International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management

The Influence of Hotel Attributes on the Selection of a Conference Venue

Michael Riley Nikos Perogiannis
Article information:
To cite this document:
Michael Riley Nikos Perogiannis, (1990),"The Influence of Hotel Attributes on the Selection of a Conference Venue",
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 2 Iss 1 pp.
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09596119010005509
Downloaded on: 21 April 2015, At: 17:47 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 0 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 784 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Ahmed Hassanien, Crispin Dale, (2012),"Product innovation in events venues: directions, process and evaluation", Journal of
Facilities Management, Vol. 10 Iss 4 pp. 266-286 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14725961211265738
Graham Hankinson, (2005),"Destination brand images: a business tourism perspective", Journal of Services Marketing, Vol.
19 Iss 1 pp. 24-32 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/08876040510579361
Downloaded by ECU Libraries At 17:47 21 April 2015 (PT)

Judith Mair, Michelle Whitford, (2013),"An exploration of events research: event topics, themes and emerging trends",
International Journal of Event and Festival Management, Vol. 4 Iss 1 pp. 6-30 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17582951311307485

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 161304 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication
Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 THE INFLUENCE OF HOTEL ATTRIBUTES ON THE SELECTION OF A CONFERENCE VENUE
T
he results of a study conducted amongst
professional conference managers and
hotel managers are presented.
The Influence
of Hotel
Attributes on
Downloaded by ECU Libraries At 17:47 21 April 2015 (PT)
the Selection
of a
Conference
Venue
Michael Riley and Nikos Perogiannis
The relationship between the hotel industry and the
conference industry is both more conventionally
commercial and institutional than other host-guest
relationships. It is essentially an agency transaction in
which neither of the parties is actually the consumer. On
the one hand, repeat business suggests familiarity between
personnel but on the other, the long timespan between
agreement and implementation separates them. This study
asks how close is their thinking on one central aspect of
the relationship. At the same time, the study is aware of
the kind of complacency that comes from being too
intimate. The study uses a set of fifty attributes of hotels
and attempts to find the attributes that are salient to the
decision to choose a particular hotel. Many, though not
all, of the attributes used are taken from a similar study
by Oberoi and Hales[1].
17
The Aims of the Study
The study has three objectives. It seeks to answer the
questions:
(1) Is there a consensus between professional
conference organisers and hotel managers as to
what the former consider salient attributes in the
choice of a venue? In other words, do hoteliers
know their professional customers?
(2) What are the salient attributes?
(3) Is there any connection between the salient
attributes and re-occurring operational problems?
The first two objectives were achieved by asking a sample
of both professional conference organisers and hotel
managers to rate the same set of attributes with the
proviso, in the case of the hotel managers, that they were
rating the attributes on what their potential professional
customers would make of them. The third objective was
achieved by an invitation to state three common faults or
complaints. The idea here is not to argue that sales
attribute ratings and listed faults can be directly correlated,
but simply to see if any of the salient attributes that are
operational in character appear as common poor
performers. If this were so, it would indicate a major factor
in the relationship between the parties.
Whilst common sense suggests that the selection decision
will be some function of object attributes, the evidence
from previous studies that this is so is not that convincing.
The problem lies in two areas; picking out the salient
attributes then finding out if and how they work together
in the choice calculation. The rational model has been most
thoroughly tested in this area by Lewis[2]. His findings,
however, even cast doubt on the role of conspicuous
attributes themselves concluding that the choice may be
very idiosyncratic. Lewis was, however, studying individual
customer choices of hotels. Claxton[3] studied the choice
of conference venue directly and attempted to measure
"trade offs" between attributes using conjoint analysis.
The use of attributes is more confidently applied to
professional conference organisers simply because they
are not consuming personally and, therefore, are less likely
to introduce idiosyncrasies into their calculation. The study
is not attempting to produce a valid rank order of attributes
but merely a set of ordered attributes that are salient and
another set which are not. One of the tasks of the
methodology is to set a barrier as to what is salient and
what is not. The role of the rank order is to measure the
degree of consensus.
The Approach
The study used a questionnaire which listed, in random
fashion, 50 attributes of hotels and asked each subject
 18 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY HOSPITALITY MANAGEMENT 2 , 1

Table I. The Rank Order of Questions by Proportion of Combined Frequency of Categories 3 and 4 for Both Samples

Sample A: Conference organisers percentage ranking for Sample B: Hotel managers percentage ranking for
grades 3 and 4 grades 3 and 4
Question Grades 3 and 4 Question Grades 3 and 4
Number (%) Number (%)

41 96.96 High quality of food 40 100 Helpful staff

42 93.93 Cleanliness of hotel 41 100 High quality of food
46 93.93 Experienced conference manager 42 99.99 Cleanliiness of hotel
to deal with
2 93.93 Comfortable seating in conference 2 97.77 Comfortable seating in
room conference room
4 93.93 Good sound insulation in 46 97.72 Experienced conference
conference room manager to deal with
Downloaded by ECU Libraries At 17:47 21 April 2015 (PT)

23 93.93 Complete blackout attainable in 10 95.55 Availability of basic audio-

conference room visual equipment
19 93.75 Hotel able to accommodate all 3 93.32 Good acoustics in conference
delegates in-house room
40 93.75 Helpful staff 47 93.32 Hotel experienced and
specialised in conferences
44 90.9 Efficient check-in/check-out 44 91.1 Efficient check-in/check-out
procedures procedures
3 90.62 Good acoustics in conference 19 88.63 Hotel able to accommodate all
room delegates in-house
13 87.87 Air conditioned conference room 26 84.43 Good road links
47 84.84 Hotel experienced and specialised 4 84.43 Good sound insulation in
in conferences conference room
7 81.81 Availability of syndicate rooms 15 77.77 Good parking facilities
34 78.78 Competitive room rates 7 77.77 Availability of syndicate rooms
1 75.75 Purpose-built conference room 48 73.32 Previous satisfactory
experience with hotel
26 72.72 Good road links 23 73.32 Complete blackout attainable
in conference room
35 71.87 Competitive catering rates 34 71.1 Competitive room rates
10 69.69 Availability of basic audio-visual 13 71.1 Air conditioined conference
equipment room
36 66.66 Discount policy on room rates 27 70.44 Good rail service
6 66.66 Availability of adjoining breakout 1 68.88 Purpose-built conference
rooms room
15 63.63 Good parking facilities 35 68.88 Competitive catering rates
5 63.63 Natural daylight in conference 6 66.66 Availability of adjoining
room breakout rooms
24 63.33 Availability of accommodation in 14 64.44 Modern and new facilities
suites if required
22 59.99 Availability of "state of the art" 5 62.78 Natural daylight in conference
communication facilities room
18 59.37 Dining room for the use of 12 62.21 Availability of typewriters,
delegates exclusively etc. for use if required
(Continued)
 THE INFLUENCE OF HOTEL ATTRIBUTES ON THE SELECTION OF A CONFERENCE VENUE 19

Table I. Continued

Sample A: Conference organisers percentage ranking for Sample B: Hotel managers percentage ranking for
grades 3 and 4 grades 3 and 4
Question Grades 3 and 4 Question Grades 3 and 4
Number (%) Number (%)

12 57.57 Availability of typewriters, etc. for 24 59.08 Availability of accommodation

use if required in suites if required
8 53.33 Conference room bigger than 38 53.33 Catering, conference room,
actually needed etc. included in price
14 51.51 Modern and new facilities 20 46.65 Availability of exhibition space
48 51.51 Previous satisfactory experience 16 39.99 Sports recreation facilities
with hotel
27 48.48 Good rail service 36 39.52 Discount policy on room rates
Downloaded by ECU Libraries At 17:47 21 April 2015 (PT)

37 46.87 Discount policy on catering rates 39 33.33 Availability of secretarial staff

16 45.45 Sports recreation facilities 22 33.32 Availability of "state of the
art" communication facilities
38 34.37 Catering, conference room, etc. 18 31.1 Dining room for the use of
included in price delegates exclusively
20 32.25 Availability of exhibition space 37 29.54 Discount policy on catering
rates
39 30.3 Availability of secretarial staff 8 26.66 Conference room bigger than
actually needed
29 20.68 Town/city centre location 29 20.92 Town/city centre location
49 18.74 No other function held at the 30 17.77 Availability of night-life
hotel at the same time entertainment nearby
17 18.74 Bars/lounges for the use of 33 13.63 Hotel situated within three
delegates exclusively miles of a major airport
32 18.18 Availability of restaurants nearby 28 13.63 Shopping facilities nearby
9 16.12 Conference room with theatre- 17 13.33 Bars/lounges for the use of
style slope delegates exclusively
33 15.62 Hotel situated within three miles 31 10 Countryside location
of a major airport
11 15.62 Translating facilities 43 9.3 Availability of staff speaking all
major languages
43 12.89 Availability of staff speaking all 32 9.09 Availability of restaurants
major languages nearby
31 10.71 Countryside location 50 8.88 Hotel belongs to a chain
45 9.09 Coffee shop open 24 hours 45 4.54 Coffee shop open 24 hours
28 3.12 Shopping facilities nearby 25 4.44 Availability of night-life
entertainment in-house
30 3.03 Availability of night-life 9 4.44 Conference room with
entertainment nearby theatre-style slope
50 0 Hotel belongs to a chain 11 2.27 Translating facilities
21 0 Shopping facilities in-house 49 0 No other function held at the
hotel at the same time
25 0 Availability of night-life 21 0 Shopping facilities in-house
entertainment in-house
 20 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY HOSPITALITY MANAGEMENT 2,1

Table II.

Sample A: Conference organisers percentage ranking for Sample B: Hotel managers percentage ranking for
grades 3 and 4 grades 3 and 4
Question Grades 3 and 4 Question Grades 3 and 4
Number (%) Number (%)

41 96.96 High quality of food 40 100 Helpful staff

42 93.93 Cleanliness of hotel 41 100 High quality of food

46 93.93 Experienced conference manager 42 99.99 Cleanliness of hotel

to deal with

2 93.93 Comfortable seating in conference 2 97.77 Comfortable seating in

room conference room

4 93.93 Good sound insulation in 46 97.72 Experienced conference

conference room manager to deal with
Downloaded by ECU Libraries At 17:47 21 April 2015 (PT)

23 93.93 Complete blackout attainable in 10 95.55 Availability of basic audio-

conference room visual equipment

19 93.75 Hotel able to accommodate all 3 93.32 Good acoustics in conference

delegates in-house room

40 93.75 Helpful staff 47 93.32 Hotel experienced and

specialised in conferences

44 90.9 Efficient check-in/check-out 44 91.1 Efficient check-in/check-out

procedures procedures

3 90.62 Good acoustics in conference 19 88.63 Hotel able to accommodate all

room delegates in-house

13 87.87 Air-conditioned conference room 26 84.43 Good road links

47 84.84 Hotel experienced and specialised 4 94.43 Good sound insulation in

in conferences conference room

7 81.81 Availability of syndicate rooms 15 77.77 Good parking facilities

34 78.78 Competitive room rates

1 75.75 Purpose-built conference room

to rate each attribute in terms of its significance to a
conference organiser's decision to choose a particular hotel
based on a four-point scale. The study recognised at the
outset that most attributes of hotels would be necessary
for a conference and that their presence would be assumed.
The scale was constructed so that the categories
represented "not at all important", "necessary but would
not arbitrate between venues", "necessary and would
arbitrate between options" and "crucial in the selection".
This creates a division in the scale between categories that
arbitrate in the selection process and those that do not.
Following this line, a rank order of significance is
constructed by splitting the scale so that 1-2 represents
no significance and 3-4, significance. The frequencies in
category are the unit of measurement. This avoids the
assumption of equal intervals implied if the mean is used
to form the rank. Using frequencies, however, necessitates
the imposition of an arbitrary bench mark of significance.
The assumption is made here that statements achieving
a frequency of 0.75 and over in categories 3 and 4 are
significant attributes to the choice of venue.
Questionnaires were sent to 82 conference managers and
74 hotel managers. The sample was not random. In the
case of professional conference organisers, it was taken
from a list of their professional association. Similarly, the
hotel managers sample came from a listing of conference
hotels to ensure that the views were relevant. The
resultant sample was 33 conference organisers and 45
hotel managers.
 THE INFLUENCE OF HOTEL ATTRIBUTES ON THE SELECTION OF A CONFERENCE VENUE 2 1

The Findings
The analysis which follows is taken from Table I which
lists the rank order of questions by proportion of combined
frequency of categories 3 and 4 for both samples.
There is a high degree of correlation in the rank order
between the samples; correlation = 0.931. (A rank order
correlation is a measure of the closeness of the relationship
between two sets of ranks. A correlation can be both
positive and negative. Perfect positive correlation would
be 1, but in general terms a score of 0.7 is considered
a positive correlation.) There is a strong consensus and,
not surprising, the attributes categorised as salient also
display a strong similarity. Table II lists the attributes
achieving a proportion of 0.75.
Downloaded by ECU Libraries At 17:47 21 April 2015 (PT)
significantly disagree. Here, the study reverts to using the
mean score instead of the frequency. The mean score for
each attribute for each sample was compared. Each question-
attribute was submitted to a t-test at 0.05. (A t-test is a
statistical test of significance of the difference between two
mean scores. The statistic takes account of the distribution
of scores and sample sizes. The hypothesis is that there
is no difference between the two mean scores on each
question-attribute. The test attempts to prove that the two
means come from different populations. If the probability
of this is less than the prescribed level of confidence, here
0.05, then the samples are said to differ significantly and
a real difference between the means is acceptable.) Table
III displays the attributes which were significantly different.

This is revealing, but again, not too surprising. There is

a "keep it simple stick to the knitting" feel about Table
II Sample A. The conference organisers are concerned
with getting the basics right. To an extent, the hotel
managers have agreed. This operational focus reflects the
findings of Renaghan and Kay[4].
Given the degree of consensus, it was thought essential
to highlight those attributes on which the two samples
. . .venue selection is very
closely linked to expected
performance. . .
Most of these are not salient, but two attributes, 4 and
23, are. Hotel managers have not realised how important
these operational matters are to an organiser.

Table III. Significantly Different Attributes

Sample A: Sample B:
Conference Hotel
Organisers Managers
Question Number Mean Mean

4 3.48 3.17 Good sound insulation

9 1.77 1.44 Conference room with theatre-style slope
15 2.72 3.02 Good parking facilities
18 2.59 2.17 Dining room for the use of delegates exclusively
22 2.7 2.22 Availability of "state of the art" communication facilities
23 3.45 3.06 Complete blackout attainable in conference room
28 1.5 1.84 Shopping facilities nearby
30 1.51 1.86 Availability of night-life entertainment nearby
36 2.81 2.32 Discount policy on room rates
37 2.46 2.04 Discount policy on catering rates
46 3.45 3.72 Experienced conference manager to deal with
47 3.21 3.62 Hotel experienced and specialised in conferences
48 2.57 3.04 Previous satisfactory experience with hotel
49 1.93 1.15 No other function held at the hotel at the same time
50 1.12 1.71. Hotel belongs to a chain
 22 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY HOSPITALITY MANAGEMENT 2 , 1

excellence and the consensus a tango around the same

Table IV. The Most Persistent Faults old problems. The fact that discount policies seem not
to be influential simply adds to this picture.
Conference % Hotel %
Organisers Managers

Untrained and Air

unprofessional conditioning 48
staff 52 What really does constitute
Low standard of Poor timing 48 value for money
audio-visual
equipment 34 in the conference
Lack of staff
when needed
34 Noise 27 business?
Conference Low standard
room not of audio-visual
These results need to be viewed with caution because
purpose built 27 equipment 25
Downloaded by ECU Libraries At 17:47 21 April 2015 (PT)

of the small sample size, limited objectives and separate

The final objective was to see if there is any connection
between persistent complaints and salient attributes. Each
subject was asked to rank the four most persistent faults.
Table IV is based on the proportion against total possible
frequency.
The results shown in Table IV are not surprising, but
indirectly, most of these are related to the salient attributes
of Sample A (Table II).
Conclusions
The overall conclusion drawn is that venue selection is
very closely linked to expected performance and not to
location and facility factors. Conference organisers are
looking for places where they get the detail right and
where they are treated exclusively. The thought occurs,
however, that the fact that the common faults are
represented in the salient attributes of the conference
organisers may be an explanation for the consensus. If
true, it would indicate a sad state of affairs. Seen in this
light, the strategies of conference organisers might be
avoidance of known problems rather than a search for
sets of data. However, what the study does suggest is
that research into directly linking poor performance to
selection of venue would be very fruitful. If conference
organisers are "living with" common faults then there
must be some intervening processes such as structural
or market impediments at work. What really does
constitute value for money in the conference business?
This, too, would bear fruitful examination through
research.
References
1. Hales, C.H. and Oberoi, V., "Assessing the Quality of
the Conference Hotel Service-product: Towards an
Empirically-based Model", Conference paper, Journal
of Contemporary Hospitality Management Conference,
April 1989.
2. Lewis, R.C., "Predicting Hotel Choice: The Factors
Underlying Perception", Cornell Quarterly, February
1985, pp. 82-96.
3. Claxton, J.D., "Conjoint Analysis in Travel Research;
A Manager's Guide", in Ritchie, B. Jr. and Goeldner
C.R. (Eds.), Travel, Tourism and Hospitality Research
A Handbook for Managers and Researchers, Wiley,
New York, 1987.
4. Renaghan, L.M. and Kay, M.Z., "What Meeting
Planners Want: The Conjoint-analysis Approach",
Cornell Quarterly, May 1987.

Michael Riley is a Lecturer in the Department of Management Studies for Tourism and Hotel Industries and Nikos
Perogiannis is a postgraduate student studying International Hotel Management, both at the University of Surrey, UK.
 This article has been cited by:

1. Kayla Elston, Jason Draper. 2012. A Review of Meeting Planner Site Selection Criteria Research. Journal of Convention &
Event Tourism 13, 203-220. [CrossRef]
2. Dia Zeglat, Yuksel Ekinci, Andrew LockwoodService quality and business performance 209-236. [CrossRef]
3. Jeong-Ja Choi. 2005. Factors Influencing State Association Planners' Overall Satisfaction with a Convention Experience. Journal
of Convention & Event Tourism 6, 65-80. [CrossRef]
4. Lisa S. Robinson, Roger J. Callan. 2002. Professional U.K. Conference Organizers' Perceptions of Important Selection and
Quality Attributes of the Meetings Product. Journal of Convention & Exhibition Management 4, 1-17. [CrossRef]
5. Lisa S. Robinson, Roger J. Callan. 2002. A Qualitative Gambit to Formulate a Foundation for the Appraisement of Service
Quality in the U.K. Meetings Industry. Journal of Convention & Exhibition Management 3, 1-15. [CrossRef]
6. Jeong-Ja Choi, Carl A. Boger. 2002. State Association Market. Journal of Convention & Exhibition Management 4, 55-73.
[CrossRef]
7. Lisa S. Robinson, Roger J. Callan. 2001. The U.K. Conference and Meetings Industry. Journal of Convention & Exhibition
Management 2, 65-80. [CrossRef]
8. Roger J Callan, Margaret K Hoyes. 2000. A preliminary assessment of the function and conference service product at a UK
stately home. Tourism Management 21, 571-581. [CrossRef]
9. John T Bowen, Beverley A Sparks. 1998. Hospitality marketing research. International Journal of Hospitality Management 17,
125-144. [CrossRef]
10. Roger J. Callan. 1995. Hotel classification and grading schemes, a paradigm of utilisation and user characteristics. International
Journal of Hospitality Management 14, 271-283. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by ECU Libraries At 17:47 21 April 2015 (PT)

11. Margaret Shaw, Robert C. Lewis, Ann Khorey. 1991. Measuring meeting planner satisfaction with hotel convention services:
a multi-variate approach. International Journal of Hospitality Management 10, 137-146. [CrossRef]