Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Hostels are an important part of the tourism industry but despite this, many of the metrics used to measure conventional hotels do not apply to the hostel sector. Therefore, this study developed a new methodology called HOSTELQUALITY for the classification of hostels. The method was applied in 10 establishments located in 3 tourist cities in Brazil. The method includes 29 questions in 10 dimensions: environment, leadership, security, cleanliness, location, social atmosphere, equipment, staff, price, and customers. It provides a five-level classification: Deficient, Weak, Average, Good, and Excellent. In addition, it provides graphical output. The results showed that half of the hostels received a good rating. The findings indicate that no establishment achieved a degree of excellence and demonstrated the new methodology’s applicability, providing a consistent and easy-to-interpret classification. This new methodology can be used on specialized websites, by institutions, and by governments to provide supporting information.

Keywords

Hostelquality hostels backpackers quality hospitality and tourism operations

Introduction

The hotel industry depends on guest experiences. Customer satisfaction is the most decisive measure of hotel service quality (Vavra, 1997). Guests evaluate the quality of a hotel’s facilities by analyzing tangible and intangible attributes (Berezina et al., 2015; Dong et al., 2014; Wilkins et al., 2007). Among the intangible determinants, factors related to the behavior, attention, and availability of hotel staff are among the most important (Berezina et al., 2015). Regarding physical attributes, cleanliness and comfort help to achieve customer satisfaction (Chaves et al., 2012; Li et al., 2013). However, customer perceptions and expectations differ according to the hotel type (Xu and Li, 2016). This is because different hotel segments focus on different products and services (Tanford et al., 2012). Therefore, market segmentation in terms of hosting is considered a competitive strategy in this business.

According to Brochado, Rita, and Gameiro (2015), “hostels are formed in the popular backpacker market and embody a hybrid product that combines accommodation services with an informal and friendly atmosphere.” These characteristics make the niche hostel market attractive to new investors and valuable for the development of tourism.

For hotels, there are traditionally quality assessment tools that can provide quick information for future guests (Wu and Ko, 2013). In the case of hostels, several studies have explored the assessment of hostels (Valiyappurakkal, 2021; Nieves and Quintana, 2018; Valenca, 2020). Some studies have identified the most important attributes of hospitality services that affect consumer decision making. Concerning the specifics of the hostel business, several studies have been carried out to assess the quality of the services offered by hostels to their guests. For example, Nash et al. (2006) presented the results of research on hostels in Scotland, Hecht and Martin (2006) did the same for hostels in Canada, Chitty et al. (2007) for hostels in Australia, Musa and Thirumoorthi (2001) for hostels in Malaysia, and Brochado et al. (2015) for hostels in Portugal. Owing to the peculiar characteristics of hostels, many of these tools do not cover the specific characteristics of that segment.

In this context, the article’s objective is to present a method developed specifically for hostel evaluation named HOSTELQUALITY. The design of HOSTELQUALITY started with a Systematic Literature Review that covered the main quality criteria for hostels. Then constructs were generated, called dimensions, aggregating a set of evaluation criteria. This method offers three outputs: a quality index, a gap index, and a graphical presentation through a radar. The methodology was applied to a tourist region in Brazil, allowing the evaluation of the results of a real application.

This paper is organized into four sections. The theoretical framework is presented first, addressing the topics of service quality and customer satisfaction in the context of hostels. The second section presents the methods used and the factors for determining the choice of hostels, considering geographical limitations, for the application and validation of the radar. Next, the results of applying the instrument in the field are presented. The main conclusions and implications of the study are presented in the final section.

Customer satisfaction in hotels and hostels

Recently, the description of the dimensions that promote customer satisfaction in the hotel industry has driven several varieties of research (Deng et al., 2013; Ren et al., 2016). These studies are justified because high customer satisfaction is associated with the value of services, and products are essential to maintain a competitive advantage (Kotler and Armstrong, 1998).

In many studies, customer satisfaction is related to consumer emotions (Damasio, 1994; Deng et al., 2013; Han and Back, 2007). Emotion can be defined as a momentary state of the body, unlike feeling, which refers to a mental state (Damasio, 1994). There are two types of consumer emotion, positive and negative (Han and Back, 2006), and these feelings influence customer satisfaction.

Emotion is a complex reaction of a person arising from appraisals of self-relevant interactions with the environment, which result in states of excitement, the direction of attention, facial expressions, action tendencies, and behavior (Jordan, Spencer and Prayag, 2019; Lazarus, 1991; Levine, 2010).

The consumer behavior in the tourism sector should focus more on the relationship between involvement and emotions across longitudinal perspectives (Santos et al., 2021). The recent tourism literature shows growing interest in the measurement of emotions; the empirical contributions analyzed focus on emotion as generic category, on specific categories or sets or on one specific emotion (Volo, 2021). The role of emotions in tourism design is often discussed to offer suggestions to tourism stakeholders to better design experiences that can elicit certain emotional responses (Kim and Fesenmaier, 2014; Volo 2021)

Some tools have been proposed to support the management of hotel establishments. The Innovation radar in hospitality (Valença, Sobral, De Andrade Lima, and Farias, 2020) evaluated the innovation in these establishments. Multicriteria support for the decision was also applied, using PROMETHEE GAIA to evaluate the five-star hotels of Mashhad (Ostovare and Shahraki, 2019). The Data Envelopment Analysis obtained the relative technological bias between a specific group and the entire industry in Taiwanese tourist hotels (Yu and Chen, 2020).

When specifically examining accommodation type, it can be seen that consumer emotions significantly influence guest satisfaction (Han and Back, 2007; Lam, Cheung and Lugosi, 2021; Sukhu, Choi, Bujisic, and Bilgihan, 2019). Such emotions, however, must be related to emotional responses to the experiences provoked by the use or consumption of the product (Havlena and Holbrook, 1986; Jiang, K., Luk, S.T. and Cardinali, 2018). The client’s experience can be defined as a combination of physical performance, stimulated senses, and emotions, measured intuitively in opposition to their expectations, in moments of contact with the organization (Shaw, 2005).

Experiences are individualized and internal, making their measurement and management extremely challenging for hotels (Knutson et al., 2009). The effects of perceived credibility of online reviews influences hotel booking intentions (Chakraborty, 2019). In general, positive consumer emotions positively affect customer satisfaction with hotels and generate the intention to revisit in the future. Simultaneously, negative emotions negatively affect guest satisfaction (Han and Back, 2007; Lee, Cai, DeFranco, and Lee, 2020)

Identifying the factors that cause guest satisfaction is essential for hotel managers (Alrawadieh and Law, 2019) and promotes several benefits like customer loyalty and high reputation (Fornell, 1992). The definition and conceptualization of customer satisfaction vary throughout the marketing literature. However, these definitions and conceptualizations agree that the concept of satisfaction implies the necessary presence of a goal that the consumer wants to achieve (Ali, Amin and Cobanoglu, 2015). Several dimensions are known to influence customer satisfaction, and the tourism literature has already explored them to understand tourists’ perceptions (Moro et al., 2019). For example, customers’ positive perceptions regarding accommodation are evaluated in the form of products, services, and activities to improve the quality of service, such as proper maintenance of the facilities, well-defined operational procedures, and amenities offered by the hotel (Lee, Cai, DeFranco, and Lee, 2020; Prasad et al., 2014).

The attributes that define customer satisfaction vary according to hotel type (El-Adly, 2018; Xu and Li, 2016). In generic hotels, four dimensions cover the client’s experience: benefit, incentive, convenience, and environment (Knutson et al., 2009). For international tourist hotels, comfortable rooms, fast check-ins and check-outs, and high-speed internet are some of the indicators of customer satisfaction (Deng et al., 2013; Keshavarz and Jamshidi, 2018). For budget hotels, basic elements contained in the accommodation are considered important, such as cleanliness, temperature, and other attributes of comfort. In addition, the implementation of each control point of the dimensions that generate customer satisfaction differs according to the level and segment of the establishment (Knutson et al., 2009; Rahimi and Kozak, 2017). Therefore, defining a type of hosting medium and knowing its specifics are extremely important in the hotel sector.

According to Oliveira and Gameiro (2013), there are differences between traditional hotels and hostels. In this sense, in addition to their characteristic central services, different types of accommodation have different products. Therefore, clients evaluate accommodation differently and have different expectations, perceptions, and preferences according to the type of establishment (Beerli-Palacio, Martin-Santana, and Román-Montoya, 2020; Xu and Li, 2016).

The characterization of hostels is directly related to the profile of the guests. Backpackers are mostly young tourists who are aware of their financial resources and tend to stay longer at a destination (Pearce, 1990; Refaeli and Itzhaky, 2021). This segment of guests also presents advantages to the tourism sector as they typically travel through the year and across the destination country, use public transportation, and purchase from local businesses (Adam, Agyeiwaah, and Dayour, 2021).

Hostels emerged to serve specific segments of backpackers. Economical accommodation is their main attraction (Nash et al., 2006). Some factors distinguish them from traditional hotels, such as the provision of shared rooms and bathrooms and more informal communal environments that provide a greater degree of interaction between guests (Oliveira and Gameiro, 2013).

The hostel segment is growing, prompting several studies that seek to understand the main needs of hostel guests (Hecht and Martin, 2006; Nash et al., 2006; Oliveira and Gameiro, 2013; Adam, Agyeiwaah, and Dayour, 2021; Chakraborty, 2019; (Lockwood and Pyun, 2019; Rahimi and Kozak, 2017). Backpackers are different from traditional tourists (Møller Jensen and Hjalager, 2019). They cannot be considered a homogeneous group as they present different needs according to their age, gender, and nationality (Brochado and Rita, 2018; Hecht and Martin, 2006; Oliveira and Gameiro, 2013).

Regarding age, older backpackers give more priority to aspects such as privacy, security, and comfort (Adam, Agyeiwaah, and Dayour, 2021; Hecht and Martin, 2006; Oliveira and Gameiro, 2013). They also have a larger budget and do not object to paying a little extra for comfort and privacy (Hecht and Martin, 2006). On the other hand, young tourists place more value on social interaction with other visitors than older backpackers, mainly because hostels tend to be occupied by younger people (Hecht and Martin, 2006; Oliveira and Gameiro, 2013; Refaeli and Itzhaky, 2021).

Concerning gender differences, female backpackers appreciate cleanliness, amenities, safety, and staff quality more than male backpackers do (Oliveira and Gameiro, 2013). Similarly, Hecht and Martin (2006) found that safety was considered essential by female backpackers. However, men are more interested in meeting new people and making friends and do not usually book rooms as far in advance as women (Oliveira and Gameiro, 2013).

The intangible components of security and empathy are among the most significant dimensions that hostel guests consider regarding the quality of service. Among the tangible components, the facilities/equipment, a central location, a warm/friendly atmosphere, cleanliness, and feel-at-home factors are essential to guest satisfaction. When considering staff empathy, aspects such as courtesy, willingness to help, and individualized attention were the most reported by backpackers (Musa and Thirumoorthi, 2011).

Hostel managers must understand the factors that affect customer experience and adapt their establishments accordingly. In addition, the choice of an easy-to-understand methodology and its application to summarizing these attributes are other determining factors that are important for the business.

Method

The method named HOSTELQUALITY allows the assessment of the quality of hostels. The HOSTELQUALITY is based on dimensions that cover a set of quality criteria. These dimensions were designed based on a Systematic Literature Review based on PRISMA Guidelines (Page et al., 2021), covering related scientific articles published over six years. This yielded ten evaluation constructs, either frequently repeated in quality studies on hostels or had some impact on the perception of guests and the performance of the lodging establishment. The meaning of each dimension and the names of the authors who addressed them are shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

The Dimensions of HOSTELQUALITY.

Dimension	Meaning	Sources
Environment	The environmental awareness of the establishment has a positive effect on its relationship with the customer and on the performance of the establishment.	Benavides et al. (2014); Ban and Ramsaran (2017).
Leadership	Leadership can affect several important outcomes such as increased service quality and employee performance.	Benavides et al. (2014); Wang et al. (2012); Sipe (2017).
Security	Measures or items installed by the hostel with the purpose of providing greater security for the establishment and the guests.	Amblee (2015); Oliveira and Gameiro (2013); Mikulić et al. (2016).
Cleanliness	Frequency that rooms, collective bathrooms, and communal areas of the hostel are cleaned.	Amblee (2015);Oliveira and Gameiro (2013); Hiransomboona (2012).
Location	Hostels located in areas with easy access to transport, infrastructure services, and sights.	Amblee (2015); Oliveira and Gameiro (2013); Mikulić et al. (2016); Hiransomboona (2012).
Social Atmosphere	Adequacy of common equipment and/or activities aimed at providing greater social interaction among the guests.	Oliveira and Gameiro (2013); Mikulić et al. (2016).
Equipment	Availability of equipment and/or services adapted to the needs of the guests to provide greater comfort, privacy, or facilities.	Oliveira and Gameiro (2013); Mikulić et al. (2016); Hiransomboona (2012).
Staff	The technical knowledge of the staff and the training methods employed for their continuous development.	Hiransomboona (2012); Mikulić et al. (2016); Tajeddini and Trueman (2012); Oliveira and Gameiro (2013).
Price	Availability of amenities and/or services included in the daily rate, and promotions and partnerships to attract customers.	Hiransomboona (2012); Oliveira and Gameiro (2013); Mikulić et al. (2016).
Customer	Mechanisms and actions oriented to the needs of the clients.	Oliveira and Gameiro (2013); Hiransomboona (2012); Amblee (2015); Tajeddini and Trueman (2012); Sipe (2017).

The environment dimension characterizes the environmental awareness of the hostel and the benefits these actions can bring to guest satisfaction. Actions such as reducing water consumption by implementing strategies to reuse or store this resource are an example of environmentally friendly actions. Other examples include actions that contribute to avoiding or reducing direct impacts on the environment, such as initiatives to reduce waste, effluents, or emissions (Benavides et al., 2014).

The leadership dimension represents one of the seven pillars of total quality management and positively contributes to a hostel’s outcomes mainly in terms of its marketing orientation and helping to build a better relationship with the customers (Wang et al., 2012).

The frequency and involvement of directors in training programs on quality and excellence, or groups or meetings and business associations, demonstrate their concern regarding the continuous improvement of the establishment. Other leadership actions include employee recognition, such as rewards, commissions, or employee of the month programs (Benavides et al., 2014; Wang et al., 2012).

The security dimension is a key factor that influences hostel guests at the time of purchase decision and accommodation choice (Amblee, 2015; Mikulić et al., 2016; Oliveira and Gameiro, 2013). Amenities that a hostel administration can offer include 24-hour reception, floors with exclusively female rooms, separate female showers, or even extra locks on windows and doors (Oliveira and Gameiro, 2013).

Cleanliness is an important physical attribute of hostels (Hiransomboona, 2012). When well executed, this implies organization, control, and consequent security on the part of the hostel’s administration (Amblee, 2015). Moreover, this dimension is frequently evaluated by guests on reservation sites specific to the hostel sector. Cleanliness represents a physical/tangible aspect and is considered an influential attribute for guests (Li et al., 2013; Musa and Thirumoorthi, 2011; Oliveira and Gameiro, 2013).

The location dimension is a key factor for backpacker satisfaction during their stay in hostels (Oliveira and Gameiro, 2013). Choosing a hostel with the right location can save backpackers time and energy (Hiransomboona, 2012). Offers of nearby excursions, evening entertainment, shopping opportunities in the vicinity, and souvenir centers (handicrafts) are often cited as qualities of an attractive destination (Mikulić et al., 2016).

The social atmosphere dimension was included because backpackers like to get to know and interact with other people and socially open environments that foster these contacts should be encouraged. Activities that can be arranged to improve the social atmosphere of the hostel include walking tours, surf lessons, movie sessions, and cooking classes (Oliveira and Gameiro, 2013). The social atmosphere can also be characterized by cozy and familiar social environments; that is, by combining the physical environment and the presence of guests (Musa and Thirumoorthi, 2011).

The equipment dimension can influence choices by backpackers. Usually, they look for fully equipped and furnished accommodation. Laundry services, available Wi-Fi internet, or computers are examples of supplementary services that are popular among backpackers (Hiransomboona, 2012). Bar service and the quality of the internet connection also reflect important supplementary services for hostel guests (Oliveira and Gameiro, 2013).

The quality of service personnel is an important attribute of the purchase behavior of backpackers. The quality of the service is related to the friendliness of the employees and mastery of the local language and English. Moreover, backpackers expect staff to be able to advise them on tourist activities (Hiransomboona, 2012).

Value for money can determine the attractiveness of a tourist destination to hostel guests (Mikulić et al., 2016). Price-related factors identified by backpackers include the offer of multiple room rate options, reasonable pricing concerning the service provided, appropriate pricing that fits one’s travel budget, and flexibility in tariffs (Hiransomboona, 2012).

The attribute knowledge and purchase behavior of backpackers can be an opportunity to improve the quality of services in an establishment (Amblee, 2015; Hiransomboona, 2012; Oliveira and Gameiro, 2013). Thus, in the client dimension, requests for guests to report their experiences on websites (for example, HostelWorld) at check-out is a strategy for monitoring feedback and driving continuous improvement. In this way, corrective actions can be taken promptly (Oliveira and Gameiro, 2013).

Based on the literature review, was formulated a set of evaluation questions. Employees or managers can answer those questions. A summary of the questions is provided in Table 2

Table 2.

Dimensions and questions of HOSTELQUALITY.

Dimension	Question	Scale (Label and Value)
Environment	$q_{1} :$ Are there any ecological practices to reduce energy and/or water consumption as a part of conservation measures or efficiency improvements? $q_{2} :$ Are there any initiatives for habitat protection or restoration, or strategies to manage the impact on biodiversity? $q_{3} :$ Are there any incentives for ecological activities to raise guests’ awareness of environmental preservation?	None (1) One occurrence (2) Two occurrences (3) Three occurrences (4) > Three occurrences (5)
Leadership	$q_{1} :$ Do the directors participate in meetings, associations, seminars, and/or training programs on quality and excellence to raise the profile of the area? $q_{2} :$ Are there employee recognition practices and/or incentives for continuous improvement? $q_{3} :$ Do you use systematic methods to scan trends and market conditions?	None (1) One occurrence (2) Two occurrences (3) Three occurrences (4) > Three occurrences (5)
Security	$q_{1} :$ Are there measures aimed at the overall security of the hostel? $q_{2} :$ Are there items/measures aimed at the individual security of the guests? $q_{3} :$ Are there security measures related to the physical location of the hostel?	None (1) One occurrence (2) Two occurrences (3) Three occurrences (4) > Three occurrences (5)
Cleanliness	$q_{1} :$ Are communal toilets cleaned daily? If so, how many times? $q_{2} :$ Are the rooms cleaned daily? If yes, how many times? $q_{3} :$ Are the communal areas cleaned daily? If yes, how many times?	None (1) One occurrence (2) Two occurrences (3) Three occurrences (4) > Three occurrences (5)
Equipment	$q_{1} :$ Does it have exclusive facilities or services to provide more privacy and comfort for guests? $q_{2} :$ Does it have communal facilities with the purpose of providing facilities for guests? $q_{3} :$ Does it use other languages for signages in facilities and spaces, on menus, and in publicity materials? $q_{4} :$ What is the speed of the hostel’s broadband internet?	From $q_{1}$ to $q_{3}$ None (1) One occurrence (2) Two occurrences (3) Three occurrences (4) > Three occurrences (5) For $q_{4}$ : Up to 10 MB (1) 11 to 15 MB (2) 16 to 20 MB (3) 21 to 25 MB (4) Above 25 MB (5)
Social Atmosphere	$q_{1} :$ Are there communal spaces in the hostel with the aim of promoting interaction among the guests? $q_{2} :$ Are there activities provided by the hostel in order to promote greater interaction among the guests? $q_{3} :$ Are there spaces in the hostel characterized by a warm and familiar atmosphere?	None (1) One occurrence (2) Two occurrences (3) Three occurrences (4) > Three occurrences (5)
Location	$q_{1} :$ How many points of access to public transport are there within walking distance—up to 2.5 km? $q_{2} :$ How many tourist attractions are there within a radius of up to 5 km? $q_{3} :$ Are there service infrastructure establishments such as hospitals, pharmacies, shopping malls, and restaurants within a radius of up to 2.5 km?	None (1) One occurrence (2) Two occurrences (3) Three occurrences (4) > Three occurrences (5)
Staff	$q_{1} :$ How many employees have academic training in the tourism/hotel sector? $q_{2} :$ How many employees are fluent in more than one foreign language? $q_{3} :$ Is there a policy of training employees to improve the quality of service? If so, how often does such training occur annually?	None (1) One occurrence (2) Two occurrences (3) Three occurrences (4) > Three occurrences (5)
Price	$q_{1} :$ Are there any facilities/amenities included in the room rate? $q_{2} :$ Does the hostel usually enter into partnerships to offer discounts or seasonal promotions?	None (1) One occurrence (2) Two occurrences (3) Three occurrences (4) > Three occurrences (5)
Customers	$q_{1} :$ Are there tools for identifying unmet customer needs? $q_{2} :$ Were products or services introduced in the hostel in response to information collected from customers?	None (1) One occurrence (2) Two occurrences (3) Three occurrences (4) > Three occurrences (5)

Each of these questions was evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 represents the least desired result and 5 represents the greatest expected value for the hostel. The data aggregation procedure took place in two steps. The first was done by intra-dimensional aggregation, generating a score for each of the 10 dimensions. Then, the inter-dimensional step provided an overall hostel score.

The intra-dimensional aggregation was performed with the additive model, in which the decision-maker defines the values of the weights.

d_{n} = \sum_{i = 1}^{n} q_{i} w_{i}

[1]

where

d_{n}

is the score of dimension n,

q_{i}

is the result of the judgment of question i of dimension n, and

w_{i}

is the weight of question i of dimension n.

The scores of each of the dimensions $(d_{n})$ were also aggregated in the second stage using the additive model. The result (final score) is called the quality score $(Q_{s c o r e})$ .

Q_{s c o r e} = \sum_{q = 1}^{n} d_{n} w_{n}

[2]

The quality score ranges from 1 to 5, where 1 represents the worst performance and 5 the best, as shown in Table 3.

Table 3.

Levels of quality.

Score	Quality Label	Description
$Q_{s c o r e} \leq 1.8$	Deficient	The hostel has general deficiencies in the criteria of quality, not meeting minimum requirements in a majority of the evaluated attributes.
$1.8 < Q_{s c o r e} \leq 2.6$	Weak	The hostel has a standard of quality below that required by the industry, characterized by the absence or minimum achievement of factors in each dimension.
$2.6 < Q_{s c o r e} \leq 3.4$	Average	Represents the ability to perform services on a regular basis, meeting the minimum service requirements of at least one factor in most dimensions.
$3.4 < Q_{s c o r e} \leq 4.2$	Good	Indicates that the hostel has the ability to perform the services in an expected manner, achieving at least two factors in the main quality criteria (dimensions).
$Q_{s c o r e} > 4.2$	Excellent	Represents excellence in the execution of services and facilities, totaling at least three factors in the main quality criteria.

The first two quality levels, deficient and weak, demonstrate weakness in most of the required attributes. The average level indicates the ability to perform services regularly, achieving at least one occurrence of most issues. To achieve good quality, a hostel must display at least two occurrences on the scale, indicating that the services provided met the guests’ expectations. Excellent is the maximum level in the services, with an average of at least three occurrences in each factor of HOSTELQUALITY.

This index named gap quality score ( ${G Q}_{s c o r e}$ ) measures the distance from the hostel to the best performance on the scale. This parameter can be used as a tool for continuous improvement or for monitoring establishments over time.

{G Q}_{s c o r e} = \sum_{q = 1}^{n} ({5 - d}_{n}) w_{n}

[3]

Results

In order to evaluate the performance of HOSTELQUALITY, an application was provided covering establishments in Recife, Olinda, and Ipojuca. These cities are chosen because they are tourist hotspots in Brazil (SETUR, 2008).

All the hostels were associated with the HostelWorld group. This platform covers more than 35,000 hotels and hostels in 170 countries (HSW, 2017). The platform features more than nine million comments from users who have stayed in their registered accommodation. These online reservation sites are considered influential in terms of guests’ decision-making processes and demands, as they publicly share client reviews (Kim et al., 2009; Torres et al., 2014).

There are 14 hostels in Recife, Olinda, and Ipojuca associated with the HostelWorld Group, and ten of the 14 hostels agreed to participate. This research used a non-probabilistic sample due to accessibility criteria for the interviewees (Batista and Campos, 2015).

This numerical application aims to present the operation of HOSTELQUALITY and demonstrate its characteristics. As the sampling process was non-probabilistic, such results cannot be generalized to the entire universe.

Interviews were conducted with the managers or owners of the 10 hostels using the structured questionnaire of HOSTELQUALITY. The respondents were expected to know both the infrastructure resources (physical attributes) and intangible attributes, including the services provided, as these aspects are determinants of guest satisfaction (Wilkins et al., 2007; Dong et al., 2014).

All interviews were conducted in person before the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Each interview lasted for around one and a half hours. The establishments and managers were not identified. The concepts of quality used to support the present research were then explained to standardize the language among the participants. After data collection, the

Q_{s c o r e}

for each hostel was calculated, and the results are shown in Table 4.

Table 4.

Hostels’ performance.

Hostel	$Q_{s c o r e}$	Quality Label	${G Q}_{s c o r e}$
$h_{1}$	2.77	Average	2.23
$h_{2}$	3.06	Average	1.94
$h_{3}$	3.62	Good	1.38
$h_{4}$	4.06	Good	0.94
$h_{5}$	3.55	Good	1.45
$h_{6}$	3.22	Average	1.78
$h_{7}$	3.68	Good	1.32
$h_{8}$	3.71	Good	1.29
$h_{9}$	2.59	Weak	2.41
$h_{10}$	2.35	Weak	2.65

Two hostels ( $h_{9}$ and $h_{10}$ ) were in the weak quality category and had similar results. Visually, this characteristic can be seen in the location, price, and social atmosphere dimensions. The hostels’ locations had a strong tourist appeal with several attractions and services within walking distance. Customer perceptions are positively influenced by the amenities offered by the accommodation. The environment, staff, and leadership were the dimensions that reached the lowest scores for both hostels. In terms of the environmental dimension, the hostels followed few ecological practices and offered few incentives for the protection and restoration of the environment.

Staff and leadership both presented similar scores in the weak category. The staff were primarily volunteers at $h_{9}$ and $h_{10}$ hostels. In this way, the turnover of personnel was intense, which hindered investment in employees. This is a worrying factor, as it is an intangible aspect for guests; well-trained staff result in a positive image for the company and encourage positive online feedback (Barreda and Bilgihan, 2013). Figure 1 shows a summary of the radars by category.

Figure 1.

Hostels with Weak, Average, Good, and Global Radars.

Three hostels ( $h_{1}$ , $h_{2}$ , and $h_{6}$ ) were classified as moderate quality and had similar scores in the location, price, and staff dimensions. However, the facilities and social atmosphere dimensions were different. In the facilities dimension, hostel $h_{2}$ had a score of 4.25, which was the highest in this category. This establishment had high-speed internet and was the largest of the hostels surveyed. Furthermore, it provided some conveniences for guests, such as individual power outlets in bedrooms, laundry facilities, computers, hairdryers, and co-working spaces. Hostel $h_{6}$ stood out in the social atmosphere dimension and reached a score of 4. The team’s performance, free local experience structure, and social atmosphere of the hostel contributed to this result.

The three hostels obtained similar negative results in the staff and environmental dimensions. In the staff dimension, the three establishments did not have employees with hospitality and tourism-related qualifications; hostels $h_{1}$ and $h_{2}$ also did not train their employees. This goes against the preferences of backpackers, who expect efficient staff who are capable of providing information on tourism in the region (Hiransomboona, 2012). In the environment dimension, these hostels showed similar actions, such as the timed use of air conditioners and bathroom signs. Only hostel $h_{6}$ stood apart by collecting rainwater for use in the garden.

Approximately 50% of the hostels reached the good-quality category. Hostels in this class stood out in the dimensions of staff, safety, and the social atmosphere. In the staff aspect, unlike hostels in the other categories, there was an appreciation for tourism and hospitality professionals, as demonstrated by the fact that three of the hostels had at least two employees who had graduated in these areas. These hostels required English-speaking receptionists, and all hostels in this class had at least two professionals with this ability. These aspects follow Oliveira and Gameiro (2013), who pointed out that to reach a level of excellence, the staff must have a baccalaureate degree and the ability to speak several languages.

Hostels $h_{4}$ and $h_{8}$ had the highest security scores. Hostel $h_{4}$ used wristbands for identification, offered individual lockers, and had women-only rooms. Hostel $h_{8}$ provided private security at night, security cameras at the entrances to the rooms, 24-hour reception, and single-sex rooms. Another essential dimension for hostels at this level is the social atmosphere. Hostels $h_{5}$ , $h_{7},$ and $h_{8}$ often held themed events according to the time of year. Hostel $h_{8}$ offered a bar with live music, barbecue facilities, and a swimming pool for guests. Hostel $h_{3}$ offered facilities such as swimming pools, video projectors, and smoking areas. On the other hand, hostel $h_{4}$ had welcome events for guests that created emotional ties with the staff, in addition to hosting movie screenings.

The cleanliness dimension had lower average values than the others. This result was probably due to the cleaning schedule. The communal toilets were cleaned twice a day, while rooms and public spaces were cleaned only once per day. These frequencies can be considered low because they are spaces with a high turnover of people, and cleanliness also represents a powerful security factor for hostel guests (Amblee, 2015).

The establishments obtained low scores in the environmental dimension. However, hostel $h_{7}$ , which uses solar panels to generate energy for its electric showers, achieved a good result. Also, hostel $h_{4}$ was the most eco-friendly among those surveyed, achieving a score of 4.67. Their ecofriendly actions included having taps and toilets with water waste-control installed, performing selective organic collection, and having a vegetable garden.

Finally, it is important to note that $h_{4}$ the hostel that obtained the highest ${G Q}_{s c o r e}$ score among the others, obtaining a score of 4.06, was also the establishment that scored the highest in the leadership dimension with a score of 4.33. This fact can be linked to the intensive participation of directors in area associations, events, and training programs on innovation and quality. They also encouraged employee recognition programs and used systematic methods to scan trends and market conditions, such as benchmarking and follow-ups with guest comments on specific sites.

The $Q_{s c o r e}$ indexes ranged from 2.35 to 4.06. It is possible to calculate the averages of the indexes by region, hotel group, city, or category. The ${G Q}_{s c o r e}$ of the 10 hostels was 3.26, and the performance by dimension is presented in Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Quality Radar of the 10 Hostels.

The individual $Q_{s c o r e}$ ranged from 2.35 to 4.06. It is possible to calculate the averages of the indexes by region, hotel group, city, or category. The $Q_{s c o r e}$ of the ten hostels was 3.26, and the performance by dimension is presented in Figure 2.

Conclusions

The present study aimed to create a method for evaluating the quality of hostel facilities. Based on a review of the literature on tourism, hospitality, and quality, a methodology called HOSTELQUALITY was developed.

The HOSTELQUALITY comprises 29 questions across ten dimensions, encompassing the main attributes considered essential by hostel guests. The quality score of the hostels and the gap quality score allow an assessment of the current situation of the hostel and how close it is to excellence. In addition, the method has a graphical output as a radar. This allows for a quick interpretation of the results. An additional conversion scale interprets the quality score in a five-level classification of hostels: deficient, weak, average, good, and excellent.

The method was applied in the real world to three of the most touristic cities in Brazil. It was possible to assess the performance of the method and compare its output with data collection. HOSTELQUALITY showed that some of these hostels were in the weak quality category and below some quality standards. The poor results in the staff and leadership dimensions were related to the absence of an employee training plan. This is a concern, as staff quality is an intangible aspect for guests. This result was also observed in the three hostels in the moderate-quality category.

Practical and theoretical implications

This research has applications in management, tourism, and hospitality. It has implications for academic and market environments. The results of this study contribute to academic research related to the use of qualitative methods to measure the quality of hostels. The investigation results provide data for strategic planning, especially in identifying the strengths and weaknesses of hosting institutions. The analysis categories allow us to verify where it is necessary to propose improvement actions and what to focus on as differentials to be explored in the institutions.

As for the marketing implications, the HOSTELQUALITY methodology can be used to classify hostels on hosting sites. In addition to being used as a guide for travelers, it can be consulted when choosing accommodation options. The system is suitable for analyzing hostel quality and providing quick information to guests. In addition, HOSTELQUALITY could serve as a guide for hostel managers to perform benchmarking regarding quality in similar establishments. It is worth mentioning that the radar results can provide information for hostel decision-makers, management groups, and government sectors. It can be used to compare quality improvements over time. Finally, the methodology can be a gateway to the development of new quality assessment methods for hostels.

Limitations

The model was designed using an additive model to promote compensation between the dimensions. In this sense, it is suggested that non-compensatory methods for the analysis of unbalanced dimensions be developed. Also, as it is a method developed for hostels, it cannot evaluate other forms of accommodation without adaptation. Another limitation is that the method considers a single decision-maker. There is the possibility of presenting respondent biases, as the questions can be answered based on the perceptions of the interviewee, from a single point of view.

Another research limitation refers to the sample size, 14 hostels in Recife, Olinda and Ipojuca. The results cannot be generalized, as they are not representative of the hostel population associated with the HostelWorld Group. The sample presented worked as a focus group to test the qualitative methods to measure the quality of hostels. As an intention for future research, applying a more significant sample is suggested.

Further research

Developing an index that measures the correlation between the ten dimensions is recommended in future research. This new indicator will allow a better understanding of the associations between the variables and dimensions of the method. Such an indicator could use the Spearman or Pearson Correlation Coefficient.

As a second recommendation for further research, the HOSTELQUALITY could incorporate additional empirical variables. The improvement will show how behavioral, cultural, and legal factors affect guests’ evaluations.

Finally, incorporating neural networks and artificial intelligence mechanisms into HOSTELQUALIT can support the decision maker in evaluating hostels. Such application will require deepening the questions of interaction and perception. However, nowadays, using the HOSTELQUALITY results in predictive tools such as Perceptron allows new horizons of evaluation of hostels.

ORCID iD

Marcos Felipe Falcao Sobral https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4768-2622

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento CientÃ&z.hfl;Â-fico e TecnolÃ&z.hfl;Â3gico (001).

References

Adam

Agyeiwaah

Dayour

(2021) Understanding the social identity, motivations, and sustainable behaviour among backpackers: a clustering approach. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing 38(2): 139–154.

Ali

Amin

Cobanoglu

(2015) An Integrated Model of Service Experience, Emotions, Satisfaction, and Price Acceptance: An Empirical Analysis in the Chinese Hospitality Industry. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management 25(4): 449–475.

Alrawadieh

Law

(2019) Determinants of hotel guests’ satisfaction from the perspective of online hotel reviewers. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research 13(1): 84–97.

Amblee

(2015) The impact of cleanliness on customer perceptions of security in hostels: A WOM-based approach. International Journal of Hospitality Management 49: 37–39.

Ban

Ramsaran

(2017) An exploratory examination of service quality attributes in the ecotourism industry. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 34(1): 132–1148.

Baptista

Campos

DCD

(2015) Metodologias de pesquisa em ciências: análises quantitativa e qualitativa. In: Metodologias de Pesquisa em Ciências: análises Quantitativa e Qualitativa. Rio de Janeiro: LTC.

Barreda

Bilgihan

(2013) An analysis of user-generated content for hotel experiences. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology 4(3): 263–280.

Beerli-Palacio

Martin-Santana

Román-Montoya

(2020) Complementary services at hotels in accordance with their pricing strategy and the price sensitivity of tourists. International Journal of Hospitality Management 87: 102458.

Benavides

Quintana-García

Marchante-Lara

(2014) Total quality management, corporate social responsibility and performance in the hotel industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management 41: 77–87.

10.

Berezina

Bilgihan

Cobanoglu

, et al. (2015) Understanding Satisfied and Dissatisfied Hotel Customers: Text Mining of Online Hotel Reviews. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management 25(1): 1–24.

11.

Brochado

Rita

Gameiro

(2015) Exploring backpackers’ perceptions of the hostel service quality. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 27(8): 1839–1855.

12.

Brochado

Rita

(2018) Exploring heterogeneity among backpackers in hostels. Current Issues in Tourism 21(13): 1502–1520.

13.

Chakraborty

(2019) Perceived credibility of online hotel reviews and its impact on hotel booking intentions. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 31: 3465–3483.

14.

Chitty

Ward

Chua

(2007) An application of the ECSI model as a predictor of satisfaction and loyalty for backpacker hostels. Marketing Intelligence and Planning 25(6): 563–580.

15.

Damasio

(1994) Descartes Error: Emotion, Reason and the Human Brain. London: Vintage Books.

16.

Deng

Yeh

Sung

(2013) A customer satisfaction index model for international tourist hotels: Integrating consumption emotions into the American Customer Satisfaction Index. International Journal of Hospitality Management 35: 133–140.

17.

Dong

Zhang

(2014) Classification of customer satisfaction attributes: an application of online hotel review analysis. In: Conference on e-Business, e-Services and e-Society. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 238–250. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-662-45526-5_23.

18.

El-Adly

(2018) Modelling the relationship between hotel perceived value, customer satisfaction, and customer loyalty. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 50: 322–332.

19.

Fornell

(1992) A National Customer Satisfaction Barometer: The Swedish Experience. Journal of Marketing 56(1): 6.

20.

Han

Back

(2006) Investigating the effects of consumption emotions on customer satisfaction and repeat visit intentions in the lodging industry. Journal of Hospitality and Leisure Marketing 15(3): 5–30.

21.

Han

Back

(2007) Assessing customers' emotional experiences influencing their satisfaction in the lodging industry. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing 23(1): 43–56.

22.

Havlena

Holbrook

(1986) The varieties of consumption experience: comparing two typologies of emotion in consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Research 13(3): 394–404.

23.

Hecht

Martin

(2006) Backpacking and hostel-picking: an analysis from Canada. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 18(1): 69–77.

24.

Hiransomboona

(2012) Marketing mix affecting accommodation service buying decisions of backpacker tourist traveling at Inner Rattanakosin Island in Bangkok, Thailand. Procedia Economics and Finance 3: 276–283.

25.

HSW (2017) Annual Report 2016. Dublin, Ireland: Hostel World Group. Avaliable at: http://www.hostelworldgroup.com/∼/media/Files/H/Hostelworld/reports-and-presentations/hostelworld-annual-report-2016.pdf (Access 10 jun 2020).

26.

Jiang

Luk

Cardinali

(2018) The role of pre-consumption experience in perceived value of retailer brands: Consumers’ experience from emerging markets. Journal of Business Research 86: 374–385.

27.

Jordan

Spencer

Prayag

(2019) Tourism impacts, emotions and stress. Annals of Tourism Research 75: 213–226.

28.

Keshavarz

Jamshidi

(2018) Service quality evaluation and the mediating role of perceived value and customer satisfaction in customer loyalty. International Journal of Tourism Cities 4(2): 220–244.

29.

Kim

Fesenmaier

(2014) Measuring Emotions in Real Time. Journal of Travel Research 54(4): 419–429.

30.

Kim

(2009) The effects of perceived justice on recovery satisfaction, trust, word-of-mouth, and revisit intention in upscale hotels. Tourism Management 30(1): 51–62.

31.

Kotler

. 1998. Administraçäo de Marketing: Análise, Planejamento, Implantaçäo e Controle. 5. ed. São Paulo: Atlas.

32.

Knutson

Beck

Kim

, et al. (2009) Identifying the dimensions of the guest's hotel experience. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly 50(1): 44–55.

33.

Lam

Cheung

Lugosi

(2021) The impacts of cultural and emotional intelligence on hotel guest satisfaction: Asian and non-Asian perceptions of staff capabilities. Journal of China Tourism Research 17(3): 455–477.

34.

Lee

Cai

DeFranco

, et al. (2020) Exploring influential factors affecting guest satisfaction: big data and business analytics in consumer-generated reviews. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology 11(1): 137–153.

35.

Levine

(2010) Emotion and power (as social influence): Their impact on organizational citizenship and counterproductive individual and organizational behavior. Human Resource Management Review 20(1): 4–17.

36.

Law

(2013) Determinants of customer satisfaction in the hotel industry: An application of online review analysis. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research 18(7): 784–802.

37.

Lazarus

(1991) Emotion and Adaptation. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.

38.

Lockwood

Pyun

(2019) Developing a scale measuring customers’ servicescape perceptions in upscale hotels. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 32(1): 40–59.

39.

Møller Jensen

Hjalager

(2019) Travel motivations of first-time, repeat, and serial backpackers. Tourism and Hospitality Research 19(4): 465–477.

40.

Mikulić

Krešić

Miličević

, et al. (2016) Destination attractiveness drivers among urban hostel tourists: An analysis of frustrators and delighters. International Journal of Tourism Research 18(1): 74–81.

41.

Moro

Batista

Rita

, et al. (2019) Are the states united? An analysis of US hotels’ offers through TripAdvisor’s eyes. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research 43(7): 1112–1129.

42.

Musa

Thirumoorthi

(2011) Red Palm: exploring service quality and servicescape of the best backpacker hostel in Asia. Current Issues in Tourism 14(2): 103–120.

43.

Nash

Thyne

Davies

(2006) An investigation into customer satisfaction levels in the budget accommodation sector in Scotland: A case study of backpacker tourists and the Scottish Youth Hostels Association. Tourism Management 27(3): 525–532.

44.

Nieves

Quintana

(2018) Human resource practices and innovation in the hotel industry: The mediating role of human capital. Tourism and Hospitality Research 18(1): 72–83.

45.

Ostovare

Shahraki

(2019) Evaluation of hotel websites using the multicriteria analysis of PROMETHEE and GAIA: Evidence from the five-star hotels of Mashhad. Tourism Management Perspectives 30: 107–116.

46.

Oliveira

Gameiro

(2013) Toward a better understanding of backpackers’ motivations. Tékhne 11(2): 92–99.

47.

Pearce

(1990) The Backpacker Phenomenon: Preliminary Answers to Basic Questions. Department of Tourism. North Queensland: James Cook University.

48.

Page

McKenzie

Bossuyt

, et al. (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews. BMJ 372(71): 71–x.

49.

Prasad

Wirtz

(2014) Measuring hotel guest satisfaction by using an online quality management system. Journal of Hospitality Marketing and Management 23(4): 445–463.

50.

Rahimi

Kozak

(2017) Impact of customer relationship management on customer satisfaction: The case of a budget hotel chain. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing 34(1): 40–51.

51.

Refaeli

Itzhaky

(2021) Which road will I take?’Predictors of risk-taking behaviour among young backpackers. Current Issues in Tourism 25: 1–15.

52.

Ren

Qiu

Wang

, et al. (2016) Exploring customer experience with budget hotels: Dimensionality and satisfaction. International Journal of Hospitality Management 52: 13–23.

53.

SHAW

. 2005. Revolutionize your customer experience. Springer.

54.

Santos

Sousa

Ramos

, et al. (2021) Emotions and involvement in tourism settings. Current Issues in Tourism 1–6: 1526–1531.

55.

SETUR/PE . (2008). Pernambuco para o Mundo – Planejamento Estratégico 2008 a 2020. Secretaria de Turismo de Pernambuco. Avaliable at: http://www2.setur.pe.gov.br/c/document_library/get_file?p_l_id=22093andfolderId=30717andname=DLFE-1984.pdf (Access: 12 mar. 2020).

56.

Sipe

(2017) Leadership, Innovation Outputs, and Business Performance: A Mixed Methods Study of Senior Managers in the Attractions Industry. International Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Administration: 1–24. Advanced online publications.

57.

Sukhu

Choi

Bujisic

, et al. (2019) Satisfaction and positive emotions: A comparison of the influence of hotel guests’ beliefs and attitudes on their satisfaction and emotions. International Journal of Hospitality Management 77: 51–63.

58.

Tajeddini

Trueman

(2012) Managing Swiss Hospitality: How cultural antecedents of innovation and customer-oriented value systems can influence performance in the hotel industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management 31(4): 1119–1129.

59.

Tanford

Raab

Kim

(2012) Determinants of customer loyalty and purchasing behavior for full-service and limited-service hotels. International Journal of Hospitality Management 31(2): 319–328.

60.

Torres

Lehto

(2014) Examining key drivers of customer delight in a hotel experience: A cross-cultural perspective. International Journal of Hospitality Management 36: 255–262.

61.

Valença

Sobral

MFF

Andrade Lima

, et al (2020) Innovation radar in hospitality: a new procedure to evaluate the innovation in hotels. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology 11(2): 313–326.

62.

Vavra

(1997) Improving Your Measurement of Customer Satisfaction: A Guide to Creating, Conducting, Analyzing, and Reporting Customer Satisfaction Measurement Programs. Milwaukee, WI: ASQ quality press.

63.

Valiyappurakkal

(2021) Gap theory based performance analysis: A case study of an Indian hostel building with passive architectural character. Journal of Building Engineering 41: 102395.

64.

Volo

(2021) The experience of emotion: Directions for tourism design. Annals of Tourism Research 86: 103097.

65.

(2016) The antecedents of customer satisfaction and dissatisfaction toward various types of hotels: A text mining approach. International Journal of Hospitality Management 55: 57–69.

66.

Chen

(2020) Evaluation of efficiency and technological bias of tourist hotels by a meta-frontier DEA model. Journal of the Operational Research Society 71(5): 718–732.

67.

Wang

Chen

(2012) Total quality management, market orientation and hotel performance: The moderating effects of external environmental factors. International Journal of Hospitality Management 31(1): 119–129.

68.

Wilkins

Merrilees

Herington

(2007) Towards an understanding of total service quality in hotels. International Journal of Hospitality Management 26(4): 840–853.

69.

H-C

(2013) Assessment of Service Quality in the Hotel Industry. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism 14(3): 218–244.

Hostelquality: A methodology for assessing the quality of hostels

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Customer satisfaction in hotels and hostels

Method

Results

Conclusions

Practical and theoretical implications

Limitations

Further research

ORCID iD

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

References