Search results

Based on the Oktoberfest context and memory-dominant logic (MDL), the purpose of the study included assessing drivers of the perceptions of experience uniqueness; if these drivers and experience uniqueness perceptions transformed in memorable experiences; and if memorable experiences translated into enhanced life satisfaction. Based on these relationships, a typology and theory extension is provided integrating practical examples.

A five-factor model was tested using exploratory structural equation modeling and structural equation modeling; the factors included food and beverage quality; connectedness; experience uniqueness; meaningfulness and memorability; and life satisfaction.

Guests connectedness impacted life satisfaction perceptions. Positive perceptions of the experience uniqueness resulted in higher memorability. Food and beverage quality impacted both memorability and life satisfaction. Higher memorability resulted in higher life satisfaction. Attendee nationality impacted the relationship among several of the study’s factors.

Progress was made on assessing the MDL concepts and translating them into quantitative values. Study results supported the impact of connectedness and product quality on perceptions of Oktoberfest experience uniqueness along with the impact of meaningfulness of the experience on life satisfaction perceptions. The authors acknowledged limitations because of one Oktoberfest beer tent focus and the weaknesses of survey methodology, limiting pre- and post-activity reporting and future investigation of moderating effects.

The consideration of higher order impacts (i.e. life satisfaction) is needed when delivering experiences and to entice loyalty and social media apostles. Consumers’ experience connectedness with high-quality perceptions and unique service design are likely to translate to memorable experiences, leading to life satisfaction perceptions. The concept of creating the experience “with” the customer appears to be a key aspect of memorability.

These results tested aspects of MDL and a typology emerged of ideal types as a modified MDL framework driven by two continua: transactional vs experiential quality and experiences designed “to” vs “with” customers.

The purpose of this study is to unearth antecedents of regrettable dining experiences related to the information source, action and inaction perspectives, dining companion influence and interactions among information source, the focal customer’s valence and the dining companion’s valence on regret, leading to sequential behavioral outcomes.

Using a scenario-based experimental study, 344 qualified questionnaires were collected. Univariate ANOVA and multiple linear regression analyses were implemented.

The results of this study reveal that action regret is more intense than inaction regret during the choice-making phase; dining companion negative feedback intensifies focal customer’s regret. The significance of the information source on regret disappeared when only one party reported negative feedback; conversely, when two parties in the co-consumption experience revealed negative feedback, the relationship between information source of choice and regret was sustained.

The nature of scenario-based design may lack realism. Thus, more field experiments are encouraged to test the propositions further. This research enhances our understanding of gastronomic experiences in a negative disconfirmation context, drawing upon action/inaction regret theory, attribution theory and the expectancy disconfirmation model.

From a triad relationship perspective, this study provides valuable input on who or what will be attributed to the issues when encountering a food and wine sensory failure. Additionally, insightful recommendations are supplied on avoiding the possibility of inducing the experience of regret and how practitioners can increase the potential for a memorable dining experience.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that enriched the existing knowledge of regrettable dining experiences relating to information sources and social influence.

This study aims to explore memory-dominant logic (MDL) in the luxury hotel context to assess the flow of management experience decisions to memorable experiences, which lead to guest outcomes. While research into memorable experiences has gained traction, the theoretical underpinnings of what makes an experience memorable in a luxury hotel setting are not well documented.

A grounded theory, qualitative methodology was used to assess MDL value transformation. Inductive methods included conducting in-depth interviews with hotel managers and analyzing social media reviews for each hotel. Guest reviews served as an indicator of memory outcomes and the counterpoint to the managerial interviews, supporting or refuting interview findings.

Key dimensions emerged, emphasizing the importance of managerial inputs to experience design, service experience attributes and memorable experience creation, demonstrating a sequence of memory-based value creation and outcomes such as positive word of mouth/electronic word of mouth (WOM/eWOM). Sentiment analysis identified attributes that appear to be a “must-have” to avoid dissatisfaction, as well as areas at risk for negative memories. Dimensions were developed into a framework using themes derived from MDL value transformation, management and consumer inputs that influence memorable experience outcomes in this context.

The study supported the MDL theoretical framework by illustrating the flow from managerial inputs to the service experience, to elements of experience co-creation, and through to the guests’ WOM/eWOM and experience memories. The findings highlighted the symbiotic relationship between firm culture and service experience design, providing guidance for managerial practice going forward.

This paper uncovers major themes and dimensions identified by guests and managers as necessary in creating memorable experiences in a luxury setting and develops a framework that serves as a foundation for further study, including anteceding factors and their impact on hedonic consumption across experience domains.

This study aims to consider how the degree of participation at various hierarchical levels impacts action plan implementation success and firm financial performance. Specifically, the study seeks to assess the relationship among organizational structure, involvement by top management, middle management, lower management and frontline employees and its effect on firm performance; and, when controlling for firm size and industry segment membership, the effect of the relationship among direct involvement effects and interacting involvement effects on performance.

The study used survey methodology and a random sample of members in a US state restaurant association. The analysis included comparisons between groups using independent sample t tests and hierarchical regression to assess direct and interacting effects.

The findings indicate that, regardless of firm size or industry segment, the direct effects of greater top management involvement and the interaction effects of one three‐way interaction (middle management, lower management, and frontline staff) and the four‐way interaction led to higher levels of action plan success. For the longer‐term impact on financial performance, higher participative approaches used by top management and frontline staff were significantly associated with higher overall profits and financial success.

The sample was drawn from a specific region in the USA and may not be generalizable. The study attempts to minimize the potential for non‐response bias and to ensure inter‐rater reliability but these potential threats to validity cannot be totally ruled out.

In general, higher top management participatory approaches are important to enhance financial and strategy implementation success, regardless of firm size. The interaction of participation by all levels of the firm is a useful approach to increase the likelihood of strategy implementation success. Top management and frontline employee participation are critical organizational levels for enhancing participative management approaches and ultimately increasing financial performance for all foodservice firms.

The value of this study is the consideration of the impact of participation by degree across four hierarchical levels on firm performance and plan execution success.

This study aims to examine the quick service restaurant (QSR) differentiation in the minds of consumers, customers and non-customers and addresses the use of absolute measures. The study integrated competitive context and customer vs non-customer perceptions to better understand marketing strategies and the impact on customer value.

A conceptual framework is provided with marketing strategy, 7Ps, value positioning and outcomes. A survey instrument to assess perceptions of QSR marketing mix dimensions and leading QSR brands as referents was used. The study used exploratory factor analysis, ANOVA and logistic regression to address research questions.

The five QSR brands were differentiated by three marketing mix dimensions: quality, convenience and price. Subway and Starbucks customers perceived higher quality than McDonald’s and Burger King. Price separated Starbucks and McDonald’s customers. Overall, QSR customers perceived higher quality and convenience than non-customers. Age group was a predictor of customer membership of QSR overall and McDonald’s.

The study used participants in Germany and had more respondents identified as McDonald’s customers or referent.

The quality bundle represents unique resources for each QSR brand. Management teams should use a holistic mindset in considering the quality bundle reputation and how the various attributes support each other.

Consumers look to three factors for QSR rather than 7Ps: quality, convenience and price. Relative comparisons of perceptions among brands and between customers vs non-customers provided important contributions for QSR marketing mix factors.

This paper aims to (1) organize the open literature on hotel revenue management systems, (2) compare practitioner systems in terms of functionality and (3) integrate (1)-(2) into research stream recommendations for the open literature with an empirical focus.

The authors use Nickerson’s taxonomy development method from the field of information systems to build the taxonomy.

New forecasting areas include developing a metric for the degree of strategic fit of a hotel’s pricing strategy and using it in conjunction with quantifications of online reviews for predictions. New price optimization avenues include determining whether a lack of congruence between customer perceptions of fairness and trust and pricing history has a detrimental effect on overall hotel performance and determining which combinations of flexible products, decision-maker risk aversion, nonparametric forecasting and reference effect optimization features work best in which situations.

This is the first study to combine vendor activities outside the technical realms of forecasting and price optimization with an emphasis on the choice modeling technical framework. This study points to several promising studies using qualitative methods, action research and design science.

The purpose of this study is to review the hospitality and tourism strategy literature to identify trends related to key topical areas of research. The study objectives include identifying hospitality and tourism strategy challenges; presenting a synthesis of frequent strategy topics; and identifying opportunities for future research.

Earlier studies in the hospitality strategy literature were reviewed and synthesized to identify trends, gaps and opportunities.

Hospitality strategy research continues to improve and extend the boundaries of strategic thought in the hospitality literature. In assessing the literature from 1980 to 2013, it was apparent that the literature was following the mainstream trend of combining theoretical perspectives to some degree as well as applying more process-based concepts to hospitality strategy research. There were several challenges for propelling hospitality strategy research forward; these included the educational infrastructure, theory development and the quantity and quality of researchers in the field.

Given the depth and breadth of the strategy topics and research, it was difficult to ensure sufficient coverage was provided in the limited space of one journal article.

The study provides a good foundational understanding of where the hospitality strategy research had been and the trajectory of where it was headed. Further, it serves as a valuable resource for current researchers and those entering this area of research.

This paper aims to outline the innovation process activities described by quick‐service restaurant (QSR) managers and to compare it with an earlier QSR process model and with those used in other food service settings.

Six semi‐structured interviews with QSR chain executives in the USA were conducted to better understand the underlying factors and dimensions that describe successful innovation process practices.

For new QSR menu innovations, the development teams follow a structured approach to reduce the likelihood of failure due to issues such as poor consumer demand or implementation. QSR screen new food innovations approximately five times during the development process. Furthermore, today's QSR innovation process integrates more sophisticated market research technology and a post‐audit is carried out after the new food concept has been launched. In comparison with studies of Michelin‐starred chefs QSR development teams use an approach that is much more explicitly structured as a whole due to the larger scale roll‐out as well as greater cross‐functional and regional differences to consider in the QSR setting.

The study was conducted in only one country and on a small sample. Based on an analysis of the findings, the innovation development process of QSR can be broken down into 13 main steps. Compared with earlier hospitality innovation studies, the process in this setting includes multiple screenings for high‐risk innovations, and greater emphasis on operational and training issues.

The study expands the scope of hospitality innovation research and the findings have important implications not only for QSR settings but also for other restaurant segments, and for other hospitality service endeavours.

The purpose of this paper is to assess the level of strategic management topic representation within the academic field of hospitality. The study addresses the following questions: what is the frequency of articles related to the topic of strategy in recent hospitality journals? How does the content of these articles differ from the more general field of strategic management? And, what are the potential gaps where researchers in the hospitality field can make contributions?

This study looks at the number and percentage of strategy-related articles published in leading hospitality journals for 2005 through 2009. The determination of the percentage of strategy-related articles published and categorizing these articles by key strategy topic area required several steps: defining strategic management as an academic area within hospitality; determining key strategy topic areas and key words or terms; and defining characteristics of the hospitality field that may impact what is and what is not strategic management in hospitality. Hospitality journal articles were then coded as strategy-related or other, and (if determined to be strategy-related) the articles were categorized into one of ten key topic areas.

Overall strategy articles represent about 27 percent of the total journal articles from the five-year period. In comparing hospitality journals to the sole top-tier business journal focusing on strategy, this study indicates differences exist among key topic areas of focus. These differences seem to indicate that researchers in general strategic management tend to focus on less applied and more theoretical notions of strategy where researchers in hospitality strategic management tend to focus on more tactical methods when addressing questions of strategy.

The limitations of this study are: the study focuses on four hospitality journals and the top-rated general strategy journal; and categorizing strategy articles was done using inter-judge reliability by the authors. Future research might identify a socially constructed definition of strategic management in hospitality.

The importance of strategic management and strategic thinking in hospitality and hospitality research has never been greater. With increasing turbulence in the global environment, the field of hospitality (and its related research) must assess and provide strategic approaches to address challenges and opportunities for the future.

The value of this study is in providing an overview of what has been studied in hospitality strategy in the recent past and pointing out future research opportunities for hospitality strategic management issues.

This paper aims to compare and contrast the innovation process described by Michelin‐starred chefs with existing theoretical innovation process models.

Semi structured interviews with Michelin‐starred chefs in Germany were conducted to better understand the underlying factors and dimensions that describe process practices. A sample of 12 Michelin‐starred chefs awarded one, two or the maximum of three stars were interviewed about how they develop new food creations in their restaurants.

Research results indicated that the development process of Michelin‐starred chefs has similarities and differences to traditional concepts of new product development. Michelin‐starred chefs' innovation processes do not include a business analysis stage and because of the simultaneity of production and consumption and the importance of human factors in service delivery, employees play a more important role in fine dining innovation than in other product innovation situations. Furthermore, Michelin‐starred chefs' innovation processes do not implement an all‐encompassing evaluation system.

The study was conducted in only one country and on a small sample. Based on an analysis of the findings, the innovation development process of Michelin chefs can be broken down into seven main steps.

The present study expands the scope of hospitality innovation research and the findings have not only important implications for high‐end restaurant settings but also other restaurant segments, and other hospitality service endeavors.