Search results

The purpose of this study is to discover what attributes of casino buffet restaurants are the most important for customers’ willingness to pay (WTP).

Choice-based conjoint analysis was used in this study to test seven attributes: food, price/value, real price, service, atmosphere, the number of reviews and user-generated star ratings. Sawtooth Software was used to do the conjoint analysis, and a series of significance t-tests were run to determine the significance of each attribute on WTP with Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS).

Based on a survey of 483 respondents who had visited a buffet at a casino within the last two years, this study found that food is ranked as the most significant attribute of a casino buffet restaurant, followed by real price and service quality.

Theoretically, this work is the first to the authors’ knowledge to apply the antecedents of behavioral intention to willingness-to-pay for niche restaurants. Practically, the results of this study will help casino buffet operators as they re-open after COVID-19. Future studies could collect data in the post-pandemic environment and examine WTP at casino buffets in different geographic locations.

Employers are increasingly attempting to mitigate subtle but harmful forms of employee rudeness and slights. These include “microaggressions”, “everyday discrimination” and “workplace incivility”, among others. It is unclear which of these various terms is most acceptable for introducing the topic in the workplace. This paper explores human resources (HR) leaders' considerations about the terms and the organisational context that allow for successful implementation.

16 expert interviews were conducted with HR leaders from large organisations in the United Kingdom. Reflexive Thematic Analysis was used to explore interview transcripts.

HR leaders reflected on various terms for subtle slights, largely according to how understandable (coherent) and emotionally resonant (provocative) they appeared. They did not converge on any universally accepted term. Less abstract terms were regarded as most acceptable for a broad audience. There was a view that leaders, often representing dominant groups, would find provocative terms such as microaggressions less acceptable than under-represented groups; the latter would find their experiences of subtle slights validated by terms such as microaggressions. Participants suggested that understanding the need for change was a necessary precursor to participation in training. Compliance-based approaches were considered less helpful. Implications for the design of training initiatives are presented whereby several terms could be used and explained.

This is the first study to gather HR leaders' views on the acceptable terminology for subtle slights. Findings suggest employers may find value in adopting an implementation science approach to introducing diversity initiatives.