College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences

COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES

SCHOOL OF FORESTRY, GEOGRAPHICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES

SCHOOL OF FORESTRY, ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOGRAPHICAL SCIENCES

DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY, BIODIVERSITY AND TOURISM

RESEARCH REPORT

IMPACT OF HOTEL RATING ON SERVICE QUALITY AND CUSTOMER CHOICE OF HOTEL: A CASE STUDY OF SPEKE RESORT HOTEL MUNYONYO

NABUKEERA DIANA CHRISTINE

REGISTRATION NO; 16/U/8167/EVE

STUDENT NO; 216007336

SUPERVISOR

DR. BRENDA BOONABAANA

RESEARCH REPORT SUBMITTED TO THE SCHOOL OF FORESTRY, ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOGRAPHICAL SCIENCES IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF BACHELOR OF TOURISM OF MAKERERE UNIVERSITY

OCTOBER, 2019

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I wish to extend my sincere gratitude to Mr. Semakula Samora and Professor Joseph Obua for the guidance during the conduct of this research. I am especially grateful to Dr. Brenda

Boonabaana who helped me complete my research in time to beat the submission deadline.I am also thankful to the academic and non-academic staff of the school of forestry who have in one way or another created a conducive environment that enabled me conduct this research to completion.

Appreciation also goes to Crane management for the permitted access to the various hotel premises of the Speke group of hotels where the research was conducted.

Special thanks go to my parents for their sponsorship of my entire academic journey from start to date. In addition expressed appreciation for their continued support in all per takings from start to date.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENT

DECLARATION ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ...... iii TABLE OF CONTENT ...... iv LIST OF FIGURES ...... vi ACRONYMS ...... viii ABSTRACT ...... ix CHAPTER ONE ...... 1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1Background to the study ...... 1 1.2Problem statement ...... 5 1.3Objectives of study ...... 6 1.3.1General objective ...... 6 1.3.2Specific objectives ...... 6 1.4 Research questions ...... 6 1.5Significance of study ...... 7 CHAPTER TWO ...... 8 LITERATURE REVIEW ...... 8 2.1 Hotel rating in Uganda ...... 8 2.2 Hotel attributes that matter ...... 8 2.3 Relationship between hotel rating and service quality ...... 12 2.3.1Service quality dimensions ...... 14 2.4 Relevance of traditional hotel rating system ...... 17 2.5 Effectiveness of hotel rating and role of management ...... 18 2.6 Research Gap ...... 19 CHAPTER THREE ...... 21 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS ...... 21 3.1 Study Area ...... 21 3.2 Study design ...... 22

3.3 Sampling and sample size ...... 22 3.4 Data collection ...... 23 3.4.1 Questionnaires...... 23 3.5 Data analysis ...... 24 3.6 Ethical consideration ...... 24 CHAPTER FOUR ...... 25 RESULTS AND INTEPRETATION ...... 25 4.1Demographic characteristics of respondents...... 25 4.2 Factors that influence customer choice of hotel ...... 26 4.3 Influence of hotel rating on choice of hotel...... 28 4.4 Relationship between hotel rating customer satisfaction ...... 30 4.5 Respondent generated comments on hotel ...... 33 CHAPTER FIVE ...... 36 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 36 5.1 Discussion ...... 36 5.2 Conclusion ...... 39 5.3 Recommendations ...... 40 REFERENCES ...... 42 APPENDICES ...... 47 QUESTIONNAIRE ...... 47

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1Most frequently studied hotel attributes...... 9

Figure 2Service quality model ...... 15

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1Most frequently studied attributes in regards to factors of importance to hotel customers...... 10

Table 2 Minimum requirement for an accommodation facility and stand-alone restaurant to qualify for classification ...... 11

Table 3 Star rated hotels in Uganda ...... 14

Table 4Service quality dimensions...... 16

Table 5Number of respondents selected for sample size ...... 23

Table 6 Demographic characteristics of respondents ...... 26

Table 7Factors that influence choice of hotel ...... 28

Table 8 Definition and understanding of concept of hotel rating ...... 29

Table 9 Results from respondents that understand concept of hotel rating ...... 30

Table 10General view of the relationship between hotel rating and customer satisfaction ...... 31

Table 11 Detailed analysis of relationship between hotel rating and customer satisfaction...... 33

Table 12 Comments or recommendations by all respondents regarding hotel ...... 35

vii

ACRONYMS

WHR - World Hotel Rating

UNWTO - United Nations World Tourism Organization

EAC - East African Community

UTB - Uganda Tourism Board

MICE -Meetings, Incentives, Conferences, Exhibitions

V.I.P. - Very Important Person

WTTC - World Tourism and Travel Council

UBOS - Uganda Bureau of Statistics

PR - Public Relations

U.K - United Kingdom

USA - United States of America

CHOGM - Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting

UHOA - Uganda Hotel Owners’ Association

viii

ABSTRACT

This research was conducted on a case study of Speke Resort hotel Munyonyo. The hotel is a member of the Crane group of companies. The hotel was chosen for its particularly diverse clientele, both local and international. The overall objective of the research was to assess the impact of hotel rating on professionalism and how it informs customer expectations, perceptions and choice of hotel and the specific objectives were; to identify factors that influence choice of hotel, to examine how hotel rating influences choice of hotel and to assess the relationship between hotel rating and service quality. Data was collected using a semi structured questionnaire copies disseminated to a sample of 83 respondents from the hotel.Secondary data was also considered from reviews by customers on review plat forms particularly trip advisor and booking. Com. The data collection was done in March and April 2019 and thereafter analyzed using SPSS to generate statistical summaries. Data collected revealed that respondents first consider the basic factors that should be present at every hotel, and then the desirables as per their preferences when choosing which hotel to visit, it also revealed that hotel rating is considered an indicator of those qualities to clients. The data collected also showed the relevance of hotel rating and how in that it affects customer expectations of the hotel when choosing which hotel to visit and perceptions of what they actually found on the ground. It was concluded that respondents felt basic factors were important when choosing where to stay and other variables may vary from one person to another basing on their purpose of visit. It was also concluded that respondents understand the concept of hotel rating and rely on the rating of a hotel to form their expectations and informed perceptions. The study recommended that Speke Resort Munyonyo install a plaque at the hotel entrance showing the hotel rating to help customers form more realistic expectations based on the rating.

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1Background to the study

The tourism industry and hospitality industry is one of the fastest growing industries in Uganda. According to UBOS (2019), Uganda received 1.8 million tourists in 2018 up from the 1.4million tourists in 2017 who injected about UGX 1.4 billion into the economy, about 10% GDP contribution. In a bid to attract more tourists, Uganda contracted three P.R. firms from U.K, USA and Germany at $0.5 million each(Lyatuu, 2019). The tourism and hospitality industry employs 6% of Uganda’s labor force, this includes employment by hotels travel agents and so on(Musoke, 2018). With the increasing relevance of tourism in Uganda, the hospitality sector has been cited as a key component towards the growth and development of the tourism industry in the country. This in turn has led to a shift in attention towards hotels which host the tourists to ensure they play their part towards the growth of this industry.

A hotel is an establishment providing accommodation, meals and other services to travelers and tourists, although locals may also use these facilities(Maphela, 2019). Hotel establishments provide paid lodging on the short term basis.The precise features and services provided to guests can vary quite drastically from one hotel to another, and hotel owners generally aim to attract a particular type of customer through their pricing model and marketing strategy, or via the range of services they offer. Hotelsare service based operationsand rarely have a physical reward on consumption, instead they sell the experience and therefore give the at most attentionto the quality of service provided to clients(Zhoua, Yea, Pearceb, & Wua, 2004). In light of this hoteliers recognize the need to elaborate on the service quality levels.

Service quality is an assessment of how well a delivered service conforms to clients’ expectations(Samoszuk, 2017)Service providers often assess service quality provided to their customers in order to improve service and better assess client expectations(Atilgan, Akinci, & Askoy, 2003). Still in a bid to assess and meet these expectations and create a standard of

product and service, hoteliers developed a concept of hotel rating to act as a guiding tool for the various hotels while making quality decisions.

Hotel rating is a concept used to classify hotels according to their quality of product and service that is, the higher the rating, the better the quality of products and services provided by the establishment. The initial purpose of hotel rating is to inform travelers about facilities that should be expected but this has expanded to focus on the whole experience (Vine & P.A.L, 1981).Due to the first growing rate of the hospitality industry, there was recognized a need to standardize products and services provided, thus leading to the development of hotel rating. When people travel wherever for whatever reason, they will require a place to stay, hotel or other accommodation chosen considering a number of factors while making a choice on where to stay, hotel rating being a major factor(Ch., 2012).

Hotel rating has become one of the most relied upon tools by travelers and tourists, whether local or international looking for vacation spots, dining, adventure and so on, this is especially seen with the increasing dependency on online ratings and reviews. Travelers world over have resorted to rely more on the online reviews simply because they are consumer generated as opposed to the traditional ratings that at times aren’t in line with customer needs(Hu, 2014).

World over, hotels have various rating systems, the most common being the five star hotel rating system where one star means standard limited facilities and five stars to mean luxurious extensive facilities. Other rating systems include; letter grading from A to F, A being exceptional facilities and F being basic facilities, American Automobile Association (AAA) which uses the diamond system, Gagot U.S. based travel and dining guide which uses the symbol of the key from one to five, among others(Hu, 2014). While not technically five star ratings, all the systems above also use a five category scale to rate hotels;

One Star Hotels: These properties are generally small and independently owned, with a family atmosphere. There may be a limited range of facilities and the meals may be fairly simple. For example, lunch may not be served or some bedrooms may not have an en suite bath or shower. However, maintenance, cleanliness and comfort would be of acceptable standards of the various hotels(Moses & Novelli, 2014). 2

Two Star Hotels: In this class hotels will be typically be small to medium sized and offer more extensive facilities than one star hotels. Guests can expect comfortable, well equipped overnight accommodation usually with an en suite bath or shower. Reception and other staff will aim for a more professional presentation than at the one star level and will offer a wider range of straight forward services including food and beverages(Moses & Novelli, 2014).

Three Star Hotels: At this level hotels are usually of a size to support higher staffing levels as well as a significantly higher quality and range of facilities than at the lower star classifications. Reception and other public areas will be more spacious, and the restaurant will normally also cater to non-residents. All bedrooms will have an en suite bath and shower and will offer a good standard of comfort and equipment such as a direct dial telephone and toiletries in the bathroom. Besides room service some provisions for business travelers can be expected(Moses & Novelli, 2014).

Four Star Hotels: Expectations at this level include a degree of luxury as well as quality in the furnishings, décor and equipment in every area of the hotel. Bedrooms will also usually offer more space than at the lower star levels. They will be well designed with coordinated furnishings and décor. The en suite bathrooms will have both bath and shower. There will be a high staff to guest ratio with provisions of porter service, twenty four hour room service, laundry and dry cleaning service etc. The restaurant will demonstrate a serious approach to its cuisine(Moses & Novelli, 2014).

Five Star Hotels: these hotels offer spacious and luxurious accommodations throughout the hotel, matching the best international standards. The interior design should impress with its quality and attention to detail, comfort and elegance. The furnishings should be immaculate. The service should be formal, well supervised and flawless in its attention to guests‟ needs, without being intrusive. The restaurant will demonstrate a high level of technical skill. The staff will perform all duties with the highest level of competence(Moses & Novelli, 2014).

Unlike the systems above, the following aren’t based on a five quality category classification scale, even though they have the same aim of categorizing quality levels these systems follow a different set of rules as explained below; 3

1. Frommer’s three star rating systems, which is based on professional reviews based on quality, value, service amenities and special features of a hotel. This system’s base rating is zero stars which means recommended and three stars being exceptional. 2. Zagat rating system which uses surveyors each knowledgeable in the categories they rate, these make reviews about properties with thirty point scale. With this system, hotels are rated in different categories i.e. rooms, services, dining etc. 3. Green key international which is a voluntary eco classification awarded to establishments by Foundation for Environmental Education. 4. Green key global and Green globe which are certifications for sustainable tourism.

All these systems are based on a number of factors like food service, view, room variations, and environmental sustainability, among others as a form of establishing standards. Usually hotels are assessed based on traditional systems, primarily considering the facilities provided, which may be a disadvantage for a smaller hotel it may be under ranked simply because it lacks an elevator which may actually not even be important for their clientele when they are looking for where to stay(Vine & P.A.L, 1981).

On a global scale, there’s no internationally accepted rating that cuts across world over. According to the World Hotel Rating (WHR) project(2010), attempts were made to unify the classification system so that it becomes an internationally recognized, reliable and standard reference point when looking for accommodation.The project aimed at setting international classification standards and rating criteria along the lines of world star rating. It also looked at establishing an information platform on hotel industry which would be multilingual and multi- cultural thus playing a key role in the development of quality hotel services and thus promoting sustainable tourism. All attempts, however weren’t successful as hoped because it was assumed that hotel classification standards should be from a private independent initiative. Efforts by UNWTO(2010) were also recognized for designing international criteria to act as a guideline for members to follow when designing a rating tool, this in a bid to increase on uniformity of quality standards in terms of products and services offered across nations(Hu, 2014).

In Africa, it is majorly the much frequented destinations or those that have significantly larger tourist numbers that have emphasized hotel rating with the standard criteria usually designed by 4

the central body basing on the country laws. For example countries like South Africa, Egypt and so on have made it a point to standardize the services and products offered at the existent hotels mostly due to public demand by the guests that look for satisfaction in the totality of the experience. Generally hoteliers don’t understand the concept of hotel rating or its benefits, they thus tend to neglect it which in turn harms the industry in a way makes its recovery even more costly(Uganda Tourism Board, 2017).

The East African region has also taken steps to standardize hotel products and services through hotel rating. In a bid to make the East African region a more attractive destination, the EAChas made it a requirement for all member states to carry out the hotel rating program so as to ensure quality standards across the region, which has in turn revamped the rating exercise in the different, member states.In Uganda, hotel rating wasn’t everofficially conducted until 2015 when UTBembarked on the hotel rating exercisein Kampala under the EAC mandate. The exercise was conducted as per EAC guidelines or rating criteria. The exercise was again repeated in 2017 for the rest of the country and the relevant hotels were awarded stars accordingly(Uganda Tourism Board, 2017).

1.2Problem statement

Hotel rating system is a crucial part of the hospitality industry in terms of guest preference. It essentially translates into quality of facilities and services expected for example if a hotel has four stars, the guests expect a certain quality of facilities and services that reflect the rating, they would expect exceptional service for this particular rating.(Musoke, 2015). This however isn’t the case for hotels in Uganda. A four star hotel in Uganda doesn’t provide services that reflect its rating, hotels here in most cases fall short of their ratings partly because some of these ratings are self-proclaimed and those that were awarded in right failed to maintain the quality for one reason or the other.Hoteliers in Uganda don’t fully understand the concept of hotel rating, its benefits or the consequences of neglecting the exercise, they question the relevance of the concept in Uganda as they argue that hotel rating is a foreign concept and doesn’t apply locally. Hotels tend to offer substandard quality of services compared to their rating thus leading to guest dissatisfaction and loss credibility by these operations which also affects the industry as a

whole(Muhwezi, 2019). Scholars likeAtilgan, Akinci, & Askoy(2003),Dolnicar & Otter(2003), and Parasuraman(1985) talk about hotel rating, how it can be most effective in implementation and the hospitality industry at large, however there is little information on why it is important (benefits) to implement or the consequences that arise from neglecting the concept of hotel rating. Therefore this research will contribute towards analyzing the impact of hotel rating systems on the quality of hotel services and guests’ decisions when choosing accommodation facilities.

1.3Objectives of study

1.3.1General objective

The general objective of the study was to assess the impact of hotel rating on professionalismand how it informs customer expectations, perceptions and choice of Speke Resort hotel Munyonyo over other hotels.

1.3.2Specific objectives

The specific objectives were;

1. To identify factors that qualify Speke Resort hotel Munyonyo as the hotel choice. 2. To examine how hotel rating influences choice of hotel to be Speke Resort hotel Munyonyo. 3. To understand the relationship between hotel rating and service quality at Speke Resort hotel Munyonyo.

1.4Research questions The following questions guided the study:

1. How dotravellers choose to visit Speke Resort hotel Munyonyo? 2. Do customersat Speke Resort hotel Munyonyo understand the concept of hotel rating? 3. Why do they opt for Speke Resort hotel Munyonyo with 4 star rating over other hotels? 4. How does hotel rating of Speke Resort hotel Munyonyo influence customer expectations and perceptions? 6

1.5Significance of study

The results of this study will be of importance to different stakeholders in tourism industry. It will help to show and thus open possibilities for exploration of service delivery gaps between customer expectations and perception of services offered by the various establishments.

This research could also be used as a reference point for relevant bodies in charge of the hotel rating in Uganda to design a more effective rating tool from a tourist point of view.

It will also act as a reference point for other academia intending to conduct similar or related research as well as achievement of higher qualifications in learning.

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Hotel rating in Uganda

The objectives of star rating have expanded from just informing travelers on basic facilities to be expected, to focus on the hotel experience as a whole.A regular traveler who has been to several hotels around the world’s popular cities can easily tell you the difference between the standards and star rating of a hotel, so is star rating as relevant as it was years ago?(Mubiru, 2015).

With reference to an article by Musoke Joseph(2015), the first ever hotel rating exercise in Uganda was carried out in 2015by the Uganda tourism board (UTB),a body responsible for marketing Uganda as a tourism destination to the rest of the world.The grading and classification done by UTB in Uganda was under the East African Community (EAC) directive meaning regulating bodies in member states, that is, Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda, S. Sudan had to ensure uniformity of standards in the hotels across the region (Mubiru, 2015).

2.2Hotel attributes that matter

Few issues in tourism research are as practically relevant to the industry as the investigation of the role hotel attributes play in the consumers’ minds. Knowing the attributes that determine accommodation choice, the features that are perceived as being important in a hotel and the hotel characteristics that lead to higher customer retention enables hotel managers to make optimal hotel development decisions. For instance, if a swimming pool is not of interest for the target market served, the money for a huge investment can easily be saved without negative market consequences(Barsky & Labagh, 1992). Because of this practical relevance, this area of research is strongly developed and numerous attempts have been made to empirically identify the most crucial aspects of the hotel offer as perceived by consumers. For the purpose of reviewing past approaches a number of studies were examined to determine which ones were deemed as of at most importance to consumers by previous researchers, graph figure 1 summarizes results of areas moststudied areas(Barsky & Labagh, 1992). As can be seen, 95% of the studies include 8

service items, 90% include attributes of the hotel, 86% use items from the location and room category for the survey conducted, F&B and price/value items are presented to the respondents in 76% of all studies, image and security in 62% of the cases and marketing issues seem of importance to no more than 38% of the research teams.

Figure 1Most frequently studied hotel attributes.

Source: Dolnicar & Otter(2003)

The various areas were further broken down to determine which attributes in particular are most included as of importance to clients when choosing a hotel to visit as listed in table 1, these attributes existed in over 90% of previous studies, it should however be noted that these studies were looking at different problems and thus different outcomes(Dolnicar & Otter, 2003).

Table 1Most frequently studied attributes in regards to factors of importance to hotel customers.

Services Room service Staff Professionalism Service Personalized friendliness / service quality speed service Hotel Cleanliness Aesthetic Meeting rooms Parking Shops Location Landscaping Quiet area Near airport Convenient parking Room Cleanliness Comfort of bed Bathroom Sound proof amenities rooms Price/value Value for Discount rates Free breakfast money F&B Restaurant Bar/lounge Variety Specialty facilities restaurants Image Reputation Brand image Brand recognition Security Of hotel Of room Security Personnel on floor Marketing Travel agent Word of mouth recommended

Source: Dolnicar & Otter(2003)

Using the transparent criteria adopted by all the EAC member states, UTB embarked on the rating exercise which took about a year. A number of factors here were considered with emphasis placed in areas likelocation of facility, front office, guest rooms, restaurant, bar, hygiene and sanitation, human resource and so on. These factors were highlighted by rating officials as of at most importance to the clients who access these facilities(Musoke, 2015). A minimum requirement for a hotel to qualify for rating was also stated as shown in table below extracted from a UTB notice (Uganda Tourism Board, 2017).

Table 2 Minimum requirement for an accommodation facility and stand-alone restaurant to qualify for classification Hotels, Motels, Villas, Cottages and Serviced Apartments Lodges and Tented Camps Restaurants 1 Occupational permit Occupational permit Occupational permit 2 Trading license Valid EIA report audits Trading license Proper drainage in and around the 3 premises Trading license Menu Proper drainage in and around Hand wash basin at entrance of the 4 Room designation(number) premises kitchen 5 Safe deposit box Room designation (numbers) Wash rooms(gender segregated) Hand wash basin at entrance of Proper drainage in and around 6 kitchen for staff Safe deposit box premises Hand wash basin at entrance for 7 Washrooms (gender segregated) kitchen staff Waste/refuse disposal(lined with Waste/Refuse disposal (lined and covered bins, separation of gradable Sewage disposal and treatment 8 and degradable wastes) Wash rooms (gender segregated) (Septic or National sewer) Sewage disposal and treatment 9 (septic or National sewer) Waste/ Refuse disposal Vermin proofing Water supply from an approved 10 Vermin proofing Sewage disposal and treatment source Water supply from an approved 11 source Vermin proofing Communication systems Fire safety equipment, signage and 12 Communication systems Water supply training 13 Security systems Communication systems Electrical safety certificate Fire safety. Equipment, signage and Fire safety equipment signage and 14 training training First aid box and trained staff Qualification managers and junior of staff ( staff files with 15 Electrical safety certificate Electrical safety certificate qualification experience CVs Medical certificate of staff 16 First aid box and trained staff First aid box and trained staff handling food Qualification mangers and junior of Qualification managers and junior staff (staff file with qualification of staff (staff file with 17 experience. CVs qualification experience. CVs Restaurant insurance Medical certificate of staff handling Medical certificate of staff 18 food handling food 19 Property insurance Emergency evacuation 20 Lodge/camp insurance 21 Drivers' accommodation 22 Staff accommodation

Source:UTB notice (2017)

For the start,the classification exercise was carried out in 73 hotels in and around Kampala and later to be extended to other parts of the country. Of the inspected hotels, only 29 qualified for star ratings with only three qualifying as five star hotels namely; Kampala Serena hotel, Sheraton Kampala hotel and Munyonyo Commonwealth Resort.The rating was expected to boost tourism which is a major forex earner. The hotels that excelled in quality were to be awarded plaques which could be used in attracting and retaining customers. “After the exercise hotels found claiming to have certain quality levels they haven’t earned are to be severely punished”, said John Ssempebwa deputy chief executive UTB (Musoke, 2015).

2.3Relationship between hotel rating and service quality

Efforts by UTB to standardize hotel services were recognized and commended by major players in the tourism industry in both the travel and hospitality sectors.As stated by Uganda Hotel Owners Association (UHOA)chairperson Susan Muhwezi, “Many times UTB has been accused of not marketing local hotels but where would one market unclassified hotels that can’t meet their self-proclaimed standards? For a number of years hotels were classified by the prices they charge which affected the destination as hotels couldn’t meet standards for presumed classifications. It is easier to market a classified hotel. We believe this move will help improve services and facilities offered by hotels to visitors as this is to be done country wide to identify hotels with specific unique facilities and services”(Ruyonga, 2015).

In 2017, UTB conducted a two day refresher course to train assessors in preparation for the next classification exercise between May and June 2017.“Hotel classification is the process of assessing an accommodation facility for grading purposes using a basic set of standards covering the physical and intangible service expected from a facility in a specified category and level,” James Ssebagala, the Quality Assurance Coordinator at UTB said.“According to regulations, the Classification of Accommodation Facilities and Restaurants 2014, UTB is mandated to classify hotels and stand –alone restaurants and this is being done under the criteria approved and used by all the member states of the East African Community. For purposes of classification, the EAC criterion has grouped hotels into five categories: town hotels, vacation hotels, motels, villa cottages and serviced apartments and, lodges and tented camps”(Johnson, 2017).The EAC

criterion rating system is denoted by stars where one (1) star denotes the standard lowest and five (5) star the highest grade. Save for motels and restaurants whose star rating ranges from one to three and three to five respectively, all the other categories are graded from one to five stars. While a one star establishment has the basic facilities that provide functionality and comfort to the guest, the five star establishments provide a high degree of luxury and ambience that conform to any internationally recognizable standards (Johnson, 2017).

According to a notice released by UTB in June(2017), there are about 61 rated hotels as shown in the table below in with the number of 5 star hotels increasing from 3 to 5 namely; Kampala Serena hotel, L. Victoria Serena hotel, Sheraton Kampala hotel, Munyonyo Commonwealth Resort and Mbale Resort Hotel.

Table 3 Star rated hotels in Uganda

Imperial Botanical Beach FIVE STAR 12 Hotel Entebbe HOTEL NAME LOCATION 13 Mountains of the Moon Hotel Fort Portal 1 Sheraton Kampala Hotel Kampala 14 Nanjing Hotel Kampala 2 Kampala Serena Hotel Kampala 15 The White Castle Hotel Arua 3 Munyonyo Commonwealth Resort Kampala 16 Wash and Wills Hotel Mbale 4 Mbale Resort Hotel Mbale 17 White Horse Inn Kabale Lake Victoria Serena Golf Resort & 5 Spa Entebbe TWO STAR FOUR STAR 1 Speke Hotel Kampala 1 Speke Resort Munyonyo Kampala 2 Metropole Hotel Kampala 2 Royal Suites Kampala 3 Hotel Triangle Kampala 3 Hotel Africana and Convention Centre Kampala 4 Hotel Ruch Kampala 4 Protea Hotel Kampala Kampala 5 Eureka Place Kampala 5 Imperial Royale Hotel Kampala 6 Arch Apartments Kampala 6 Golf Course Hotel Kampala 7 Sky Hotel International Kampala Igongo Cultural Centre and Country 7 Hotel Mbarara 8 Sir Jose Hotel Kampala 8 Imperial Golf View Hotel Entebbe 9 Shangri La Hotel Kampala 9 Imperial Resort Beach Hotel Entebbe 10 Airport View Hotel Entebbe 10 Jinja Nile Resort Jinja 11 Arcadia Lodges Bunyonyi Kabale Imperial Botanical Beach 11 Lake View Resort Hotel Mbarara 12 Hotel Entebbe 12 LAICO Lake Victoria Hotel Entebbe 13 Bunyonyi Overland Resort Kabale 13 Protea Hotel Entebbe Entebbe 14 Central Inn Entebbe THREE STAR 15 Gulu Churchill courts Hotel Gulu 1 Ivy's Hotel Kampala 16 Golden Courts Hotel Arua 2 Mackinnon Suites Kampala 17 Green Hills Hotel Kabale 3 Kabira Country Club Kampala 18 Hotel Kash, Bananuka Drive Mbarara 4 Grand Imperial Hotel Kampala 19 Hotel Kash, Masaka Road Mbarara 5 Silver Springs Hotel Kampala 20 Kalya Courts Hotel Mbarara 6 Sports View Hotel Kira-Wakiso 21 Hotel Paradise on the Nile Jinja 7 Fairway Hotel Kampala 22 Mt. Elgon Hotel& Spa Mbale 8 Fang Fang Hotel Kampala 23 Nabisere Hotel Masaka 9 Agip Hotel Mbarara 24 New Classic Hotel Mbarara 10 Bomah Hotel Gulu 25 Ridar Hotel Mukono 11 Colline Hotel Mukono 26 Sandton Hotel Kasese Source: UTB notice (2017)

2.3.1Service quality dimensions

Today’s customer is more exposed, sophisticated, informed about what is good and bad service. Customers, today, demand for an above average personalized service of sorts. This means hotels

should provide services to satisfy customers, especially if they are hoping for repeat visits (Kamunyu, 2017). Parasuraman defines service quality as “the difference between customer expectations of service quality and customer perceptions of the service delivered” (Parasuraman, Zeithaml et al. 1985) although Klaus differs when he describes service quality to mean the physical, situational and behavioral aspect. This means that what happens before, during and after the delivery of services to the customer matters a lot (Klaus and Maklan 2007). Sureshchandar et al (2002), revealed that when a guest perceives the service quality to be poor, his or her satisfaction levels will also be poor, if medium, perception will be medium and those who ranked service quality as high, are highly satisfied with the service and are more likely to return. It is thus important for hotels to look at quality of services delivered and their improvement if they want to retain their customers and this can be done through the service quality dimensions. The service quality dimensions also known as the SERVIQUAL model is a method used to capture and measure service quality experienced by customers. Given the inability to touch or have physical evidence of service(Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Berry, 1985), the model acts as a measurement tool for that service and exposes shortcomings through the service quality gaps.

Figure 2Service quality model

Source:Mulder(2019) 15

1. Knowledge gap: arises due to a lack of organizational knowledge of customer expectations. 2. Standards gap: arises due to a difference in organization perception of customer expectations and actual customer expectations. 3. Delivery gap: arises due to a difference in organization services offered and customer expectations. 4. Communication gap: arises when there is a difference between what the organization promises and what it actually delivers. 5. Satisfaction gap: arises from a difference between customer expectations and actual experience(Mulder, 2019).

To close these gap five dimensions were chosen to act as base for measurement of service quality.

Table 4Service quality dimensions.

Dimension Description Tangibles Appearance of physical facilities, equipment, personnel, and communication materials Reliability Ability to perform the promised service dependably and accurately Responsiveness Willingness to help customers and provide prompt service Assurance Knowledge, courtesy of employees and their ability to convey trust and confidence Empathy Caring, individualized attention the firm provides its customers

Source:Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Berry(1985)

In Uganda a significant number of research papers have been written regarding service quality, however this is mostly in the health sector. According to a study conducted byTukamushaba,Musinguzi, Katongole, & Xiao(2012) where service quality items were analyzed, it was concluded that service quality items needed to be improved especially to do with staff skills in handling customers’ requirements and the hotel owners’ inability to provide

flexible services to customers which affected service quality. There is need for hotel owners to recruit personnel with skills in customer care in order to improve service quality.

2.4Relevance of traditional hotel rating system

“Although it is undoubtedly true that hotel classification and grading at destination is a means through which destinations can create standards and improve customer confidence in hotels and other related services, it is also true that qualitative guest reviews of hotel services provide more grade improvement opportunities at enterprise level than a statutory destination grade. It is expected by many advocates of the grading exercise that hotel rating should assist to create a minimum standard. It should also be noted that benefits of the grading exercise can’t be achieved by a one off grading attempt and managers shouldn’t attempt to use their statutory grade as a representation of the guest perceived quality of their services. Managers should note that the primary beneficiary of this exercise is usually a guest as they live to taste the grade in its fullness and no good manager would put up with a statutory grade that deceives their guest. They should thus keep reminded that the grading job is often better done by a customer who patronizes the service at a fee. Managers therefore achieve a grade of their hotel and sustain it by translating qualitative guest reviews into class changing actions at individual hotel level”(Kamunyu, 2017).

According to The Independent (2019), Lilly Ajarova took over at UTB as the new Chief Executive Officer. She talked to the Independent’s Ronald Mukasa about her plans for Uganda’s tourism industry where stated, the way forward would be developing a well thought out plan on developing the sector. This would including branding Uganda as the pearl of Africa by developing a common image with this slogan. Areas of concern identified were marketing and budget where areas like online marketing would be exploited. Before the marketing it should first be ensured that products to be marketed ore of a certain standard internationally acceptable, which can be achieved through exercises like hotel rating. Promoting of domestic tourism was also looked at as an area of importance to change the Ugandan mentality of tourism being only for foreigners. She finalized by emphasizing that tourism should be everyone’s business, whether proving something or participating as a tourist.

Bradford Ochieng, the Deputy Chief Executive Officer UTB said, “classifying all tourist facilities in the country would enable Uganda not only enforce standards in the hospitality industry but also improve the country’s competitiveness and ability to attract visitors. We thus view you as key partners in the tourism chain. However, we also have to remember that we are competing for the same travelers with our neighbors. Therefore, we have to critically look at our competitiveness, in terms of pricing, hygiene, standards.” he said, adding, “That’s why as UTB, we are at the forefront of ensuring that standards are enforced in this industry. This can only be done when we know the people who are in this business and the available facilities; whether hotel, lodge, guest house, so as to plan better for the sector” (Senyonyi, 2019).

2.5Effectiveness of hotel rating and role of management

“Majority of the hotels in the central region of Uganda generally offer acceptable services to their clients while those in protected areas such as parks are perceived as good but expensive with less variety.” Suzan Muhwezi, the Chairlady of UHOA said, adding,“The process of registering, licensing and classifying accommodation facilities in the country is aimed at helping Uganda compete favorably with other hotels in the East African region and also internationally. As you might know, we are also positioning ourselves as the MICE (Meetings, Incentives, Conferences, and Exhibitions) destination of choice in East and Central Africa. We have therefore partnered with UTB to embark on a countrywide sensitization campaign so as to empower our members meet the expected standards by both the domestic and international market”(Senyonyi, 2019).

She also clarified, “Despite an earlier classification and grading exercise carried out by UTB, they were starting process afresh given that proprietors of the facilities had said they weren’t properly sensitized on what was needed of them at the time.All tourism operators; hotels, guides, airlines, tour operators will now require a license from UTB to operate. A tourism license will be levied on everyone involved in the sector so as to have uniformity across. We shall thus sensitize all our members regarding this issue as well. We didn’t want UTB to start charging for this license before sensitizing members what it was about” (Gahene, 2019).

Richard Kawere, CEO of the Uganda Tourism Association (U.T.A.), while addressing the participants urged, them to instead focus on upgrading rather than debating minimum standards. According to UTB, if a hotel establishment is given a star rating, it eases its marketing and guests will be given the right information about the establishment thereby reducing disappointments. As a result, the hotel industry will flourish because of delivering as expected, leading to guest satisfaction, repeat business, and customer loyalty among others. The star grading system is used to rate the quality and standards of services of hotels and they vary from country to country. The hotels can be graded from one-star to five-stars based on a number of factors such as facilities, service level, location, and staff professionalism among others.Registration and licensing of all tourist facilities by UTB is currently ongoing (Mugula, 2019).

2.6 Research Gap

A lot of literature exists about hotel rating, but most of the local writings are either articles or presentations by authorities like UTB and UHOA. These don’t really explore the concept of hotel rating to its entirety as they are more generic and look at the tourism industry as a whole, which leaves the hospitality industry suffering due to lack of this information(Kamunyu, 2017). Hotel rating hasn’t really been embraced by the eastern world compared to western countries in Europe and the U.S.A., though countries like the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Qatar have exploited hotel rating to their advantage for example with developments like 7 star hotels in Dubai and Abu Dhabi, there are also countries like China that are interested in availing services to customers but aren’t concerned about the quality of these services(SU & SUN, 2007). The EAC has tried to embrace hotel rating but has faced resistance from member countries. Ugandan players in the hospitality industry for example complained that the $1000/= fee to participate in the rating exercise is very steep as they don’t even see the importance of the exercise altogether, these added that they feel it is unfair to judge them based on international standards as the playing field in this instance wouldn’t be leveled. This however is the first problem as the customers in the hospitality sector are all the same and whether local or international, they all look for the same things, this has been interpreted as a way to down play the critical role rating plays in the development of the hospitality industry(Gahene, 2019). 19

Dolnicar & Otter(2003) explore which service quality attributes matter to users of these hotel services, looking at the most studied attributes and factors in the previous studies and respondents’ reactions,Zhoua, Yea, Pearceb, & Wua(2004) explore the evolution of rating from traditional systems to online reviews and ratings, looking at the effectiveness of traditional systems versus consumer generated reviews on the various online platforms,Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Berry(1985) look at the service quality gaps that cause a difference in expectation and perception, hinder customer satisfaction during delivery and the five dimensions of product and service to focus on to close the service quality gaps and ensure customer satisfaction,Atilgan, Akinci, & Askoy(2003) explore the trends of service quality in the tourism industry over the years where customer expectations have shifted from simply having basic facilities to demand to the element of luxury and specialized service depending on the facility andBalmer & Baum(1993) focus on the hygiene factors and how they have changed in the hospitality industry from having a bare minimum to having health inspectors to ensure maintenance of the highest hygiene standards.Su & Sun(2007) look at how service quality has been neglectedin Taiwan with the perception by hoteliers that customers only care about receiving the service and not the quality and how this has impacted the hotels in Taiwan especially with the growing preference for Air BnBby tourists (an online marketplace for arranging or offering lodging, primarily homestays, where an individual rents out their home for tourists to stay at for a particular time period) instead of staying at an actual hotel.Most of the studies look at rating and how it should be implemented in the different areas of sustainability, specialization (niche market) and so on, this research looks to contribute towards the exploration of the negative implications that arise from neglecting hotel rating and the dangers that arise from lack of standards uniformity by participants.

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

3.1 Study Area

The study was conducted at the SpekeResort hotel Munyonyo. Speke Resort Munyonyo is a member of the Ruparelia group of companies, the hotel is a 4 star hotel resort located in Munyonyo, Makindye division along the northern shores of Lake Victoria, about 40 minutes from Entebbe International airport and 15 minutes from the city center. The hotel was commissioned in 2007 in time to host the Commonwealth heads of government meeting 2007 (CHOGM).Thehotel was established on 92 acres with about 335 rooms including presidential suites and cottages, 23 conferencing and banqueting venues for both indoor and outdoor functions and events, 5 fine dining restaurants including in room dining, a gym and spa, kids’ play area, business center, Olympic sized swimming pool, pony camp and marina(Nabuufu, 2019).

Source: Nabuufu(2019)

3.2Study design

The study explored a case study research design. A case study research design involves a descriptive and exploratory analysis to allow in depth investigation of the single hotel. The design was adopted for the research since it allows in depth investigation, is inexpensive and is fast since it allows data collection from one point. The study was conducted with mixed research methods which allowed the collection and analysis of quantitative and qualitative data.

3.3Sampling and sample size

The study applied simple random sampling technique to select and interview respondents at the hotel. Under this technique, each individual respondent is chosen by chance and has an equal chance of being selected.

The hotel receives an average of 100 guests a week during the low seasons, these mainly comprise of particularly bridal parties and guest at the restaurant. The in house guests at the hotel are usually foreigners from different parts of the world(Nabuufu, 2019). Given the current low traffic during the months of April and May, a population of 100 was determined and a sample selected using the Krejcie and Morgan (1970) formula which gave a sample of 80 respondents.

Where;

Is the table value of chi square for 1 degree of freedom at 95% confidence level (3.841).

N is the population size.

P is the proportion (assumed to be 0.5 since this would provide the maximum sample size). e is margin of error given the confidence interval (0.05).

= 79.5074 80 respondents

The international respondents took a larger percentage as they were the highest number of guests at the hotel(Nabuufu, 2019).

Table 5Number of respondents selected for sample size

Locals 10% 8

Foreigners ( Africa, 90% 75 Asia, Europe, U.S.A) Total 100% 83

Source: Primary data

3.4 Data collection

Data collected was both primary and secondary data.Primary data was collected through use of a semi structured questionnaire distributed out to selected respondents. Data was also collected through observation and use of a camera to capture different scenes for interpretation during analysis.Secondary data was collected from online sources like published articles and customer reviews from recognized credible review platforms preferred by guests when booking, preferably trip advisor and booking.com.

3.4.1 Questionnaires

Structured questionnaire with close ended questions was administered to collect data. Appropriate responses to close ended questions were indicated by ticking. Attached is a copy in the appendix.

3.5Data analysis

A deductive analysis approach was used to analyze data based on a predetermined structure by use of research objectives as a guide for grouping and analyzing data.Data was transcribed, organized, coded and summarized using SPSS software. Descriptive statistics were used to produce tables for response on attributes that matter when rating.Findings were stated based on objectives of research and areas of future research.

3.6Ethical consideration

Permission to collect data was sought from management of the hotel and Crane management on condition that a copy of this research would be availed to the hotel. In addition,confidentiality of the information was ensured while sticking to the objectives of data collected for academic purposes only.

CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS AND INTEPRETATION

4.1Demographic characteristics of respondents.

The study had a total of 83 respondents that managed to fill at least 75% of the questionnaire whose data responses were analyzed. Demographic characteristics of respondents are presented in table 5. It can be inferred that a larger percentage of respondents 57% were male while 43% were female. Furthermore 75% of these were not sure of the hotel at which they were staying compared to the 25% who were aware.

A larger percentage of respondents 65% were between the ages of 19 years and 28 years, it was also observed that these were attached to different organizations that made bookings with the hotel. 21% were between the ages of 29 years and 38 years 4% were between the ages of 39 years and 48 years and 10% were between the ages of 49 ears and 58 years.

Findings also indicated that a larger percentage of respondents 48% were at the hotel for business purposes, while 22% were visiting friends and relatives, 20% were visiting for leisure purposes and 5% were visiting for academic purposes. It was observed that there was a strong positive correlation between purpose of visit being business and age group between 19 years and 28 years. It was also observed that the higher the age of the respondent the higher the chances of their purpose of visit being leisure.

A larger percentage of respondents 66% were from Africa and these went ahead to specify where it was observed that most of them were from Zimbabwe and Ghana, 19% were from Europe who also specified that most of them were from France, 10% were locals from Uganda and 5% were from America.

Findings also indicate that a larger percentage of respondents 60% were visiting the hotel for the first time, 28% had visited between 2 times and 5 times, and 12% had visited between 6 times

and 10 times. Most of the respondents that had visited 6 to 10 times stated that they were at the hotel for business purposes.

Table 6 Demographic characteristics of respondents

N=83 VARIABLE F % Sex Male 47 57% Female 36 43% Hotel Speke Resort hotel Munyonyo 21 25% Not sure 62 75% Age 19-28 54 65% 29-38 18 21% 39-48 3 4% 49-58 8 10% Purpose Business 40 48% Leisure 17 20% VFR 18 22% Academic 4 5% Other 4 5% Origin Uganda 8 10% Africa 55 66% America 4 5% Europe 16 19% Visits 1st 50 60% 2-5 visits 23 28% 6-10 visits 10 12%

4.2 Factors that influence customer choice of hotel

Findings on factors that influence customer choice of hotel are presented in table 7. The table shows the extent to which respondents agreed or dis agreed that the listed factors were considered when deciding to stay at the hotel. It was observed that most of the respondents really considered basic factors when choosing the hotel as seen in the table. 96% respondents agreed

they considered facilities available at the hotel, these mainly attributed this factor to the need for conference centers of different sizes to conduct their business, 91% agreed they considered services that were offered by the hotel, and the common service of interest here mentioned by most was transportation from the airport to the hotel, 98% of the respondents agreed they considered quality dining options, these attributed the factor to the 8 restaurants listed on the hotel website, 100% respondents agreed they considered safety, these incited the incident of the American tourist that had been abducted earlier in the year, and 100% respondents agreed they considered hygiene where these cited the Ebola outbreak in the neighboring Democratic Republic of Congo.

Respondents also significantly reacted negatively to a number of factors listed for example; 40% respondents disagreed to having no choice on the matter of determining which hotel to go to, 24% respondents disagreed to choosing the hotel because of a cordial relationship with the host, these added that they didn’t know the host, 15% disagreed to choosing the hotel because of its online rating as these didn’t even know the hotel’s online rating, and 12% disagreed to choosing the hotel because of nearness to the airport because some of them weren’t sure of the distances from the airport and the others stated that wasn’t really choice there is only one international airport in the country.

Findings also indicated significant percentage of respondents were neutral or indifferent to a number of factors as discussed. 60% respondents were indifferent t considering online reviews as they stated that they didn’t check for the reviews, 51% were neutral to having a choice on which hotel to go to and these explained that much as the hotel was chosen for them by their respective companies, they had a say to some extent about the standards that had to present at whatever hotel was chosen for them, 46% were neutral to choosing the hotel because of a cordial relationship with the host because they didn’t really know the host on a personal basis, 46% respondents were indifferent to the hotel being near the airport, also because it’s the only international airport in the country and 40% respondents were neutral past experiences as most of them were at the hotel for the first time.

Table 7Factors that influence choice of hotel

Factors Strong disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Near the airport 10 12% 40 48% 33 40% Near the city 8 9% 22 3% 38 46% 15 18% Near key attractions 15 8% 48 58% 20 24% Facilities 3 4% 40 48% 40 48% Services 7 8% 30 36% 46 55% Helpful staff 4 5% 17 20% 20 24% 42 51% Quality dining 2 2% 42 51% 39 47% Safe 20 24% 63 76% Past experiences 4 5% 33 40% 20 24% 26 31% Online rating 13 15% 29 35% 24 29% 17 20% Online reviews 4 5% 50 60% 20 24% 9 11% Word of mouth 4 5% 29 35% 30 36% 20 24% Hygiene 12 14% 71 86% Value for money 2 2% 3 4% 39 47% 39 47% Had no choice 10 12% 23 28% 42 51% 8 10% Cordial guest-host relation 4 5% 16 19% 38 46% 25 30%

4.3Influence of hotel rating on choice of hotel.

The findings on the influence of hotel rating on choice of hotel are presented in table 8, and table 9. This section was designed to assess respondents’ knowledge or understanding of the concept of hotel rating, this was assessed using a number of aspects.

Findings in table 8 indicate that a larger percentage of respondents 72% understood the concept of hotel rating compared to the smaller percentage 28% that didn’t have knowledge of the concept. These were then separated so as to collect viable data. Respondents that weren’t conversant with the concept of hotel rating were then removed from analysis for this section.

Table 8Definition and understanding of concept of hotel rating

ASPECT F % Understand hotel rating concept 60 72% Don’t understand concept 23 28% TOTAL 83 100%

Findings on respondents who understand the concept of hotel rating are presented in table 9. Of the 60 respondents, a larger percentage 65% didn’t have an idea of the rating of the hotel at which they were staying as they stated they weren’t sure,the 33% and 2% who stated a rating added that this was the rating that was reflected on the site where the hotel was listed.

Respondents generated a rating based their opinions from their experiences to compare with the actual hotel rating of 4 stars,28% awarded the hotel 3 stars explaining a hotel with such standards at worst could have at least 3 stars but may or may not be higher because of the quality of services offered, 52% awarded 4 stars explaining that some of the services and facilities were lacking for a higher rating and 20% were not sure of what rating to award the hotel as they explained they didn’t have a full picture of the hotel to create a viable opinion.52% respondents affirmed that rating was a reliable factor when choosing this hotel because the facilities available reflect the hotel rating for example the room size and quality, the décor and location. 40% respondents stated that rating wouldn’t be a reliable factor for choosing this hotel because the services offered don’t match the current hotel rating as they don’t meet standards.

Findings also indicate that 73% respondents would recommend this hotel basing on the experience during their stay. Most of the respondents pointed key attraction factors like well-kept gardens and proximity to the lake. As well as the live band in the evening at the main restaurant (Nyanja restaurant). 27% respondents however stated that they wouldn’t recommend this hotel as their experience fell short of expectations. This was mainly attributed to the service delivery by the staff.

It was also indicated that a larger percentage of respondents, 72% would stay at this hotel only of it had the current rating or higher. These explained that a hotel of this pricing and size can’t be of

a lower rating as it would be cause for alarm to customers, while 15% respondents stated they would still stay At this hotel if it was of a lower rating explaining sometimes lower rated hotels have good service but are classified as such because of size or the facilities present.

Respondents were then asked if they would still stay at hotel in question if it had a different rating and13.43% said they would still consider staying at the hotel even with a lower rating, 64.18% said they would only consider staying at the hotel with the current rating or a higher one and 22.38% stated that they were not sure.

Table 9Results from respondents that understand concept of hotel rating

Understand hotel rating concept N=60 ASPECT F % Official hotel rating Right rating 20 33% Wrong rating 1 2% Not sure 39 65% Respondent generated rating 4 stars 31 52% 3 stars 17 28% Not sure 12 20% Rating as a reliable factor Yes 31 52% No 24 40% Not sure 5 8% Would you recommend hotel Yes 44 73% No 16 27% Acceptable hotel class lower rating 9 15% Higher rating 43 72% Not sure 8 13%

4.4Relationship between hotel rating customer satisfaction

Findings for the relationship between hotel rating and customer satisfaction are presented in table 10.This section was designed to analyze customer expectation versus the perception, it was 30

meant to show how customers feel about the experience they had during their stay at the hotel.Respondents were asked to state the extent to which they agree or disagree that the listed factors were present at the hotel given its rating of 4 stars , these factors represented the five dimensions of service quality of Parasuraman(1985)and a few stood out as of interest to the respondents. From a general analysis findings indicate that a larger percentage of respondents found agreed to the responsiveness dimension as far as the hotel is concerned, 42% agreed to the dimension of empathy being present, 41% agreed to assurance being present. 39% agreed to reliability being present and 46% agreed to tangibles being present. This therefore shows that a significantly higher percentage of respondents agreed that these dimensions were present at the hotel to the quality that matches the rating of 4 stars, although these still didn’t make half the respondents that participated. The general analysis may however differ from the image portrayed by the detailed analysis.

Table 10General view of the relationship between hotel rating and customer satisfaction

Strongly Strongly Dimension disagree Disagree Neutral Agree agree Tangibles 6 7% 1214% 1923% 2024% 2631% Reliability 911% 1720% 1822% 2227% 1720% Assurance 56% 1417% 2429% 2024% 2125% Empathy 79% 911% 2530% 2125% 2125% Responsiveness 67% 1214% 810% 2328% 3441%

A detailed analysis of findings for the relationship between hotel rating and customer satisfaction are presented in table 11. Findings indicate data collected shows there were generally more evenly spread responses regarding the presence of these factors at the hotel. Regarding the dimension of tangibles, respondents reacted more positively to these factors being present. 97% respondents agreed to the visually appealing physical structure, this was mostly attributed to the gardens and the proximity to the lake. 79% respondents agreed to the hotel having exceptional guest rooms, and 50% respondents agreed to the lobby being aesthetically appealing, this was attributed to the African décor. Respondents didn’t have much opinion about the parking as most

of them were dropped off by public transportation, those that had vehicles were frustrated by the distance of the parking from the hotel. A larger percentage of respondents 69% were neutral to the business center as they weren’t aware that one was available.

Findings also indicate significant number of respondents on either side in the dimension of reliability where some were in agreement of presence of these factors while a significant percentage were also in disagreement for example 44% respondents agreed to the presence of convenience at the hotel this was attributed to the hotel offering transportation from the airport, while 33% disagreed stating that it was difficult getting to town as it was a significant distance and one had to get through a lot of traffic. This was the case for these factors where respondents based on their individual experiences and thus explaining the wide spread of results.

A significantly larger percentage of respondents reacted positively to the dimension of assurance like the 60% respondents who agreed to the presence of communication from staff to guests. Guests felt like information was clearly passed on to them.

The dimension of responsiveness had more negative responses compared to other dimensions.87% respondents disagreed to the presence of ta credible Wi-Fi connection. While all respondents agreed that the Wi-Fi was available, most of them added that it was barely strong enough to get any work done. 27% respondents also disagreed to prompt service as they felt the staff were slow in service delivery.

The overall analysis of customer responses doesn’t give a definite direction of the hotel performance different respondents felt differently because they had different experiences, however a direction can be derived from key high values that represent common opinions of respondents about certain factors in the different dimensions.

Table 11Detailed analysis of relationship between hotel rating and customer satisfaction.

Strongly Strongly FACTORS disagree Disagree Neutral Agree agree Tangibles Lobby 10 12% 20 24% 3 4% 30 36% 20 24% Restaurants 4 5% 30 36% 30 36% 7 8% 12 14% Guest rooms 4 5% 1 1% 12 14% 25 30% 41 49% Business center 4 5% 4 5% 57 69% 5 6% 13 16% Parking 12 14% 15 18% 18 22% 15 18% 23 28% Physical structure 1 1% 1 1% 36 43% 45 54% Reliability Convenience 10 12% 23 28% 13 16% 21 25% 16 19% Consistent 10 12% 18 22% 13 16% 22 27% 20 24% Multilingual Product knowledge 5 6% 10 12% 29 35% 23 28% 16 19% Assurance Awards 4 5% 8 10% 40 48% 14 17% 17 20% Communication 5 6% 20 24% 8 10% 25 30% 25 30% Empathy Personalized service 5 6% 8 10% 25 30% 20 24% 25 30% VIP service 8 10% 25 30% 29 35% 21 25% Flexible 17 12 14% 25 30% 13 16% 16 19% Responsiveness Proactive 5 6% 8 10% 25 30% 45 54% Prompt 7 8% 16 19% 17 20% 20 24% 23 28% Flexible 810% 2328% 1113% 4149% Wi-Fi 54 65% 18 22% 4 5% 3 4% 4 5%

4.5 Respondent generated comments on hotel

The findings on respondent generated comments at Speke Resort hotel Munyonyo are presented in table 12. Respondents had a number of comments regarding the hotel on what should be improved to meet the 4 star rating. 70% respondents stated that the Wi-Fi was weak and could allow for accomplishment of any work. 33

13% stated that the gardens were beautiful, this was attributed to the gardens and close proximity to the lake as well as the manmade waterfall.

Source: Nabuufu(2019)

48% stated that the service was slow, 28% stated the hotel was too big to move around on foot, these were mainly walk-ins as in house guests were driven around in go carts, 38% stated that they wanted more variety on the menu, 14% mentioned difficulty to communicate with staff because of language barrier, with were foreigners especially French speaking.

4% suggested the hotel show its name and rating at entrance of reception. The hotel has a name installed at the gate but this is also a bit confusing as there are two hotels stated but one entrance, this causes confusion about which hotel guests are staying at.

Source: Primary data

Table 12Comments or recommendations by all respondents regarding hotel

Comment F %

Wi-Fi connection is weak 58 70

Beautiful gardens 11 13

Service is slow 32 48

Hotel is too big to move around on foot 23 28

More variety for the menu 26 38

Staff only speak English and local language 12 14

Show name hotel rating at entrance 3 4

CHAPTER FIVE

DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Discussion

Findings indicate that a larger percentage of respondents weren’t sure of the hotel at which they were staying. These, based on my observation, were attached to groups attending conferences. According to a notice released by UTB(2018), there are only 61 classified hotels in the country, this implies there are only 61 hotels with credible information for public consumption. Susan Muhwezi the head of UHOA (2019)explained that it is hard marketing a hotel that hasn’t been classified thus passing on information and making it available to the public becomes more complicated.

The highest percentage of respondents were between the ages of 19 years and 38years, there was a strong positive relationship between these ages and visiting for business purposes. There was also a positive relationship between respondents of ages 39 and above, and visiting for purposes of leisure.According to Susan Muhwezi(2019) Africans and particularly Ugandans don’t possess a traveling culture, those that travel usually go to these various places for business purposes and as such don’t really get involved in the tourism sector. Lilly Ajarova, the new C.E.O. of UTB said in an interview, “Tourism should be everyone’s business. We should all take part either as providers or participants.” She added, “The tourism and hospitality industry are suffering because we are still hesitant to get involved, this is why we still have issues of standards and quality”(Musoke R. , 2018).

Findings also show a number of factors stood out as of at most importance to respondents when deciding where to stay. A significantly larger percentage of respondents they chose the hotelbased on basic factors of facilities, services, safety, hygiene and helpful staff as these, according to respondents,should be given at most attention by any accommodation facility. Respondents also considered quality dining facilitiesas an important factor, this because a hotel, especially one like Speke Resort hotel Munyonyo that has such a diverse clientele should also have a continental menu, with something for everyone.Respondents’ reaction to online rating and 36

online reviews were more evenly spread compared to other factors. Respondents were more inclined to consider online rating compared to online reviews. The reason for this was that respondents who make the bookings online tend to rely on the preprogrammed filters like location and hotel rating so for example for Speke Resort hotel they would look for four star hotels in Kampala, Uganda. Respondents also said at times online reviews may be misleading as some of these are generated by parties that may benefit from the hotel having a good image in the media (some organizations create fake accounts to give good reviews).

A study conducted by Dolnicar and Otter(2003) to determine which attributes or factors were most used to analyze decision making process for choice of hotel revealed that basic factors like services, facilities, F&B, security were given more attention compared to other factors. Previous studies show basic factors are given more attention by researchers because these resonate more with the respondents who are the consumers of these services, other factors that would be considered tend to vary from one person to another depending on purpose for visit(Barsky & Labagh, 1992). This study also showed the evolution of basic factors, attributes like services basic factors had expanded from just reliability to things like Wi-Fi and professionalism.

Findings indicate a significant number of the respondents didn’t understand the concept of hotel rating. Of those that understood the concept of hotel rating, majority awarded the hotel 4 stars followed by 3 stars whichwas attributed to the facilities and staff present at the hotel in terms of strengths and weaknesses which were elaborated on by these respondents who explained how the present services and facilities available measured up to those stars respectively.

Previous studies show that hotel rating isn’t a concept that is understood by many, most people don’t understand how these stars are awarded (or the criteria followed). Studies show that many times hotel rating is assumed to be dependent on the hotel prices which is certainly not the case as a number of factors mostly related to quality and capacity come into play(Gahene, 2019). Authorities like UTB and UHOA, in a bid to create awareness on how crucial hotel rating is, embarked on programs to sensitize hoteliers on what hotel rating really means and avail necessary information at their disposal in preparation for the repeat of the exercise throughout the whole country by UTB(Muhwezi, 2019).

Findings showed that majority of respondents felt that the hotel measured up to its rating of four stars, however this was mostly attributed to the physical structure and aesthetic. A more detailed analysis showed a number of factors that stood out as they were really lacking according to respondents. Most of the respondents stated that the Wi-Fi connection was very weak and could be improved. From observation, the Wi-Fi was for a fact very weak, barely strong enough to get any work complete which was a major issue given the cultivated reputation of a business hotel as well as increasing need for the internet more as basic need instead of as a luxury in this current era. A significantly large proportion of respondents stated that service was slow. This was observed mainly at the restaurant and the marina especially during the weekends due to the increase in guest numbers. Respondents also raised the issue of multilingual staff. From observation all the staff were English speaking yet most of the guests only understood French which created a communication barrier, these however had respective group leaders who communicated to the staff on their behalf, which also contributed to the slow service.

Moses and Novelli(2014) describe a four star hotel to have a high degree of luxury and convenience for the guests, this raging from space, service delivery and flexibility of the staff, this includes spacious guest rooms, a menu design for an international clientele, multilingual staff to cater to guests from all parts of the world and presence of standard operating procedures (SOPs) to ensure prompt service. A hotel that claims to be four star shouldn’t fall short of these qualities thus risking loss of credibility by dissatisfied customers.

Respondents suggested the hotel install a plaque at the entrance showing its rating, these added that knowing the rating of the hotel before helps to form more realistic expectations, respondents also proposed that the hotel provide go carts to move around the hotel as the hotel is very large. According to the human resource manager Ritah Nabuufu(2019), the hotel lies on about 92acres. From observation in house guests were provided with these go carts to move around the hotel, this complaint was mainly raised by walk-ins who were at the hotel for short while. In addition the issue of the parking lot being significant distance from the hotel was also raised.

Consumer generated ratings and reviews and suggestions are the way forward as far as hotel rating is concerned. The best way to ensure your customers are satisfied is by asking them what

they are looking for and providing exactly that(Kamunyu, 2017). This helps to close the service quality gaps and aids in image building of the establishment. Parasuraman(1985) once stated that there is no better person to judge a service than one who pays for it, the knowledge gap that looks at the lack of organizational knowledge of customer expectations is considered the primary gap matters of expectation versus perception. If hotels are given access to customer opinions about the services provided, these hotels should endeavor to shape their delivery to the expectations of customers which will ensure satisfaction, a major goal to be achieved by any hospitality establishment(Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Berry, 1985).

5.2 Conclusion

According to specific objective one that looks at factors that determine choice of hotel for the case of Speke Resort hotel Munyonyo, it can be concluded that respondents felt basic factors like hygiene, safety, facilities, services, quality dining options and value for money are first considered by clients. A general analysis here showed that respondents are first interested in the presence of such basic factors first before looking at any desirables. The study showed that other desirable factors like cordial guest-host relationship, proximity to the airport, proximity to the city, proximity to attractions, online rating and others were awarded importance based on the subjective opinion of the respondents, these factors were deemed of a certain level of importance depending on the reason for visit. It can therefore be concluded that all hotels regardless of rating or size, should have present factors that are considered basic as a base line and then desirables depending on the type of clientele they wish to attract.

According to research question two that looks at whether customers understand the concept of hotel rating, it was concluded that indeed customers understand hotel rating and know what they are looking for as far as quality is concerned for a hotel to deserve a particular rating, this also disproves the theory of rating being based on hotel pricing as a larger percentage of respondents had at least an idea of what hotel rating is and could comment or form valid opinions concerning the matter and given the data collected these gave the hotel a lower rating than its actual rating and stated that hotel rating wasn’t a reliable factor for choosing this hotel, with all reasons given being more or less related to what is on paper not reflecting what is on the ground. Theyalso

concluded that they would only consider staying at this hotel with its current rating or a higher one.

According to research question three which looks at how hotel rating informs customer expectations and perceptions, it can be concluded that the rating the hotel is given plays a big role in customer formulation of expectations, in this case respondents revealed that they would be more inclined to forgive a few inconsistencies and shortcomings at the hotel if it had a low rating but this leniency reduces proportionately with the increase in the stars a hotel possesses. That said a larger percentage of respondents focused their attention on basic factors simply because they didn’t know the rating of the hotel and on eventually finding out the hotel rating could determine what was acceptable and what wasn’t with regards to Speke Resort hotel Munyonyo in particular.This showed that customer expectations to larger extent depend on the hotel rating known to them and their level of satisfaction as well is determined by the extent to which these expectations were met.

The study gave an overall image that hotel rating is important to clients at the hotel but didn’t come so much into play in this case because first of allthe current state of the rating system in the country where by the classes to which the hotels in Uganda belong are not known to the public who formulate the clientele in these hotels, the secondly the hotels such as Speke Resort hotel Munyonyo, whose rating is known by some doesn’t provide services that measure up to its rating. This leaves customers especially foreigners disadvantaged when choosing hotels and thus discouraged to visit the country due to uncertainty of crucial factors like quality of accommodation or value for their money.

5.3 Recommendations

From the findings of the study, the following can be recommended;

1. The Wi-Fi connection should be strengthened so as to enable guests that want to make use of it at least be able to perform basic tasks like making searches.

2. The menu variety at the restaurant should be expanded so as to cater to most if not all the needs of the diverse clientele so that anyone from any part of the world is able to at least pick out something. This can be done by adding more continental dishes that may cut across nations. 3. Management should consider setting up a refresher course for staff to polish up on their product knowledge and promptness during service delivery. 4. Management, particularly the human resource department should consider recruiting more multilingual staff to resolve the language barrier that’s usually between the staff and international non-English speaking guests. This could be done by making it a requirement for potential recruits to know at least two international languages, that is, English and another foreign language. 5. A plaque showing the class of hotel should be installed at the entrance to make guests aware of the rating the hotel possesses according UTB which is in charge of classification of hotels in Uganda. 6. Advertising on different platforms to increase hotel visibility in the market should also be put into consideration. This, through the various media platforms for example the social media platforms to which the hotel subscribes should be exploited in this area.

REFERENCES

Arlen, C. (2008, October 24). ebook: service performance. Retrieved from Service Performance: http://www.serviceperformance.com/the-5-service-dimensions-all-customers-care-about/

Atilgan, E., Akinci, S., & Askoy, S. (2003). Mapping service quality in the tourism industry. Managing Service Quality:An international journal. vol.13 Issue 5, 412-422.

Balmer, S., & Baum, T. (1993). Applying Herzberg's hygiene factors to the changing accomodation environment. International journal of contemporary hospitality management 5, 32-35.

Barreda, A., & Bilgihan, A. (2013). An analysis of user-generated content for hotel experience. Journel of hospitality and tourism technology vol.4 no.3, 263-280.

Barsky, J., & Labagh, R. (1992). A Strategy for Customer Satisfaction. In T. C. quaterly.

Boulding, W., Kalra, A., Staelin, R., & Zeithaml, V. A. (1997). A dynamic model of service quality: from expectations to behavioral intentions. Journal of marketing research vol.30, 7-27.

Ch., H. (2012, June). Classification, hotel and serviced apartments . Retrieved from Hotellerie Suisse: https://www.hotelleriesuisse.ch/de/pub/services/klassifikation.htm

Dolnicar, D. S., & Otter, D. T. (2003). Which Hotel attributes Matter? A review of previous and framework of future research. 9th Annual conference of the Asia Pacific Tourism Association, (pp. 176-188). Sydney.

Gahene, A. (2019, April). news:Nile post. Retrieved from Nile Post: https://nilepost.co.ug/2019/05/16/utb-to-register-classify-hotels-afresh-to-attract-tourists/

Hu, C. (2014, March 6). travel:cnn. Retrieved from CNN.com: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnn.cm/travel/amp/hotel-star-ratings/index.html

Jeong, M., & Jeon, M. M. (2008). Customer Reviews of hotel experiences through consumer generated media. Journal of Hospitality & Leisure marketing 17:1-2, 121-138.

Johnson, C. (2017, June). news: New Vision. Retrieved from New Vision: https://chimpreports.com/utb-trains-local-health-inspectors-to-maintain-hotel-standards/

K.E., C., J.A., G., & D.L., K. (1994). An exploratory study into the purchase decision process used by leisuretravellers in hotel selection. Journal of hospitality and leisure marketing 4, 53-71.

Kamunyu, D. D. (2017, Febuary 7). home: Uganda Hospitality Institute. Retrieved from Uganada Hospitality Institute: http://www.uhi.ac.ug/hotel-classification-and-grading-in- uganda-for-now-guests-will-do-a-better-job-for-you/

Ladhari, R., & Michaud, M. (2015). eWOM effects on hotel booking intentions, attitudes, trust,and website perceptions. International journal of hospitality managemnet 46, 36-45.

Laroche, M., Ueltschy, L. C., Abe, S., Cleveland, M., & Yannopoulos, P. P. (2004). Service Quality Perceptions and Customer Satisfaction: Evaluating the Role of Culture. Journal of international marketing, 58-85.

Lu, Z., & Feng, Z. (n.d.). The post-purchase evaluation of the China’s star rated hotel service quality: A content analysis of guest comments on third party hotel booking websites. Toronto, Canada; Weihai, Shandong, China.

Lyatuu, J. (2019, January 16). News: the observer. Retrieved from The Observer: https://observer.ug/news/headlines/59660-uganda-targets-1m-more-tourists-in-2019

Maphela, J. (2019, January ). home:food and beverage. Retrieved from food and beverage.com: http://fandfood.com/what-is-beverage/

Ministry of tourism. (2014). Tourism master plan., (pp. 22-168). Kampala.

Mohsin, A., & Lockyer, T. (2010). Customer perceptions of service quality in luxury hotels in New Delhi, India: An exploratory study. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 22 Issue:2, 160-173.

Moses, O. M., & Novelli, M. (2014). Tourism in the East African Community. Tourism and hospitality research, 53-66.

Mubiru, B. (2015, July). lifestyle: The Ugandan. Retrieved from The Ugandan: https://theugandan.com.ug/uganda-drop-hotel-stars/

Mugula, G. (2019, May 16). news: eagle online. Retrieved from Eagle Online: https://eagle.co.ug/2019/05/16/utb-uhoa-sensitize-tourism-stakeholders-on-standards.html

Muhwezi, S. (2019, May). UTB to repeat the rating exercise for all hotels in the country. (T. Brenda, Interviewer)

Mukasa, R. (2019, Febiuary 26). news archives: the independent. Retrieved from The Independent: https://www.independent.co.ug/tourism-should-be-every-ugandans-business/

Mulder, P. (2019, May). toolkit:tools hero. Retrieved from Tools hero: https://www.toolshero.com/quality-management/servqual-model/

Musoke. (2015, June 24). Home, Business; New Vison. Retrieved from New Vision-Uganda news: https://www.newvision.co.ug/new_vision/news/1328973/uganda-hotel-grading-complete-star- hotels-set-recognized

Musoke, R. (2018, March 20). home:the independent. Retrieved from The Independent: https://www.independent.co.ug/ugandas-tourism-revenue-figures

Nabuufu, R. (2019, April 5). Speke Resort Hotel Munynyo. (D. Nabukeera, Interviewer) news: Eagle online. (2019, April). Retrieved from Eagle online: https://eagle.co.ug/2019/05/16/utb-uhoa- sensitize-tourism-stakeholders-on-standards.html news: the Independent. (2019, April). Retrieved from The Independent: https://www.independent.co.ug/tourism-should-be-every-ugandans-business/ 44

Parasuraman, Zeithaml, V., & Berry, L. (1985). A conceptual model of service quality and its impliications for future research. Journal of Marketing, 41-50.

R.K., G., Shea, L., & P., W. (1996). How business travellers discriminate between mid-priced and luxury hotels:An analysis using a longitudinal sample. Journel of hospitality and leisure marketing 4, 63-75.

Resources:Check market. (2019, April). Retrieved from Check Market: https://www.checkmarket.com/sample-size-calculator/

Ruyonga, J. (2015, June 30). safari news: prime safaris. Retrieved from Prime Safaris: https://www.primeugandasafaris.com/safari-news/uganda-tourism-board-utb-ends-uganda-hotels- classification-uganda-safari-news.html

RYAN, C., & HUIMIN, G. (2007). Perceptions of chinese hotels.

Samoszuk, S. (2017, June). course navigator:study.com. Retrieved from Study.com: https://study.com/academy/lesson/service-quality-definition-dimensions.html

Senyonyi, T. W. (2019, May 16). news:Business focus. Retrieved from Business Focus: https://businessfocus.co.ug/utb-uhoa-sensitize-hoteliers-on-standards/

Stringam, B. B., Jr, J. G., & Vanleeuwen, D. M. (2010). Assessing the Importance and Relationships of ratings on user generated traveler reviews . Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 11:2, 73-92, DOI:, 2-17.

SU, C.-S., & SUN, L.-H. (2007). Taiwan’s Hotel Rating. A Service Quality Perspective, pp. 1-10.

Tukamushaba, E. K., Musinguzi, D., Katongole, C., & Xiao, H. (2012). Modeling service quality improvement priorities in selected hotels for efficient service delivery. International journal of tourism science , 21-43.

Uganda Tourism Board. (2017, september). Notice: New Vision. Retrieved from New vision: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=7&cad=rja&uact=8&ved =2ahUKEwjwq66vgajkAhUGuRoKHem3BC4QFjAGegQIAxAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.n

ewvision.co.ug%2Fwps%2Fforms%2Fverify_digital_asset%3Fasset_id%3Dfc1ba22e-9f39-4102- 9c59-bde6d5e5a968&us

Uganda Tourism Board. (2018, September 23). Home, notices: New Vision. Retrieved from New Vision: https://www.newvision.co.ug/new_vision/news/1486275/notice-uganda-tourism-board

Vine, & P.A.L. (1981). Hotel classification, art or science? International journal of tourism management, 18-29.

World Tourism and Travel Council. (2014). Travel and Tourism Economic impact. pp. 2-20.

Zhoua, L., Yea, S., Pearceb, P. L., & Wua, M.-Y. (2004). Refreshing hotel satisfaction studies by reconfiguring customer review data. International journal of hospitality management, 1-10.

APPENDICES

QUESTIONNAIRE

Dear sir/madam,

I am Diana Nabukeera from Makerere University, Department of Forestry, Biodiversity and Tourism pursuing a Bachelor’s degree in Tourism. As part of my requirements for my degree, I am carrying out a research study on the topic, “Impact of hotel rating on service quality and customer choice of hotel.” You have been randomly selected to voluntarily participate in this study. You are kindly requested to answer the following questions to the best of your knowledge by ticking and/or filling in the spaces provided unless otherwise. This information will be used for academic purposes only and your identity will be treated with the highest degree of confidentiality. Your participation is highly appreciated.

GENERAL INFORMATION

Name of hotel……………………………………………………………………………………..

Sex

Female Male

Age

19-2829-3839-48 49-58 59 and above

Purpose of visit

Business Leisure Academic Visiting friends and relatives

Other specify………………………………………………………………………………

Origin

Uganda Rest of Africa America Asia Europe

Other specify……………………………………………………………………......

Number of visits to hotel

1st time 2 to5 times 6 to 10 times 10 and above

FACTORS DETERMINING CHOICE OF HOTEL

This section looks at customer expectation. The following factors customers consider when choosing where to stay. Please tick any one of the boxes for each factor to show the extent to which you agree or disagree.

Factor Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly agree disagree Near the airport Near the city center (Kampala) Near key attractions Facilities Quality dining options Services Helpful staff Hygiene Safe Past experience Online rating Online reviews Word of mouth Value for money Had no choice Cordial guest-host relationship

INFLUENCE OF HOTEL RATING ON HOTEL CHOICE

This section examines respondents’ knowledge or understanding of the concept of hotel rating. Please answer these questions to the best of your knowledge, unless otherwise.

. What do you understand by hotel rating?

……………………………………………………………………………………………

. What rating would you give this hotel?

……………………………………………………………………………………………. . In your opinion is hotel rating reliable when choosing where to stay?

……………………………………………………………………………………………… . Would you stay at this hotel if; . Lower rated, explain ……………………………………………………………………………………………. . Higher rated, explain ……………………………………………………………………………………………. . Would you recommend this hotel to someone else? ……………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………… . Do you have any recommendations, comments about your experience at this hotel?

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HOTEL RATING AND SERVICE QUALITY

This section looks at customer perception. Given the rating of this establishment ….stars, please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree that the following amenities and services were present at this establishment.

Quality dimensions Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly agree disagree Reliability Convenience Consistency Product knowledge Responsiveness Proactive Communication Flexible Assurance Multi lingual Awards Tangibles Physical structure Lobby Restaurants Guest rooms Business center Parking Complementary Wi-Fi Empathy Personalized service VIP services

THANKYOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION!!!

Hotel lobby

Conference/ meeting space

Nyanja restaurant (main restaurant)