UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND
Faculty of Social Sciences and Business Studies
Department of Business
CUSTOMERS’ BRAND COMMITMENT AND BRAND LOYALTY TOWARDS
LAPLAND HOTELS
Master’s thesis
Service Management
Titta Mikkonen (185754)
18.02.2017
ABSTRACT
UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND
Faculty
Department
Faculty of Social Sciences and Business Studies
Department of Business
Author
Supervisor
Titta Mikkonen
Raija Komppula
Title
Customers’ brand commitment and brand loyalty towards Lapland Hotels
Main Subject
Level
Date
Number of pages
Service Management
Master’s degree
18.02.2017
61+18
Abstract
The aim of this study is to observe the explanations of Lapland Hotels chain’s customers to why
they would choose Lapland Hotels even though the hotel would not be in Lapland. The main
research question is, how do the customers of Lapland Hotels explain their brand commitment and
brand loyalty to the brand. The purposes are also to find out what explanation is the most common,
and do the explanations differ between different commitment groups.
This is a quantitative research, which uses same data that was collected for previous study.
Electronic questionnaire was sent to customers whose e-mail addresses were in Lapland Hotels’
customer register. Target group of this study is the customers of Lapland Hotels. In this research,
824 respondents’ answers were observed.
The most common explanation groups were “price/quality ratio / location / coincidence / must”,
“service quality”, “unique brand / private chain” and “reward program / offer”. Interestingly, 4,13
% respondents explained their brand commitment or brand loyalty by strong emotional bond to
Lapland. Based on the results, it can be discovered that brand commitment and brand loyalty exist
because of different reasons, and behind these reasons are different factors. To the development of
brand commitment and brand loyalty affects customer satisfaction, brand trust, brand personality
and brand love.
The limitation of this study is that the research use the same data that was collected for different
research purposes. Because of that, it would be interesting to investigate this same subjet for example
qualitatively.
Keywords
brand commitment, brand loyalty, customer satisfaction, brand trust, brand personality,
brand identification, brand love
TIIVISTELMÄ
ITÄ-SUOMEN YLIOPISTO
Tiedekunta
Yksikkö
Yhteiskuntatieteiden ja kauppatieteiden tiedekunta
Kauppatieteiden laitos
Tekijä
Ohjaaja
Titta Mikkonen
Raija Komppula
Työn nimi
Asiakkaiden sitoutuminen ja uskollisuus Lapland Hotels -brandiin
Pääaine
Työn laji
Aika
Sivuja
Palvelujohtaminen
Pro Gradu -tutkielma
18.02.2017
61+18
Tiivistelmä
Tutkimuksen tarkoituksena on tarkastella Lapland Hotels -ketjun asiakkaiden perusteluita siihen,
miksi he valitsisivat Lapland Hotelsin myös Lapin ulkopuolella. Päätutkimuskysymyksenä on,
kuinka Lapland Hotelsin asiakkaat selittävät brandiin sitoutumistaan tai brandiuskollisuuttaan.
Tarkoituksena on myös selvittää, mikä selitys nousee yleisimmäksi, ja eroavatko asiakkaiden
selitykset sen mukaan, ovatko he sitoutuneita Lapland Hotelsiin vai eivät.
Tutkimus on suoritettu kvantitatiivisesti. Käytössä on valmis aineisto, joka on kerätty aiemmin toista
tutkimusta varten. Sähköinen kyselylomake lähetettiin henkilöille, joiden sähköpostiosoite oli
Lapland Hotelsin asiakasrekisterissä. Tutkimuksen kohderyhmänä on siis Lapland Hotelsin
asiakkaat. Tutkimuksessa tarkasteltiin 824 asiakkaan vastauksia.
Yleisimmiksi vastausryhmiksi nousivat ”hinta/laatu-suhde / sijainti / sattuma / pakko”, ”palvelun
laatu”, ”ainutlaatuinen brandi / yksityinen ketju” ja ”kanta-asiakasjärjestelmä / tarjous”. Tuloksista
nousi mielenkiintoisena seikkana esiin, että 4,13 % vastaajista selitti brandiin sitoutumistaan tai
brandiuskollisuuttaan vahvalla tunnesiteellä Lappiin. Tulosten perusteella voidaan todeta, että
asiakkaan brandiin sitoutuminen ja brandiuskollisuus johtuvat eri syistä, ja näiden syiden takana on
erilaisia vaikuttajia. Brandiin sitoutumiseen ja brandiuskollisuuden syntyyn vaikuttavat asiakkaan
tyytyväisyys, asiakkaan luottamus brandiin, brandipersoonallisuus ja brandirakkaus.
Tutkimuksen rajoitteena on se, että tutkimus on suoritettu datalla, joka on aiemmin kerätty eri
tutkimustarkoitukseen. Siksi olisi mielenkiintoista tutkia aihetta lisää esimerkiksi laadullisesti.
Avainsanat
Brandiin sitoutuminen, brandiuskollisuus, asiakkaan tyytyväisyys, brandiluottamus,
brandipersoonallisuus, brandiin samastuminen, brandirakkaus
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract
Tiivistelmä
1.
INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 6
1.1 Background ....................................................................................................................... 6
1.2 Objectives and research questions .................................................................................... 8
1.3 Research approach, context and limitations ..................................................................... 8
1.4 Key concepts..................................................................................................................... 9
1.5 Lapland Hotels .................................................................................................................. 9
1.6 Structure .......................................................................................................................... 10
2. BRAND COMMITMENT AND BRAND LOYALTY....................................................... 11
2.1 The concepts of brand commitment and brand loyalty .................................................. 11
2.2 Factors affecting to brand commitment and brand loyalty ............................................. 17
2.2.1 Customer satisfaction and brand trust ..................................................................... 17
2.2.2 Brand personality and brand identification ............................................................. 20
2.2.3 Brand love ............................................................................................................... 24
2.3 Theory conclusion .......................................................................................................... 27
3. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................... 30
3.1 The research methods ..................................................................................................... 30
3.2 Data collection ................................................................................................................ 30
3.3 Analysis of the data ........................................................................................................ 31
4. RESULTS............................................................................................................................. 36
4.1 Sample profile................................................................................................................. 36
4.2 Demographic characteristics of the commitment groups ............................................... 37
4.3 Respondents’ explanations for their brand commitment and brand loyalty ................... 38
4.4 Explanations compered between different commitment groups .................................... 40
5. CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................... 46
5.1 Main findings .................................................................................................................. 46
5.2 Theoretical conclusion .................................................................................................... 46
5.3 Discussion ....................................................................................................................... 49
5.4 Managerial implications ................................................................................................. 52
5.5 Limitations and implications for future research ............................................................ 52
REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................... 55
5
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. The relationship between brand commitment and brand loyalty………..................13
Figure 2. A brand personality framework…………………………………………………….21
Figure 3. Customer’s self-image……………………………………………………………...22
Figure 4. Consumer-object relations……………………………………………………....….26
Figure 5. Theoretical framework…………………………………………………….......…...28
Figure 6. The division of respondents’ level of commitment...................................................34
Figure 7. The numbers of respondents in the commitment groups...........................................34
Figure 8. Respondents’ explanations for their brand commitment and brand loyalty
(percentage)..............................................................................................................................40
Figure 9. The division of commitment groups’ explanations...................................................43
Figure 10. Remodeled version of the division of commitment groups’ explanation................44
Figure 11. The positions of respondents’ explanation in brand commitment’s and brand
loyalty’s dimensions.................................................................................................................50
TABLES
Table 1. Sample profile.............................................................................................................36
Table 2. Demographic characteristics of three commitment groups........................................38
Table 3. The division of explanations.......................................................................................39
Table 4. The explanations of different commitment groups.....................................................41
Table 5. Commitment groups’ intention to use Lapland Hotels’ hotel services.......................45
Table 6. The explanations of respondents categorized under different factors of brand
commitment and brand loyalty.................................................................................................47
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 Original questionnaire in Finnish
6
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
The idea for this thesis became from a prior study that was made to Lapland Hotels –hotel chain
in 2015. The aim of previous study was to find out what kind of reward program or loyalty card
systems the customers of this hotel chain value. Interestingly, in addition to the aims of that
research, the study raised that some of the customers were extremely committed to Lapland
Hotels and they were more loyal to that brand than other customers. The purpose of this
master’s thesis is to investigate that commitment by analyzing the same data, which was
collected to the prior study.
Earlier hospitality firms used a tactic called conquest marketing, meaning that their aim was to
catch as many new customers as possible (Shoemaker & Lewis 1999). Nowadays companies
try to achieve competitive advantage by creating strong and long-lasting relationships with their
customers (Bhattacharya & Sen 2003). This is called relationship marketing, and the idea is to
develop brand loyalty through different ways than economics or product traits (Lee & Back
2010). By strong and long-lasting relationships, companies receive loyal customers and positive
word of mouth (Bhattacharya & Sen 2003). By greater customer loyalty in turn, brands may
achieve a greater market share and other positive brand performance outcomes (Chaudhuri &
Holbrook 2001).
Improving and sustaining brand loyalty has been the goal of companies, and brand loyalty has
been a commonly used indicator of success for many years (Kandampully & Suhartanto 2000;
So, King, Sparks & Wang 2013). Thus, brand loyalty is one of the most important way for
achieving competitive advantage (Tepeci 1999; Mattila 2006). Concepts like service quality,
perceived value and brand trust are usually considered to be involved in the development of
brand loyalty (So et al. 2013). Especially trust is important when observing service brands,
because at the same time customer buys a service, she or he is experiencing it (Lee & Back
2010). Because of that, customers must have trust towards the brand and to the service so that
she or he even decide to consume it.
The use of hotel services has become common, and instead of luxury, purchasing hotel services
are considered as a normal way of life (Kandampully & Suhartanto 2000). Among all
7
alternatives available, customers do select products or services, that they perceive to serve best
their wants and needs (Kim & Perdue 2013). Because the demand of unique and individual
boutique hotels has grown, it can be reached a conclusion that customers want to differentiate
when they are choosing hotels (So et al. 2013). So et al. (2013) suggest that hotel marketers
should develop a different and unique hotel brand image or hotel brand personality, which
differs from the brand personalities of the competitors and enable customers to identify with it.
Memorable and enjoyable experiences should be offered to customers, because customers’
hotel choice is not affected only by cognitive attributes like price, but also affective and sensory
attributes like comfortable feeling and room quality (Kim & Perdue 2013). Also, the study of
Alnawas and Altarifi (2016) supports that with a different and unique hotel brand image, hotels
differentiate from their competitors and help customers to identify with their brand. Strong
hotel brand produces value to the company, but also to customers (So et al. 2013).
The competition in lodging industry is tough, since the product and service similarity of hotels
and destinations is high (Kandampully & Suhartanto 2000; Usakli & Baloglu 2011). Therefore,
achieving some competitive advantage is necessary for hotel brands (Kandampully &
Suhartanto 2000). Because of this product similarity, among price and location, customers
evaluate hotels based on hotel brand quality (Tran, Dauchez & Szemik 2013). Based on that,
service quality is important factor for hotels to gain competitive advantage (Kandampully &
Suhartanto 2000).
There are existing hotel chain brands and private hotel brands. Hotel chains means that under
the same hotel brand exist several different hotels in different locations. For example, Sokos
Hotels is a hotel chain, which has over 50 hotels in Finland, Tallinn and Saint Petersburg (Sokos
Hotels 2017). Hotel chains may have different product brands, meaning that under the same
organization, there are different kind of hotel brands (O’Neill & Mattila 2010). These product
brands may be completely individual without any obvious similarities with parent company
(O’Neill & Mattila 2006), or they may include same logos or similarities on their names
(O’Neill & Mattila 2010). For example, Sokos Hotels has different product brands, which have
similarities. These product brands are Original Sokos Hotels, Break Sokos Hotels and Solo
Sokos Hotels (Sokos Hotels 2017).
In hotel chains, the brand name can be worthwhile, because it is noted, that brand name is an
important quality indicator for customers (O’Neill & Mattila 2010). Choosing hotel chain is
8
easy and safe decision to customer, because she or he may have visited the same hotel chain
earlier in other destination. Hotel chain brand gives certain standard and quality promise to
customer. On the other hand, one bad experience in a single hotel of the chain can influence
that customer do not choose hotels of that chain elsewhere either. Hotel chains have usually
some kind of reward programs, which is also a strength of hotel chain brands. Customers may
want to centralize their consumption to the certain chain so they get maximum benefits from
these programs. Private hotels in turn offer in general unique and specific experiences, because
they do not need to fit into chain’s brand. Private hotels can work with their own vision, and
changes in private hotel brand are easier, because there are no sharp definitions or exact
standards assigned by the chain. Choosing a private hotel may feel a higher risk to customers,
because there are no standards and quality promises made by the hotel chain brand. On the other
hand, choosing private chain is a chance to have new experiences.
1.2 Objectives and research questions
The purpose of this study is to increase the understanding of customers’ brand commitment and
brand loyalty, and the factors affecting them in the case of Lapland Hotels. The objectives of
this research are to explore, how customers of Lapland Hotels explain their own brand
commitment and brand loyalty, and whether the explanations of different customer groups
based on the level of commitment differ from each other’s.
The main research question of this study is:
-
How do the customers of Lapland Hotels explain their brand commitment or brand
loyalty to the brand?
The sub-questions of this study are:
-
Which explanations are the most common?
-
How do the explanations of committed and not committed customers differ from each
other’s?
1.3 Research approach, context and limitations
Because this research is based on prior study, and the same research data is used, the research
approach is dictated from that. The research approach used in this study is quantitative research
9
approach, which means that by this research it can be achieved statistical information (Heikkilä
1998, 16). The context of this research is hospitality industry, to be precise, hotel services. The
study is limited to observe only the customers of Lapland Hotels brand. The target group of this
research is customers who had informed their e-mail addresses to Lapland Hotels’ customer
database.
1.4 Key concepts
Brand is a combination of attributes, which differentiate the company or group of companies
from their competitors (Kotler, Keller, Brady, Goodman & Hansen 2009, 861). These attributes
are for example name, symbol, design and sign (Kotler et al. 2009, 861). Brand adds value and
benefits to the company (Bailey & Ball 2006).
Brand loyalty means customer’s attitudes and behaviors that are favorable to the brand.
Attitudinal loyalty means, that customer has commitment or positive attitude to the brand, and
because of that she or he repurchases (Chaudhuri & Holbrook 2001). Behavioral loyalty in turn
means that customer repurchases products or services of the brand for a reason or another
without any strong emotions (Chaudhuri & Holbrook 2001).
Commitment means the intention to behave such way that it support the other part of the longterm relationship (Fournier 1998). There are different kind of relationships where commitment
exist, but in this research, commitment refers to customers’ commitment towards brands.
1.5 Lapland Hotels
Lapland Hotels Oy is the biggest private hotel chain in Finland (Lapland Hotels 2016). The
hotel chain includes 16 hotels: most of them in Lapland and two in cities elsewhere, another in
Oulu and another in Tampere (Lapland Hotels 2016). Lapland Hotels offer diverse
accommodation services and activities for both, business and pleasure travelers (Lapland Hotels
2016).
Lapland Hotels is not only about hotel services; it is also the experience of Lapland. The website
and Facebook profile of Lapland Hotels include many photos of Lapland’s nature (Facebook
2016; Lapland Hotels 2016) and the meaning of the hotel chain is to offer a complete Lapland
10
experience for the customers. The decoration of the hotels includes Lapland elements like
reindeer’s antlers and skins, and the kitchens of the hotels serve food with a Nordic taste
(Lapland Hotels 2016).
The first sentence of the introductions of the urban hotels is “a chance to experience Lapland
in a heart of a city” (Lapland Hotels 2016). This describes well the whole idea of Lapland Hotels
chain. By Lapland Hotel’s website the customer can also find information about and join to
Lapland Club and read I Love Lapland -magazine, which is an online customer magazine of
Lapland Hotels (I Love Lapland 2016; Lapland Hotels 2016). Also, the name of this customer
magazine illustrates the ideology of this hotel chain.
1.6 Structure
In the next section, the theory of this research will be presented. Concepts that are used in the
theory section are brand commitment, brand loyalty, customer satisfaction, brand trust, brand
personality, brand identification and brand love. After theory, the methodology is introduced in
the section three. In the fourth section, the results are covered. Finally, the section five is
conclusion, where the implications are discussed.
11
2. BRAND COMMITMENT AND BRAND LOYALTY
2.1 The concepts of brand commitment and brand loyalty
Brand commitment and brand loyalty are own, separate concepts, but they have extremely much
in common and they are often strictly connected to each other’s. The reasons why customer do
repurchase can be explained by brand commitment or brand loyalty, or with both. Because of
that, these both concepts are used in this study. In this section the definitions of these concepts
and their similarities and differences are discussed.
Commitment can be defined so that the existing relationship is so notable, that the partners of
that relationship have a desire to work at the relationship (Bowen & Shoemaker 1998). Brand
commitment means customer’s desire to behave such way that it supports the brand where she
or he is committed. Besides actual buying behavior, it can be customer’s positive speak about
the brand to others or sharing information about the brand for example in social medias.
Customers’ commitment to a brand depends on several different factors (Wilson, Zeithaml,
Bitner & Gremler 2008, 43). The level of brand commitment is affected for example by earlier
experiences and customer satisfaction, emotional and social bonds to the brand, different
alternatives available and the risk or cost of changing brand (Wilson et al. 2008, 43).
Brand commitment can be categorized to affective, continuance and value-driven commitment
(Tanford, Raab & Kim 2011). In affective commitment, customer has an emotional, desirebased attachment to a brand (Fullerton 2003; Shoemaker & Bowen 2003; Bansal, Irving &
Taylor 2004; Mattila 2006), and customers will experience the psychological state of affective
commitment, when they like or even love the brand (Fullerton 2003). Affective commitment
includes sincere willingness to support the brand, and customer with affective commitment
admires the brand. The situation, where customer has a pleasing attitude towards the brand, is
loyal and tend to consume the product or services of that brand often, can likely be explained
by affective commitment (Fullerton 2005). Mattila (2006) suggests that the emotional bond of
affective commitment is needed so that customers will repeat supporting the brand. But it can
be also thought, that in affective commitment, the emotional bond is the reason why customer
supports the brand. In other dimensions of commitment, the reason for supportive behavior
vary.
12
Continuance commitment means customer experience that it is difficult to change from the
brand in which she or he is committed (Fullerton 2005) and it includes factors such as switching
costs, dependence and lack of choice (Fullerton 2003). Customer may not have other
alternatives to choose, or she or he may not have the daring to change the brand. Other reason
to continuance commitment can be the need to support the brand. If the brand is owned by a
friend or relative, the customer may feel duty to buy products or services of that specific brand.
Value-driven commitment can be defined so that customers have commitment to a brand
because they are belonging to a loyalty program, and they achieve value from the benefits of
that reward program (Tanford et al. 2011; Tanford, Raab & Kim 2012). In this dimension, the
achieved benefits are the motivator of customer. The development of brand commitment is
time-consuming and usually it takes more than one purchasing experience (Fullerton 2005).
Brand loyalty can be observed from two or three different perspectives: attitudinal and
behavioral loyalty (Kandampully, Zhang & Bilgihan 2015) or attitudinal, behavioral and
composite loyalty (So et al. 2013). Behavioral loyalty means that customer repeat consuming
brand’s products for one reason or another (Chaudhuri & Holbrook 2001; Nam, Ekinci &
Whyatt 2011). In this loyalty dimension, customer’s behavior is the main point, and customer
might not even have any specific thoughts about the brand. Repurchasing may happen because
of customer’s used habits, which may be learned for example from her or his parents when
customer were kid. Attitudinal loyalty in turn means that customer has commitment or positive
attitude towards the brand (Chaudhuri & Holbrook 2001). In this loyalty perspective, the
customer’s behavior is intentional, and the customer choose that brand consciously. Composite
loyalty includes both, attitudinal and behavioral features (Dimitriades 2006).
Brand commitment or customer’s own habits leads the customer to buy product or service of
the same brand time after time (Lee, Back & Kim 2009). This supports the idea that customers’
repurchasing can be explained by brand commitment or brand loyalty. Tepeci (1999) suggests
that only intentional repurchasing is brand loyalty, but in the knowledge of different brand
loyalty perspectives introduced above, it could be formulated that only intentional repurchasing
is attitudinal brand loyalty. On the other hand, customer’s positive attitude towards a brand does
not always mean consuming the products or services of the brand, because it may not always
induce actual buying behavior (So et al. 2013). That is why customers’ brand commitment and
trust towards the brand need to be turned also into actual purchase behavior (Kumar & Shah
2004).
13
Figure 1. The relationship between brand commitment and brand loyalty
In the Figure 1, the relationship between brand commitment and brand loyalty is illustrated. On
the left of this figure are the dimensions of brand commitment, and on the right, it can be found
the dimensions of brand loyalty. Some of these dimensions are overlapping, and those
overlapping parts illustrate the consistency. The consistencies of affective commitment and
attitudinal loyalty are that customer is having emotional, desire-based commitment towards the
brand, which achieve customer to repurchase intentionally. The consistency of value-driven
commitment and brand loyalty is that customer behave in a supporting way to the brand because
of the reward program. Continuance commitment and behavioral loyalty have that in common,
that customer may be forced to repurchase. This may be because of a lack of alternatives or in
the hotel industry for example a situation, where employee is on a business trip, and the
employer decides which hotel the employee must stay.
The main difference between brand commitment and brand loyalty is that brand commitment
may not include actual behavior. For example, customer may adore some expensive luxury
brand, but she or he may not have enough money to buy it. In this situation, the customer has
brand commitment, but not brand loyalty. Or she or he may consider the reward program of
that brand excellent even though she or he does not use the products or services of that brand.
14
She or he may be still committed to that brand, and support the brand by telling others how
great reward program that brand has. In continuance commitment, there can be a situation,
where for example a good friend of the customer is an entrepreneur, and even though the
customer does not prefer the brand, she or he may feel as her or him duty to speak positively
about the brand.
In this study, the most interesting and important concepts are affective commitment and
attitudinal loyalty. If the brand loyalty and brand commitment are used as similar concepts in
this study, it refers to the overlapping part of attitudinal loyalty and affective commitment.
McKercher, Denizci-Guillet and Ng (2012) suggest, that when customer loyalty is observed in
the field of hospitality, it should be examining from different perspective than in other
industries. They present concepts of vertical and experiential loyalties, which were supported
in their study (McKercher et al. 2012). By vertical loyalty they mean, that customer can be loyal
at more than one different tiers in the tourism system (McKercher et al. 2012). This means, that
the customer can be loyal for example to hotel brand and airline company (McKercher et al.
2012). Experiantial Loyalty in turn means, that customer is loyal to specific holiday styles or
experiences, for example certain type of hotels or activities (McKercher et al. 2012).
Back (2005) in turn suggest, that in hospitality industry, it should be focusing on attitudinal
brand loyalty. When customers’ loyalty towards the hotel brand is observed, it is important to
seek customers’ repeat purchase behavior and their attitudes towards the hotel brand (Tideswell
& Fredline 2004). Attitudinal loyalty develops through three different stages; first customer
becomes cognitively loyal when she or he has some understanding about brand attributes or
brand personality (Back 2005). The cognitive loyalty means that the information, which the
customer has from the brand, makes her or him prefer the brand better than other alternatives
(Oliver 1999). The likelihood of purchasing product is the higher, the more the customer knows
about the product and the brand (Tepeci 1999). This loyalty stage is still shallow (Oliver 1999).
When the customer has besides the information some favorable experience of brand
performance, he or she become affectively loyal (Back 2005). This means, that in addition to
positive attitude towards the brand, affective loyalty includes satisfied usage of brand’s
products or services (Oliver 1999). The third stage is conative loyalty and it is achieved when
the customer is particularly committed to that brand (Back 2005). Conative loyalty means
behavioral intention, and in this stage the customer has an intention and want to repurchase the
15
products or services of the brand (Oliver 1999). Oliver (1999) adds to the development of
loyalty a final stage, which is behavioral manner called “action inertia” or action loyalty. In this
stage, the behavioral intention is transformed into readiness to purchase, and in this stage the
customer is committed to behave and repurchase (Oliver 1999).
A concept of customer engagement also exists, which is close to the concepts of brand
commitment and brand loyalty. So et al. define customer engagement as “a customer’s personal
connection to a brand as manifested in cognitive, affective, and behavioral actions outside of
the purchase situation” (So, King & Sparks 2014, 310-311). In their definition, the behavioral
manifestation means customer’s behaviors like blogging, writing reviews or customer-tocustomer interaction (So et al. 2014). Customer engagement is a diverse concept, and it can be
observed from five different dimensions (So et al. 2014). These dimensions are identification,
enthusiasm, attention, absorption and interaction (So et al. 2014). The study of So, King, Sparks
and Wang (2016) proved, that among three different predictors of customer loyalty (service
brand evaluation, brand trust and customer engagement), the customer engagement is the most
meaningful. Customer engagement has an influence to customer’s evaluation of the brand and
brand trust, which in turn have an influence to brand loyalty (So et al. 2016). Also, the study of
So et al. (2014) supports that customer engagement can have an enhancing influence to brand
loyalty.
Brand committed and brand loyal customers are usually brand advocates, meaning that they
speak positively about the brand and recommend it to others (Drennan, Bianchi, CachoElizondo, Louriero, Guibert & Proud 2015). Nowadays the usage of Internet, social medias and
smart phones is general, so the meaning and impact of advocates and word of mouth may be
more notable. Besides online word of mouth, Internet enables brands to develop and sustain
their relationships with their customers elsewhere than in the actual service situation (So et al.
2014). That is why many tourism brands have established social network accounts for the brand
for example to Facebook or Twitter (So et al. 2014). Customer with a brand commitment is also
more likely to use supplementary services, like the restaurants or room services of the hotel
(Bowen & Shoemaker 1998). Because of these behaviors, loyal customers are valuable for
brands (Bowen & Shoemaker 1998). Customers with high level of brand commitment are not
sensitive on pricing issues and can be even willing to change the timing of their vacation so that
they can stay for sure at the hotel they are committed to (Tideswell & Fredline 2004).
16
Committed customers have smaller likelihood to switching than customers who are not
committed (Fullerton 2003). Especially affective commitment is important factor to keep
customers (Fullerton 2003). In Mattila’s (2006) research, the results proved that affective
commitment increased and reinforced customers’ loyalty. Customers who have notable
affective commitment not only purchase more likely the products or services of the brand, but
also recommend that brand to others (Mattila 2006). Same kind of results can be found in the
study of Fullerton (2005), where the findings was that affective commitment makes the
customer to repurchase and advocate the brand. Continuance commitment in turn had a weak
effect on repurchasing and negative effect on advocate the brand (Fullerton 2005).
In a hotel context, brand loyalty evolves through service experience and its improvement (So
et al. 2013). So et al. (2013) also suggest, that hotels should create positive service experiences
to get and support strong customer loyalty. In hotel industry, the role of front line employees is
important, because customers are inevitably in contact with them (Tepeci 1999). That is why
selecting service-oriented employees to front line positions is also important, because that is
how customers will receive good service experiences and satisfaction, which in turn may lead
to brand loyalty (Tepeci 1999). Remembering the customers who have been earlier visiting that
hotel and giving individual attention to them may also have a positive impact on customers’
loyalty towards that hotel brand (Tepeci 1999), because customers value personalized service
(Kandampully & Suhartanto 2000).
There are also different obstacles to brand loyalty and brand commitment and to their
development. For example, some customers are variety seekers by their nature, and they want
to experience new even though they are satisfied with product or services that they have tried
(Oliver 1999). For example, hotel customers may be satisfied with their stay at the hotel, but
still they want to discover new next time they are travelling (Bowen & Shoemaker 1998). Other
obstacles are for example multibrand loyalty, meaning that customer is loyal and committed to
several brands, or changes in selection of goods and changes in customers’ needs (Oliver 1999).
Brand can stop manufacturing products or even end their whole existing and customers’
different situations in life can change their needs and wants. In the view of hotel industry, there
can be a situation, where there is no hotel of that specific hotel brand in the destination where
the customer is travelling, and that is why she or he need to choose another hotel chain. One
obstacle is also money. Customer may have the intention and desire to purchase some specific
product or service, but she or he do not have enough money to actual buying behavior.
17
Therefore, in some situations, these obstacles prevent customers’ brand commitment turning
into actual buying behavior and brand loyalty.
2.2 Factors affecting to brand commitment and brand loyalty
Brand loyalty and brand commitment are affected by different kind of factors. To get loyal and
committed customers, hotel brands should first be aware of what are the factors affecting to
brand loyalty and brand commitment (Tepeci 1999). That is why understanding the antecedents
of brand commitment and brand loyalty is important for brands (Tideswell & Fredline2004). It
is also notable, that different customers can be loyal or committed for different reasons (Tepeci
1999) and trust towards the brand develops differently among customers (Bowen & Shoemaker
1998).
2.2.1 Customer satisfaction and brand trust
Customer loyalty and satisfaction are tightly in touch with each other’s (Oliver 1999), but still
they do not mean same thing (Shoemaker & Lewis 1999). Satisfaction is a customer’s emotion
when she or he experience that the consumption fulfills her or his needs, wants and expectations
(Oliver 1999; Shoemaker & Lewis 1999). Satisfaction can be divided into two formulations:
transient and overall satisfaction (Ekinci, Dawes & Massey 2008). Transient satisfaction is a
result of a single service interaction, and based on customer’s evaluation of events and
behaviors that occurs during that service experience (Ekinci et al. 2008). Overall satisfaction is
a result of multiple transient satisfactions, which are based and compared on several earlier
experiences (Ekinci et al. 2008).
The study of Dimitriades (2006) suggest, that customer satisfaction has a direct effect on brand
commitment, and brand commitment in turn is directly related to customer loyalty. Customers
evaluate brands with their satisfaction, and this evaluating and satisfaction level explain why
customers become loyal to brands (Fullerton 2005). High satisfaction level makes more likely
customers to repurchase the products or services of the brand and to recommend it and tell
positive word-of-mouth to others (Sun, Chi & Xu 2013). Oliver’s (1999) study proposed, that
satisfaction is necessary in the development of loyalty, but it is less important factor when there
are already other issues that increase the level of loyalty. Nevertheless, satisfaction does not
always lead to loyalty (Oliver 1999). The study of Kandampully and Suhartanto (2000) proved,
18
that including hotel image, customer’s satisfaction with hotel services like reception,
housekeeping and food are in important role when observing customer loyalty.
Perceived value affects to customer satisfaction and brand loyalty (Su et al. 2013). Customer
gets certain benefits from the service process, and these benefits are needed so that the customer
forms a commitment to the brand (Bowen & Shoemaker 1998). These benefits create value for
the customer and value in turn makes the customer to get into relationship (Bowen &
Shoemaker 1998). One factor of perceived value, is perceived service quality. When customer
notice that their expectations are fulfilled by the brand, they perceive high quality and value,
get satisfied and probably repurchase (Tepeci 1999). So et al. (2016) suggest that it is
conceptually appropriate that terms perceived service quality, perceived value and customer
satisfaction are joined to one higher-order construct of service brand evaluation because of their
similar effects and meanings to customer loyalty and brand commitment. Therefore, these
concepts are discussed in the same section in this research.
Also, trust has an important role in brand loyalty and brand commitment. In hotel industry, trust
means that customer can believe that the hotel and its employees have the ability and knowledge
to serve the customer in such way that customer is satisfied, and that the hotel service
experience is what customer expected (Martinez & Rodriguez del Bosque 2013). This is called
performance or credibility trust (Martinez & Rodriguez del Bosque 2013). Second component
of trust is benevolence trust, and it means that in addition to the ability and knowledge,
customers can believe that the hotel and its employees have a real willingness to think
customers, when they are making decisions about the services (Martinez & Rodriguez del
Bosque 2013). Benevolence trust includes that the hotel and its employees act way that shows
care, concern and honesty (Martinez & Rodriguez del Bosque 2013). When satisfaction, trust
and loyalty are observed and explained, the importance of customers’ emotions is notable (Lee
et al. 2009). Brand loyalty is mostly based on to the customer’s evaluation of the consumption
experience whit that specific brand (So et al. 2016).
The relationship where brand commitment and brand loyalty exists, is affected for example by
trust (Chaudhuri & Holbrook 2001), and trust can truly be considered as an antecedent of brand
loyalty and brand commitment (Bowen & Shoemaker 1998). Trust includes reliability, and that
is a good characteristic to the brand, because it is harder to copy by competitors (Bowen &
Shoemaker 1998). The study of Chaudhuri & Holbrook (2001) proved, that trust has an effect
19
for both, behavioral and attitudinal loyalty. The study of Bansal et al. (2004) in turn proved,
that trust has an effect to brand commitment: the stronger the trust is, the stronger is the affective
commitment also.
Narteh, Agbemabiese and Braimah (2013) studied the effect of trust, competence,
communication, conflict handling, brand commitment and bonding to customer loyalty in
Ghanaian luxury hotel industry. The results of their study proved, that all these six relationshipmarketing practices are positively related to customer loyalty (Narteh et al. 2013). To develop
and maintain customer loyalty, hotel brand managers should keep their promises and keep sure
that customers’ information and belongings are safe to win customers’ trust and confidence
(Narteh et al. 2013). Managers should also build and maintain valued relationship and stronger
bonds between the hotel, employees and customer, and have effective communication with
customers, especially when they are handling potential conflicts (Nartet et al. 2013).
One way to achieve customer’s commitment towards the brand is reward programs (Tanford
2013). The aims of reward programs are to increase the sales revenues of the brand and make
customers to buy larger range of brands products or services, and to build higher commitment
between the brand and the customers (Uncles, Dowling & Hammond 2003). The study of
Tanford et al. (2011) proved, that reward program members were more committed to the brand
than nonmembers and that high-tier reward members had a higher level of affective
commitment than lower tier members or nonmember. Tanford et al. (2012) studied the
differences between full-service and limited-service hotel guests. The results of their study were
that full-service guests are more likely belonging to hotel brand’s reward program and their
commitment towards the brand is based on both, emotional attachment alias affective
commitment and benefits received from reward program alias value-driven commitment
(Tanford et al. 2012). Still So et al. (2014) suggest, that in the long term, loyalty programs and
price discounts are unsustainable strategies because of their rising costs, and that is why brands
should prefer psychological attachment when they want to create and improve brand loyalty.
Also, Kumar & Shah (2004) noted, that reward programs do not contain customers’ potential
in the future. Having a reward program does not guarantee to have loyal customers (Tanford &
Montgomery 2015).
20
2.2.2 Brand personality and brand identification
Customer’s buying behavior is affected by his or her personal characteristics like age, values,
lifestyle, personality and self-concept (Kotler et al. 2009, 230) and customers do not consume
only because of the need, but also because of a symbolic benefit (Albert & Merunka 2013).
Ross presented in 1971 as a “self-evident” (Ross 1971, 38) fact, that customers consume only
products, which they find consistent with their own self-image. Not only customers have
personality, also a concept of brand personality exists.
Kotler et al. (2009, 231) define personality as human psychological features that influence how
person commonly reacts to different kind of environmental stimuli. The concept of brand
personality can be defined as “the set of human characteristics associated with a brand” (Aaker
1997, 347). This definition is typical and widely used in the literature of marketing. By brand
personality and human characteristics associated with a brand, the brand become personalized
(Lee & Back 2010). If the personalities of customer and brand are similar, it is more likely that
the customer choose to consume products of that brand (Kotler et al. 2009, 231). The human
characteristics associated with a brand tend to be quite long-lasting and distinct (Aaker 1997),
so having a strong and positive brand personality enhances a competitive advantage.
A study of Usakli and Baloglu (2011) proved, that tourists do connect personality characteristics
to tourism destinations, so the concept of destination personality also exists. Because the aim
of Lapland Hotels is to offer complete Lapland experience even though the location of a hotel
may not be in Lapland, in addition to brand personality, the destination personality of Lapland
can also be assumed to have an influence in this case. The study of Usakli and Baloglu (2011)
also indicated, that if the personality of the destination and customer’s self-concept are similar,
the customer has a favorable attitude towards the destination, and because of that, she or he will
have an intention to return the destination and tell positive word-of-mouth about it. In Lapland
Hotels’ case, it can be assumed, that if the customer perceives her or his own self-image to be
similar with the personality of Lapland, it may be beneficial for Lapland Hotels too.
Unlike human personality, brand personality traits are formed through different antecedents of
brand personality, such as user imagery, company’s employee and company’s product
supporters (Aaker 1997). User imagery means human characteristics that are connected to a
typical user of the brand (Aaker 1997; Lee & Back 2010). Lee and Back (2010) consider
21
perceived price as an antecedent of brand personality, because especially in the lodging
industry, hotel classes and their service positioning are expressed by pricing strategies. A
change in price can influence company’s clientele (Kandampully & Suhartanto 2000). The
change in the clientele in turn may influence hotel’s image, since especially in the hotel
industry, company’s clientele is a significant and indirect factor to brand image (Kandampully
& Suhartanto 2000).
Aaker (1997) developed a framework of brand personality, which includes five different
personality dimensions.
These dimensions
are sincerity,
excitement, competence,
sophistication and ruggedness (Aaker 1997). Aaker (1997) states, that each of these dimensions
have two or more distinct facets. The facets of sincerity are down-to-earth, honest, wholesome
and cheerful, the facets of excitement are daring, spirited, imaginative and up-to-date, the facets
of competence are reliable, intelligent and successful, sophistication’s facets are upper class
and charming and the facets of the final dimension, ruggedness, are outdoorsy and tough (Aaker
1997). This framework is illustrated in the Figure 2. Brand personality can range across these
dimensions and have characteristic traits from more than one dimension (Lee & Back 2010).
When observing Lapland Hotels, the brand has characteristics of all those dimensions, but it
fits best to the dimension of excitement, because Lapland is usually experienced to be exciting
and unique, and these characteristics describes also Lapland Hotels brand.
Figure 2. A brand personality framework (Aaker 1997, 352)
Tran et al. (2013) researched the relationship between hotel brand personality and hotel brand
quality. The result of their study suggests that a significant relationship exists when hotel brand
quality is a dependent variable and hotel brand personality independent variable (Tran et al.
22
2013). They compared the five dimension of brand quality and the five dimension of brand
personality and found out that each quality dimensions had their pair from personality
dimensions (Tran et al. 2013). These five dimension pairs had an effect to brand value and
brand loyalty, when sincere hotel brand had empathy quality, competent hotel brand had
assurance quality, exciting hotel brand had tangible quality, rugged hotel brand had
responsiveness quality and sophistication hotel brand had reliable quality (Tran et al. 2013).
From these results, it can be reach a conclusion, that in case of Lapland Hotels, brand loyalty
forms when exciting Lapland hotel offers tangible quality.
When the customer and her or his personality are observed, the concept of customer’s selfimage is notable. Customer’s self-image can be divided in four different aspects. These aspects
can be seen in Figure 3, where the customer’s self-image is illustrated. Actual self-image means
how person sees her- or himself and ideal self-image means how person would like to see heror himself (Back 2005). A person is viewed also in others perspective, so customer’s self-image
has also social aspects. Social self-image means how other people see the person and ideal
social self-image means how the person would like other people to see her- or himself (Back
2005). Ross (1971) studied the importance of brand or product consistent with customer’s selfimage to customer’s purchasing behavior. The research proved, that customers do prefer to
purchase products or brands which they find to be similar with their own self-image (Ross
1971). By purchasing products that are similar with their self-image, customers support their
self-images (Tepeci 1999).
Figure 3. Customer’s self-image
23
Identification happens when a person experiences her- or himself having same kind of
characteristics than members of a group (So et al. 2013). From this definition, it can be thought
that customer identifies to a brand, when she or he find some similarities between her- or
himself and the brand. Underwood, Bond and Baer (2001) suggest, that in a services
identification continuum, where low identification services are for example airlines and high
identification services musicians or sports teams, customers feel a medium level of
identification to hotel services. Bhattacharya and Sen (2003) suggest that if company’s identity
helps customer to satisfy his or her self-definitional needs, there is a greater probability that the
customer is attracted to that company and its identity. The more similar customer’s and
company’s identities are, the more attractive company’s identity is in customer’s mind
(Bhattacharya & Sen 2003). When brand’s personality attributes and customer’s personality
attributes match, customer favor that brand (Back 2005).
When identification exists, the customers become convinced of their psychological relationship
with the brand, become psychologically committed to it (Bhattacharya & Sen 2003) and through
this, customers can keep, protect and develop their self-esteem (So et al. 2013). For example,
business hotel customers are not staying at upper end hotels just because of a high-quality room
and service, but also because of impressing business associates (Back 2005). This can be
generalized to other situations too: people tend to consume products and services not only
because of the need, but also because of a desire to express themselves and impress others.
Also, Lee et al. (2009) state that in the upscale market segment, customers do not buy only the
product, but also symbol of status. A person has a need for social consistency and approval, so
person behaves the way she or he thinks other see her of him (Back 2005). By their own
behavior, customers can develop their social self-image towards their ideal social self-image.
Lee and Back (2010) researched the antecedents and consequences of brand personality in the
upper-upscale business hotel, and their findings suggested that by choosing an upper-upscale
business hotel brand, customers express and confirm their self-concept that is consistent with
the competence and sophistication brand personality. In addition to product or services, in
upper-upscale markets the customer buys also character of luxury, glory and status connected
to user imagery (Lee & Back 2010). The results of their study also proved that brand personality
affects to brand loyalty indirectly through trust (Lee & Back 2010). Because customers trust
and rely strongly on tangible features like hotel brand name, price and decoration style, the
importance of customer hotel brand identification and image congruence may be increased by
24
intangibility features of hotel services when customer is choosing the brand and becoming
brand loyal (Back 2005).
Customer’s brand commitment based on identification and shared values have proved to
influence customer loyalty (Fullerton 2003). In this way one consequence of customercompany identification, customer loyalty or brand loyalty, is existed (Bhattacharya & Sen
2003). So et al. (2013) discovered that customer brand identification effects indirectly to hotel
brand loyalty. In their research, they found out that when customer brand identification occurs,
the customer is favorable when she or he is evaluating the quality of the hotel’s service, she or
he experiences the hotel and its service more utility and she or he trusts more easily to that
brand (So et al. 2013). So et al. (2013) also suggest that in hotel industry, factors connected to
customer’s evaluation of the service experience are remarkable when observing brand loyalty.
So, customer brand identification does not create brand loyalty directly itself, but it is
remarkable factor, which have indirect effect to brand loyalty (So et al. 2013). Also, the study
of Nam et al. (2011) suggests that brand identification have effect on brand loyalty.
Back (2005) studied the effects of image congruence on customers’ brand loyalty in the upper
middle-class hotel industry. The results of this study suggested that when customer find
similarities between her or him social self-concept and the hotel brand image, she or he is more
satisfied with the hotel (Back 2005). Then, through satisfaction, brand loyalty exists (Back
2005). Also, this study proposes that if customer perceive hotel brand personality or image
similar to her or him self-image, the degree of customer satisfaction increases (Back 2005).
That is why hotel brands should develop their advertising, decoration style, personnel’s
appearance et cetera similar to the target market’s image (Back 2005). By this, the brand can
develop also the degree of brand loyalty because customer satisfaction increase brand loyalty.
2.2.3 Brand love
Customers form relationships with products, brands and services (Shimp & Madden 1988).
Because brand becomes personalized by brand personality (Lee & Back 2010), customer can
create and build up a loving relationship with the brand such as brand would be another person
(Alnawas & Altarifi 2016). Customer can therefore love and consider her or his favorite brand
as a friend or partner (Lee & Back 2010). Brand love can be defined as “the degree of passionate
emotional attachment a satisfied consumer has for a particular trade mark” (Carroll & Ahuvia
25
2006, 81). Brand love is a complex phenomenon, and there is no unambiguous explanation to
it (Albert, Merunka & Valette-Florence 2008).
Shimp and Madden (1988) presented a framework for customer-object relationship based on
Sternberg’s triangular theory of love established on 1986. Customer-object relationship
obviously differs from the relationship between two persons, because despite customer’s strong
feelings, the object cannot love or like back (Shimp & Madden 1988) and that is why love in
customer-object relationships is unidirectional and less dynamic (Whang, Allen, Sahoury &
Zhang 2004). Sternberg’s (1986) triangular theory of love suggests that love has three different
components: intimacy, passion and commitment/decision. In Customer-object relations, the
intimacy appears as customer’s feelings of closeness and connectedness with brands or
products, and it could be named as “liking” (Shimp & Madden 1988). Another component of
love, passion, is presented as “yearning” in the customer-object relationship (Shimp & Madden
1988). Yearning means the feeling, that customer just cannot have enough of that specific
product or brand, and that the desire for the product is strong (Shimp & Madden 1988). The
final component of love, commitment/decision is appearing in the customer-object relationship
as a decision to like the brand or as a commitment to a brand so that customer become loyal
and repurchases brand’s products or services (Shimp & Madden 1988).
Shimp and Madden (1988) also proposed eight different customer-object relations based on
Sternberg’s love theory and the three different components of love. These relations are
illustrated in Figure 4. In the Figure, + means that this component exists in that relation and –
means that this component is absence. First relation is nonliking, and it means a situation where
customer has no specific feeling for the brand, and none of the components of love exists
(Shimp & Madden 1988). Second love relation is liking, and it is a relation where customer
feels attraction towards the brand, but has not a strong desire to purchasing (Shimp & Madden
1988). In liking relationship, the customer may purchase the products of that brand sometimes,
but the customer is not committed to the brand (Shimp & Madden 1988). The next relationship
is infatuation, where the customer has a strong yearning for the brand (Shimp & Madden 1988).
Brands that are used for satisfying symbolic needs and statuses, are usually targets of infatuation
relationships (Shimp & Madden 1988). Functionalism is a relation where the customer decides
to consume the products of the brand without any strong emotions (Shimp & Madden 1988).
Inhibited desire is a relationship where the customer has the desire and want to purchase a
product, but there is some obstacle that limits her or his behavior (Shimp & Madden 1988).
26
This obstacle can be for example lack of money. Then there is also a relationship called
utilitarianism, where the customer has the liking and the commitment to purchasing the product,
but is not yearning to have it (Shimp & Madden 1988). Succumbed desire is a relation, where
customer has yearning and commitment, but no liking (Shimp & Madden1988). This
relationship can be explained for example as a situation, where customer is forced or
pressurized to consume by some external sources like family, business executive or religion
(Shimp & Madden 1988). Final relation is loyalty, and it means that customer have all
components of love: liking, yearning and commitment (Shimp & Madden 1988).
Figure 4. Consumer-object relations (Shimp & Madden 1988, 165)
Albert et al. (2008) noted, that Shimp and Madden do not test empirically their framework.
Albert et al. (2008) use to the definition of customer’s love five different characteristics. These
characteristics are passion for a brand, brand attachment, evaluating the brand favorable, having
positive emotions towards the brand and finally showing the love towards the brand in public
(Carroll & Ahuvia 2006; Albert et al. 2008). The study of Albert et al. (2008) researched the
feeling of love toward a brand, and the result of their study was that several dimensions of love
towards a brand exists.
The results of the research of Whang et al. (2004) suggest that customer-object relationships
have different kind of commitment than in interpersonal relationships. Unlike in interpersonal
relationships, the results of that research showed that in customer-object relationships, the
customer has no problem of having many similar products (in that case motorcycles), but still
27
giving up an old product is hard (Whang et al. 2004). The study of Whang et al. (2004) also
found out, that passionate love was the only love type that affects to loyalty. The findings of
Carroll and Ahuvia (2006) suggest that brands with hedonic or self-expressive products are
more loved. Brands offering self-expressive benefits have also higher level of customers’ love
and more customers that have favorable post-purchase behavior (Carroll & Ahuvia 2006).
Alnawas and Altarifi (2016) researched the role of brand identification and brand love in the
development of brand loyalty in hotel services. The result of their study was that customer hotel
brand identification has an influence on brand loyalty through brand love (Alnawas & Altarifi
2016). Also, the study results of Drennan et al. (2015) suggest, that brand love is relevant factor
when brand loyalty is enhanced, especially in hedonic products. Albert and Merunka (2013)
found a significant relationship between brand love and brand commitment. Their study proved,
that brand love affects to brand commitment and attitudinal loyalty, and it also encourage
customers to tell positive things about the brand (Albert & Merunka 2013). Brand love’s
influence to brand commitment was even greater than the influence of brand trust or brand
identification (Albert & Merunka 2013).
Lapland evokes strong emotions in some Finns. Those “Lapland aficionados” have continuous
longing and wish to visit Lapland and they are committed emotionally to Lapland (Komppula
2016). The situation, where an individual has an emotional bond to specific place is called place
attachment (Yuksel, Yuksel & Bilim 2010). Characteristic to place attachment is that person
has the sense of being home at the place where she or he feels attached to (Yuksel et al. 2010).
Place attachment has proved to have a significant influence on customer satisfaction and
important predictor of loyalty intentions (Yuksel et al. 2010). In Komppula’s (2016) research,
the emotional bond of Lapland aficionados seemed to be the main reason why those Lapland
lovers travelled to Lapland. Therefore, it can be though that these consequences of brand love
are also related to love of Lapland and especially to Lapland Hotels brand.
2.3 Theory conclusion
Brand commitment and brand loyalty are broad and ambiguous, but also very important
concepts. They can be considered as synonyms, separate concepts or antecedents of each
other’s. In this research, they are observed as concepts, that are not completely synonyms, but
have much in common. Often customer has both, brand commitment and brand loyalty together,
28
but there are also existing situations, where customer may be brand loyal, but is not committed
to brand or she or he has brand commitment without actual buying behavior. The focus of this
research is in the common characteristics of affective commitment and attitudinal loyalty,
which include emotional commitment, intentional repurchasing and positive attitude towards
the brand. Customers’ brand commitment and brand loyalty are notable part of nowadays
marketing, because with them, companies achieve economic safety and competitive advantage.
Brand commitment and brand loyalty have several useful consequences, like customers’
intention to repurchase, brand advocates and positive word-of-mouth.
There are several different factors, that affect directly or indirectly to brand commitment and
brand loyalty. In the Figure 5 the theoretical framework of this study can be seen. On the top of
this figure, brand commitment and brand loyalty can be found partly overlapping each other’s.
Below these concepts are the factors affecting them: concepts affecting directly to them are
customer satisfaction, brand love and brand trust. Brand identification has an indirect effect on
brand commitment and brand loyalty, and that is why it can be found undermost. When the
customer is satisfied with the brand, can trust or even love the brand, she or he has a high
potential of being also a loyal customer. Brand identification affects to all these direct factors
and through them to brand commitment and brand loyalty. When customer brand identification
occurs, customers are usually more satisfied with the brand, they may love the brand and feel
deeper trust towards the brand.
Figure 5. Theoretical Framework
29
In the perspective of this research, it can be assumed that the customers of Lapland Hotels
explain their commitment towards the brand by these factors discussed earlier. It can be
supposed that customers who feel committed and tend to repurchase the services of Lapland
Hotels, are satisfied with the brand, evaluate the service quality high, can trust to Lapland
Hotels, feel brand love and identify with Lapland Hotels brand, or at least sense some of these
factors. It is also probable, that customers with high level of brand commitment or intention to
purchase the services of Lapland Hotels explain their brand commitment and brand loyalty with
different factors than customers with low level of brand commitment or purchase intentions.
30
3. METHODOLOGY
3.1 The research methods
Quantitative research means, that statistical information is collected from the research subject,
and with that, the information can be summed up to be more understandable with different
analysis methods (Tähtinen & Isoaho 2001, 9–11). Quantitative research approach is used,
because it was the approach of the prior study behind this research. In this study, the same data
is analyzed from a different perspective. The data is collected by questionnaire, which means
that this research is based on survey method (Heikkilä 1998, 19). The starting point for this
study is abductive, which means that the data for this study has been existing before the
theoretical framework was formed. By quantitative research approach, it can be discovered
which explanations behind customers’ brand commitment and brand loyalty are the most
common, and the explanations of different customer groups can be statistically compared.
3.2 Data collection
The empirical data of this research was collected from customers of Lapland Hotels, who’s email addresses were on hotel chain’s customer database. The link to enquiry was sent with
email message to 23 500 customers during Spring 2015. The enquiry link was opened by 1667
customers, from whom 1314 responded the enquiry entirely. Response rate of the original study
was approximately 5,6%. In this study, only those responses were accepted, which included
suitable answer to question number 22. In question number 22, the respondent was asked to
describe freely what would make her or him to take a room from Lapland Hotels elsewhere
than in Lapland, if the location and price would be similar with competitors. Suitable answer
means that the answer included some explanation for what would make the customer to take a
room from Lapland Hotels. If the customer was not answered anything, or she or he was
answered for example “I do not know”, that respondent was deleted. In this research, 824
responses were considered, so the response rate of this study is approximately 3,5%.
The original questionnaire included open questions and questions with answer alternatives, so
the data collected with this questionnaire includes numerical data and qualitative material. This
had an effect to the analysis methods that were used. The original questionnaire can be found
as appendix 1 in the end of this paper. In the perspective of this research, the questions number
31
19, 21 and 22 are most important. Especially question number 22 is important, because it is the
question, where the respondents explain their commitment or loyalty towards Lapland Hotels
brand. Question number 19 measured respondents’ actual buying behavior and behavioral
loyalty, because there the respondents should answer if they “would definitely”, “would
probably”, “could consider” or “would not” take a room from Lapland Hotels. Question number
21 measured respondents’ affective commitment towards Lapland Hotels. There the
respondents had five different statements, and they had to choose most suitable alternative from
completely disagree to fully agreement. With this question, the different commitment groups
of respondents were developed.
3.3 Analysis of the data
All the suitable responses were marked on Excel, where the data was moved to SPSS. The
answers to question number 22, which explained the respondents’ commitment or loyalty
towards Lapland Hotels brand, were encoded by content analysis based on the data, so that all
similar answers were coded to be the same. The idea in content analysis is to observe the
similarities and differences between the data, and to compact or classify it (KvaliMOTV 2016).
By content analysis, verbal material can be turned into statistic data (KvaliMOTV 2016). In this
way, the answers to the question number 22 were formed to seven different answer groups.
These coded answer groups are 1) earlier experience (satisfaction, trust, loyalty), 2) pricequality ratio / location / coincident / must, 3) reward program / offer, 4) desire to experience
new, 5) service quality, 6) strong emotional bond to Lapland and 7) unique brand / private
chain.
First answer group, “earlier experience (satisfaction, trust, loyalty)”, includes all open answers
which highlighted that the respondent has been visiting Lapland Hotels earlier, and has been
satisfied to her or his experience. The answers coded to this answer group suggested, that the
respondent is already a loyal customer to Lapland Hotels, has had a pleasant stay there earlier,
or has trust to the brand for example based on friend’s recommendation. So, the feelings of
trust, satisfaction and loyalty are essential in this answer group.
“Price-quality ratio / location / coincidence / must” contains answers that were quite neutral and
did not include emotions. Most of the answers coded to this group mentioned inexpensive price
or good price-quality ratio. Answers referred also to the location of the hotel. Some described
32
as their explanation just coincidence and others told for example that their employer chooses
where they stay in their business trips. So, respondents whose answer were coded to this answer
group, did not reveal emotions or sense of commitment. Their explanations included
conventional characteristics regarding to hotels, or factors that refer to the fact that respondent
do not made the decision intentionally or her-/himself.
Third coded answer group is “reward program / offer”, and the answers coded to this group
explained the behavior of the respondent by hotel’s reward program or existing offers.
Respondents who described themselves as Lapland Hotels regular customers, did not be coded
into this group. Essential matter in answers coded to this group were that respondents wanted
to have some benefits from the hotel’s reward program. So, the motivation behind customers’
behavior was in this case some benefits that could be achieved by reward program or discount
that they would have by this offer. Some of the respondents described that they are satisfied
with some other hotel’s reward program, and to choose Lapland Hotels, they should get same
or better benefits from there.
Fourth answer group is “desire to experience new”, and the answers inside this group share
respondents’ willingness to have new experience or interest to test new hotel or new brand. In
this explanation group, the answers were quite unambiguous.
“Service quality” includes all answers that described somehow hotel’s service and quality, but
did not mention price or price-quality ratio. Respondents whose answer were coded into this
group mentioned for example parking lots, cleanliness, gym, performing artists, air
conditioning, hotel’s flexibility, good restaurant and cheerful customer service. So, this group
represent answers, that included features concerning customer service, hotel’s quality,
supplementary services and whole hotel experience. These answers were general to describe
any hotels; they were not describing especially Lapland Hotels or the personality or uniqueness
of Lapland Hotels chain.
Sixth answer group, “strong emotional bond to Lapland”, includes respondents who explained
their reasons for choosing Lapland Hotel by explicit emotional attachment to Lapland. So, the
respondents whose answer were coded to this answer group explained their behavior by
commitment to Lapland. They described themselves as friends of Lapland, or used other words
that referred to strong emotions. These respondents did not mention any characteristics or
33
quality standards concerning hotel services, but their explanations always referred to Lapland
and feelings towards it.
Seventh and final coded answer group, “unique brand / private chain”, includes answers that
described the uniqueness of Lapland Hotels or the wish to support smaller, private hotel chain
from Lapland. Common characteristics to these answers were that Lapland Hotel brand was
described to be unique, individual, different and more personal than other hotel chains. Also,
the image of Lapland was mentioned, but not so emotionally than in the group of “strong
emotional bond to Lapland”. Some respondents described their wish to support private hotel or
hotel which origins are from Lapland or Finland.
Another coding that needed to be done was number coding to question number 21, which
measured the affective commitment of respondents. There these question alternatives were
coded to numbers so that “fully disagree” is equivalent to number -2, “disagree” is -1, “no
agreement neither disagreement” is 0, “agree” is 1 and “fully agree” is 2. By this number coding
a sum variable from question number 21 could be formed. By that sum variable, the different
commitment groups were developed.
Forming a sum variable means that a new variable is created by connecting several old
variables. In this case, it means that the five statements of question number 21 were connected
to be one variable, that describes how committed the respondent is to Lapland Hotels. Because
of this number coding (“fully disagree” = -2, “fully agree” = 2) and the five statements that
were connected, the value of the respondents’ commitment level range between scale [-10,10].
Figure 6 illustrates how the respondents’ commitment level values based on this sum variable
are divided. Number 10 refers to strong affective commitment, number 0 is neutral and number
-10 points out that there is no affective commitment existing.
34
Figure 6. The division of respondents’ level of commitment
Because of the division of the commitment level values, it was decided to form three
commitment groups. Commitment level values that were -3 or below that, formed a group of
“not committed”. All commitment level values between [-2,2] were included to a group called
“neutral”. Then, all commitment values that were 3 or more, formed a group of “committed”.
There were 148 respondents (18,0 %) in “not committed” group, 467 respondents (56,7 %) in
“neutral” group and 208 respondents (25,3 %) in “committed” group. The numbers of
respondents in each commitment groups are illustrated in Figure 7. The mean value of
“committed” group’s level of commitment was 4,9. The mean value of “neutral” group’s level
of commitment was 0,2, and the mean value of “not committed” group’s level of commitment
was -5,2, when the scale of values is between [-10,10].
Figure 7. The numbers of respondents in the commitment groups
35
To observe respondents actual buying behavior, another number coding and sum variable was
made. The question number 19, where the respondents were asked if she or he would or would
not stay in Lapland Hotels in business trip or vacations in Oulu or Tampere, were number coded
by their answer alternatives. Alternative of “I would not stay in Lapland Hotels” were coded to
number -2, “I could consider of staying in Lapland Hotels” were coded to number -1, “I would
probably stay in Lapland Hotels” were coded to number 1 and “I would for almost sure stay in
Lapland Hotels” were coded to number 2. Then, from the four statements of the question
number 19, a sum variable was formed. This sum variable describes the respondents’ intention
to use the hotel services of Lapland Hotels, and its scale of value was [-8,8]. By this sum
variable, two groups of customers’ actual buying behavior were formed. Respondents whose
value of this sum variable were over 0 formed a group of “would stay in Lapland Hotels”, and
respondents whose value of this sum variable were 0 or below it formed a group of “would not
stay in Lapland Hotels”.
After the data was processed to be suitable, it was analyzed by SPSS -program, where
frequencies and crosstabs were used. Frequencies illustrates how the answer to a specific
question vary and how many respondents have chosen each answer. By crosstabs the answers
between two or more different groups can be compared. So, in crosstabs, the relation between
two variables is observed (Heikkilä 1998, 210).
36
4. RESULTS
4.1 Sample profile
The sample profile of this study is presented in Table 1, where different statistical information
about the respondents can be seen. From the 824 respondents, 61,3 % were women and 38,7 %
were men, meaning that women were more active to answer to the questionnaire than men.
Most of the respondents were from Finland (803 respondents), but 17 persons from abroad were
participated too. These foreign respondents were for example from Sweden (5 respondents),
Denmark (3 respondents) or other countries in Europe, but also from China (2 respondents) and
United States (2 respondents).
Table 1. Sample profile
Frequency (%)
Gender (N = 824)
Frequency (%)
Cross earnings per year € (N= 811)
Male
319 (38.7)
Under 5 000
10 (1.2)
Female
505 (61.3)
5 000–9 999
10 (1.2)
10 000–14 999
25 (3.0)
Age (N = 820)
20–35 years
45 (5.5)
15 000–19 999
43 (5.2)
36–50 years
224 (27.2)
20 000–24 999
55 (6.7)
51–65 years
411 (49.9)
25 000–29 999
80 (9.7)
66–80 years
140 (17.0)
30 000–39 999
163 (19.8)
40 000–49 999
77 (9.3)
13 (1.6)
50 000–59 999
70 (8.5)
Southern Finland
220 (26.7)
60 000–79 999
40 (4.9)
Western Finland
137 (16.6)
80 000–99 999
21 (2.5)
21 (2.5)
Location (N = 512)
Abroad
Eastern Finland
27 (3.3)
At least 100 000
Oulu province
65 (7.9)
I do not want to tell
Lapland
50 (6.1)
196 (23.8)
The categorization of respondents’ location is made by using old provinces of Finland. First
group is abroad, and it includes respondents who are not living in Finland. Second location
group is Southern Finland, and it includes respondents, who lives in cities or towns that were
part of the province of Southern Finland. These cities or towns are for example Helsinki, Espoo,
Hämeenlinna, Riihimäki, Lappeenranta, Imatra and Hamina. Western Finland includes cities or
towns like Nokia, Tampere, Pori, Kokkola, Seinäjoki, Vaasa and Turku. Respondents who were
37
categorized to the group of Eastern Finland, where example from Joensuu, Mikkeli, Kuopio,
Savonlinna, Varkaus or Iisalmi. The old province of Oulu includes cities or towns like Kajaani,
Oulu, Ylivieska and Haapavesi. Final group is Lapland, and respondents categorized to this
group, live in the north of Finland. Cities of towns categorized to Lapland were Kemi,
Keminmaa, Rovaniemi and Utsjoki. Some respondents did not answer to the question which
observed the location of the customers (312 responds were missing). The biggest location group
is Southern Finland; 220 respondents were living in there. 50 customers were from Lapland.
The smallest group is Eastern Finland, and it included 27 respondents.
Respondents’ ages at the answering moment varied between 20 and 80 years. Almost half of
the respondents were 51–65 years old. Second largest age group were 36–50 years, which
contain 27,2 % of the respondents. Only 45 respondents (5,5 %) were 20–35 years old. Over 66
years old were 140 respondents (17,0 %).
Also, respondents’ gross earnings per year were asked. Almost 200 respondents (23,8 %) did
not want to tell their incomes. From those who told their gross earnings per year, majority (19,8
%) earn 30 000€–39 000€ per year. 21 respondents (2,5 %) earn over 100 000€ per year, and
20 respondents (2,4 %) earn under 10 000€ per year.
4.2 Demographic characteristics of the commitment groups
In Table 2, the statistical information about each commitment groups are illustrated. Between
the division of commitment groups gender, statistically significant difference was found
(p<0.01). In “not committed” and “neutral” groups, approximately 35 % were men and 65 %
were women. In “committed” group, there were 48,1 % men and 51,9 % women, so the
difference between the gender is not so high in “committed” group than in other groups.
Statistically extremely significant difference (p<0.001) were found between the age divisions
of these commitment groups. In “not committed” group, the differences between each age
groups are not so high, and in relative to other groups divisions, “not committed” group have
more younger respondents. There are no statistically significant differences between the
commitment groups divisions of location or incomes (p>0.005).
38
Table 2. Demographic characteristics of three commitment groups
Demographic
Not Committed
Neutral
Committed
characteristic
(N= 148)
(N = 467)
(N = 208)
p-Value, ChiSquare test
p-Value,
Cramer's V
Frequency (%)
Gender
Male
51 (34.5)
168 (36.0)
100 (48.1)
X² (2) = 10.286a
0.112
Female
97 (65.5)
299 (64.0)
108 (51.9)
p=0.006
p=0.006
20–35 years
14 (9.5)
23 (5.0)
8 (3.8)
X² (6) = 26.040a
0.126
36–50 years
51 (34.7)
125 (26.9)
47 (22.6)
p=0.000
p=0.000
51–65 years
64 (43.5)
248 (53.4)
99 (47.6)
66–80 years
18 (12.2)
68 (14.7)
54 (26.0)
4 (4.2)
5 (1.8)
4 (2.9)
X² (10) = 12.034a
0.109
Southern Finland
42 (44.2)
115 (41.1)
62 (45.6)
p=0.283
p=0.283
Western Finland
26 (27.4)
81 (28.9)
30 (22.1)
Eastern Finland
2 (2.1)
13 (4.6)
12 (8.8)
Oulu province
9 (9.5)
41 (14.6)
15 (11.0)
12 (12.6)
25 (8.9)
13 (9.6)
Under 5 000
1 (0.7)
6 (1.3)
3 (1.4)
X² (26) = 19.900a
0.11
5 000–9 999
2 (1.4)
5 (1.1)
3 (1.4)
p=0.796
p=0.796
10 000–14 999
3 (2.0)
12 (2.6)
10 (4.8)
15 000–19 999
8 (5.4)
22 (4.7)
13 (6.3)
20 000–24 999
10 (6.8)
33 (7.1)
12 (5.8)
25 000–29 999
9 (6.1)
45 (9.6)
25 (12.0)
30 000–39 999
30 (20.3)
95 (20.3)
38 (18.3)
40 000–49 999
13 (8.8)
42 (9.0)
22 (10.6)
50 000–59 999
12 (8.1)
41 (8.8)
17 (8.2)
60 000–79 999
10 (6.8)
25 (5.4)
5 (2.4)
80 000–99 999
4 (2.7)
13 (2.8)
4 (1.9)
At least 100 000
3 (2.0)
13 (2.8)
5 (2.4)
41 (27.7)
104 (22.3)
51 (24.5)
Age
Location
Abroad
Lapland
Cross earnings per year €
I do not want to tell
4.3 Respondents’ explanations for their brand commitment and brand loyalty
Based on the coded explanation groups, which explain the reasons why customer would choose
to stay in Lapland Hotels outside of Lapland, it is observed how common each of these
explanations are. In Table 3, it can be seen how many answers each coded answer groups have.
39
The most common explanation group is “price-quality ratio / location / coincidence / must” by
258 answers (31,3 %). This is quite curious, because the question number 22, that observed
these explanations behind customers’ behavior, were chose its words so that the respondents
should assume that the Lapland Hotel is equal with its competitors when it comes to price and
location.
Table 3. The division of explanations
EXPLANATION
Frequency
%
73
8.9
Price/quality ratio / location / coincidence / must
258
31.3
Reward program / offer
101
12.3
29
3.5
218
26.5
34
4.1
111
13.5
Earlier experience (satisfaction, trust, loyalty)
Desire to experience new
Service Quality
Strong emotional bond to Lapland
Unique brand / private chain
Second largest coded explanation group is “service quality” with 218 answers (26,5 %).
“Unique brand / private chain” and “reward program / offer” have almost as many answers;
“unique brand / private chain” has ten more answers and it is the third largest answer group.
Also, “strong emotional bond to Lapland” and “desire to experience new” are almost as
common answers. “Desire to experience new” is the smallest group with 29 answers (3,5 %),
which is five answers less than “strong emotional bond to Lapland” had. “Earlier experience
(satisfaction, trust, loyalty)” is the fifth common answer group with 73 responses (8,9 %). In
Figure 8, these same results are illustrated in a pie chart. The percentage value illustrates how
large part from all the answers each coded answer groups have.
40
Figure 8. Respondents’ explanations for their brand commitment and brand loyalty
4.4 Explanations compered between different commitment groups
Another objective for this research was to explore, if the explanations vary between different
commitment groups. In Table 4, the explanations of each commitment groups can be seen, and
in Figure 9, the divisions of these explanation groups between each commitment groups are
illustrated.
Statistically extremely significant (p<0.001) differences can be found between explanation
groups of “price/quality ratio / location / coincidence / must”, “earlier experience (satisfaction,
trust, loyalty)” and “strong emotional bond to Lapland”. “Price/quality ratio / location /
coincidence / must” is the most common answer of “neutral” group and the second common
answer of “not committed” and “committed” groups. “Earlier experience (satisfaction, trust,
loyalty)” and “strong emotional bond to Lapland” are remarkably more common answer to
“committed” group compared to other commitment groups. Statistically significant difference
(p<0.05) can be found in “service quality”, which is relatively more common explanation for
the group of “not committed” than to other groups. It is also the most common explanation of
“not committed” respondents. There are no statistically significant differences between the
explanation groups of “unique brand / private chain”, “reward program / offer” and “desire to
experience new” (p>0.05).
41
Table 4. The explanations of different commitment groups
Not Committed
Neutral
Committed
p-Value,
p-Value,
(N = 148)
(N = 467)
(N = 208)
Chi-Square test
Cramer’s' V
167 (35.8)
42 (20.2)
X² (2) = 16.362a,
0.141,
p=0.000
p=0.000
X² (2) = 11.429a,
0.118,
p=0.003
p=0.003
X² (2) = 1.887a,
0.048,
p=0.389
p=0.389
X² (2) = 74.634a,
0.301,
p=0.000
p=0.000
X² (2) = 34.129a,
0.204,
p=0.000
p=0.000
X² (2) = 0.643a,
0.028,
p=0.725
p=0.725
X² (2) = 3.961a,
0.069,
p=0.138
p=0.138
Frequency (%)
Price/quality ratio /
48 (32.4)
location / coincidence
/ must
Service quality
Unique brand /
51 (34.5)
15 (10.1)
128 (27.4)
68 (14.6)
39 (18.8)
28 (13.5)
private chain
Earlier experience
4 (2.7)
20 (4.3)
49 (23.6)
(satisfaction, trust,
loyalty)
Strong emotional
4 (2.7)
7 (1.5)
23 (11.1)
bond to Lapland
Reward program /
21 (14.2)
56 (12.0)
24 (11.5)
offer
Desire to experience
new
5 (3.4)
21 (4.5)
3 (1.4)
When the Figure 9 is observed, the differences between each commitment groups division of
explanation can be noticed. In the column of “not committed” group, the biggest part belongs
to explanation group of “service quality”. In this explanation group, the answers were for
example: “peaceful and cozy hotel”, “tempting night shows”, “free parking lot, or even
parking space available in hotel’s instant distance for delivering luggage”, “extremely good
service, easy reserving, good gym, rooms with high quality, free Wi-Fi”, “the quality of
restaurant services, for example the diversity of breakfast. Flexible times for check in and out”
and “expert service, modern rooms, good beds and specially bedlinen with high quality and
rich and diverse breakfast”. In “not committed” group, the explanation of “reward program /
offer” is also relatively more common than in other commitment groups. In this explanation
42
groups, the answers were for example “good offer. The price is that you anyway look at first”,
“free night, which would accumulate from several payed nights. For example, during two
years”, ”with loyalty card it should be get at least free dinner when staying overnight, like it is
in Scandic, Sokos hotels and Cumulus now”, “I would stay, yes, if I could get some explicit
concrete benefits for that” and “bonus program, that would make it possible to use Lapland
Hotels inexpensively on vacations”. So, in “not committed” group, majority of the explanations
are neutral and general without any emotions included towards Lapland Hotels.
In the column of “neutral” respondents, the largest explanation group is “price/quality ratio /
location / coincidence / must”. In this explanation group, the example answers are “suitable
location and price level”, “there is no matter what the hotel chain is in self. Most important is
price and location”, “hotel is all the same to me”, “I am not so committed, I stay there where
are free rooms”, “necessity” and “coincidence”. The explanation group of “unique brand /
private chain” is also relatively more common in “neutral” group than in others. Example
answers to this explanation group are ”I prefer companies from Lapland when it is possible”,
“some individual characteristic”, “hotel’s own personality, humanity”, “exoticism, Lapland”,
”it is private. I cannot stay at retail co-operative hotel, because it gets me pimples”, “domestic,
more personal and with high quality”, “there is this own atmosphere in Lapland” and
“standing out with customer service and being different (unique)”. In addition to these groups,
the explanation of “desire to experience new” is relatively more common in the group of
“neutral”. Examples to this explanation group are “interest to try new hotel”, “desire to
experience new. I have not stayed overnight in Lapland Hotels”, “first maybe curiosity” and
“I would in a way go to check out hotels atmosphere, service, coziness in general and so on,
meaning that I would compare it to other hotels… Waiting to find out something that clearly
would tell that hotel is Lapland Hotel!!?!”. The division of “neutral” group’s explanation is
quite similar with the group of “not committed”. The relative size of each explanation groups
is quite equal between these two commitment groups. So, in “neutral” group also, those
explanations that do not include strong emotions or emotional bonds towards Lapland Hotels
are most common.
43
Figure 9. The division of commitment groups’ explanations
In the column of “committed” group, the most common explanation is “earlier experience
(satisfaction, trust, loyalty)”. This explanation was relatively much more common in
“committed” group than in others. In this explanation group, the respondent described their
answers for example like this: “so far they have been nicer and cozier because of their small
size. Breakfast is better than elsewhere. Individual rooms. Booking is handy to do by phone and
customer service is always friendly”, “reputation”, “familiar house with their habits”, “over
40 years’ experience from Lapland Hotels”, “someone would recommend” and “somehow
Lapland Hotels brand has just created stable and trustworthy view of their business”. In
“committed” group, also the explanation of “strong emotional bond to Lapland” were
remarkably more common than in other commitment groups. The example answers to this
explanation groups are “I have warm emotions towards Lapland”, “being Lapland
aficionado”, “I have been visiting Lapland approximately 100 times during my life, found there
my partner and committed to that region completely. I can even move to live there. Considering
this background, I think it is obvious to favor Lapland Hotels”, “I am emotionally committed
to Lapland, its nature and spirit. Outside Lapland I could enjoy staying in hotel, that somehow
reminds me from my trips to Lapland”, “well if the price and location is equal with others, then
of course Lapland Hotels. I am so mad about Lapland, that only the name of the hotel will affect
to my decision”, “Lapland brings me great memories and it feels home. I will recommend it to
44
my relatives when they come to Tampere and ask me where they should stay overnight”, “I am
Laplander and proud of it – and proud of Lapland Hotels” and “only hearing the first part of
this combination name, ‘Lapland’, would get me stay in that hotel outside Lapland. I am
Lapland’s person by root and branch, and I would stay Lapland Hotels even though it would
be in China”. So, in “committed” group, those explanations that include emotions are more
common than in other commitment groups. Also, the division of the explanations is different
in “committed” group compared to other commitment groups.
In Figure 10, the explanation groups of “Price/quality ratio / location / coincidence / must” and
“service quality” and the explanation groups of “earlier experience (satisfaction, trust, loyalty)”,
“unique brand / private chain” and “strong emotional bond to Lapland” are connected. In this
way, the differences between the explanation’s division of different commitment groups are
clarified. The division of “not committed” and “neutral” groups look still similar, but the
difference to “committed” group is remarkable. In “committed” group, the size of that new,
connected explanation group that includes emotions is quite similar that the size of “neutral”
and “not committed” groups’ new, connected explanation that does not include any bond to
Lapland Hotels. In Figure 10, the meaning of emotions can clearly be observed to the
“committed” group.
Figure 10. Remodeled version of the division of commitment groups’ explanation
45
When the actual buying behavior of respondents were explored by the commitment level of
customers, statistically extremely significant differences were found (p<0.001). In Table 5 the
commitment groups’ intention to use Lapland Hotels’ hotel services can be seen. Most of the
respondents (94,4 %), who are not committed to Lapland Hotels would not stay in Lapland
Hotels outside of Lapland either. From those who are committed to Lapland Hotels, 67,4 %
would stay in Lapland Hotels in Oulu or Tampere. From “neutral” group, 25,9 % would stay in
Lapland Hotels.
Table 5. Commitment groups’ intention to use Lapland Hotels’ hotel services
Not committed
(N =145)
Neutral
(N = 436)
Committed
(N = 190)
p-Value,
Chi-Square test
p-Value,
Cramer's V
137 (94.5)
323 (74.1)
62 (32.6)
X² (2) =162.554a,
p=0.000
0.459,
p=0.000
8 (5.5)
113 (25.9)
128 (67.4)
Frequency (%)
Would not stay in
Lapland Hotels
Would stay in
Lapland Hotels
So, based on the Table 5, it can be said that the level of customer’s commitment has powerful
meaning to her or his actual buying behavior. When customer is committed to Lapland Hotels
brand, it is probable, that she or he will also use Lapland Hotels’ services. Also, if customer is
not committed or has neutral attitude towards Lapland Hotels, she or he will not probably use
the services of that brand either.
46
5. CONCLUSION
5.1 Main findings
The results of this research illustrate that customers of Lapland Hotels explain their brand
commitment and brand loyalty for different reasons. From the respondents’ open explanations,
seven different explanation types were found, and these different explanation types were coded
to seven different explanation groups. The most common explanation group to customers’
brand commitment and brand loyalty towards Lapland Hotels were “price/quality ratio /
location / coincidence / must” with 31,3 % of the answers. Second common answer group were
“service quality” with 26,5 % of the answers. There were statistically significant differences
between the explanations of different commitment groups. The explanations of committed
customers included more answers with emotional characteristics, when the explanations of not
committed and neutral customers included more answers with neutral and general
characteristics. The level of commitment has also remarkable influence to customers’ actual
buying behavior.
5.2 Theoretical conclusion
In the theory section of this research, besides brand commitment and brand loyalty, also the
factors affecting to them were discussed. In Table 6, the coded explanation groups are
categorized based on these factors that were discussed in chapter 2.2. The orange numbers
behind each explanation groups do not have special meaning in Table 6. Under satisfaction and
trust were categorized the explanation groups of “service quality” and “earlier experience
(satisfaction, trust, loyalty)”. Satisfaction and trust means, that customer either feels that her or
his wants and need are fulfilled or trust that them can be fulfilled. In “service quality” group,
respondents explain their behavior by describing things that make them feel satisfied. In “earlier
experience (satisfaction, trust, loyalty)”, respondents in turn described that they have already
been satisfied and that they trust that Lapland Hotels can fulfill their wants and needs over
again. When the meaning of satisfaction and trust to brand commitment and brand loyalty is
observed, it can be discovered that the results of this study support also the results of earlier
studies. Satisfaction and trust do have an effect to the development of brand loyalty and brand
commitment.
47
Table 6. The explanations of respondents categorized under different factors of brand
commitment and brand loyalty
Under brand personality and brand identification was categorized the group of “unique brand /
private chain”. In this explanation group, respondents described Lapland Hotels’ different, own
and unique personality or the wish to support something that differs from big and dominant
hotel chains. Brand personality means characters or features associated with the brand, and it
makes the brand to stand out from its competitors. Unfortunately, in this research the
personalities of the respondents are not on record, so it is not possible to observe if the
respondents, whose answers are coded to this answer group are identifying with Lapland Hotels
or just pleased to Lapland Hotels’ personality. So, when it comes to the meaning of brand
personality to brand commitment and brand loyalty, the results of this study are consistent with
the theory. Brand personality does have an effect to the development of brand commitment and
brand loyalty. The results of this study also support that by strong brand personality, the brand
achieves competitive advantage. The meaning of brand identification was not supported in this
study, because in this study, it cannot be known if the customer is identifying with the brand or
not.
Third factor that were discussed in chapter 2.2, were brand love. The answer group of “strong
emotional bond to Lapland” were categorized under this factor, because all answers coded to
this answer group included strong emotions that can be described as love. Interestingly, all
respondents, whose answer were coded to this answer group, described their warm emotions
48
and love towards Lapland, not to Lapland Hotels. So, it is questionable, it the concept of brand
love is completely valid in this situation. In the chapter of brand love, also a concept of place
attachment is discussed. Place attachment could explain these answers, because it can be
thought, that respondents, whose answer were coded to “strong emotional bond to Lapland”,
have place attachment towards Lapland. Because of the place attachment, they would stay in
Lapland Hotels, where they could have relief to their longing to Lapland. Some respondents
whose answer were coded to this answer group particularly mentioned, that with Lapland
Hotels, they could feel of being in Lapland even though they would not be there. This refers
also to the place attachment. The results of this study support the theory of brand love in that
way, that customers can create a loving relationship to an object, and they can consider the
object as their friend or partner. In the case of Lapland Hotels, the customers’ love towards
Lapland proved to have an influence to customers’ commitment and loyalty towards Lapland
Hotels.
Three explanation groups were not categorized under each of these factors discussed and
illustrated in Table 6. These groups are “Price/quality ratio / location / coincidence / must”,
“reward program / offer” and “desire to experience new”. Any of the three factors affecting
brand commitment and brand loyalty, cannot be directly behind these three explanation groups.
These explanation groups are also the ones, that do not include any emotions or emotional
bonds.
So, based on the results of this research, it can be reached a conclusion, that customer
satisfaction, brand trust, brand personality and brand love have effect to brand commitment and
brand loyalty, only when the commitment and loyalty are explained by emotions. This in turn
describe the meaning of attitudinal loyalty and affective commitment. In other words, the results
of this study support the theory, because in this research, attitudinal loyalty, affective
commitment and emotions appeared to be most important. When the customer is committed to
a brand, she or he has emotions towards the brand, and she or he will probably purchase the
products or services of that brand. By affective commitment, attitudinal loyalty and customers’
emotions, the brand will achieve competitive advantage.
49
5.3 Discussion
When the results of this research and the explanations of respondents are observed, different
dimensions of brand commitment and brand loyalty can be found behind respondents’
explanations. In Figure 11, the coded explanation groups are positioned by numbers to the
figure of the relationship between brand commitment and brand loyalty, which was presented
earlier in chapter 2.1.
In Figure 11, the orange number (1) means the explanation group of “price/quality ratio /
location / coincidence / must”. It is positioned in that place, because based on the answers coded
to this answer group, it can be assumed that respondents who explained their behavior by this
coded answer group, do not have affective commitment or other emotional bond to Lapland
Hotels. The orange number (1) is positioned half on continuance commitment and half to
behavioral loyalty. This is explained by the different answers coded to this answer group. Some
respondents answered, that their employer choose where they stay overnight on their business
trips. These situations belong to continuance commitment, because customers cannot make the
decision by themselves, and for them it is hard to change to another brand. But not all answers
coded to this answer group were in that situation, so the orange number (1) could not be
positioned wholly to continuance commitment. The situations that do not belong to continuance
commitment, are included to behavioral loyalty. Answers in this explanation group did not
include tones of emotions or positive attitudes, so they can be thought as a customary habit. It
is true, that 20,2 % of committed respondents answered to this answer group too, and when the
customer is committed to brand, it could be thought that her or him should be positioned to
dimensions of attitudinal loyalty or affective commitment. The explanation for this may be the
way in which these commitment groups were formed. If the respondent get commitment value
of 3, it was still coded to be in the group of commitment, although the value of 3 between the
scale of [-10, 10] is quite neutral. So, it may be so that respondents who were in committed
group, and had explained their behavior by “price/quality ratio / location / coincidence / must”,
are the ones whose commitment value was closer to 3 than 10.
Orange number (2) in the Figure 11 refers to coded explanation group of “service quality”. It is
positioned to attitudinal loyalty, because explanations inside this answer group were evidently
intentional and conscious, but they described characters that are generic for all hotels, not
specially to Lapland Hotels.
50
Figure 11. The positions of respondents’ explanation in brand commitment’s and brand
loyalty’s dimensions
Orange number (3) means coded answer group of “unique brand / private chain”. It is positioned
to affective commitment and attitudinal loyalty, because answers coded to this answer group
expressed clearly intentional behavior and reference especially to Lapland Hotels. This answer
group could have been positioned also elsewhere inside the attitudinal loyalty, because the
answers inside this group did not describe strong emotions, only positive attitudes towards
unique brand or usually a willingness to avoid retail co-operative hotels. The willingness to
support local businesses refers to commitment of a sort though.
“Earlier experience (satisfaction, trust, loyalty)” match to the orange number (4) in Figure 11.
This explanation group is positioned also to affective commitment and attitudinal loyalty,
because it included also intentional behavior, but as well emotional commitment based on
satisfaction, trust or loyalty. Respondents of this answer group are truly loyal to Lapland Hotels
and they trust to Lapland Hotels brand.
Orange number (5) is “strong emotional bond to Lapland”. It is positioned to affective
commitment and attitudinal loyalty in the Figure 11. This is because the respondents coded to
51
this answer group, explained their behavior by strong emotional bonds and love towards
Lapland. This group could be positioned also only to the dimension of affective commitment,
if the customers’ whose answer were coded to this group would not have actual buying
behavior, meaning that they would not be loyal to Lapland Hotels, but they would still be
committed to Lapland Hotels. But in this research, this group is positioned also to the dimension
of attitudinal loyalty, because it is supposed that respondents do have also actual buying
behavior.
“Reward program / offer” is the orange number (6). This coded answer group is positioned to
value-driven commitment and composite loyalty, because customers whose answer were coded
to this group, explained their behavior by motivation to have good offers or great benefits from
reward program.
Orange number (7) is not positioned inside of any dimensions of brand commitment or brand
loyalty. This is because it refers to the coded explanation group of “desire to experience new”.
If the customer wants always to experience new, then a rough assumption is that she or he is
not loyal. Of course, there can be respondents, who are loyal to a hotel chain, and their desire
to experience new means that they want to experience the new hotels of that chain. Or the
respondent can still recommend a brand to others, although she or he is not loyal to that brand,
which would make them be still committed to the brand. From the answers coded to this answer
group, things like that cannot be noticed. Therefore, in this research it is reasonable that the
group of “desire to experience new” is not positioned to any dimensions of brand commitment
or brand loyalty.
Over half of the explanation groups are positioned quite near each other’s to the dimensions of
attitudinal loyalty and affective commitment. This highlights the meaning of affective
commitment, attitudinal loyalty and customers’ emotions when it comes to brand commitment
and brand loyalty in hotel services. These groups that are positioned to attitudinal loyalty and
affective commitment, include 53 % of all respondents. From “committed” group, 66,9 %
included to those groups that are positioned to attitudinal loyalty and affective commitment,
which means that emotions explain almost 70 % respondents’ commitment. So, also this prove
that affective commitment, attitudinal loyalty and customers’ emotions are extremely
remarkable.
52
5.4 Managerial implications
From managerial perspective, this research offers useful knowledge. Based on the results, it
must be said, that hotel managers need to be aware of the price level, price/quality ratio and
location of their competitors, and make sure that their own hotel is also competitive when it
comes to these features. After these basics, hotel managers should concentrate to have high
service quality and strong brand personality. With these, hotels stand out from their competitors
and get satisfied customers. Strong brand personality can be achieved for example by making
brave decisions when it comes to hotel chain’s appearance and atmosphere. High service quality
can be achieved by having friendly personnel and flexible and individual customer service. To
have more satisfied customer, hotel can offer for example good parking lots, Wi-Fi, great
restaurant and good gym. Having a reward program, that offers good benefits to customers,
may be useful as well.
When it comes to Lapland Hotels, it can be discovered that having this strong brand personality
with Lapland atmosphere, is a real competitive advantage, that is worth of maintaining. When
the coded explanation groups that refers to Lapland or Lapland Hotels’ personality (“strong
emotional bond to Lapland” and “unique brand / private chain”) are joined, it means that even
17,6 % of all respondents explained their behavior with these issues that stand Lapland Hotels
out from its competitors.
5.5 Limitations and implications for future research
This research observes only the customers of Lapland Hotels and their thoughts and perceptions
of Lapland Hotels. Because Lapland Hotels is unique hotel chain with strong brand personality,
the results of this study are not completely usable to other hotels.
When it comes to research validity, which means if the study measures those things which were
supposed to measure (Heikkilä 1998, 186), in case of this study, it must be critical. The original
questionnaire, by which the data used in this research is collected, is made by for different
purpose. The aims of that prior study were completely different, and the questionnaire is made
to measure those aims. That is why the suitability of this data is questionable. There were only
few questions in the original questionnaire, that could be used in this research, and the phrasing
of questions was not the best for this study. Better and more extensive results would have been
53
possible, if the questionnaire would have been made based on the perspective of this research.
By questionnaire made for this study and data collected with that, the personality of respondents
could have been observed, and there would be for example larger certainty about respondents’
brand commitment or brand loyalty towards Lapland Hotels. Because the aim of the original
questionnaire was to investigate the attitudes of Lapland Hotels’ customers toward reward
programs, it is possible, that the meaning of reward program or offers are pronounced in this
study.
Because the answers of this most important, open question number 22, were coded into seven
different explanation groups, by which the whole analyze was made, the meaning of the success
of this coding is remarkable. Even though the coding was made carefully and without too risky
interpretations, it is true that the results may vary, if the coding would be made differently.
Also, the open answers of respondents may not have been deciphered correctly. Some of the
answers were quite short, for example just one word, so wrong interpretations are possible. This
affects to research’s reliability, which means the research’ ability to provide results, that are not
coincidental (Heikkilä 1998, 187). Another researcher may have deciphered these open
questions differently, and made different kind of coding. Also, if the respondent had answered
several issues that explains her or his behavior, the answer was coded only to one explanation
group. It is possible, that the emphasis of this open answer was not made right, and the answer
was coded to different explanation group that would be the most important in the view of
respondent. For example, if the respondent was answered “good price/quality ratio and rooms
with high quality”, the answer was coded to group of “price/quality ratio / location / coincidence
/ must”, even though rooms with high quality refers to service quality. It is possible, that in the
view of respondents, the high quality of rooms is more important than price/quality ratio. It is
also possible, that there have been typing or thought mistakes when the answers are coded.
Even though there are over 800 responses used in this study, the response rate of this study is
still only approximately 3,5%. It can be questioned, if the results of this study honestly give an
extensive view from the thoughts and perceptions of all customers of Lapland Hotels.
In the view of future research, it would be interesting to investigate these same research
questions, but more profound. For example, by qualitative research, it could have deeper
understanding from customers’ own personality, customers’ brand identification and their
54
meaning to brand commitment in case of Lapland Hotels. It would be also interesting to observe
brand commitment and brand loyalty and factors affecting them in case of another hotel chain.
55
REFERENCES
Aaker, J. L. 1997. Dimensions of brand personality. Journal of Marketing Research 34(3), 347–
356.
Albert, N. & Merunka, D. 2013. The role of brand love in consumer-brand relationships.
Journal of Consumer Marketing 30(3), 258–266.
Albert, N., Merunka, D. & Valette-Florence, P. 2008. When consumers love their brands:
Exploring the concept and its dimensions. Journal of Business Research 61, 1062–1075.
Alnawas, I. & Altarifi, S. 2016. Exploring the role of brand identification and brand love in
generating higher levels of brand loyalty. Journal of Vacation Marketing 22(2), 111–128.
Back, K.-J. 2005. The effects of image congruence on customers’ brand loyalty in the upper
middle-class hotel industry. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research 29(4), 448–467.
Bailey, R. & Ball, S. 2006. An exploration of the meanings of hotel brand equity. The Service
Industries Journal 26(1), 15–38.
Bansal, H. S., Irving, P. G. & Taylor, S. F. 2004. A three-component model of customer
commitment to service providers. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 32(3), 234–
250.
Bhattacharya, C. B. & Sen, S. 2003. Consumer-company identification: a framework for
understanding consumers’ relationships with companies. Journal of Marketing 67, 76–88.
Bowen, J. T. & Shoemaker, S. 1998. Loyalty: a strategic commitment. Cornell hotel and
restaurant administration quarterly 39(1), 12–25.
Carroll, B. A. & Ahuvia, A. C. 2006. Some antecedents and outcomes of brand love. Market
Lett 17, 79–89.
56
Chaudhuri, A. & Holbrook, M. B. 2001. The chain of effects from brand trust and brand affect
to brand performance: the role of brand loyalty. Journal of Marketing 65, 81–93.
Dimitriades, Z. 2006. Customer satisfaction, loyalty and commitment in service organizations.
Management Research News 29(12), 782–800.
Drennan, J., Bianchi, C., Cacho-Elizondo, S., Louriero, S., Guibert, N. & Proud, W. 2015.
Examing the role of wine brand love on brand loyalty: a multi-country comparison. Internal
Journal of Hospitality Management 49, 47–55.
Ekinci, Y., Dawes, P. L. & Massey, G. R. 2008. An extended model of the antecedents and
consequences of consumer satisfaction for hospitality services. European Journal of Marketing
42(1), 35–68.
Fournier, S. 1998. Consumers and their brands: developing relationship theory in consumer
research. Journal of Consumer Research 24, 343–373.
Fullerton, G. 2003. When does commitment lead to loyalty? Journal of Service Research 5(4),
333–344.
Fullerton, G. 2005. The impact of brand commitment on loyalty to retail service brands.
Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences 22(2), 97–110.
Heikkilä, T. 1998. Tilasollinen tutkimus. Helsinki: Oy Edita Ab.
Kandampully, J. & Suhartanto, D. 2000. Customer loyalty in the hotel industry: the role of
customer satisfaction and image. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management 12(6), 346–351.
Kandampully, J., Zhang, T. & Bilgihan, A. 2015. Customer loyalty: a review and future
directions with a special focus on the hospitality industry. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management 27(3), 379–414.
Kim, D. & Perdue, R. R. 2013. The effects of cognitive, affective, and sensory attributes on
hotel choice. International Journal of Hospitality Management 35, 246–257.
57
Komppula, R. 2016. Tourists’ interpretations of a ‘feelgood in Lapland’ holiday – a case study.
In Y.S. Lee, D. Weaver & N. Prebensen (Edit.), Artic Tourism Experiences: Production,
Consumption & Sustainability. CABI.
Kotler, P., Keller, K. L., Brady, M., Goodman, M. & Hansen, T. 2009. Marketing Management.
Edinburgh Gate: Pearson Education Limited.
Kumar, V. & Shah, D. 2004. Building and sustaining profitable customer loyalty for the 21st
century. Journal of Retailing 80, 317–330.
Lee, J.-S. & Back, K.-J. 2010. Examining antecedents and consequences of brand personality
in the upper-upscale business hotel segment. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 27, 132–
145.
Lee, Y.-K., Back, K.-J. & Kim, J.-Y. 2009. Family restaurant brand personality and its impact
on customer’s emotion, satisfaction and brand loyalty. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism
Research 33(3), 305–328.
Martinez, P. & Rodriguez del Bosque, I. 2013. CSR and customer loyalty: the roles of trust,
customer identification with the company and satisfaction. International Journal of Hospitality
Management 35, 89–99.
Mattila, A. 2006. How affective commitment boosts guest loyalty (and promotes frequent-guest
programs). Cornell hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 47(2), 174–181.
McKercher, B., Denizci-Guillet, B. & Ng, E. 2012. Rethinking loyalty. Annals of Tourism
Research 39(2), 708–734.
Nam, J., Ekinci, Y. & Whyatt, G. 2011. Brand equity, brand loyalty and consumer satisfaction.
Annals of Tourism Research 38, 1009–1030.
Narteh, B., Agbemabiese, G. C., Kodua, P. & Braimah, M. Relationship marketing and
customer loyalty: evidence from the Ghanaian luxury hotel industry. Journal of Hospitality
Marketing & Management 22, 407–436.
58
Oliver, R. 1999. Whence consumer loyalty? Journal of Marketing 63, 34–44.
O’Neill, J. W. & Mattila, A. S. 2006. Strategic hotel development and positioning: the effects
of revenue drivers on profitability. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly
47(2), 146–154.
O’neill, J. & Mattila, A. 2010. Hotel brand strategy. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly 51(1), 27–
34.
Ross, I. 1971. Self-concept and brand preference. The Journal of Business 44(1), 38–50.
Shimp, T. A. & Madden, T. J. 1988. Consumer-object relations: a conceptual framework based
analogously on Sternberg’s triangular theory of love. Advances in Consumer Research 15, 163–
168.
Shoemaker, S. & Bowen, J. T. 2003. Commentary on “loyalty: a strategic commitment”.
Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 44(5-6), 47 –52.
Shoemaker, S. & Lewis, R. C. 1999. Customer loyalty: the future of hospitality marketing.
Hospitality Management 18, 345–370.
So, K. K. F., King, C. & Sparks, B. 2014. Customer engagement with tourism brands: scale
development and validation. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research 38(3), 304–329.
So, K. K. F., King, C., Sparks, B. A. & Wang, Y. 2013. The influence of customer brand
identification on hotel brand evaluation and loyalty development. International Journal of
Hospitality Management 34, 31–41.
So, K. K. F., King, C., Sparks, B. A. & Wang, Y. 2016. The role of customer engagement in
building consumer loyalty to tourism brands. Journal of Travel Research 55(1), 64–78.
Sternberg, R. J. 1986. A triangular theory of love. Psychological Review 39(2), 119–135.
Sun, X., Chi, C. G.-Q. & Xu, H. 2013. Developing destination loyalty: the case of Hainan
Island. Annals of Tourism Research 44, 547–577.
59
Tanford, S. 2013. The impact of tier level on attitudinal and behavioral loyalty of hotel reward
program members. International Journal of Hospitality Management 34, 285–294.
Tanford, S. & Montgomery, R. 2015. Developing loyalty programs for convention attendees:
an exploratory study. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration 16, 57–
77.
Tanford, S., Raab, C. & Kim, Y.-S. 2011. The influence of reward program membership and
commitment on hotel loyalty. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research 35(3), 279–307.
Tanford, S., Raab, C. & Kim, Y.-S. 2012. Determinants of customer loyalty and purchasing
behavior for full-service and limited-service hotels. International Journal of Hospitality
Management 31, 319–328.
Tepeci, M. 1999. Increasing brand loyalty in the hospitality industry. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management 11(5), 223–230.
Tideswell, C. & Fredline, E. 2004. Developing and rewarding loyalty to hotels: the guest’s
perspective. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research 28(2), 186–208.
Tran, X., Dauchez, C. & Szemik, A.-M. 2013. Hotel brand personality and brand quality.
Journal of Vacation Marketing 19(4), 329–341.
Tähtinen, J. & Isoaho, H. 2001. Tilastollisen analyysin lähtökohtia, ensiaskeleet kvantiaineiston
käsittelyyn, analyysiin ja tulkintaan SPSS-ohjelmaympäristössä. Turku: Painosalama Oy.
Uncles, M. D., Dowling, G. R. & Hammond, K. 2003. Journal of Consumer Marketing 20(4),
294–316.
Underwood, R., Bond, E. & Baer, R. 2001. Building service brands via social identity: lessons
from the sports marketplace. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 9(1), 1–13.
Usakli, A. & Baloglu, S. 2011. Brand personality of tourist destinations: An application of selfcongruity theory. Tourism Management 32, 114–127.
60
Whang, Y.-O., Allen, J. Sahoury, N. & Zhang, H. 2004. Falling in love with a product: the
structure of a romantic consumer-product relationship. Advances in Consumer Research 31,
320–327.
Wilson, A., Zeithaml,V. A., Bitner, M. J. & Gremler, D. D. 2008. Service Marketing:
integrating customer focus across the firm. New York: McGraw-Hill Education
Yuksel, A., Yuksel, F. & Bilim, Y. 2010. Destination attachment: effects on customer
satisfaction and cognitive, affective and conative loyalty. Tourism Management 31, 274–284.
Electronic sources:
Facebook 2016. Lapland Hotels [Lapland Hotels’ facebook profile] Referred 05.11.2016.
https://fi-fi.facebook.com/Lapland-Hotels-117402848343737/
I love Lapland magazine 2016. I Love Lapland [I Love Lapland’s website] Referred
05.11.2016. http://ilovelapland.fi/i-love-lapland/
KvaliMOTV 2016. 7.3.2 Sisällönanalyysi. [KvaliMOTV learning website] Referred
30.12.2016. http://www.fsd.uta.fi/menetelmaopetus/kvali/L7_3_2.html
Lapland Hotels 2016. Lapland Club. [Lapland Hotel’s website] Referred 05.11.2016.
https://www.laplandhotels.com/FI/lappi-klubi.html
Lapland Hotels 2016. Esittely. [Lapland Hotels’ website]
https://www.laplandhotels.com/FI/lapland-hotels-oy/esittely.html
Referred
05.11.2016.
Lapland Hotels 2016. Historia. [Lapland Hotels’ website]
https://www.laplandhotels.com/FI/lapland-hotels-oy/historia.html
Referred
05.11.2016.
Lapland Hotels 2016. Lapland Hotels Tampere. [Lapland Hotels’ website] Referred
05.11.2016.
https://www.laplandhotels.com/FI/kaupunkihotellit/tampere/lapland-hoteltampere.html
61
Lapland Hotels 2016. Lapland Hotels Tampere. [Lapland Hotels’ website] Referred
05.11.2016. https://www.laplandhotels.com/EN/urban-hotels/tampere/lapland-hotel-tampere2.html
Lapland Hotels 2016. Lapland Hotels Oulu. [Lapland Hotels’ website] Referred 05.11.2016.
https://www.laplandhotels.com/EN/urban-hotels/oulu/lapland-hotel-oulu-2.html
Lapland Hotels 2016. Oula kitchen & bar. [Lapland Hotels’ website] Referred 05.11.2016.
https://www.laplandhotels.com/FI/kaupunkihotellit/oulu/lapland-hotel-oulu/kitchen-baroula.html
Sokos Hotels 2017. About us. [Sokos
https://www.sokoshotels.fi/en/about-us
Hotels’
website]
Referred
28.01.2017.
Lapland Hotels asiakaskysely
APPENDIX 1 (1/18)
Matkustuskäyttäytyminen
Page description:
Page exit logic:Page Logic
, jonka
IF:Question "Oletteko tehnyt viimeisen 12 kuukauden aikana työmatkan Suomessa
aikana olette yöpynyt hotellissa?" #3 is one of the following answers ("En")THEN:
Jump to
page 3 - Vapaa-ajan matkustus
Arvoisa vastaaja, kiitos mielenkiinnostasi tätä tutkimusta kohtaan. Tässä tutkimuksessa
kartoitetaan suomalaisten matkustuskäyttäytymistä sekä etenkin hotellin valintaan vaikuttavia
tekijöitä. Kyselyn tavoitteena on kehittää Lapland Hotelsin tuotteita asiakkaiden tarpeita
vastaaviksi. Vastaa kysymyksiin mahdollisimman totuudenmukaisesti. Vastaajia ei tulla
yksilöimään millään tavalla.
1. Oletteko majoittunut viimeisen vuoden aikana maksullisessa majoituksessa kotimaan
vapaa-ajan matkalla tai työmatkalla? Valitse parhaiten sopiva vaihtoehto. *
Olen, työmatkalla
Olen, vapaa-ajan matkalla
Olen, sekä työ- että vapaa-ajan matkalla
En ole
APPENDIX 1 (2/18)
3. Oletteko tehnyt viimeisen 12 kuukauden aikana työmatkan Suomessa
, jonka aikana
olette yöpynyt hotellissa? *
Kyllä
En
Työmatkustus
Page description:
SEURAAVIIN KYSYMYKSIIN VASTATESSANNE AJATELKAA
EDELLISTÄ
YÖPYMISEN VAATINUTTA TYÖMATKAANNE SUOMESSA.
APPENDIX 1 (3/18)
4. Valitsitteko edellisen työmatkanne hotellin itse?
Kyllä
En
5. Miten yleensä teette hotellivarauksen työmatkaanne varten? Valitkaa sopiva vaihtoehto. *
Pyydän jotakuta varaamaan sen puolestani
Esimieheni varaa sen puolestani
Kollegani varaa sen puolestani
Alaiseni varaa sen puolestani
Matkatoimiston kautta
Booking.comin kautta
Hotels.comin kautta
E-bookersin kautta
Hotelliketjun sivujen kautta
Suoraan hotellista matkatoimiston varaussivuston kautta, sähköpostilla. puhelimella
tai hotellin vastaanottotiskiltä.
Jokin muu tapa, mikä?
APPENDIX 1 (4/18)
6. Valitkaa seuraavista mahdollista sopimushotellia koskevista vaihtoehdoista teille parhaiten
soveltuva:
Työnantajani edellyttää, että työmatkoilla käytetään vain työnantajan hyväksymiä
sopimushotelleja.
Työnantaja suosittelee sopimushotellien käyttöä työmatkoilla.
Voin halutessani poiketa työmatkallani sopimushotellien käyttösuosituksesta.
Työnantajalla ei ole sopimushotelleja.
APPENDIX 1 (5/18)
APPENDIX 1 (6/18)
10. Arvioikaa kuinka monta kertaa vuodessa teette vähintään yhden yöpymisen vaativan
työmatkan kotimaassa.Käyttäkää vain kokonaislukua.
Vapaa-ajan matkustus
Page description:
Page exit logic:Page Logic
IF:Question "Oletteko tehnyt viimeisen 12 kuukauden aikana vapaa-ajan matkan
Suomessa , jonka aikana olette yöpynyt hotellissa?" #11 is one of the following answers
("En") THEN:
Jump to page 5 - Lapland Hotels
11. Oletteko tehnyt viimeisen 12 kuukauden aikana vapaa-ajan matkan Suomessa
, jonka
aikana olette yöpynyt hotellissa? *
Kyllä
En
Vapaa-ajan matkustus
APPENDIX 1 (7/18)
Page description:
SEURAAVIIN KYSYMYKSIIN VASTATESSANNE AJATELKAA
EDELLISTÄ
YÖPYMISEN VAATINUTTA VAPAA-AJAN MATKAANNE SUOMESSA.
12. Valitsitteko edellisen vapaa-ajan matkanne hotellin itse?
Kyllä
En
13. Miten yleensä teette hotellivarauksen vapaa-ajan matkaanne varten? Valitkaa sopiva
vaihtoehto. *
Pyydän jotakuta varaamaan sen puolestani
Aluevaraamon kautta (Esim. Levin matkailu)
Booking.comin kautta
Hotels.comin kautta
E-bookersin kautta
Hotelliketjun sivujen kautta / hotellien omien sivujen kautta
Suoraan hotellista
Jokin muu, mikä
APPENDIX 1 (8/18)
APPENDIX 1 (9/18)
16. Arvioikaa kuinka monta kertaa vuodessa teette vähintään yhden yöpymisen vaativan
vapaa-ajan matkan kotimaassa. Käyttäkää vain kokonaislukua.
Lapland Hotels
APPENDIX 1 (10/18)
Page description:
Lapland Hotels avaa syksyllä 2015 uudet kaupunkihotellit Oulussa ja Tampereella.
Haluamme kuulla asiakkaitamme parhaan mahdollisen palvelun kehittämiseksi.
Pyydämme Teitä kertomaan mielipiteitänne kanta-asiakasohjelmasta seuraavissa
kysymyksissä.
17. Millaista kanta-asiakasohjelmatyyppiä pidätte parhaimpana. Valitkaa suosimanne
vaihtoehto.
Kanta-asiakasohjelma, jossa asiakasta palkitaan rahassa mitattavin eduin siten, että
mitä enemmän käyttää palveluja, sitä parempia etuja saa (kuten esimerkiksi
lentoyhtiöiden ohjelmat). Edut ovat käytettävissä niiden kerryttyä, eli ei välttämättä
jokaisen vierailun yhteydessä.
Kanta-asiakasohjelma, joka tarjoaa asiakkaalle räätälöityjä palveluja ja
erikoistarjouksia asiakkaan oman profiilin mukaisesti
Kanta-asiakaskortti, jolla saa aina saman alennuksen tai edun riippumatta palvelujen
käytön määrästä.
18. Arvioikaa, miten tärkeitä seuraavat hotellin kanta-asiakasohjelman ominaisuudet ovat
teille
APPENDIX 1 (11/18)
APPENDIX 1 (12/18)
APPENDIX 1 (13/18)
APPENDIX 1 (14/18)
22. Mikä saisi teidät majoittumaan Lapland Hotelsin hotellissa Lapin ulkopuolella jos hotelli
on sijainniltaan ja hinnaltaan samankaltainen Scandicin, Sokoksen tai Radisson Blu:n
kanssa? Kertokaa vapaasti omin sanoin alla olevaan laatikkoon.
Taustatiedot
Page description:
APPENDIX 1 (15/18)
VASTATKAA VIELÄ LOPUKSI SEURAAVIIN KYSYMYKSIIN
23. Sukupuoli?*
Mies
Nainen
24. Syntymävuosi (muodossa xxxx, esim 1985)
25. Asuinpaikkasi postinumero (viisi numeroa)
26. Ammattiasemanne?
Opiskelija
Työntekijä
Toimihenkilö
Esimiesasema
Johtava asema
Asiantuntija
Yrittäjä / osakas yrityksessä
Eläkeläinen
Jokin muu
APPENDIX 1 (16/18)
27. Mikäli olette työelämässä ja muun kuin oman yrityksen palveluksessa, mikä seuraavista
kuvaa parhaiten työnantajaanne, valitkaa sopivin vaihtoehto:
Valtio tai valtion laitos (tai esim. yliopisto)
Kunta, kuntainliitto, tms. kunnallinen työnantaja, tai seurakunta
Valtakunnallinen pääkonttorista johdettu suuryritys
Alueellinen tai paikallinen yritys
Pieni yksityinen yritys
28. Mitkä ovat teidän vuotuiset henkilökohtaiset bruttotulot?
Alle 5 000 €
5 000 – 9 999 €
10 000 – 14 999 €
15 000 – 19 999 €
20 000 – 24 999 €
25 000 – 29 999 €
30 000 – 39 999 €
40 000 – 49 999 €
50 000 – 59 999 €
60 000 – 79 999 €
80 000 – 99 999 €
Vähintään 100 000€
En halua sanoa
APPENDIX 1 (17/18)
APPENDIX 1 (18/18)
Osallistuminen arvontaan
Page description:
Jätä yhteystietosi tälle sivulle mikäli haluat osallistua arvontaan. Kaikkien vastanneiden
kesken arvotaan yksi kahden hengen, kahden yön yöpymisen sisältävä viikonloppulahjakortti Lapland Hotelsin uusiin hotelleihin vapaavalintaisesti Tampereelle tai Ouluun.
Arvonta suoritetaan 31.5.2015 mennessä ja voittajalle ilmoitetaan henkilökohtaisesti. Tietoja
ei tulla käyttämään mainontaan eikä niitä yhdistetä kyselyn vastauksiin.
30. Etunimi
31. Sukunimi
32. Postiosoite
33. Sähköpostiosoite
34. Puhelinnumero
Kiitos vastaamisesta!
Page description: