International

Journal of Management
(IJM), ISSN 0976
6502(Print), ISSN 0976(IJM)
- 6510(Online),
INTERNATIONAL
JOURNAL
OF MANAGEMENT
Volume 5, Issue 11, November (2014), pp. 51-60 IAEME

ISSN 0976-6502 (Print)

ISSN 0976-6510 (Online)
Volume 5, Issue 11, November (2014), pp. 51-60
IAEME: http://www.iaeme.com/IJM.asp
Journal Impact Factor (2014): 7.2230 (Calculated by GISI)
www.jifactor.com

IJM
IAEME

IMPORTANCE OF CUSTOMER SATISFACTION IN

INDIAN HOTELS ON ACCOUNT OF PERSONAL, SOCIAL
AND ORGANIZATIONAL ASPECTS
Dr. Sanjeev Kumar,

Dr. Sandeep Malik

Assistant Professors, Institute of Hotel & Tourism Management

Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak (Haryana)-India

ABSTRACT
Objective: The purpose of the present study is to see the importance of customer satisfaction on
account of personal, social and organizational aspects.
Research Design The significance of customer satisfaction is examined with the help of a
structured questionnaire administered to the guests visiting sampled hotels of Delhi and NCR region.
The questionnaire was having items related to the personal satisfaction from staying in a hotel,
recognition in the society and its importance for improvement in organizational performance. The
statistical tools like percentage analysis, one way ANNOVA and factor analysis are used to analyse
the responses.
Findings The findings of the study confirm that customer satisfaction has a great importance for
personal and social growth of customers and organizational profitability as well. However,
contribution of customer satisfaction towards the betterment of organizational performance rated as
highest followed by personal and social improvement of guests.
Research limitations: The study has its precincts like availability of time, sample size, personal
opinion of the respondents etc.
Keywords: Customers, Satisfaction, Personal, Social, Organizational.
INTRODUCTION
Customer satisfaction has always been the topic of interest not only for scholars and
practitioners but for industry also. Though lot of researches have been conducted on these issues in
51

International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 - 6510(Online),
Volume 5, Issue 11, November (2014), pp. 51-60 IAEME

western context (Kandampully & Suhartanto 2003) but still there is huge deficit in fast growing
Indian Hospitality milieu. Due to the exponential growth and changing lifestyle; the hospitality
services and products have become necessities rather than luxuries. This has intensified competition
not only to attract customers but satisfying them and converting them into loyal ones so as to
enhance organisational performance. Though lot of studies indicate the significance of customer
satisfaction for organizations but there is hardly any study pointing out its significance for the
personal and social growth.
Therefore, an attempt has been made in the present paper to see that whether the customer
satisfaction has any contribution towards the personal, social and organizational expansion. Further,
it is tried to analyze that whether respondents of all sampled hotels consider the significance of
customer satisfaction for these three aspects. Finally underlying dimensions are extracted out of the
variables under study.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
As per environmental psychological approach Mehrabian and Russell (1974) suggested that
customers positive perceptions of the physical environment influence customers desire to stay,
desire to return, and money spending and further supported by Donovan and Rossiter (1982). In line
with this Darley and Gilbert (1985); Holahan (1986) and Stokols and Altman (1987) added that the
physical environment influences the customers satisfaction with the services they have purchased.
Ritchie and Zins (1978) underlined the importance of general factors including nature,
culture, sports, recreational and commercial amenities, infrastructure, prices, attitudes towards
tourists and the accessibility of the region, not forgetting social and cultural elements such as history,
architecture, language, gastronomy, art, music, and so on.
Lounsbury and Hoopes (1985) investigated factors associated with vacation satisfaction and
described that holiday satisfaction is measured in terms of numerous aspects from the surroundings,
climate, accommodation, spending budget, rest and relaxation, through opportunities to practise
favourite pastimes, socialising with other people and letting ones hair down, to the individuals
personal situation: age, sex, education, work, income, marital status, the number of accompanying
children, etc.
They also investigated in their study of factors associated with vacation satisfaction that
holiday satisfaction is measured in terms of many aspects from the surroundings, climate,
accommodation, spending budget, rest and relaxation, through opportunities to practice favourite
pastimes, socialising with other people and letting ones hair down, to the individuals personal
situation: age, sex, education, work, income, marital status, the number of accompanying children,
etc.
Moutinho (1987) up held it in his research on consumer behaviour and declared that
satisfaction is influenced by a large number of natural, social and motivational attributes, including
service quality, perceptions and the effort made by the tourist and the availability of alternative trips
to different destinations.
Bitner and Zeithaml (1999) in their book titled Service marketing defined customer
satisfaction as being for the patient, a function of his or her assessment of service quality, product
quality, and price and they also observed that it is influenced by the perceptions of service and
product quality, and also is affected by personal factors and uncontrollable situation factors. In the
same line Kristensen, Martensen, and Gronholdt (1999); and Martensen, Gronholdt, and Kristensen,
2000)54 perceived service quality has been considered as one of the primary driver of customer
satisfaction.

52

International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 - 6510(Online),
Volume 5, Issue 11, November (2014), pp. 51-60 IAEME

Bitner et al. (1999) elaborated that customer satisfaction is influenced by the perceptions of
service and product quality, and also is affected by personal factors and uncontrollable situational
factors.
Hartman (1967) articulated a three-dimensional concept that can be used to characterize the
cognitive, affective, and systemic dimensions of satisfaction. Specifically, the cognitive aspect refers
to the performance or function of a service encounter, whereas the affective aspect concerns the
customers feelings about the service. The systemic aspect represents the customers trade off
between what is received and what is given.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
To measure the significance of customer satisfaction on account of personal, social and
organizational aspects in sampled hotels, A questionnaire is prepared and administered to 441 guests
visiting chain hotels of Delhi and NCR region. The questionnaire is having 20 items. Personal
aspects has items like making guests stay delightful, making them stress free, improving their
lifestyle, making them feel at home away from home and amplifying the professional opportunities
are included. Likewise, social aspect was studied with the help of items like providing them
recognition in the society, making their social/family life cheerful and enlarging their social network.
Similarly to examine the significance of customer satisfaction on account of organizational factors
for sampled hotels from guests viewpoint, items like motivating participation of guests in hotel
customer programmes, making guests feel proud to be associated with the hotel, making guests loyal
to the hotel, reinforces positive attitude toward the brand, cheapest means of promotion, increases
market share, increasing profits, improving overall firms performance, improves shareholder value,
its essentiality for corporate survival, helpful in long term retention of customer and building word
of mouth reputation are included. First three items in organizational factors though are related to
both guests and the organization but their impact is more towards the hotels as compared to guests.
Therefore, they are incorporated in organizational factors.
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
To assess the significance of higher level of customer satisfaction in sampled hotels, mean
scores of all respondents from the sampled hotels were taken. For the purpose mean scores of
respondents of different sampled hotels were calculated and it is bring into being that all respondents
of different categories from sampled hotels validated that greater level of significance of customer
satisfaction, is positively related to all the items included in the schedule. It helps in making their
stay delightful, making them stress free, providing them recognition in the society, improving
lifestyle, motivating in participating in hotel customer programmes, amplifying professional
opportunities, making them loyal to the organization, increasing shareholders value etc.. As
indicated by Table: 1 the range of percentage scores obtained by the respondents from different
sampled hotels is between 80.13 and 81.65. This high range of these percentage scores is confirming
the importance of customer satisfaction for personal, social and organizational aspects. The
percentage scores of Hotel C is higher (81.65) than Hotel A (M=80.69) and Hotel E (M=80.13)
which means that significance of customer satisfaction from the point of view of respondents of
Hotel C is significantly higher in comparison to respondents of Hotel A and Hotel E. However no
significant difference was observed between Hotel A (M=81.13) and Hotel D (M=81.11)
Further the sampled hotels have been analysed for significance of customer satisfaction for
personal, social and organizational development separately.

53

International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 - 6510(Online),
Volume 5, Issue 11, November (2014), pp. 51-60 IAEME

TABLE: 1
PERCENTAGE ANALYSIS OF SIGNIFICANCE OF CUSTOMER SATISFACTION FOR
PERSONAL, SOCIAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL ASPECTS
Item
No.

Hotel A
n=89
Score
%
Personal Factors
1
418
93.93
2
343
77.08
4
348
78.20
353
79.33
10
275
61.80
1737
78.07
n*item
445.00

Organisational Factors
6
307
68.99
9
268
60.22
11
359
80.67
12
394
88.54
13
407
91.46
14
406
91.24
15
402
90.34
16
385
86.52
17
399
89.66
18
408
91.69
19
396
88.99
20
402
90.34
Total
4533
84.89
n*item
1068.00
Social Factors
3
337
7
279
8
335
Total
951
Total
%
n*item

75.73
62.70
75.28
71.24
81.13
267

Hotel B
n=97
Score
%

Hotel C
n=72
Score
%

Hotel D
n=84
Score
%

Hotel E
n=99
Score
%

463
366
386
381
302
1898

95.46
75.46
79.59
78.56
62.27
78.27
485.00

344
274
293
284
242
1437

95.56
76.11
81.39
78.89
67.22
79.83
360.00

403
317
326
335
281
1662

95.95
75.48
77.62
79.76
66.90
79.14
420.00

460
382
393
385
304
1924

92.93
77.17
79.39
77.78
61.41
77.74
495.00

330
277
383
426
444
444
439
419
432
445
431
433
4903

68.04
57.11
78.97
87.84
91.55
91.55
90.52
86.39
89.07
91.75
88.87
89.28
84.24
1164

254
223
286
317
326
323
320
312
318
331
316
318
3644

70.56
61.94
79.44
88.06
90.56
89.72
88.89
86.67
88.33
91.94
87.78
88.33
84.35
864.00

303
256
312
373
380
382
381
368
370
381
378
374
4258

72.14
60.95
74.29
88.81
90.48
90.95
90.71
87.62
88.10
90.71
90.00
89.05
84.48
1008.00

351
291
378
425
444
446
448
427
436
451
422
424
4943

70.91
58.79
76.36
85.86
89.70
90.10
90.51
86.26
88.08
91.11
85.25
85.66
83.22
1188.00

357
308
361
1026

73.61
63.51
74.43
70.52

276
247
275
798

76.67
68.61
76.39
73.89

305
272
316
893

72.62
64.76
75.24
70.87

382
325
359
1066

77.17
65.66
72.53
71.78

80.69
291

81.65
216

81.11
252

80.13
297

As indicated in Table: 1 it is bring into being that respondents of all sampled hotels perceive
the importance of customer satisfaction more for organizational aspects (percentage scores ranges
from 83.22 to 84.89) in comparison to personal (ranges from 77.74 to 79.83) and social aspects
(ranges from 70.52 to 73.89). Hence it may be concluded that higher level of customer satisfaction
54

International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 - 6510(Online),
Volume 5, Issue 11, November (2014), pp. 51-60 IAEME

contributes more towards the organizational development followed by personal and social
development of the respondents.
Further, an attempt was made to see whether the respondents from all sampled hotels confirm
the importance of organizational factors in comparison to personal and social factors or they differ
significantly on the same. For the purpose one way ANNOVA with post Hoc analysis was
performed on different groups i.e Hotel A and Hotel B, Hotel A and Hotel C, Hotel A and Hotel D,
Hotel A and Hotel E, Hotel B and Hotel C, Hotel B and Hotel D, Hotel B and Hotel E, Hotel C and
Hotel D, Hotel C and Hotel E, and Hotel D and Hotel E. Table: 2 shows that mean scores of all
sampled hotels are almost equal (ranges from M=4.0066 to M=4.0826) which means that there is no
significant difference among respondents of all sampled hotels on account of personal, social and
organizational indicators. Mean score of Hotel C is maximum (M=4.0826) followed by Hotel A
(M=4.0567), Hotel D (M=4.0554), Hotel B (M=4.0345) and Hotel E (M=4.0066). Though mean
differences of all the sampled hotels are almost equal but mean difference of Hotel C and Hotel E is
maximum i.e. .07607 (Please Refer to Table: No. 3).
TABLE: 2
ANALYSIS FOR COMPARISON OF SIGNIFICANCE OF CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
Hotel Name
Hotel A
Hotel B
Hotel C
Hotel D
Hotel E
Total

N
89
97
72
84
99
441

Mean
4.0567
4.0345
4.0826
4.0554
4.0066
4.0446

Std.
Deviation
.46308
.48350
.44919
.40030
.47238
.45499

Std.
Error
.04909
.04909
.05294
.04368
.04748
.02167

95% Confidence
Interval for Mean
Lower
Upper
Bound
Bound
3.9592
4.1543
3.9371
4.1320
3.9771
4.1882
3.9685
4.1422
3.9124
4.1008
4.0020
4.0871

Minimum
2.60
2.45
2.70
3.00
2.85
2.45

Maximum
4.60
4.60
4.60
4.55
4.55
4.60

TABLE: 3
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SIGNIFICANCE OF CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

Scheffe

Dependent Variable: Significance of Customer Satisfaction

(I) Name of the
(J) Name of the
group/hotel
group/hotel
Mean
Difference
Std.
(I-J)
Error
Sig.
Hotel A
Hotel B
.02221
.06699
.999
Hotel C
-.02590
.07234
.998
Hotel D
.00138
.06942 1.000
Hotel E
.05018
.06666
.967
Hotel B
Hotel C
-.04810
.07099
.977
Hotel D
-.02082
.06802
.999
Hotel E
.02797
.06520
.996
Hotel C
Hotel D
.02728
.07329
.998
Hotel E
.07607
.07069
.885
Hotel D
Hotel E
.04879
.06770
.971

95% Confidence
Interval
Lower
Upper
Bound
Bound
-.1850
.2294
-.2497
.1979
-.2134
.2161
-.1560
.2564
-.2677
.1715
-.2312
.1896
-.1737
.2297
-.1995
.2540
-.1426
.2947
-.1606
.2582

Hence it may be concluded that respondents of all sampled hotels except Hotel C and Hotel E
do not differ significantly on significance of customer satisfaction.

55

International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 - 6510(Online),
Volume 5, Issue 11, November (2014), pp. 51-60 IAEME

Hence overall it can be interpreted that respondents of all sampled hotels advocated the
importance of customer satisfaction for personal and social growth along with the organizational
improvement. However, the scope of improvement in organization is greater than the personal and
social due to higher level of satisfaction.
TABLE: 4
ANNOVA ANALYSIS FOR SIGNIFICANCE OF CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
ANNOVA
Significance of Customer Satisfaction
Sum of Squares
Between Groups
.280
Within Groups
90.807
Total
91.087

df
4
436
440

Mean Square
.070
.208

F
.336

Sig.
.854

The ANNOVA Table (Table: 4) also indicates that various sampled hotels do not differ
significantly on significance of customer satisfaction as the calculated value of ANNOVA is less
than the tabulated value.
From the Table: 5 it is apparent that mean scores of organizational factors are significantly
higher than the personal and social factors. The results are further sustained by Figure: 1.
TABLE: 5
MEAN SCORES OF SIGNIFICANCE OF CUSTOMER SATISFACTION ON ACCOUNT
OF PERSONAL, SOCIAL AND ORGANISATIONAL FACTORS
Hotel Name
Hotel A
Hotel B
Hotel C
Hotel D
Hotel E

Personal
78.07
78.27
79.83
79.14
77.74

social
71.69
71.62
71.39
71.35
71.58

Organizational
85.94
85.96
85.76
85.62
85.96

100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
Hotel A

60.00

Hotel B

50.00

Hotel C

40.00

Hotel D

30.00

Hotel E

20.00
10.00
0.00
Personal

social

organizational

FIGURE 1: BAR DIAGRAM OF MEAN SCORES OF SIGNIFICANCE OF CUSTOMER

SATISFACTION FOR PERSONAL, SOCIAL AND ORGANISATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
OF RESPONDENTS
56

International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 - 6510(Online),
Volume 5, Issue 11, November (2014), pp. 51-60 IAEME

From the table it can be seen that respondents have indicated organizational factors as the
most significant and social factors as least significant. Personal factors are indicated highest by
respondents from Hotel C (M=79.83), whereas respondents from Hotel E indicated it as the least
(M=77.14).
Social factors are given almost equal importance by all the respondents. In organizational
factors also there is marginal difference between their percentage scores. So altogether it can be
acknowledged that there is no significant difference in the level of significance of customer
satisfaction, corporate image and customer loyalty amongst the respondents from all sampled hotels
on the basis of personal social and organizational viewpoints or they all have indicated almost the
same.
FACTORS RESPONSIBLE FOR SIGNIFICANCE OF CUSTOMER SATISFACTION,
CORPORATE IMAGE AND CUSTOMER LOYALTY
Further, to allow grouping of identified 20 variables for the significance of customer
satisfaction for personal, social and organizational development a factor analysis with orthogonal
varimax rotation is conducted. SPSS software is used for this purpose. The prepared schedule was
given to 700 respondents staying in different sampled hotels out of which 455 were received back
and out of these 441 were found usable. So it can be considered a good response rate (63 per cent).
Factor analysis with varimax rotation is used on 19 variables to see the significant factors for
personal, social and organizational development. Initially factor analysis was conducted on all 20
variables item it makes your stay delightful was having factor loading less than 0.50. Therefore item
has been excluded from the list and factor analysis was conducted on remaining 19 items.
TABLE: 6
GOODNESS OF FIT TEST FOR FACTOR ANALYSIS
KMO and Bartlett's Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy.
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity

.808

Approx. Chi-Square

9082.016

Df

171

Sig.

.000

From the values of KMO test (0.808) and Bartletts test of sphericity at given degree of
freedom it is proved that data is fit for factor analysis (Table: 6). Cronbachs alpha reliability score
comes out to be 0.862 which proves that scale has good internal consistency.
Four important dimensions extracted by factor analysis (Table:7) which are important for
customer satisfaction, corporate image and customer loyalty. Indicating 78.939 percent of total
variance (Table: 8), all variables are loaded to a great extent on these factors.

57

International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 - 6510(Online),
Volume 5, Issue 11, November (2014), pp. 51-60 IAEME

TABLE: 7
IMPORTANT DIMENSIONS FOR CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
Factor Loadings
Organizational factors
It helps in long term customer retention
It improves shareholders value
It reinforces positive attitude toward the brand
It helps in building word of mouth reputation
It increases overall firms performance
It is the cheapest mean of promotion
It increases market share
It is essential for corporate survival
It increases profits
Social network and association with hotel
It makes you feel proud to be associated with the hotel
It amplifies your professional opportunities
It enlarges your social network
Lifestyle and loyalty
It improves your lifestyle
It makes social/family life cheerful
It makes you feel the hotel- a home away from home
It makes you loyal to the hotel
It motivates you to participate in Hotel-Customer programmes
Recognition in society and stress free
It provides you recognition in the society
It makes you stress free
Variance (Percent)
Eigen value
Cronbachs Alpha Scores of Factors

.901
.891
.877
.875
.807
.728
.699
.670
.632
.857
.836
.695
.807
.804
.697
.681
.646

32.591
6.192
0.953

16.930
3.217
0.863

.931
.916
14.849 14.570
2.821 2.768
0.767 0.934

TABLE: 8
PERCENTAGE OF VARIANCE EXPLAINED BY THE IMPORTANT DIMENSIONS OF
CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
Component
Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings
Total
% of Variance Cumulative %
1
6.192
32.591
32.591
2
3.217
16.930
49.520
3
2.821
14.849
64.369
4
2.768
14.570
78.939
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Factor 1: Organizational Factors
First factor is related with various facets of organizational factors. It contains 9 items
representing 32.591 per cent of variance. This factor is having an eigen value of 6.192. Items
included in this factor are like it helps in long term retention, it improves shareholders value, It
reinforces positive attitude toward the brand, It helps in building word of mouth reputation, It
increases overall firms performance, It is the cheapest mean of promotion, it increased market
58

International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 - 6510(Online),
Volume 5, Issue 11, November (2014), pp. 51-60 IAEME

share,. It is essential for corporate survival and It increases profits. Organizational factor are
considered as most important factors by respondents of different hotels and in this factor item.
Factor 2: Social Network and association with the hotel
This factor contains 3 items having an Eigen value of 3.217 which are accountable: for
16.930 per cent of variance. Items included in the factors are It makes you feel proud to be
associated with the hotel, It amplifies your professional opportunities, and It enlarges your social
network these items are related to social and personal factors.

Factor 3: Lifestyle and loyalty

Third factor again is having items related to personal and social factors. Having 5 items with
an Eigen value of 2.821 is accountable: for 14.849 percent of variance. Items like it improve your
lifestyle, it makes social/family life cheerful, it makes you feel the hotel- a home away from home, it
makes you loyal to the hotel and it motivates you to participate in Hotel-Customer programmes are
contained by this factor.
Factor 4: Recognition in the society and stress free
Two items are there in the fourth and last factor, responsible for 14.570 percent of variance
and Eigen value of 2.768. These items are pertaining to recognition in the society and making guests
stress free.
It is evident from the above diagrams and analysis that higher level of customer satisfaction,
corporate image and customer loyalty is considerably adding to all these factors i.e personal, social
and organizational.
In some of the cases like Govt. Employees and Visiting Friends and Relatives, the percentage
scores are low, it may be because of the reason that the respondents were not sure about the
significance of Customer satisfaction, corporate image and Customer loyalty and they were neutral
on the rating scale. Except these few cases respondents of all categories have revealed with their
percentage scores, the significance of customer satisfaction, corporate image and customer loyalty
on the account of personal, social and organizational factors.
CONCLUSION
On the basis of above analysis following findings emerged:
All the respondents have confirmed that customer satisfaction is very much important for
customers as well as hotels
There is no significant difference in the level of significance of customer satisfaction
amongst the respondents from all sampled hotels on the basis of personal, social and
organizational aspects.
Respondents from all the sampled hotels have indicated that customer satisfaction contributes
more toward organizational factors as compared to the personal and social factors.
The paper aimed at finding significance of customer satisfaction in sampled hotels for
customers and the organizations. Results obtained through analysis of percentage, ANNOVA and
factor analysis etc. confirm the significance of customer satisfaction. In addition there is no
significant difference between the sampled hotels on account of these indicators. However,
organizational factors were found to be most affected and social factors as the least effected factors
because of higher level of customer satisfaction. All these results indicate that these three
59

International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 - 6510(Online),
Volume 5, Issue 11, November (2014), pp. 51-60 IAEME

dimensions are noteworthy for both the customers and sampled hotel. A lot of studies have shown
the importance of customer satisfaction for the overall profitability of the organization only but the
present study will provide an insight to the management as well as further researcher to study the
aspect from a different perspective.
REFERENCES
[1]
[2]

[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]

[7]
[8]
[9]

[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]

[15]

[16]

Bitner, M.J. & Zeithaml, V.A. (1999). Service marketing (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Darley, J.M. and Gilbert, D.T. (1985). Social psychological aspects of environmental
psychology. In Lindzey, G., and Aronson, E. Handbook of Social Psychology (3rd ed.).
Vol. II. New York: Random House, Inc., 949-991.
Donovan, R., and Rossiter, J. (1982). Store atmosphere: An environmental psychology
approach. Journal of Retailing, 58, 34-57
Hartman, R. S. (1967). The Hartman Value Profile (HVP): Manual of interpretation, research
concepts. Southern Illinois press, Muskegon, ML.
Holahan, C.J. (1986). Environmental psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 381-407.
Kandampully, Jay andSuhartanto, Dwi (2003) 'The Role of Customer Satisfaction and Image
in Gaining Customer Loyalty in the Hotel Industry', Journal of Hospitality Marketing &
Management, 10: 1, 3 25
Kristensen, K., A. Martensen, and L. Grnholdt (1999), Measuring the impact of buying
behavior on customer satisfaction, Total Quality Management 10(45):602614.
Lounsbury, J.W. and Hoopes, L. (1985): An Investigation of Factors Associated with
Vacation Satisfaction. Journal of Leisure Research, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 1-13.
Martensen, A., Gronholdt, L., and Kristensen, K. (2000). The relationship between customer
satisfaction and loyalty: Cross industry differences. Total Quality Management, 11,
S509S514.
Mehrabian, A., and Russell, J.A. (1974). An Approach to Environmental Psychology.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Moutinho, L. (1987): Consumer Behaviour in Tourism. European Journal of Marketing,
pp. 1-44.
Ritchie, Brent, J.R. and Zins, M. (1978): Culture as Determinant of the Attractiveness of a
Tourism Region. Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 5, April/June, pp. 20-35.
Stokols, D., and Altman, I. (1987). Handbook of Environmental Psychology. New York,
NY: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
K.Senthil and R.Ramesh, Strategies for Service Characteristics of Star Hotel in Chennai,
International Journal of Management (IJM), Volume 1, Issue 2, 2010, pp. 29 - 36, ISSN Print:
0976-6502, ISSN Online: 0976-6510.
Zafaran Hassan, K.K Ramachandran and Norlida Kamaluddin, Managing Market
Competitive Strategy Successfully: An Empirical Testing of Successful Generic Strategy
Implementation Leading to Product Quality and Customer Satisfaction, International Journal
of Management (IJM), Volume 4, Issue 4, 2013, pp. 9 - 22, ISSN Print: 0976-6502,
ISSN Online: 0976-6510.
Parul Gupta and R.K. Srivastava, Analysis of Customer Satisfaction in Hotel Service Quality
using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), International Journal of Industrial Engineering
Research and Development (IJIERD), Volume 2, Issue 1, 2011, pp. 59 - 68, ISSN Online:
0976 - 6979, ISSN Print: 0976 6987.

60