This document summarizes a study on the communication styles used by hotels when responding to online guest reviews. The study analyzed responses from 3 Best Western hotels in Rome to identify whether the responses used a company-focused or customer-focused style. A company-focused style prioritizes defending the hotel and minimizing issues, while a customer-focused style expresses empathy, apologizes for problems, and invites return visits. The study found most responses used a company-focused style that lacked personalization. The implications are that hotels should be trained to develop more customer-focused responses emphasizing elements like empathy, credibility and emotion to better address guest feedback.

1. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 1
Hotel responses to Guests’ Online Reviews:
An Exploratory Study on
Communication Styles
Angelo Bonfanti*, Vania Vigolo*, Francesca Negriᵜ
*University of Verona, ᵜUniversity of Parma
Italy
vania.vigolo@univr.it

2. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 2
Angenda
• Introduction
• Literature review
• Purpose
• Method
• Results
• Limitations and further research

3. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 3
Introduction
• Travellers perceive online reviews as up-to-date, reliable
trustworthy and helpful, more than information supplied by
service providers and marketers (Murphy, Mascardo, & Benckendorff,
2007, Gretzel & Yoo, 2008; Ayeh et al., 2013)
• e-WOM: unprecedented spreading rate (Ladhari, 2015)
• Hotels are the most affected by eWOM (Serra Cantallops and Salvi,
2014)
• 80% of tourists read numerous reviews before deciding in
which hotel to stay and 53% would not be willing to book a
hotel that had no reviews (Tnooz, 2014, PhoCusWright survey).

4. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 4
Why responding to
guests’ online reviews (GORs)?
Reviews can affect:
-hotels’ brand image and online reputation,
-customer attitude and loyalty towards the hotel
-revenues …
Online reviews represent a powerful tool for hotel managers
to:
-gain knowledge about their customers
-develop effective relationships with them, and
-react to service failure (Escobar-Rodríguez & Carvajal-Trujillo, 2014;
Ladhari & Michaud, 2015).

5. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 5
Why responding to GORs?
An effective response approach can
strengthen the relationships with
satisfied guests and provide convincing
explanations about service failure

6. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 6
Different approaches to GORs
• Zhang and Vásquez (2014) analysed responses provided by 4-
and 5-star hotels:
- highly conventionalised responses
- general responses without detailed explanation;
- repetition of the same lexicon and syntax
- emphasis on corporate identity rather than personal identity in
responding to complaints
• Min et al. (2015) suggested the importance of following the same
principles as when answering face-to-face customer complaints.
Especially, they examined the role of empathy statements,
problem paraphrasing, and speed of response.

7. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 7
Gap
Little is known about how hotels managers
can effectively respond to online reviews
(Sparks & Bradley, 2014; Park & Allen, 2013; Cheng & Loi,
2014; Min, Lim, & Magnini, 2015

8. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 8
Communication style
• “The style of a business message must match the strategic
objective of its author for that message to be effective”
(Campbell, Brammer, & Ervin, 1999: 72)
• “Style is largely a matter of tone. The writer uses a style;
the reader infers a communication’s tone”(Fielden , 1982)
• Style produces emotional reaction among readers (Fielden ,
1982)

9. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 9
A model for effective
communication (a)
Baccarani and Bonfanti (2015) proposed a theoretical model
for effective oral communication based on the factors of
persuasion proposed in the Aristotelian philosophy of rhetoric:
•Logos  content
•Ethos  credibility, i.e. the ability of the writer to
communicate a trustworthy response
•Pathos  stimulate positive emotions

10. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 10
A model for effective
communication (b)
The most common “moves” in hotel responses
outlined in previous studies (e.g. De Ascaniis et al.,
2015; Levy et al., 2013; Zhang & Vásquez, 2014)
pertain mainly to the logos dimension  what to
respond rather then how.
Hotel managers tend to focus more on the content
of the response than on its style

11. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 11
Responses to GORs
in hotel chains
• Hotel chains are reported to pay particular attention
to online reviews (online reputation, consistent
corporate brand image)
• However, few studies have focused on specific hotel
chains, and recent studies have recommended to
address this gap in literature (e.g., Serra Cantallops &
Salvi, 2014).

12. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 12
Purpose
To explore how hotels belonging to the same
chain respond to guests’ online reviews
 Focus on hotels’ communication style

13. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 13
Method
• Best Western: one of the largest hotel chains in the world (MKG
Hospitality, 2015), 17 hotels in Rome (13 million tourists in 2014)
• Reviews and responses posted on Booking.com
• Only reviews and responses written in Italian and in English were
considered, for a total of 1,564 reviews.
• Threshold for response rate: al least 20%
• Only 3 hotels consistently responded to reviews (response rate:
20%-40%)
• Final sample : 447 responses to customers reviews posted
between September 2013 and August 2015
• The full text of each response was copied into a spreadsheet for
subsequent analysis with content analysis software (NVivo 10).

14. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 14
Data analysis
• Before conducting content analysis, the data were pre-processed
(Xiang, Schwartz and Uysal’s, 2015)
• By means of NVivo software, one of the researchers coded the
data sources one at a time and examined the relationships
between codes/themes. The other researchers were charged
with independently verifying the coding schema in order to
triangulate results and move to fewer relevant codes.

15. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 15
Findings
447 responses to:
•190 positive reviews
•13 negative reviews
•244 mixed reviews ” (i.e. including both positive and negative
comments).

16. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 16
Company-focused
communication style
Customer-focused
communication style
Logos communicating complacency apologising
defending circumscribing negative aspects
justifying clearly presenting the facts
shifting the blame to others closing with greetings and signature
Minimizing service failure expressing gratitude and thanking
inviting to (personalised) return
Ethos being cloying and wordy
communicating professionalism, sincerity, awareness,
trustworthiness, and expertise
closing with abbreviations mentioning past successful service delivery
using conventional phrases using an essential and personal writing tone
Pathos providing hasty and standardised
responses
expressing comprehension, sincere regret and desire to
remedy
using a flat writing tone providing information in emotional way
using “cold” communication
telling a personal service experience for the person who
writes or stayed in hotel
worrying about the others’ feelings

17. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 17
Just an example
Company-focused style Customer-focused style
Logos “Sorry, but you should have
asked the receptionists how to
reach the station. They are very
helpful. Often people forget to
give adaptors back and it may
happen that we do not have any.
As for the breakfast, did you try
boiled eggs with extra virgin olive
oil and fresh tomatoes or hot
carrots with oregano with fresh
ricotta? Waiting for you to visit
us again, regards” (HR1)
“Dear Mr Ayaz, we have read your
review and please accept our
apologies for the bad experience you
have had. Our main aim is the
satisfaction of our guest, for that
reason we should be grateful if you
could be so kind to let us know at
what time you had the check in and
what happened with the receptionist”
(HR79)

18. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 18
Company-focused style Customer-focused style
Ethos “Our Hospitality Concept is
committed to provide the highest
standard of service … we strive to
impress memories and experiences
to all our guests” (HR375)
(comment to positive review)
“Dear Guest, thank you for your
review, we try our best to deliver a
good service and receiving a positive
feedback make us feel happy. Best
regards, Name Surname Front Office
Manager” (HR406)
Pathos “Thank you for your review. Sorry
for the inconvenience. We shall
manage to solve this problem.
Waiting for you to come again,
regards” (HR54)
“We are glad to hear you appreciated
our services though we regret you had
not the chance to stay in one of our
Fashion rooms. We have many
typologies of rooms and I am sure that
if you had asked, our front desk staff
would have moved you to a different
room more suitable for you” (HR139)

19. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 19
Managerial implications
• The response rate to online reviews is still low  to create
and share a set of measurable, clear and achievable metrics
to stimulate a higher response rate for the next future
• Hotels should develop their written communication skills by
paying attention not only to the logos dimension of the
response, but also to other communication elements such
as ethos and pathos
• Hotel managers should be trained about how to respond to
guests’ reviews
• Hotel managers could encourage customers to provide
detailed and constructive reviews

20. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 20
Limitations and future research
• Sample size and location (limited number
of responses, only one chain in one city)
• Only one platform (Booking.com)
• Did not interview hotel managers

21. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 21
Thank you for your attention!