differences in expectations and perceptions between hospitality providers and international...
TRANSCRIPT
This article was downloaded by: [UOV University of Oviedo]On: 31 October 2014, At: 07:26Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
International Journal of Hospitality &Tourism AdministrationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wjht20
Differences in Expectations andPerceptions Between HospitalityProviders and International Customers:The Case of Korean and Japanese GroupTourists in Thai HotelsSeongseop Kima, Statia Elliotb, Rob Lawa & Kaye Chona
a School of Hotel & Tourism Management, Hong Kong PolytechnicUniversity, Kowloon, Hong Kongb School of Hospitality and Tourism Management, University ofGuelph, Guelph, Ontario, CanadaPublished online: 14 May 2014.
To cite this article: Seongseop Kim, Statia Elliot, Rob Law & Kaye Chon (2014) Differences inExpectations and Perceptions Between Hospitality Providers and International Customers: The Caseof Korean and Japanese Group Tourists in Thai Hotels, International Journal of Hospitality & TourismAdministration, 15:2, 121-149, DOI: 10.1080/15256480.2014.901058
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15256480.2014.901058
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
International Journal of Hospitality & TourismAdministration, 15:121–149, 2014Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 1525-6480 print/1525-6499 onlineDOI: 10.1080/15256480.2014.901058
Differences in Expectations and PerceptionsBetween Hospitality Providers and
International Customers: The Case of Koreanand Japanese Group Tourists in Thai Hotels
SEONGSEOP KIMSchool of Hotel & Tourism Management, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Kowloon,
Hong Kong
STATIA ELLIOTSchool of Hospitality and Tourism Management, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario,
Canada
ROB LAW and KAYE CHONSchool of Hotel & Tourism Management, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Kowloon,
Hong Kong
The aim of this study is to ascertain, in an international tourismcontext, whether there are cultural discrepancies between hotelemployees who have been educated and trained in a host country,and guests who have traveled to that country, given that each groupis imbued with their own national culture. The findings indicatethat not only do Thai frontline hotel employees have different expec-tations about the behavior of Japanese and Korean customers, butthat the expectations of both customer groups concerning their ownbehavior differ from those of Thai employees. A significant gap wasfound in perceptions of actual behavior between the internationalcustomers and hotel staff, suggesting that cultural discrepanciesare indeed present, but also vary by ethnicity. The scale of the dis-crepancy between Thai employees’ perceptions of Japanese tourists’behavior, for example, was larger than in the case of the Korean
Received December 28, 2011; accepted July 2, 2012.Address correspondence to Seongseop Kim, School of Hotel & Tourism,
Hong Kong Polytechnic University, TST East, Kowloon, Hong Kong, SAR China. E-mail:[email protected]
121
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
122 S. Kim et al.
customers. Comparison of the expectations of the two internationalcustomer groups also revealed strong differences.
KEYWORDS customers, service, hotel, expectation, perception,Thai
INTRODUCTION
Postmodern society has witnessed tremendous growth in internationaltourism. According to reports from the World Trade Organization (WTO;2006, 2010), international tourist arrivals reached 880 million in 2009 despitethe worldwide economic downturn, and international tourism numbers areexpected to reach 1.6 billion in 2020. As the international travel momentumdrives increasing numbers of tourists to explore different cultural juris-dictions, the hospitality and tourism industry needs to identify value andbehavioral differences across multicultural markets and to better understandthe implications of these differences in the context of the service encounter.
Interpersonal interactions between frontline hotel employees and guestshave been widely investigated by measuring service quality (Parasuraman,Zeithaml, & Berry, 1994; Tsaur, Lin, & Wu, 2005), which is conceived as abridge between expected and perceived performance. Interestingly, culturehas been found likely to influence expectations of service and evalua-tions of employee performance, particularly during cross-cultural encountersbetween international tourists and hospitality practitioners in a host country(Furrer, Liu, & Sudharshan, 2000; Lee, Khan, & Ko, 2008; Reisinger & Turner,2002a, 2002b; Tsang & Ap, 2007). Cultural distinctiveness, which involvesmultifaceted cultural dynamics, is susceptible to miscommunication, misinter-pretation, misperception, and misevaluation in service transactions betweenhospitality service providers and international guests in a tourism destina-tion (Armstrong, Mok, Go, & Chan, 1997; Jafari & Way, 1994; Manzur &Jogaratnam, 2006; Mattila, 1999a, 1999b; Tsaur et al., 2005; Woods & King,2002; Zhu, Cole, & Card, 2007).
To come to a more complete understanding of the potential service gapbetween host and guest in the multicultural hospitality context, there is anurgent need to critique the dyadic responses of hospitality providers andinternational tourists. To do so, it is necessary to measure not only employ-ees’ expectations and perceptions of customers’ behavior, but also customers’expectations and perceptions of their own behavior. This is a “thinkingoutside the box” concept that goes beyond conventional service qualitystudies, which typically reflect only the customer perspective. Employeeevaluations are also important in identifying more precisely the gaps in host–guest contact outcomes (Lee et al., 2008; Sizoo, Iskat, Plank, & Serrie, 2003).In the unique context of international pleasure travel, behavior that may be
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
International Customers 123
considered deviant to some extent may simply be a reflection of the culturalvalues learnt in one’s own country. Hence, cultural collisions—whether largeor small—between international travelers imbued with different national cul-tural values are likely to occur at international tourism destinations. Themultifaceted cultural paradigm of the international tourism context depictedin Figure 1 illustrates the potential for numerous service gaps to occur.
In the study reported herein, it was assumed that, in the internationaltourism context, there is a cultural discrepancy between hotel employ-ees who have been educated and trained in the host country and guestswho have traveled to that country from overseas accompanied by theirown national cultural values. The study’s objectives were fivefold. The firstobjective was to identify the differences in behavioral expectations betweenfrontline hotel employees and international customers. The second was toinvestigate the differences in perceptions of international customers’ behav-ior between employees and the customers themselves. The third was toassess the differences between employees’ expectations and perceptionsof international customers’ behavior. The fourth was to explore the differ-ences between international customers’ expectations and perceptions of theirown behavior, and the fifth to analyze the discrepancies between behavioralexpectations and perceptions across two groups of international customers.
The behavioral expectations and perceptions of different cultural groupswas assessed in the Asian context, as the region sees substantial num-bers of travelers crossing borders, and hospitality providers must cater tomulticultural markets to succeed. More specifically, this study focused on theexperience of two international traveler groups, Japanese and Koreans, andone frontline employee group, in Thailand.
International tourism
Service Provider’s Culture
B National Culture Group
A NationalCulture Group
C National Culture Group
D NationalCulture Group
E National Culture Group
F National Culture Group
FIGURE 1 Cultural differences as perceived by hospitality service providers and internationalcustomers.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
124 S. Kim et al.
LITERATURE REVIEW
The seminal work of Greet Hofstede (1980) produced a cultural dimen-sion framework using a sample of 80,000 IBM employees in 66 countriesacross seven occupations (Furrer et al., 2000). Based on the results of thisextensive research, he conceptualized four international cultural dimensions,assigned indexes to each country, and associated the dimensions with asociety’s demographic, geographic, economic, and political environment.Hofstede’s (1980) four dimensions are individualism/collectivism, uncertaintyavoidance, power distance, and masculinity–femininity.
Numerous scholars have applied this model to a variety of researchfields, including marketing, psychology, sociology, management studies,journalism, and hospitality. Others have revised or extended the originalmultidimensional cultural framework to ethnological typology theory(Lenartowicz & Roth, 1999), the identification of typologies withinthe individualism−collectivism dimension (Singelis, Triandis, Bhawuk, &Gelfand, 1995; Triandis, 1995), and alternative models (Clark, 1990;Steenkamp, 2001).
Culture is commonly defined as the collective programming of the mindthat distinguishes the members of one group from those of others in terms ofknowledge, beliefs, art, morals, customs, habits, and capabilities, and whichcan be influenced by macro-level influences, such as the economic, political,legal, religious, linguistic, educational, technological, and industrial environ-ment (Hofstede, 1991; Sekaran, 1983; Steenkamp, 2001). When an individualfeatures these cultural traits, they become part of his or her personality.When they are prevalent in a small group, they become part of a subculture.When shared with co-nationals, they become part of the national culture,although culture can vary by ethno-geographic area or regional affiliation(Soares, Farhangmehr, & Shoham, 2007).
Individuals become imbued with their national culture from early child-hood by learning the national language and the nation’s social values,history, national philosophy, religion, and political system in a wide socio-cultural system of boundaries determining a country’s education, legal, andpolitical institutions and ethnic dynamics (Furrer et al., 2000; Lee et al., 2008;Testa, 2002). Disparities between national cultures are likely to give rise tomisunderstandings, and may even evolve into litigation, in host−guest inter-actions. Most commonly, the country has been used as a proxy for culturein cross-cultural encounter studies.
No matter what proxies are used to define culture, patterns of action andthought, as well as perceptions, are commonly found to be more homoge-neous within a given culture than across cultural borders. As culture is gen-erally acquired by an individual in early childhood, and is enriched and rein-forced through shared life experiences, it influences the members of a societyin numerous settings, including the family, social group, geographical region,
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
International Customers 125
and profession (Albert, 1986; Soares et al., 2007). Culture exerts a substantialinfluence by regulating behavior that is favorable to one cultural bound-ary, establishing a consensus of appropriate behavior and lifestyles, andproviding a framework of experiences and beliefs that are held in common.
Cultural differences emerge as two perspectives in relation to interna-tional tourism destinations: (a) an ideological perspective, which concernsthe beliefs, roles, norms, values, attitudes, and customs that prevail in a soci-ety, and (b) a behavioral perspective, which concerns how to behave or actduring travel (Fowler, 2006; Kim, Prideaux, & Kim, 2003; Lee et al., 2008).In this regard, culture can be considered an underpinning determinant ofthe ideological and behavioral perspectives of international customers andhospitality employees.
In the international tourism sector, two facets of cultural differences areat play: tourists experience countries with cultures different from their own,and the hospitality staff in the host country experience clients with differentcultural profiles. A number of intercultural approaches have been adoptedto explore differences in cultural values in the hospitality sector, with theresults of such research producing a range of managerial implications. Theresults can be categorized into three main research streams, as follows.
The most popular type of research approach in this arena has been tocompare the perceptions of hospitality industry customers of different nation-alities, typically to improve service to the groups under study (Armstronget al., 1997; Ayoun & Moreo, 2008; Becker & Murrmann, 1999; DeFranco& Mok, 1998; Hui & Au, 2001; Iverson, 1997; Kim & Prideaux, 2005; Kimet al., 2003; Manzur & Jogaratnam, 2006; March, 1997; Ngai, Heung, Wong, &Chan, 2007; Reisinger & Turner, 1998, 2002a, 2002b, 2003; Shoham, Schrage,& van Eeden, 2004; Sussmann & Rashcovshy, 1997; Thompson & Cutler,1997; Tsang & Ap, 2007).
The second research stream has explored perceptional discrepanciesbetween employees and international customers in the international tourismcontext, with some providing direction for addressing such discrepancies(Bahar & Kozak, 2007; Nasution & Mavondo, 2008; Reisinger & Turner, 1998;Saleh & Ryan, 1991; Sizoo et al., 2003). The third type of research comparesattitudinal or behavioral conflicts between hospitality industry employeesand guests of different nationalities (Charlesworth, 2007; Devine, Baum,Hearns, & Devine, 2007; Groschi & Doherty, 2006; Hui, Au, & Fock, 2004;Johns & McCleary, 2005; Mattila, 1999a, 1999b; Mattila & Choi, 2006; Pizam,Pine, Mok, & Shin, 1997; Tsang & Ap, 2007; Yu & Goh, 1995; Wong, 2004).The common thread across the three streams is the assumption that culturaldifferences exist and influence the service encounter and, hence, are criticalto service success.
The current study was carried out to investigate the perceptual incon-gruence between two Asian national groups, the Japanese and Koreans,and frontline hotel service staff in Thailand. As previously noted, research
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
126 S. Kim et al.
exploring the cross-cultural service encounter from the customer view-point is prolific. Less common has been research devoted to identifyingthe perceptions of the service provider during the service encounter (Sizooet al., 2003). In addition, relatively limited effort has been made to comparethe expectations and perceptions of hospitality employees and internationalcustomers within the same study.
As service is a transaction between service provider and service receiver,there is a gap in the measurement of service quality between the two parties(Saleh & Ryan, 1991). Reisinger and Turner (1998) identified a differencein the perception of satisfaction and expectation levels between Australianservice providers and Korean tourists, which they attributed to the differentcultural backgrounds of the two groups. Sizoo et al. (2003) discussed thefactors that affect foreign customers’ behavior and employees’ service per-formance and the service evaluation of both parties. They found one of themost significant factors to be cultural differences. They concluded that com-munication and job satisfaction would be improved, and revenue ultimatelyboosted, if both the service provider and recipient in a cross-cultural serviceencounter had a better understanding of their counterpart’s culture.
In the same context, Bahar and Kozak (2007) explored the differ-ent perceptions of service and facility quality between service providersand foreign tourists. They found that differences in understanding betweeninternational customers and service providers in terms of marketing com-munication and performance levels were likely to result in distrust andunwillingness to serve clients from a particular cultural group. Nasutionand Mavondo (2008) compared perceptions of customer value among hotelemployees and their customers. The employee group in their study per-ceived higher levels of quality, value for money, and prestige relative tothe customer groups. Even though there is a lack of evidence on the dif-ferent perceptions of hospitality hosts and international customers, researchidentifying dyads of residents (hosts) and guests has been popular in thetourism field since Smith’s (1977) introduction of the tourism destinationhost-guest paradigm from the anthropological and sociological perspectives.As hotel employees constitute a host group that provides services, the numer-ous host–guest studies that have been conducted in the tourism sector haveapplication to the hospitality setting.
In sum, previous studies have concluded that hotel employees and inter-national customers are likely to evaluate a given service differently due tocultural heterogeneity. For example, hotel staff may not understand why aparticular international customer group boisterously eats meals with friendsor tends not to leave tips, whereas from the international customer group’sperspective, such behavior is completely reasonable. Thus, an understandingof the cultural gulf in perceptions between these two parties would be veryhelpful in reducing misunderstandings, enhancing customers’ experientialvalue, and increasing service quality.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
International Customers 127
As described above, numerous cross-cultural studies in the hospital-ity and tourism field have been conducted. But they have not extensivelycompared both expectations and perceptions in terms of behavioral itemsbetween local hotel employees and international customers. Further, theyhave not made a comparison of the results between various groups of for-eign customers. Most cross-cultural employee−customer studies have beenlimited to European and North American hospitality setting. Thus, this studywas designed to integrate multifacets of cross-cultural studies and showcasediverse viewpoints in one article.
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Figure 2 pictorially illustrates the encounters between the employees of Thaihotels that cater primarily to Korean and Japanese package tourists and thesetwo groups of international package tourists. This conceptualization reflectsthe communication process between frontline employees and guests, andwas translated into five research questions and hypotheses to explore thebehavioral differences between Japanese and Korean tourists in the studyreported herein.
Differences in Behavioral Expectations Between Frontline HotelEmployees and International Customers
A number of studies have assessed the cross-cultural differences among cus-tomers from different countries and identified a range of features unique toeach (e.g., Armstrong et al., 1997; Iverson, 1997; Kim & Prideaux, 2005; Kimet al., 2003; March, 1997; Reisinger & Turner, 1998, 2002a, 2002b; Shohamet al., 2004; Sussmann & Rashcovsky, 1997; Thompson & Cutler, 1997; Tsang& Ap, 2007; Tsaur et al., 2005).
The perceptual discrepancy in service delivery quality between hospital-ity service staff and international customers is likely to exist a priori becauseculturally diverse customers bring different expectations of service quality totheir evaluations, expectations that have been influenced by cultural varia-tions in social values, norms, practices, and customs (Armstrong et al., 1997;Ayoun & Moreo, 2008; DeFranco & Mok, 1998; Gilbert, Veloutsou, Goode,& Moutinho, 2004; Manzur & Jogaratnam, 2006; Mattila, 1999a; Reisinger &Turner, 1998; Tsang & Ap, 2007; Tsaur et al., 2005). For example, customersfrom cultures characterized by a high level of power distance may tend toconsider service providers to be lower in status and expect a higher level ofservice quality from them (Mattila, 1999b).
At the same time, service employees have expectations of internationalcustomers that have been learnt over time at school and during training and
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
128 S. Kim et al.
Expectations ofJapanese and
Korean customers’behavior
Perceptions of Japanese and
Korean customers’ behavior
Expectations ofKorean customers’
behavior
Perceptions of Korean
customers’ behavior
Expectations ofJapanese
customers’ behavior
Perceptions of Japanese
customers’ behavior
Hypothesis 1 Hypothesis 1
Hypothesis 2 Hypothesis 2
Hypothesis 3Hypothesis 4 Hypothesis 4
Hypothesis 5a
Hypothesis 5b
As perceived by Japanese customers
As perceived by Thai frontline
employees
As perceived by Korean customers
FIGURE 2 Research framework.
previous work and tour experience (Nasution & Mavondo, 2008; Reisinger& Turner, 1998; Sizoo et al., 2003; Woods & King, 2002). Because frontlineservice providers are educated and trained in the educational and organiza-tional environment of the host country, their expectations of customers areunlikely to be consistent with customers’ expectations toward them (Bahar& Kozak, 2007; Manzur & Jogaratnam, 2006; Tsang & Ap, 2007; Yeung &Leung, 2007). Hence, it is hypothesized that there is a significant differencein cross-cultural expectations and perceptions between the two parties.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
International Customers 129
H1a: There are differences in behavioral expectations between frontlinehotel employees and international customers.
H1b: There are differences in perceptions of international customers’behavior between frontline hotel employees and the customers them-selves.
In the hospitality environment in which international tourists gather,foreign customers may be unaware that employees are watching them asthey engage in various types of behavior. That is, they may not consciouslyperceive what they are doing. Hospitality service providers, in contrast,are constantly aware of the customers they encounter in their establish-ments. They scrutinize customer behavior and evaluate customers’ actualexperiences during on-site encounters (Kandampully, Mok, & Sparks, 2001;Sizoo et al., 2003; Woods & King, 2002; Zeithaml, Berry, & Parasuraman,1993).
It is thus understandable that there is a gap between customers’ eval-uation of their own behavior and employees’ evaluation of that behavior.This gap is likely to be widened by employees’ biased perceptions of par-ticular nationalities due to previous favorable or unfavorable experiences(Jafari & Way, 1994; Sizoo et al., 2003). Additionally, customers may eitherbe unaware of or deny improper behavior on their own part. Thus, differ-ences in perceptions may lead to differences between customers’ evaluationof their own behavior and employees’ evaluation of that behavior, whichleads us to Hypothesis 2.
H2a: There are differences in perceptions of international customers’behavior between frontline Thai hotel employees and the customersthemselves.
H2b: There are differences between frontline hotel employees’ expecta-tions and perceptions of international customers’ behavior.
The discrepancy between hotel employees’ expectations of how cus-tomers should behave in a hotel and their perceptions of Korean andJapanese customers’ actual behavior can be evaluated through the eyes ofhotel staff. Misinterpretations can easily arise between service providers andreceivers of different nationalities, not only because of differences in negoti-ating, contracting, complaining, or organizational behavior, but even becauseof subtle differences in the use of eye contact, smiling, and gestures. Serviceproviders are likely to have certain expectations of customers’ manner oretiquette in a hospitality or business setting based on their own learningprocess (Nasution & Mavondo, 2008; Sizoo et al., 2003; Tsang & Ap, 2007;Yeung & Leung, 2007; Wong, 2004).
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
130 S. Kim et al.
A staff member in a host country may be dissatisfied with a customerwhen his or her perceptions of the customer’s behavior are worse than hisor her expectations of that behavior. Such a discrepancy is likely—and likelyto widen—if staff are not sufficiently aware of the national characteristicsof certain customer groups and thus unprepared to deal with multiculturaldistinctiveness.
Serious problems can arise when frontline hospitality service providersrespond negatively to one national customer cohort based on hands-onexperience or prejudice (Wong, 2004; Yeung & Leung, 2007). Staff may refuseto serve tourist groups of certain nationalities, show reluctance to performfavors for them, or even reject their reservations (Bahar & Kozak, 2007;Kivela & Chu, 2001). If, in contrast, a particular international customer groupconforms to the positive expectations of hotel staff, then staff are happier toserve that group and may form stronger dyads with its members. Finally, itmay be feasible to influence service encounters positively to provide greatersatisfaction to both customers and employees. It is possible for either favor-able or unfavorable attitudes toward certain nationalities of customers to bereinforced.
H3a: There are differences between frontline hotel employees’ expecta-tions and perceptions of Japanese and Korean customers’ behavior.
H3b: There are differences between international customers’ expectationsand perceptions of their own behavior.
Individuals consider their behavior to be proper or improper based ontheir accumulated experiences and learning, although they recognize thatthere are exceptions in certain social or cultural settings. Culture formationis an ongoing process of constructing, acquiring, and transforming knowl-edge in a society or nation (Armstrong et al., 1997; Charlesworth, 2007).Ultimately, tourists are assumed to behave in a tourism destination accord-ing to their notions of appropriate behavior. However, international touristsmay not wish to abide by behavioral norms or etiquette when they areabroad because they are eager to seek relief from the restrictions of thosenorms (Jafari & Way, 1994). Furthermore, their belief that they are not beingobserved while abroad may produce deviant conduct or discourteousness.Generally speaking, the less experience an individual has with foreign travel,the greater his or her lack of understanding of multicultural diversity. It isalso likely that deviant behavior may be more extreme when the purpose oftravel is pleasure rather than business or study.
By extension, the disparity between behavioral expectations andperceptions may be greater in the package tour context. Participants in suchtours are usually accompanied by friends or like-minded persons and may
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
International Customers 131
thus exhibit a greater tendency toward improper behavior than individualtravelers.
H4a: There are differences between Japanese and Korean customers’expectations and perceptions of their own behavior.
H4b: There are differences in behavioral expectations and perceptionsamong tourists with different cultural backgrounds.
There are many examples of inter-country cultural disparities betweenthe Asian and Western hospitality contexts. There is also cross-culturalincongruence between different ethnic or national groups within Asianand Western cultures (Johns & McCleary, 2005). For example, in manyAsian countries/regions (including Hong Kong, Korea, Japan, Taiwan, andThailand), tourists/customers are expected to remove their shoes and put onslippers before entering a hotel room because it is considered filthy to wearoutdoor shoes indoors. However, the nationals of other Asian regions, suchas the Middle East, are accustomed to walking around indoors with theirshoes on.
With regard to eating customs, the mainland Chinese and Koreans usu-ally order several dishes, which they then share. Such a pattern of eatingcan be explained by Hofstede’s (1980, 1991, 2001) concept of collectivismand Kim, Pan, and Park’s (1998) description of a low-context culture. TheJapanese, however, are unlikely to understand the expectation that theyshare food with others. Different Asian countries may also have differentexpectations of the proper etiquette between men and women. Tourists fromMuslim countries, for example, may feel uneasy around topless bathers orthose in skimpy swimwear when relaxing at the swimming pool in a hotel orresort. Although Asia in general tends to be conservative about female roles(Kim, Choi, Agrusa, & Kim, 2010), such nations/regions as Korea, Japan,Hong Kong, and Singapore have become Westernized, and their social normsare changing very rapidly.
Differences in behavior with regard to complaints can also be found.Japanese customers, for example, tend not to complain directly to serviceproviders, but instead send a letter of complaint or complain to a higher-level manager (Fields, 2000; Huang, Huang, & Wu, 1996), whereas Koreanand Chinese customers tend to express their opinions about poor or unsatis-factory service freely in public and ask staff directly the reasons for it (Huanget al., 1996; Kim et al., 2003).
Different cultural values are also likely to determine customer satis-faction, preferences, expectations, and service quality (Armstrong et al.,1997; Lee et al., 2008; Manzur & Jogaratnam, 2006; Mattila, 2000; Nasution& Mavondo, 2008; Tsang & Ap, 2007; Tsaur et al., 2005; Zeithaml et al.,
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
132 S. Kim et al.
1993; Zhu et al., 2007). Some research has shown differences across culturalborders within the same Asian region because of differences in ways of life,religion, weather, ethnicity, customs, and history.
H5a: There are differences in behavioral expectations between Japaneseand Korean customers.
H5b: There are differences between Japanese and Korean customers interms of behavioral perceptions.
RESEARCH METHODS
Measurement
Development of the questionnaire instrument comprised three steps. First,previous cross-cultural studies in the hospitality and tourism literature werereviewed (Armstrong et al., 1997; Fields, 2000; Huang et al., 1996; Reisinger& Turner, 2002a, 2002b; Tsang & Ap, 2007). Second, in-depth interviewswere carried out to test the developed questions within the specific con-text of frontline Thai hotel staff and Japanese and Korean package tourcustomers. In-depth interviews were conducted with seven Thai employeesat two hotels in Bangkok that mainly accommodate Korean and Japanesepackage tourists.
Third, the questionnaire items were reviewed by tour guides who pro-vide Asian package tours to Thailand. The result was a final total of 25 itemsreflecting both deviant and conforming behavior typical of hotel guests, typesof collective and complaining behavior, as well as the eating and drinkinghabits of Japanese and Korean customers. The one-page, double-sided ques-tionnaire was distributed to the three groups under study: Thai frontline hotelstaff, Japanese package tour customers, and Korean package tour customers.
The Thai hotel staff sample was instructed to “Please indicate your levelof agreement with these statements about Japanese/Korean package tourcustomers’ behavior in this hotel,” for example, “They tend to be considerateof other customers.” To evaluate their expectations of international customerbehavior, they were instructed to “Please indicate your level of agreementwith these statements regarding the behavior expected of Japanese/Koreancustomers in a hotel,” for example, “I expect that they will be considerate ofother customers.”
Similarly formatted questionnaires asked the Japanese and Korean cus-tomers to evaluate the expectations and perceptions of their own behavior.The 25 items measured the two international customer samples’ expectedand perceived behavior on 7-point Likert-type scales (1 = strongly disagree;4 = neutral; 7 = strongly agree).
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
International Customers 133
Data Collection
As noted, this study involved two groups of research respondents: hotel staffand tourists. To collect data from the former, two Bangkok hotels that targetKorean and Japanese package tourists were selected. Questionnaires weredistributed by the tour guides in charge of the relevant package tours, withthe data collection process assessed by the researchers. Frontline staff wereconsidered to be those working in the front office and in hotel restaurants.A total of 61 hotel staff questionnaires were collected, which was reduced to55 through a process of data cleansing (questionnaires with multiple missingvalues were eliminated).
The tour guides, who were given a small honorarium for their assistance,also distributed the Korean and Japanese package tourist surveys, whichwere administered on departure days after check-out. A total of 342 Koreanand 360 Japanese package tourist questionnaires were collected, which werereduced to 315 and 350, respectively, following the aforementioned data-cleansing process.
Analytical Methods
Factor analysis was performed on the customer behavior scale to identifythe underlying dimensions of the customer behavior scale. Next, reliabilitycoefficients within the extracted domains were calculated to measure thedegree of internal consistency among the items. Hypotheses were estab-lished to identify the significant differences between the two national groupswith regard to the extracted dimensions of expected and perceived cus-tomer behavior, and to explore the significant differences in the dimensionswithin the same national group. First, t-tests were applied to identify thesignificant differences between the two national groups with regard to theextracted dimensions of expected and perceived customer behavior. Wherethe same national sample was asked to respond to the expected and per-ceived behavior dimensions, paired t-tests were conducted to explore anysignificant differences in the dimensions.
RESULTS
Respondent Profile
Just over half (53.9%) of the Japanese respondents were women, mostof them in their 20s and 30s (60.6%). About 46% were college grad-uates, 31.7% were company employees, and 21.6% undergraduate orpostgraduate students. The annual household income of 31.9% was belowUS$38,200, and one in five fell into the US$38,201−US$63,640 andUS$63,641−US$89,000 income bands. Concerning travel to Thailand, 71.7%
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
134 S. Kim et al.
and 13.0% reported first time visit and once, respectively, 33.3% were travel-ing with one other person, and almost all (98.7%) were traveling with friends,relatives, or coworkers.
A great proportion of the Korean respondents were women (62.2%), andmore than half were in their 20s and 30s (54.3%). More than half (53.1%)were also college graduates, 32.6% were company employees, and 20.9%were housewives. Roughly a third (32.6%) had an annual household incomeof between US$30,000 and US$50,000. The majority (64.6%) reported first-time visit to Thailand, and 17.1% did once before. Ten percent were travelingin pairs, and 96.0% were traveling with others.
Of the Thai staff, about 60% of respondents were women, the majority intheir 20s and 30s (83.2%). Most (85%) had never visited Korea or Japan. Withregard to their experience in the hotel industry, 43.4% and 32.1% reported1−3 and 4−8 years of experience, respectively, with 69% reporting that theyhad one to three years’ experience in their current hotel. They were generallywell-educated, with 48% and 36% holding undergraduate and postgraduatedegrees, respectively. The majority (79.6%) were employed in the hotel’sroom division, 16.8% in the F&B division, and 3.6% in other divisions. Most(82%) had never studied abroad, although 15% had some overseas studyexperience. All three samples are considered to be fair representations oftheir respective populations.
Factor Analysis
Factor analysis was performed on the 25 customer behavior items listed onall three survey questionnaires to delineate the underlying dimensions of thecustomer behavior instrument. The varimax rotation method was employedto maximize the variances of the loadings, and the principal componentsapproach was used for factor extraction. The factor structure explained 58.5%of the variance. As the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling ade-quacy was .86, the factor analysis was considered to provide useful validationof the factor structure. Barlett’s test of sphericity, which assesses the hypoth-esis that there are no factors, revealed a chi-square value of 52.06 (p = .000),thus guaranteeing that one or more factors are included in the factormodel.
The cut-off size of the factor loadings measuring the correlation betweenthe observed measurements and the factors was set at .50, higher thanthe .45 recommended by Comrey and Lee (1992). Thus, the six factorsproved to be interpretable. In addition, the commonalities for each vari-able, which explain the size of the contribution to factor structure formation,ranged from .43 to .70. The domains with eigenvalues greater than 1.0 werelabeled Deviant Behavior (Dimension 1), Considerate Behavior (Dimension2), Collective Behavior (Dimension 3), Complaining Behavior (Dimension4), Eating and Drinking Behavior (Dimension 5), and Conforming Behavior
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
International Customers 135
TABLE 1 Factor Analysis of Customer Behavior with Varimax Rotation
Factor loadings
Customer behavioral items 1 2 3 4 5 6Commun-
alities
Dimension 1: Deviant behaviorFail to return room key .76 .69Take magazines, wine openers, etc. .76 .61Unwillingness to pay mini-bar bill .70 .61Leave room in an untidy condition .67 .67Express affection in hotel public areas .62 .59Wear shorts/swimsuits in hotel public areas .57 .43Litter .52 .48
Dimension 2: Considerate behaviorYield to others when using the elevator .71 .63Be considerate of other customers .66 .53Use hotel facilities respectfully .66 .59Express thanks to employees .65 .61Give employees handsome tips .62 .62
Dimension 3: Collective behaviorMove around the hotel in crowds .82 .70Move around the hotel noisily .72 .57Have meals with groups of co-nationals .67 .60Be noisy in the hotel restaurant .65 .67Order lots of food and leave leftovers .63 .53Make noise in the room .53 .63
Dimension 4: Complaining behaviorComplain to hotel employees .72 .55Speak in mother tongue .57 .50Call waiters/waitresses by pointing fingers .55 .57
Dimension 5: Eating and drinking behaviorDrink in the room .70 .61Eat national foods .63 .52
Dimension 6: Conforming behaviorAsk questions of hotel staff .70 .65Know how to use hotel facilities .52 .45
Eigenvalue 3.88 2.91 2.65 2.42 1.6 1.1Variance explained 15.5 11.6 10.6 9.68 4 1Reliability alpha 3 6 1 .68 6.5 4.4
.85 .72 .77 5 4.69 .68
(Dimension 6). The reliability alphas within the six dimensions ranged from.68 to .85. These alphas were higher than or close to the 0.70 cut-off standardrecommended by Nunnally (1978). The results are reported in Table 1.
Hypothesis Testing
Table 2 compares Japanese and Korean customers’ expectations of theirown behavior and Thai employees’ expectations of the behavior of the twocustomer groups. Significant differences (at at least the .05 level) were found
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
TAB
LE2
Com
par
ison
ofH
ote
lSt
affan
dIn
tern
atio
nal
Cust
om
ers’
Exp
ecta
tions
ofCust
om
erB
ehav
ior
Dim
ensi
ons
Japan
ese
cust
om
ers’
expec
tatio
ns
ofth
eir
ow
nbeh
avio
r(N
=31
3)
Thai
emplo
yees
’ex
pec
tatio
ns
of
Japan
ese
cust
om
ers’
beh
avio
r(N
=51
)t-
valu
e
Kore
ancu
stom
ers’
expec
tatio
ns
ofth
eir
ow
nbeh
avio
r(N
=34
9)
Thai
emplo
yees
’ex
pec
tatio
ns
of
Kore
ancu
stom
ers’
beh
avio
r(N
=53
)t-
valu
e
1.D
evia
ntcu
stom
erbeh
avio
r2.
633.
59−5
.37∗∗
∗3.
053.
51−3
.03∗∗
2.Consi
der
ate
beh
avio
r4.
774.
213.
50∗∗
4.10
4.03
.54
3.Colle
ctiv
ebeh
avio
r3.
754.
00−1
.67
4.55
4.22
2.14
∗
4.Com
pla
inin
gbeh
avio
r3.
554.
62−6
.40∗∗
∗3.
953.
93.1
55.
Eat
ing
and
drinki
ng
beh
avio
r4.
124.
67−2
.82∗∗
5.08
4.00
5.76
∗∗∗
6.Confo
rmin
gbeh
avio
r4.
134.
58−2
.34∗
3.85
4.58
−4.3
4∗∗∗
∗ p<
.05.
∗∗p
<.0
1.∗∗
∗ p<
.001
.
136
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
International Customers 137
between the Japanese customers and Thai employees on five of the sixdimensions. Compared to the hotel staff’s expectations of Japanese customerbehavior, the Japanese customers expected to be more considerate of oth-ers, less deviant, and to complain less than the staff expected. However,these customers expected to conform less than the hotel personnel expectedthem to.
Significant differences (at at least the .01 level) were also found betweenthe Korean customers and the Thai hotel staff on four of the six dimensions.Compared to the staff’s expectations, Korean customers expected to be lessdeviant, behave more collectively, drink alcohol in their rooms more often,and eat more national foods. It is clear that the Thai staff had differentexpectations concerning the behavior of these two nationalities.
The results of the comparison between the perceptions of Japanesecustomers and Thai hotel employees concerning the actual behavior of theformer are presented in Table 3, from which it can be seen that significant dif-ferences were found in all dimensions. The Thai staff perceived the Japanesecustomers to be more deviant, complain more, drink alcohol in their roomsmore often, and eat more national food and to be less considerate of others,to act more collectively, and to comply less with hotel guidelines, relative tothese customers’ perceptions of themselves
Similar patterns were identified in the Korean case, with significant dif-ferences found in all dimensions. However, the magnitude of the t-valueswas larger in every dimension for the Korean customer group relative tothe Japanese group, which indicates greater (less) congruence between theperceptions of the Thai employees and the Japanese (Korean) customersconcerning these customers’ actual behavior.
Table 4 compares the expected and actual behavior of the two interna-tional customer groups as perceived by Thai staff. Significance at the .05 levelwas found on the “considerate behavior” dimension in the comparison ofThai employees’ perceptions of Japanese customers’ expected and actualbehavior. Significance at at least the .05 level was observed for ConsiderateBehavior (Dimension 2), Complaining Behavior (Dimension 4), and Eatingand Drinking Behavior (Dimension 5) in the comparison of Thai employ-ees’ perceptions of Korean customers’ expected and actual behavior. TheThai hotel staff reported that both customer groups tended to treat othercustomers and members of staff more amiably than they had expected themto. They also said that Korean customers had a greater than expected ten-dency to make complaints directly to hotel staff. The Thai staff also foundthe Korean customers to have a greater than expected tendency to drinkalcohol in their rooms and eat national food.
Table 5 shows the results of the self-evaluations of the Japanese andKorean customers concerning their expected and actual behavior. Significantdifferences at the .001 level were found on five of the six dimensions for
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
TAB
LE3
Com
par
ison
Bet
wee
nH
ote
lSt
affan
dIn
tern
atio
nal
Cust
om
ers’
Per
ceptio
ns
ofCust
om
ers’
Act
ual
Beh
avio
r
Dim
ensi
ons
Japan
ese
cust
om
ers’
per
ceptio
ns
ofth
eir
actu
albeh
avio
r(N
=31
3)
Thai
emplo
yees
’per
ceptio
ns
of
Japan
ese
cust
om
ers’
actu
albeh
avio
r(N
=52
)t-
valu
e
Kore
ancu
stom
ers’
per
ceptio
ns
ofth
eir
actu
albeh
avio
r(N
=34
9)
Thai
emplo
yees
’per
ceptio
ns
of
Kore
ancu
stom
ers’
actu
albeh
avio
r(N
=53
)t-
valu
e
1.D
evia
ntcu
stom
erbeh
avio
r2.
333.
65−6
.17∗∗
∗1.
893.
71−1
4.02
∗∗∗
2.Consi
der
ate
beh
avio
r5.
254.
573.
72∗∗
∗5.
384.
457.
33∗∗
∗
3.Colle
ctiv
ebeh
avio
r2.
934.
15−7
.02∗∗
∗2.
394.
14−1
3.43
∗∗∗
4.Com
pla
inin
gbeh
avio
r3.
434.
30−4
.25∗∗
∗3.
294.
20−6
.30∗∗
∗
5.Eat
ing
and
drinki
ng
beh
avio
r3.
684.
46−3
.88∗∗
∗3.
054.
41−7
.12∗∗
∗
6.Confo
rmin
gbeh
avio
r5.
344.
523.
70∗∗
∗5.
994.
459.
78∗∗
∗
∗ p<
.05.
∗∗p
<.0
1.∗∗
∗ p<
.001
.
138
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
TAB
LE4
Com
par
ison
ofCust
om
ers’
Exp
ecte
dan
dA
ctual
Beh
avio
ras
Per
ceiv
edby
Hote
lSt
aff
Dim
ensi
on
Thai
emplo
yees
’ex
pec
tatio
nof
Japan
ese
cust
om
ers’
beh
avio
r(N
=53
)
Thai
emplo
yees
’per
ceptio
ns
of
Japan
ese
cust
om
ers’
actu
albeh
avio
r(N
=53
)Pai
red
t-va
lue
Thai
emplo
yees
’ex
pec
tatio
ns
of
Kore
ancu
stom
ers’
beh
avio
ur
(N=
51)
Thai
emplo
yees
’per
ceptio
ns
of
Kore
ancu
stom
ers’
actu
albeh
avio
r(N
=51
)Pai
red
t-va
lue
1.D
evia
ntcu
stom
erbeh
avio
r3.
583.
65−.
353.
513.
71−1
.23
2.Consi
der
ate
beh
avio
r4.
234.
57−2
.10∗
4.03
4.45
−3.3
4∗∗
3.Colle
ctiv
ebeh
avio
r4.
014.
15−.
624.
224.
14.6
54.
Com
pla
inin
gbeh
avio
r4.
634.
301.
683.
934.
20−2
.09∗
5.Eat
ing
and
drinki
ng
beh
avio
r4.
684.
46.9
63.
994.
41−2
.53∗
6.Confo
rmin
gbeh
avio
r4.
614.
52.3
64.
614.
49.6
6∗ p
<.0
5.∗∗
p<
.01.
∗∗∗ p
<.0
01.
139
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
TAB
LE5
Com
par
ison
ofIn
tern
atio
nal
Cust
om
ers’
Eva
luat
ion
ofThei
rO
wn
Exp
ecte
dan
dA
ctual
Beh
avio
r
Dim
ensi
ons
Japan
ese
cust
om
ers’
expec
tatio
nofth
eir
ow
nbeh
avio
ur
(N=
315)
Japan
ese
cust
om
ers’
per
ceptio
nofth
eir
ow
nac
tual
beh
avio
r(N
=31
5)Pai
red
t-va
lue
Kore
ancu
stom
ers’
expec
tatio
nofth
eir
ow
nbeh
avio
r(N
=34
8)
Kore
ancu
stom
ers’
per
ceptio
nofth
eir
ow
nac
tual
beh
avio
r(N
=34
8)Pai
red
t-va
lue
1.D
evia
ntcu
stom
erbeh
avio
r2.
632.
334.
29∗∗
∗3.
051.
8919
.09∗∗
∗
2.Consi
der
ate
beh
avio
r4.
775.
25−7
.06∗∗
∗4.
105.
38−2
0.99
∗∗∗
3.Colle
ctiv
ebeh
avio
r3.
752.
9310
.57∗∗
∗4.
552.
3930
.06∗∗
∗
4.Com
pla
inin
gbeh
avio
r3.
553.
431.
283.
953.
299.
43∗∗
∗
5.Eat
ing
and
drinki
ng
beh
avio
r4.
123.
685.
22∗∗
∗5.
073.
0522
.25∗∗
∗
6.Confo
rmin
gbeh
avio
r4.
135.
34−1
1.03
∗∗∗
3.85
6.00
−26.
31∗∗
∗
∗ p<
.05.
∗∗p
<.0
1.∗∗
∗ p<
.001
.
140
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
International Customers 141
the Japanese sample, whereas significant differences at the .001 level wereobserved on all six dimensions for the Korean sample.
The Japanese respondents reported their actual behavior to be lessdeviant than they had expected. They also perceived themselves to be moreconsiderate of others relative to their expectations and to be less collectivein their behavior. They reported that they had observed hotel guidelines toa greater extent than they had expected to, perhaps because they drank lessalcohol in their rooms and ate less national food than expected. The patternof results for the Korean sample was the same as that for the Japanesesample, although the magnitude of the t-values was greater for the former.
Table 6 reports the results of the comparison between the expected andactual behavior of the two customer groups. The Koreans were more likelythan the Japanese to report the expectation that they would not behaveproperly, complain, drink alcohol in their rooms, and eat national food.The Japanese, in contrast, were more likely to expect themselves to beconsiderate of others and observe hotel guidelines relative to their Koreancounterparts. When it came to actual behavior, however, the Japanese cus-tomers responded more frequently than the Korean customers that theiractual behavior had been deviant and collective in nature and that they haddrunk alcohol in their rooms and ate national food, whereas the latter weremore likely to report that their actual behavior had been in conformancewith hotel guidelines.
The most important findings of our data analyses are as follows. First,the comparison between the Japanese and Korean customers’ expectations oftheir own behavior with the expectations of Thai hotel employees concern-ing that behavior indicated these employees to have different expectationsof the two groups, thus providing support for Hypothesis 1. Thai employeesexpected more deviant, less considerate, more complaining, and differenteating and drinking behavior from the Japanese customers than from theKorean, whereas they expected a greater demonstration of collective behav-ior from the latter. These findings are consistent with those of previousstudies suggesting the prior existence of a perceptual discrepancy in ser-vice delivery quality between hospitality providers and international guests(e.g., Armstrong et al., 1997; Ayoun & Moreo, 2008; Bahar & Kozak, 2007;DeFranco & Mok, 1998; Gilbert et al., 2004; Manzur & Jogaratnam, 2006;Mattila, 1999a; Nasution & Mavondo, 2008; Reisinger & Turner, 1998; Tsang& Ap, 2007; Tsaur et al., 2005).
Second, a significant gap was found in perceptions of actual behav-ior between the international customer groups and hotel staff, which issupportive of Hypothesis 2. Interestingly, this gap was larger between theKorean customers and Thai employees than between the Japanese customersand Thai employees. Differences in perceptions of international customers’behavior between hospitality staff and the customers themselves may becaused by a priori biased feelings toward a particular cultural group (Bahar
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
TAB
LE6
Com
par
ison
ofExp
ecte
dan
dA
ctual
Beh
avio
ralPer
ceptio
ns
Bet
wee
nJa
pan
ese
and
Kore
anCust
om
ers
Dim
ensi
ons
Japan
ese
cust
om
ers’
expec
tatio
nofth
eir
ow
nbeh
avio
r(N
=31
5)
Kore
ancu
stom
ers’
expec
tatio
nofth
eir
ow
nbeh
avio
r(N
=34
9)t-
valu
e
Japan
ese
cust
om
ers’
per
ceptio
ns
ofth
eir
ow
nac
tual
beh
avio
ur
(N=
315)
Kore
ancu
stom
ers’
per
ceptio
nofth
eir
ow
nac
tual
beh
avio
r(N
=34
9)t-va
lue
1.D
evia
ntcu
stom
erbeh
avio
r2.
633.
04−4
.68∗∗
∗2.
321.
894.
82∗∗
∗
2.Consi
der
ate
beh
avio
r4.
774.
108.
43∗∗
∗5.
255.
38−1
.61
3.Colle
ctiv
ebeh
avio
r3.
754.
55−9
.93∗∗
∗2.
932.
396.
90∗∗
∗
4.Com
pla
inin
gbeh
avio
r3.
553.
95−4
.71∗∗
∗3.
433.
291.
505.
Eat
ing
and
drinki
ng
beh
avio
r4.
125.
08−9
.40∗∗
∗3.
683.
056.
16∗∗
∗
6.Confo
rmin
gbeh
avio
r4.
133.
852.
93∗∗
5.34
5.99
−6.4
7∗∗∗
∗ p<
.05.
∗∗p
<.0
1.∗∗
∗ p<
.001
.
142
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
International Customers 143
& Kozak, 2007; Jafari & Way, 1994; Nasution & Mavondo, 2008; Sizoo et al.,2003) or by difficulties in self-evaluation.
Third, the gap between Thai employees’ perceptions and expectationsof the two international cohorts was fairly small for the Japanese tourists andsomewhat larger for the Koreans, which provides support for Hypothesis3. It seems that the Japanese customers’ expected and actual behavior wasmore similar than that of the Koreans. It could be that Thai staff are bet-ter informed about the characteristics of Japanese customers than Koreancustomers. There may thus be a need for better training in Thai hotels tofamiliarize staff with Korean customs to help to bridge the service gap.
Fourth, in their self-assessment of their expected and actual behavior,both customer groups reported their actual behavior to be more courte-ous, considerate, independent, and conforming than their expected behavior,thus supporting Hypothesis 4. The variation between expected and actualbehavior was greater for the Korean customers than for their Japanesecounterparts. These findings reflect the suggestions of sociologists that inter-national tourists often prefer liminal activities or seek freedom from workor boredom when they travel (Boniface, 1998; Cohen, 1972; Urry, 1990a,1990b). Interestingly, the findings imply that Korean tourists expect greaterfreedom than their Japanese counterparts when they travel to foreign desti-nations, and yet their actual behavior is more compliant, which may reflectthe value that Korea’s industrialized society places on the work ethic andcompetitiveness (Han & Heather, 2001; Jeong, 1995).
Fifth, marked differences were found between the behavioral expecta-tions of the two international customer groups, which provides support forHypothesis 5a. Relative to the Korean group, the Japanese group expectedtheir own behavior to be less deviant, collective, and complaining, to engagein less drinking in their rooms, to eat more national foods, to be more consid-erate of others, and to conform more to hotel rules. Interestingly, the resultswere the complete reverse in the comparison of the perceptions of actualbehavior between the two international customer groups. In this case, theKoreans evaluated their behavior to be less deviant, less collective, and morecompliant with hotel guidelines and to engage in less drinking in their roomsand to eat fewer national foods relative to the Japanese, thus supportingHypothesis 5b.
CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS
The results of this study indicate that Japanese and Korean customers havedistinct cultural values, suggesting that cross-cultural incongruence existswithin these Asian cultures. The findings of this simultaneous explorationof the relationship between the expectations and perceptions of serviceproviders and customers support those of numerous cross-cultural studies
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
144 S. Kim et al.
of customers or tourists (e.g., Armstrong et al., 1997; Kim et al., 2003; Leeet al., 2008; Manzur & Jogaratnam, 2006; Mattila, 2000; Nasution & Mavondo,2008; Tsang & Ap, 2007; Tsaur et al., 2005; Zeithaml et al., 1993; Zhu et al.,2007) and extend our understanding of cross-cultural service encounters.
Daily encounters with international guests are the daily reality forfrontline hospitality service providers, and yet to date we have known lit-tle about their expectations and perceptions of guest behavior or whetherthese expectations and perceptions differ for guests with different culturalbackgrounds. The first hypothesis in this study posited that Thai staff havedifferent expectations of guest behavior than the guests themselves andthat these expectations differ by nationality. More specifically, the Thaihotel employees in this study expected the Japanese customers to behaveworse than these customers expected themselves to behave, whereas theKorean customers expected themselves to behave worse than the Thaistaff did.
In terms of actual behavior, the Thai staff perceived both customergroups’ behavior to be worse than the customers did. This finding is unsur-prising, as one’s own cultural tendencies will be more acceptable to oneselfthan to others. For example, drinking in one’s room and eating nationalfoods may be considered acceptable to Japanese and Korean customers, butare considered examples of deviant behavior by Thai staff. One solution foraccommodation providers serving these Asian customer groups would be tocater to their in-room food and drink needs by providing quality supportservices on a cost-recovery basis. Training and preparing hotel staff to meetthese in-room needs could also shift perceptions of such behavior from neg-ative to positive. Hotel brochures or PDP screens, for example, could includeguidelines so that customers would know not to cook food in their rooms,or drink alcohol excessively, and could promote going to a restaurant or abar as more acceptable alternatives.
Interestingly, the gap between the Thai staff’s evaluations of expectedand perceived behavior was smaller than that between the behavioral expec-tations and perceptions of either customer group. The difference betweenthe staff’s expectations and perceptions of Japanese customers’ behavior, forexample, was similar for five of the six dimensions, whereas these customersevaluated their own expected and perceived behavior as dissimilar in five ofthe six. A similar pattern was found for the Korean group. This observa-tion suggests that Thai staff know these Asian customer groups better thanthe customers know themselves. However, familiarity can breed contempt,or rather biased knowledge can detract from service quality. Initiatives tofacilitate the sharing of cultural practices should be encouraged, whetherit be formal training sessions or informal theme nights. In addition, hotelsshould hold frequent seminars to understand culturally different behaviorsof customers and take appropriate measures.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
International Customers 145
The significant gap between the Koreans’ ratings for their expectedand perceived actual behavior is interesting. They had quite low expecta-tions for themselves with regard to considerateness, complaints, collectivebehavior, and eating and drinking behavior, whereas they tended to ratetheir actual behavior quite positively in all dimensions. This gap may reflectthe tendency to view national characteristics more negatively than individ-ual characteristics or, stated differently, to believe that one’s co-nationalsare deviant, although oneself is not. The case was similar for the Japanesecustomers, although the gap between their expectations and perceptionswas smaller. Tour guides accompanying group tourists can play a role ineducating travelers with regard to current practices and acceptable behaviorin lodging establishments. If friendly tips are provided in one’s own languageand cultural setting, then they are more likely to be adhered to.
Although this study was limited to an exploration of two internationalcustomer groups and one host culture, its findings are consistent with generaltheories of human behavior, suggesting that in-groups rate group membersmore positively than non-members and that stereotypical beliefs are formedto facilitate information processing. However, extensions of this study toother cultural contexts would strengthen its conclusions. As internationaltravel continues to grow, multicultural service encounters require a deeperunderstanding to bridge the service gap between host and guest. Anotherlimitation of this study is the time when the data was collected, thus reflectingonly the characteristics of hotel customers in the summer, enjoying overseastravel during the summer vacation period. Thus, a future study needs tocapture a variety of group tourists reflecting more diverse sociodemographiccharacteristics, with data collected throughout the year.
REFERENCES
Albert, R. (1986). Conceptual framework for the development and evaluationof cross-cultural orientation programs. International Journal of InterculturalRelations, 10, 197–213.
Armstrong, R., Mok, C., Go, F., & Chan, A. (1997). The importance of cross-culturalexpectations in the measurement of service quality perceptions in the hotelindustry. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 16(2), 181–190.
Ayoun, B., & Moreo, P. (2008). The influence of the cultural dimension of uncertaintyavoidance on business strategy development: A cross-cultural study of hotelmanagers. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 27 , 65–75.
Bahar, S., & Kozak, M. (2007). Advancing destination competitiveness research:Comparison between tourists and service providers. Journal of Travel & TourismMarketing, 22(2), 61–71.
Becker, C., & Murrmann, S. (1999). The effect of cultural orientation on the servicetiming preferences of customers in casual dining operations: An exploratorystudy. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 18, 59–65.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
146 S. Kim et al.
Boniface, P. (1998). Tourism culture. Annals of Tourism Research, 25(3), 746–749.Charlesworth, Z. (2007). Educating international hospitality students and man-
agers: The role of culture. International Journal of Contemporary HospitalityManagement, 19(2), 133–145.
Clark, T. (1990). International marketing and national character: A review andproposal for an integrative theory. Journal of Marketing, 54(4), 66–79.
Cohen, E. (1972). Towards a sociology of international tourism. Social Research, 39,164–182.
Comrey, A. L., & Lee, H. B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis (2nd ed.).Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
DeFranco, A., & Mok, C. (1998). Expectations for hotel service quality: A case ofUnited States and Mexican tourists. The Consortium Journal, 2(1), 67–79.
Devine, F., Baum, T., Hearns, N., & Devine, A. (2007). Managing cultural diver-sity: Opportunities and challenges for Northern Ireland hoteliers. InternationalJournal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 19(2), 120–132.
Fields, G. (2000). Leverage Japan. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Fowler, S. M. (2006). Training across cultures: What intercultural trainers bring to
diversity training. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30, 401–411.Furrer, O., Liu, B., & Sudharshan, D. (2000). The relationships between culture and
service quality perceptions: Basis for cross-cultural market segmentation andresource allocation. Journal of Service Research, 2(4), 355–371.
Gilbert, G. R., Veloutsou, C., Goode, M. M. H., & Moutinho, L. (2004). Measuring cus-tomer satisfaction in the fast food industry: A cross-cultural approach. Journalof Services Marketing, 18(5), 371–383.
Groschi, S., & Doherty, L. (2006). The complexity of culture: Using the appraisal pro-cess to compare French and British mangers in a UK-based international hotelorganization. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 25, 313–334.
Han, B., & Heather, J. (2001). Korean tourists’ characteristics in Guam. Journal ofPhoto-Geographers, 11(1), 69–83.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London,England: McGraw-Hill.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, insti-tutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
Huang, J., Huang, C., & Wu, S. (1996). National characters and response to unsatis-factory hotel service. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 15(3),229–243.
Hui, M., & Au, K. (2001). Justice perceptions of complaint-handling: A cross-cultural comparison between PRC and Canadian customers. Journal of BusinessResearch, 52, 161–173.
Hui, M., Au, K., & Fock, H. (2004). Reactions of service employees to organization-customer conflict: A cross-cultural comparison. International Journal ofResearch in Marketing, 21, 107–121.
Iverson, T. (1997). Decision timing: A comparison of Korean and Japanese travelers.International Journal of Hospitality Management, 16(2), 209–219.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
International Customers 147
Jafari, J., & Way, W. (1994). Multicultural strategies in tourism. Cornell Hotel &Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 35(6), 72–79.
Jeong, G. (1995). A study on the Korean tourist behavioral characteris-tics: Perceptions of Korean tour conductors. Journal of Korean TourismDevelopment, 4(1), 199–212.
Johns, D. L., & McCleary, K. W. (2005). An empirical approach to identifying cross-cultural modifications to international hospitality industry sales training. Journalof Travel & Tourism Marketing, 18(4), 65–81.
Kandampully, J., Mok, C., & Sparks, B. (2001). Service quality management inhospitality, tourism, and leisure. Binghamton, NY: The Haworth HospitalityPress.
Kim, D., Pan, Y., & Park, H. S. (1998). High- versus low-context culture: A compari-son of Chinese, Korean and American cultures. Psychology & Marketing, 15(6),507–521.
Kim, S., Choi, S., Agrusa, J., Wang, K., & Kim, Y. (2010). The role of family decisionmakers in festival tourism. International Journal of Hospitality Management,29(2), 308–318.
Kim, S., Prideaux, B., & Kim, S. (2003). A cross-cultural study on casino guests asperceived by casino employees. Tourism Management, 23(5), 511–520.
Kim, S., & Prideaux, B. (2005). Marketing implications arising from a compara-tive study of international pleasure tourist motivations, and other travel-relatedcharacteristics of visitors to Korea. Tourism Management, 26(3), 347–357.
Kivela, J., & Chu, C. (2001). Delivering quality service: Diagnosing favorableand unfavorable service encounters in restaurants. Journal of Hospitality andTourism Research, 25(3), 251–271.
Lee, K., Khan, M., & Ko, J. (2008). A cross-national comparison of consumerperceptions of service recovery. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing,24(1), 1–16.
Lenartowicz, T., & Roth, K. (1999). A framework of culture assessment. Journal ofInternational Business Studies, 30(4), 781–798.
Manzur, L., & Jogaratnam, G. (2006). Impression management and the hospital-ity service encounter: Cross-cultural differences. Journal of Travel & TourismMarketing, 20(3/4), 21–32.
March, R. (1997). Diversity in Asian outbound travel industries: A comparisonbetween Indonesia, Thailand, Taiwan, South Korea and Japan. InternationalJournal of Hospitality Management, 16(2), 231–238.
Mattila, A. (1999a). The role of culture in the service evaluation processes. Journalof Service Research, 1(3), 250–261.
Mattila, A. (1999b). The role of culture and purchase motivation in service encounterevaluations. Journal of Service Marketing, 13(4/5), 376–389.
Mattila, A. (2000). The impact of culture and gender on customer evaluationsof service encounters. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 24(2),263–273.
Mattila, A., & Choi, S. (2006). A cross-cultural comparison of perceived fairnessand satisfaction in the context of hotel room pricing. International Journal ofHospitality Management, 25(2), 146–153.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
148 S. Kim et al.
Ngai, E., Heung, V., Wong, Y., & Chan, F. (2007). Consumer complaint behaviorof Asians and non-Asians about hotel services. European Journal of Marketing,41(11/12), 1375–1391.
Nasution, H., & Mavondo, F. (2008). Customer value in the hotel industry: Whatmangers believe they deliver and what customer experience. InternationalJournal of Hospitality Management, 27(2), 204–213.
Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill.Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V., & Berry, L. (1994, January). Reassessment of expec-
tations as a comparison standard in measuring service quality: Implications forfuture research. Journal of Marketing, 58, 111–124.
Pizam, A., Pine, R., Mok, C., & Shin, J. (1997). Nationality vs. industry cultures:Which has a greater effect on managerial behaviors? International Journal ofHospitality Management, 6 , 127–145.
Reisinger, Y., & Turner, L. (1998). Cross-cultural differences in tourism: A strategyfor tourism marketers. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 7(4), 79–106.
Reisinger, Y., & Turner, L. (2002a, February). Cultural differences between Asiantourist markets and Australian hosts: Part 1. Journal of Travel Research, 40,295–315.
Reisinger, Y., & Turner, L. (2002b, May). Cultural differences between Asian touristmarkets and Australian hosts: Part 2. Journal of Travel Research, 40, 374–384.
Reisinger, Y., & Turner, L. (2003). Cultural tourism: Modeling tourism behavior.London, England: Butterworth Heineman.
Saleh, F., & Ryan, C. (1991). Analyzing service quality in the hospitality industryusing the SERVQUAL model. Services Industries Journal, 11(3), 324–343.
Sekaran, U. (1983, fall). Methodological and theoretical issues and advancements incross-cultural research. Journal of International Business Studies, 14, 61–73.
Shoham, A., Schrage, C., & van Eeden, S. (2004). Student travel behavior: A cross-national study. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 17(4), 1–10.
Singelis, T., Triandis, H., Bhawuk, S., & Gelfand, M. (1995). Horizontal and verticalorientations of individualism and collectivism: A theoretical and measurement.Cross-cultural Research, 29, 240–275.
Sizoo, S., Iskat, W., Plank, R., & Serrie, H. (2003). Cross-cultural service encountersin the hospitality industry and the effect of intercultural sensitivity on employeeperformance. International Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Administration,4(2), 61–77.
Smith, V. L. (1977). Hosts and guests: The anthropology of tourism. Philadelphia, PA:University of Pennsylvania Press.
Soares, A., Farhangmehr, M., & Shoham, A. (2007). Hofstede’s dimensions of culturein international marketing studies. Journal of Business Research, 60, 277–284.
Steenkamp, J. (2001). The role of national culture in international marketing research.International Marketing Review, 18(9), 30–44.
Sussmann, S., & Rashcovsky, C. (1997). A cross-cultural analysis of English andFrench Canadians’ vacation travel patterns. International Journal of HospitalityManagement, 16(2), 191–208.
Testa, M. (2002). Leadership dyads in the cruise industry: The impact of culturalcongruency. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 21, 425–441.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4
International Customers 149
Thompson, C., & Cutler, E. (1997). The effect of nationality on tourist arts: The caseof the Gambia, West Africa. International Journal of Hospitality Management,16(2), 225–229.
Triandis, H. (1995). The many dimensions of culture. Academy of ManagementExecutive, 18(1), 88–93.
Tsaur, S.-H., Lin, C.-T., & Wu, C.-S. (2005). Cultural differences of service qual-ity and behavioral intention in tourism hotels. Journal of Hospitality & LeisureMarketing, 13(1), 41–63.
Tsang, N., & Ap, J. (2007). Tourists’ perceptions of relational quality service attributes:A cross-cultural study. Journal of Travel Research, 45(3), 355–363.
Urry, J. (1990a). The consumption of tourism. Sociology, 24(1), 23–35.Urry, J. (1990b). The tourist gaze. London, England: Sage.Woods, R. H., & King, J. Z. (2002). Leadership and management in the hospitality
industry (2nd ed.). East Lansing, MI: American Hotel & Lodging Association.Wong, N. Y. (2004). The role of culture in the perception of service recovery. Journal
of Business Research, 57 , 957–963.World Tourism Organization. (2006). Tourism 2020 vision. Retrieved from http://
www.world-tourism.org/facts/menu.html.World Tourism Organization. (2010). International tourism on track for a rebound
after an exceptionally challenging 2009. UNWTO World Tourism Barometer,8(1). Retrieved from http://www.world-tourism.org/facts/menu.html
Yeung, S., & Leung, C. (2007). Perception and attitude of Hong Kong hotel guest-contact employees towards tourists from Mainland China. International Journalof Tourism Management, 9, 395–407.
Yu, L., & Goh, S. (1995). Perceptions of management difficulty factors by expatriatehotel professionals in China. International Journal of Hospitality Management,14(3/4), 375–388.
Zeithaml, V., Berry, L., & Parasuraman, A. (1993). The nature and determinants ofcustomer expectations of service. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,21(1), 1–12.
Zhu, T., Cole, S., & Card, J. (2007). The association of tourists’ cultural tendenciesand their perceived service quality of a Chinese travel agency. Journal of Travel& Tourism Marketing, 22(2), 1–13.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UO
V U
nive
rsity
of
Ovi
edo]
at 0
7:26
31
Oct
ober
201
4