The influence of corporate social responsibility, ability, reputation, and transparency on hotel customer loyalty in the U.S.: a gender-based approach

Examples of CSR activities across industries

The purpose of CSR initiatives is to maximize the industry’s long-term favorable effect on society while minimizing the negative consequences (Petkus and Woodruff 1992). The examples of manufacturers and retailers pursuing CSR activities are numerous and include businesses as diverse as Target, Apple, Converse, Motorola, Emporio Armani, and The Gap. In the restaurant domain, McDonald’s sponsors its Ronald McDonald House Charities while Starbucks, Panera Bread, and Chipotle campaign for animal welfare. In the lodging industry, according to Kucukusta et al. (2013), hotels such as Wyndham Hotels and Resorts and Hyatt have made CSR an essential element of their strategic marketing plan. Customer skepticism about CSR involvement results from a lack of consumer awareness of such tangible community action outcomes more than from consumers’ doubt of company motives for pursuing such activities (Singh et al. 2009). Responding to consumers’ demands for more CSR activities and greater corporate transparency has been important in recent years (Saeidi et al. 2015). In line with agency theory, Piechocki (2004) argued that one essential feature of socially responsible entrepreneurship is transparent discourse with investors about CSR rules and events. Dubbink et al. (2008) have studied the role of transparency in safeguarding the effectiveness of many firms’ socially responsibility initiatives.

Corporate social responsibility and corporate ability

Brown and Dacin (1997) refer to all the information about a company to which a consumer has access as a combination of both CSR and CA. Consumers make use of trade-offs between CSR product features and corporate ability (Pomering and Dolnicar 2009). To combat consumer apprehension about CSR involvement, companies can reinforce the effects of CSR if their products and services are believed to be of higher quality when these initiatives are adopted (He and Li 2011). To achieve this, hotel management must increase quality and preserve a maintainable improvement (Gray et al. 2000).

Corporate reputation

To understand CR from a customer’s point of view, we drew on Walsh and Beatty’s (2007) definition of customer-based CR, or “the customer’s overall evaluation of a company based on his or her reactions to the company’s goods, services, communication activities, interactions with the company and/or its representatives or constituencies (such as employees, management, or other customers) and/or known corporate activities” (p. 129). Corporate reputations are perceived as the attributes that differentiate one firm from another (Barnett et al. 2006) or as reactions to the company’s services, communication activities, and interactions with the company and/or its representatives (Walsh and Beatty 2007). When confronted with a lack of personal experience regarding a product or the company’s civic action plan, individuals rely on the CR to judge its products as well as its intentions (Schnietz and Epstein 2005).

Transparency

This phenomenon may reduce individuals’ information asymmetry, perceived risk, and skepticism by providing documents regarding where and under what conditions products are manufactured (Hustvedt and Bernard 2010). In some countries in the European Union corporate activities and CSR-related information are regularly issued to the public (van Wensen et al. 2011). However, elsewhere, including North America, reporting on CSR by companies is still voluntary with no repercussions if the companies refuse. Given the vulnerability of the economy, it is fundamental that establishments pursue customer loyalty and that accountability and transparency through public reporting are recognized (Belal et al. 2013).

Customer loyalty

By generating and preserving customer faithfulness, a company develops long-term, mutually beneficial associations with its clients. A loyal customer base results in a maintainable competitive benefit (Mandhachitara and Poolthong 2011). By attracting loyal customers, executives can decrease advertising costs and diminish the impact of price sensitivity. Additionally, a high level of customer loyalty results in recommendations through positive word-of-mouth. Relevant studies have emphasized the significance of understanding the elements that contribute to customer loyalty. Due to the fact that more attention has been paid to the antecedents of customer loyalty, previous researchers have failed to provide consistent explanations regarding how they affect customer loyalty (Kumar et al. 2013). Therefore, the hospitality industry must focus on understanding customer needs in order to boost allegiance in an increasingly competitive market.

The impact of CSR and CA on customer loyalty

Scholars have proposed that CSR directly generates more customer loyalty, without requiring the intervention of mediating variables (e.g., Martínez and del Bosque 2013). They claimed that corporate ability and CSR act as evaluative criteria for determining consumer purchase intentions. An assessment of a customer’s positive perception of CA leads to favorable customer behavioral outcomes (Zeithaml et al. 1996). Based on these findings, we posit the following hypotheses:

The impact of corporate reputation on customer loyalty

Corporate reputation has long been recognized as a significant source of competitive advantage (Ali et al. 2015). In this research, we defined and employ CR as an independent variable. Consequences of CR have been underexplored empirically (Walsh et al. 2009). Simply put, companies with good reputations are likely to attain more consumers. In addition, a favorable CR has been shown to positively affect behavioral outcomes of consumers (Gounaris and Stathakopoulos 2004). A company’s reputation can increase customer loyalty (Du et al. 2007). Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:

The impact of CSR-related transparency on customer loyalty

Scholars have found that corporate transparency has significantly positive influences on consumers’ responses to a company (Bhaduri and Ha-Brookshire 2011). Customer loyalty is likely influenced by consumer’s perceptions of a company’s efforts to be transparent (Kang and Hustvedt 2014a, b). Based on the above discussions, we propose the following hypothesis:

Gender differences

Gender differences have been examined widely within the consumer behavior literature. Women and men play different roles and exhibit varying behaviors in society because they are socialized in different ways. Patino et al. (2014) endorsed the importance of gender as a key demographic factor for understanding consumers’ perceptions of CSR practices. Bossuyt and Van Kenhove (in press) found that women are more influenced by the ethical standing of companies than men. Rocha et al. (2005) argued that male and female perceptions of corporate ability differ significantly. Ma et al. (2014) found a marked moderating effect of gender in the relationship between customers’ perceived corporate ability and customer loyalty.

Researchers have recognized a positive association between gender and CR (Bear et al. 2010) in that males and females tend to utilize significantly different information processing strategies, which in turn influences judgment formation (e.g., Holbrook 1986). Hyllegard et al. (2012) argued that females are more likely than males to value comprehensive CSR data. Compared to men, women may be more likely to request publicly issued material related to CSR claims, which aid in their decision-making. Males are less influenced by information transparency (Bhaduri and Ha-Brookshire 2015). Meyers-Levy (1988) claimed that females allocate more importance than males to uncertainty, time and money constraints, and consequences of decisions and task factors. In light of these findings, we hypothesize that gender makes a difference in perceptions of CSR, CA, CR, and transparency within the hotel context:

Based on these theoretical relationships among variables, we developed eight hypotheses. Our final conceptual model is shown in Fig. 1. This research demonstrates the relationships among the study constructs.

Measurement and survey questionnaire development

The questionnaire we selected for this research was designed based on established scales for all relevant constructs. We instructed all respondents to rate their perceptions of every item using a Likert-type scale to measure responses on a continuum of one for “strongly disagree” to five for “strongly agree.” Perceptions of CSR were measured via five items adapted from previous research (Brown and Dacin 1997). We adapted the three items for measuring corporate ability from Fombrun et al. (2000) and Brown and Dacin (1997). Customer perception of overall CR was measured using three items that were originally created by Weiss et al. (1999). We measured five transparency items via a scale designed to assess consumer perceptions of transparency, as outlined in previous studies (Hustvedt and Kang 2013). To measure customer loyalty, we employed a four-item scale from previous studies (Zeithaml et al. 1996). All items appear in the “Appendix”. Our questionnaire concluded with a series of demographic questions used to identify the respondent’s gender, ethnic background, age, level of education, and annual income.

Data collection

We utilized a self-administered, online survey directed at customers in the United States called the Amazon Mechanical Turk because respondents are more demographically varied than other approaches, rendering this method a dependable means of enlisting participants for empirical inquiries (Rouse 2015). We established an incentive-based design in which the reward and incentive to contribute were directly linked to the tasks that the participants completed (Ding et al. 2005). As an incentive to participate in the survey, our respondents received a $.50 credit for their Mechanical Turk account. People who had stayed at a hotel within the last 6 months were encouraged to fill out the survey. Respondents were then given a link to our study’s webpage. We chose to utilize an online survey for cost savings, a rapid response time, greater control over the sample, and more effective data tabulation (Ilieva et al. 2002). The first part of the questionnaire included a description of hypothetical hotels and scenarios. We collected a total of 490 responses from participants.

Data screening

Before conducting the data analysis, we examined the dataset for missing information. Because outliers may bias the mean and influence the normal distribution (Field and Hole 2003), participants who were unable to fill out the questionnaire completely were removed from the dataset prior to the data analysis. To locate outliers, we used descriptive statistics, box plots (Byrne 2001). Our study yielded a total of 487 complete and usable responses.

Data analysis

First, we checked the reliability and validity of the measurement model. Then, we performed Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), using AMOS. In order to study cause and effect, we employed a multiple regression model to evaluate the impact of the four elements on customer loyalty. Multiple regression analysis is the concurrent grouping of multiple factors to measure how and to what degree they affect a certain result (the causal relationships). We used an independent sample t test to calculate the mean differences in the four factors (CSR, CA, CR, and CSR-related transparency) between genders.

Sample profile

Confirmatory factor analysis of measurement scales

Hypothesis testing

Overall CSR (β _{CSR–customer loyalty} = .271, t = 4.805, p < .001), CA (β _{CA–customer loyalty} = .237, t = 4.484, p < .001), CR (β_{CR–customer loyalty} = .271, t = 4.805, p < .05), and CSR related transparency (β _{transparency–customer loyalty} = .170, t = 3.416, p < .001). Therefore, hypotheses 1, 2, 3, and 4 were supported, as expected. The findings indicated that CSR, CA, CR, and CSR-related transparency (the independent variables) were generally associated with customer loyalty (the dependent variable). The results of the comparisons among the beta coefficients and the t-values revealed that CSR had a greater impact on customer loyalty toward a hotel. The regression results that we used to evaluate the hypotheses are presented in Table 4 and Fig. 2. Tolerance values ranged from .369 to .485. The variance inflation factor (VIF) was calculated, and the values for each independent variable in all regression models are smaller than 3.0, which indicated little multicollinearity (O’Brien 2007). Thus, the estimations were free of significant multicollinearity bias.

Regression model	Customer loyalty
	Betab	t values	VIFa
CSR	.271***	4.805	2.711
CA	.237***	4.484	2.379
CR	.090*	1.824	2.060
Transparency	.170***	3.416	2.122
R2 (Adjusted):
Customer loyalty = .430

All beta values are standardized. Italicized numbers indicate the values that have the strongest impact on the dimension

CSR corporate social responsibility; CA corporate ability, CR corporate reputation

* p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001

^aVariance inflation factor

^bOne-tailed test

Then, we utilized an independent sample t test to link the mean scores of the four independent variables when comparing the responses of male and female respondents to further classify initial gender differences, as shown in Table 5 and Fig. 3. Levene’s test for homogeneity of variances was carried out. The results were of no significance (p > .05) for all the analyzed variables, so the assumption of variance equality was not rejected. The significant differences between the means of the two groups on perceived CSR, CA, CR, and transparency (t(485) = −3.114; t(485) = −4.175; t(485) = −4.074; t(485) = −2.921, p < .01). Overall, mean scores and standard deviations for all variables were higher among female respondents (CSR: M _female = 3.995 vs. M _male = 3.834; CA: M _female = 4.153 vs. M _male = 3.939; CR: M _female = 4.333 vs. M _male = 4.131; CSR related transparency: M _female = 3.973 vs. M _male = 3.808). Thus, hypotheses 5, 6, 7, and 8 were supported.

Gender differences		Mean	SD	t value (two-tailed)	P value	Levene’s test
						F value	Significance
CSR	Male	3.834	.560	−3114	.002**	.389	.533
	Female	3.995	.575
CA	Male	3.939	.573	−4.175	.000***	.109	.742
	Female	4.153	.556
CR	Male	4.131	.568	−4.074	.000***	1.046	.307
	Female	4.333	.522
CSR related transparency	Male	3.808	.599	−2.921	.004**	.265	.607
	Female	3.973	.642

CSR corporate social responsibility, CA corporate ability, CR corporate reputation

** p < .01; *** p < .001 (two-tailed)

Conclusion and discussion

Attracting profitable customers and retaining them is always a key element of a successful business. Both those in the industry and academia are consistently seeking ways to increase customer loyalty. Although this is a popular topic, there has been no agreement on the factors that generate superior loyalty on the part of consumers (Mason et al. 2006) within the hotel context. Relevant studies have examined the antecedents and outcomes of customer loyalty (e.g., Xie and Chen 2014); however, there have been no studies examining the four elements’ link to customer loyalty within the hotel context. There have only been a few studies that have investigated gender difference among these four factors within the hotel context. Thus, the goals of this study were to explore the four antecedents of customer loyalty and determine how they influence customer loyalty simultaneously, and to investigate the variation of the perceptions of these factors between male and female customers within the hotel setting.

Our findings confirmed hypotheses 1 and 2. Our results highlighted the value of CSR initiatives in terms of customer allegiance and further support the findings of earlier studies (e.g., Galbreath 2010). It must be noted that He and Li (2011) had previously found a positive connection between CSR and customer loyalty. Hypothesis 2 is consistent with previous studies that have established the importance of quality management in the hospitality industry with the goal of increasing competitiveness (Wang et al. 2012). In addition to a company’s participation in CSR activities, service must be of high quality to elicit customer faithfulness (Mandhachitara and Poolthong 2011). We also confirmed that the contribution of CSR to a company’s attractiveness is much stronger than that of CA (Marin and Ruíz 2007).

In terms of hypothesis 3, although previous researchers have found that perceived CR is positively related to trust (e.g., Ganesan 1994) and the influence of CR on customer loyalty is fully mediated by customer satisfaction (Loureiro and Kastenholz 2011), their research confirmed the direct impact of CR on customer loyalty. With regard to hypothesis 4, our research showed that CSR-related transparency had a positive influence on overall customer loyalty toward the hotel, which is consistent with prior findings (Kang and Hustvedt 2014a). Organizations often keep a low profile with regard to their social responsibility activities, and they are reluctant to advertise their involvement for fear of customer dissatisfaction due to unfulfilled expectations (Schlegelmilch and Pollach 2005). With respect to transparency, Kelleher (2009) showed that companies need to consistently present thorough data to the public about their associations with social agencies. Therefore, it is vital for companies to reveal information openly and honestly in order to lessen charges of manipulation and “greenwashing” (Gray et al. 1995). It also indicates that providing transparent CSR information is an effective way to attract customer loyalty toward a hotel.

In terms of gender differences (hypotheses 5, 6, 7, and 8), whereas some researchers have found small or irrelevant changes (e.g., Trevino 1992) or even no significant association (Sikula and Costa 1994) in terms of perceived and CSR and customer loyalty. In fact a study by Bekkers (2010) indicated no gender gap within the CSR context. However, both male and female consumers reported that perceived CSR had a significant effect on customer loyalty. Our study confirmed along with some prior studies (O’Fallon and Butterfield 2005) that women are more likely than men to evaluate a company based on its CSR involvement.

Some scholars claimed that individuals’ perceptions of corporate ability do not vary with gender differences (Lee and Chen 2009). Mattila’s (2000) investigations of gender differences and consumer evaluations of service encounters yielded no significant differences between genders. Nonetheless, we confirmed that variations in the demographic profiles of customers can lead to variances in the perception of CA (Bekko 2000). According to Laroche et al. (2000), women also tend to rely more heavily on tangible and intangible cues in the service environment to make their evaluations. In addition, according to Ma et al., perceived corporate ability has a greater impact on females’ overall evaluations with a restaurant compared to males (2014). Lee et al. (2016) claimed that females have a stronger sense and awareness in terms of the overall service quality, while male’s abstract mind would be less conscious of the service quality and be more concentrated on the logical and consistent attributes of the industry.

Male and female participants respond differently in terms of the links between CR and customer loyalty. Based on our findings, we can infer that females are seen as comprehensive information processors, while male tends to be more selective and leave out subtle cues (Darley and Smith 1995). This indicates that women might be more likely to demand transparency with regard to CSR claims to aid in their decision-making process. This is consistent with previous findings that female customers place a higher value on the social and relational aspects of service (e.g., Iacobucci and Ostrom 1993).