Exploring the Antecedents of Hotel Customer Loyalty: A Social Identity Perspective

Abstract

One of the most important aspects in the field of marketing is to explore the path to customer loyalty. Previous studies have presented several approaches on this issue incorporating differing central constructs. However, researchers have given little consideration to social identification antecedents to hotel customer loyalty development. This study follows an integrated approach and proposes a model with two social exchange constructs (customer trust and commitment) and one social identity variable (customer identification) as the most significant elements between the perception of a responsible corporate behavior and hotel customer loyalty. Empirical data were analyzed using structural equation modeling. Findings demonstrate that corporate social responsibility positively impact on customer trust, commitment, and identification with the company. Furthermore, customer trust, along with customer commitment and customer identification with the company positively influence hotel customer loyalty. Finally, customer trust has a positive direct effect on customer commitment and identification.

KEYWORDS:

• corporate social responsibility
• customer loyalty
• trust
• commitment
• identification
• hospitality industry

Notes

1. Social identity is an individual’s sense of who they are based on their group membership. Tajfel and Turner (1979) proposed that social groups (family, friends, etc.) give individuals a sense of social identity. To increase their self-image individuals enhance the status of the group which they belong to. Similarly, individuals increase their self-image by discriminating the group they don’t belong to (e.g., the out-group). Therefore, people divide the world into “them” and “us” based on a process of social categorization. Social identity theory states that the in-group will discriminate against the out-group to enhance their self image. The central hypothesis is that group members in an in-group will seek to find negative aspects of an out-group, enhancing self-image (Tajfel & Turner, 1979, 1986). According to these authors, individuals exaggerate both the differences between groups and the similarities within the same group. People see the group to which they belong as different from others, and members of the same group as more similar than they are Tajfel and Turner (1979) proposed that there are three different processes involved in evaluating others as “us” or “them.” The first process is categorization. People categorize individuals to understand the social environment. If we can assign people to a category then they tell us something about those people. Similarly, we find out things about ourselves by knowing what categories we belong to. We define appropriate behavior by reference to the norms of groups we belong to, but you can only do this if you can tell who belongs to your group. In the second stage, social identification, we identify the group we have categorized ourselves as belonging to. In this stage, there will be an emotional significance to your identification with a group, and your self-stem will become bound up with group membership. The final stage is social comparison. The final stage is social comparison. Once we have categorized ourselves as part of a specific group, and have identified with this group, then we tend to compare that group with other groups.