at this hotel


Usually this hotel is my first choice compared to others







Even if another hotel brand offers me a lower room rate I will still stay at this hotel



Cronbach’s a




The second factor analysis was about the concept of staff satisfaction. As can be seen, the first three factors interpret 77.36% of the total variance and the data reliability factor is KM0 = 0.850 (Table 3). In addition (Table 4) it seems that the first factor has high prices on questions about the proposal that the hotel provides personalized attention to their customers, that the hotel is paying special attention to its customers, that it is trying to solve the customer problems, being multilingual, taking care of the needs and taking care of their clients and constantly dealing with their customers. This particular factor could be called CAUTION and indicates the attention of staff to their customers in services but also knowledge of issues that may concern them. On the other hand, the second factor, has high prices in the proposals that staff are always willing to serve their customers, gives immediate service to their customers and inspires confidence in their customers. Therefore, this factor could be called SERVICE which means whether staff are willing to serve their clients. Finally, the latter factor has high prices on the suggestions that the staff are very polite and friendly to hotel guests. Therefore, this factor could be called FRIENDSHIP, ie the communication of staff with the customer. Finally, it is important to stress that the credibility ratios of these factors were 0.901, 0.912 and 0.92 respectively.

Table 3: Factor analysis – the concept of staff satisfaction (general data)


Table 4: Factor analysis – satisfaction with staff (factors)






It provides personalized attention to its customers





It has the knowledge to answer customers about issues that may concern them






It is multilingual




It provides "first class" care to its customers





Understands the specific needs of customers





He never refuses to answer his clients





It provides immediate service to its customers






He is always willing to help his clients





It looks neat




Personnel behavior inspires confidence in its customers






He is very kind with their clients





He is very friendly with his clients





Cronbach’s a





The latest factor analysis that was carried out was about the factors influencing hotel satisfaction. As shown (Table 5), the first two factors interpret 69.41% of the total variance, while the credibility coefficient of the KMO data is 0.873. In particular, the first factor was high in the suggestions that the hotel has modern equipment and attractive natural facilities, that the hotel made its promises that the hotel is interested in customer problems and is clean, comfortable and attractive. This factor could be called IMAGE which is the equipment, its natural facilities but also its luxury. On the other hand, the second factor has high prices in the hotel's accessibility, the hotel's flexible working hours, the hotel's differentiated image and its high class, while the factors of credibility of the agents were 0.917 and 0.846 respectively (Table 6) and could be called ACCESS indicating the location of the hotel and its access to various parts of the island but also the hours of operations of the various departments and their access to them.

Table 5 Factor analysis - Hotel quality satisfaction (general data)


Table  6: Factor analysis - hotel quality satisfaction (factors)





The hotel has modern equipment




The hotel's natural facilities are aesthetically appealing





It responds promptly to customer requests




When a customer has a problem the hotel is really interested in solving it




It's comfortable



It's very clean



It's luxurious



The hotel has a convenient location and easy access




The hotel has hours of operation convenient for all its customers





It has a differentiated picture from other hotels




It has high-quality services



Cronbach’s a





The effort to achieve a high degree of customer satisfaction is one of the biggest challenges facing businesses today. Customer satisfaction is a key success factor for an enterprise and should be taken seriously during the production and marketing of a product or service. When their satisfaction exceeds their expectations, each company has more chances of success and profitability and therefore sustainability and gaining a larger market share. Most successful businesses raise the level of customer expectations and provide similar services that meet and exceed these expectations.

The very satisfied customers can benefit the business very much since they are less price sensitive, remain loyal for a longer period of time but still advertise for the products or services of the business to third parties.

The resulting conclusion is that hotel managers need to distinguish the features of the product or service that satisfy customers in order to maintain and exploit them but also those that dislike them so as to improve their satisfaction customers and, consequently, the successful business development.





Abdallat, M. M., Emam, H. E. S. E. (2014). Customer satisfaction. Department of Tourism and Hospitality, Faculty of Tourism and Archeology King Saud University

Akbar M. M., Parvez N., (2009), “Impact of service quality, trust, and customer satisfaction on customers loyalty”, ABAC Journal, Vol. 29, No.1, pp 24-38

Anderson W. Ε., Fornell, C., Rust T. Ρ., (1997), “Customer satisfaction, productivity, and profitability: Differences between goods and services”, Marketing science, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp 129-145

Chadee D. D., Mattsson J., (1996), “An Empirical Assessment of Customer Satisfaction in Tourism”, The Service Industries Journal, Vo1. 16, No. 3, pp 305-320

Eggert A., Ulaga W., (2002), “Customer perceived value: a substitute for satisfaction in business markets? ”, Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 17, Issue 2/3, pp 107-118

Evanschitzky H., Groening C., Mittal V., Wunderlich M., (2011), “How Employer and Employee Satisfaction Affect Customer Satisfaction: An Application to Franchise Services”, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp 136-148

Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS. Sage publications

Forozia A., Zadeh S. M., Gilani N. H. M., (2013), “Customer Satisfaction in Hospitality Industry: Middle East Tourists at 3star Hotels in Malaysia”, Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology, Vol. 5, No. 17, pp 4329- 4335

Galbreath, J., Rogers T., (1999), “Customer relationship leadership: a leadership and motivation model for the twenty-first century business”, The TQM magazine, Vol. 11, Issue 3, pp 161-171

Giese L. J., Cote A. J., (2002), “Defining consumer satisfaction”, Academy of marketing science review, Vol. 2000, No. 1, pp 1-22

Kothari C. R., (2004), Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques, New Age International (P)

Kozak M., Rimmington M., (2000), “Tourist Satisfaction with Mallorca, Spain, as an Off-Season Holiday Destination”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 38, pp 260-269

Lewis R. B., Mitchell W. V., (1990), “Defining and measuring the quality of customer service”, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 8, Issue 6, pp 11-17

Martinez P., Rodriguez del Bosque I., (2013), “CSR and customer loyalty: The roles of trust, customer identification with the company and satisfaction”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 35, pp 89-99

McDougall H. G. G., Levesque T., (2000), “Customer satisfaction with services: putting perceived value into the equation”, Journal of services marketing, Vol. 14, No. 5, pp 392-410

Mont O., Plepys A., (2003), “Customer satisfaction: review of literature and application to the product-service systems”, The international institute for industrial environmental economics

Namkung Y., Jang S., (2007), “Does food quality really matter in restaurants? its impact on customer satisfaction and behavioral intentions”, Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp 387-410

Parasuraman A., Berry L. L., Zeitbaml A. V., (1991), “Understanding customer expectations of service”, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp 39-48

Pizam A., Ellis T., (1999), “Customer satisfaction and its measurement in hospitality enterprises”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 11, No. 7, pp 326-339

Ramsaran-Fowdar R. R., (2007), “Developing a service quality questionnaire for the hotel industry in Mauritius”, Journal of Vacation Marketing, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp 19-27

Ranaweera C., Prabhu, J., (2003), “The influence of satisfaction, trust and switching barriers on customer retention in a continuous purchasing setting”, International journal of service industry management, Vol. 14, Issue 4, pp 374-395

Siddiqi O. K., (2011), “Interrelations between Service Quality Attributes, Customer Satisfaction and Customer Loyalty in the Retail Banking Sector in Bangladesh”, International Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp 12-36

Szymanski M. D., Henard H. D., (2001), “Customer satisfaction: A meta-analysis of the empirical evidence”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp 16-35

Tarn, M. L. J., (1999), “The effects of service quality, perceived value and customer satisfaction on behavioral intentions”, Journal of Hospitality & Leisure Marketing, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp 31-43

Tse D. K., Wilton P. C., (1988), “Models of consumer satisfaction formation: An extension”, Journal of marketing research, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp 204-212

Xu B. J., Chan A., (2010), “A conceptual framework of hotel experience and customer-based brand equity”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp 174-193

Yuksel A., Yuksel F., (2002), “Measurement of tourist satisfaction with restaurant services: A segment-based approach”, Journal of Vacation Marketing, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp 52-68