Zemke, D M V and Pullman, M (2008) Assessing the value of good design in hotels. Building Research & Information, 36(6), pp. 543-556. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
The relation between building design, user satisfaction, and property financial and marketing performance is explored in hotels to quantify the effect that good design has on performance and to inform business decision-making. The physical environment is a significant product for the hotel industry as it satisfies customer needs and generates valuable repeat business; employees also provide services that are utilitarian in nature but provide hedonic benefits to guests. The Design Quality Indicator (DQI) tool was adapted to measure design in 30 North American hotels constituting part of a well-known brand. Guest and employee assessments of design were obtained, and the relationships between design and hotel industry performance indicators such as a property's average daily rate (ADR), revenue per available room (RevPAR), and occupancy indices were analysed. The analysis quantifies the positive relationships between design quality, financial and market share performance, and satisfaction with the building. The links between design Impact perceptions and ADR and RevPAR are particularly notable. Based on this and continuing research, the aim is the development of a robust method for predicting the economic and market value of renovations, using a version of the DQI tailored to meet the needs of the lodging industry.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | build quality; building design; design quality indicator; financial performance; hotel industry; impact value; investment decision; occupant satisfaction; renovation |
| Index terms: | investment decision, industry performance, occupant satisfaction, marketing, user satisfaction, financial performance, hotel, renovation, decision-making, design quality indicator, revenue, design quality, satisfaction, market share, building design |
| Subjects: | decision analysis, market analysis, financial analysis, business analysis, renovation and retrofit, project delivery, architectural design, economic analysis, professional practice, business, client relations, user-centered design, construction type |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Stakeholder Management, Risk Management, Construction Technology, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here