The impact of the national culture on expectations of services: the case of Sightseeing in Porto.

The impact of the national culture on expectations of services: the case of Sightseeing in Porto Fabiana Cristina Santos Oliveira [email protected] Master in International Business Supervised by Raquel Meneses September, 2015 i “Behind every piece of paper lies a human situation”. Edward T. Hall ii Biographical Skecth Fabiana Cristina Santos Oliveira was born in April 20, 1992 in Santa Maria da Feira, Portugal. She received the Bachelor of Languages and International Relations from Faculty of Arts, University of Porto in 2013 and in the same year she arrived at the School of Economics and Management, University of Porto to join the Master of International Business. During the first semester of her last year at the Faculty of Arts, she experienced the ERASMUS exchange programme in Valencia, Spain. At the moment of this research, she worked as a Tourism Assistant in Porto. On June 2015 Fabiana presented the paper “The impact of the national culture on expectations of services: the case of Sightseeing in Porto, in the conference Global Business, Marketing and Tourism at Porto Business School. iii Acknowledgments To my supervisor Raquel Meneses for encouraging me to take risks, for challenging me to do more and better, for believing in the success of this research, for her patience, motivation and knowledge. To all the tourists that accepted to participate in this investigation, for dedicating part of their vacations being interviewed and filling in surveys. To my superiors Sr. Pires and Dona Rosa of the tourist point Quiosque Madeira for giving me the opportunity to do the interviews and to distribute the surveys during the working time, for putting my education in first place, for their patience, understanding and friendship. To the companies and people that facilitated the circulation of the surveys, in particular Lurdes from Rota do Douro, Joana from BlueBus, Luisa from Yours Guesthouse Porto and Anas from Quiosque da Batalha for their readiness to help me. To my course colleagues and friends Carolina, Gaspar, Pedro, Inês and Nádia with whom I shared two years, many fears and some victories, for their constant emotional support, for their companionship and friendship. I have no doubt that we will share other stages of our lives in the future. To Carlota, Ângela, Lorena and Sarah who revised my translations in Spanish, French and English. To the delegates Steve Varela and Bodo Lang of the Conference MAG Scholar Global Business, Marketing and Tourism for all the recommendations. To my friends Juliana, Vanessa, Débora and Filipas for the support they have always shown throughout this journey and for my systematic rejections “I cannot, I have to write the thesis”. To my parents Elisio and Madalena for their endless encouragement, patience and support and for believing in me more than I believe in myself. To my sister Catarina for inspiring me every day with her energy and joie de vivre. Thank you. iv Abstract The aim of this study is to analyse the impact of the national culture on expectations of services. With the increasing trend of globalization, it is crucial for managers to understand the main cultural differences across the world. International services are aimed at international customers, so companies that want to succeed and create satisfied customers must know what each one expect from the service. Therefore, the goal of this study is to determine if customers from different cultures have different expectations of the same service. To date, little research can be found in the literature about this relationship. In order to fill this gap, this research investigates an empirical case: the international tourist service Sightseeing, in Porto. It is a topic of high relevance in International Business because it is essential for this internationalized service to meet the cultural differences across boundaries in order to optimize its performance. In general, understanding the expectations of the different nationalities concerning a certain service, will allow companies to be more competitive. The empirical part of this study was conducted in Porto (Portugal) - elected Best European Destination 2014 by European citizens. Five nationalities were selected for this investigation (French, British, Spanish, German and Brazilian) and a mixed method research was adopted (qualitative and quantitative) in order to provide a more exacting and complete understanding of the phenomenon. Firstly some exploratory interviews were done; subsequently, the data gathered from these interviews was reversed in a survey. The surveys were distributed in a tourist service point that sells tickets for the Sightseeing buses. The results obtained from this research helps to determine the different needs and expectations of these five nationalities that are useful to the company, in particular, and to international services, in general, to create more satisfied customers. Keywords: National Culture, Service Quality, Customer Satisfaction, Expectations, Sightseeing v Index of Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 2. Literature review ........................................................................................................... 4 2.1 National Culture ...................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Service quality ....................................................................................................... 10 2.3 Customer satisfaction ............................................................................................ 12 2.4 Will and Should Expectations ............................................................................... 15 2.5 Country of Origin Effect ....................................................................................... 21 2.6 Culture and Tourist Services ................................................................................. 21 2.7 Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 26 3. Methodological considerations ................................................................................... 29 4. Qualitative Approach .................................................................................................. 32 4.1 Sample selection .................................................................................................... 32 4.2 Data procedures ..................................................................................................... 33 4.3 Findings ................................................................................................................. 34 4.3.1 Time expectations ........................................................................................... 34 4.3.2 Space expectations .......................................................................................... 35 4.3.3 Communication expectations ......................................................................... 36 5. Quantitative approach ................................................................................................. 43 5.1 Sample selection .................................................................................................... 48 5.2 Data procedures ..................................................................................................... 48 5.3 Findings and discussion ........................................................................................ 55 5.3.1 Analysis of Variance: Differences of expectations among nationalities ........ 55 5.3.1.1 Time........................................................................................................... 55 5.3.1.2 Space ......................................................................................................... 57 5.3.1.3 Communication ......................................................................................... 60 5.3.1.4 Country of Origin Effect ........................................................................... 63 5.3.2 Hierarchical Regression: Predicting expectations from COE ........................ 72 5.4 Conclusion............................................................................................................ 78 6. Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 79 References ...................................................................................................................... 84 Appendices ...................................................................................................................... 91 vi Appendix I: Interview guide ....................................................................................... 91 Appendix II: Sample description (surveys) ................................................................. 92 Appendix III: Survey ................................................................................................... 95 Appendix IV: Means of the answers between nationalities (Likert Scale 7 points) ... 99 Index of Tables Table 1: Differences between monochronic and polychronic cultures ........................... 9 Table 2: Literature Review - Similar Studies ................................................................. 24 Table 3: Respondents profiles (interviews) .................................................................... 33 Table 4: The Sightseeing time expectations by national culture .................................... 39 Table 5: The Sightseeing space expectations by national culture................................... 40 Table 6: The Sightseeing communication expectations by national culture .................. 41 Table 7: Questions of the survey – source and purpose ................................................. 44 Table 8: Factor reduction of time variables .................................................................... 50 Table 9: Factor reduction of space variables .................................................................. 50 Table 10: Factor reduction of communication variables ................................................ 51 Table 11: Factor reduction of country of origin effect variables .................................... 52 Table 12: Results of the Test of Normality for all the variables ..................................... 53 Table 13: Results of the Anova and T-test: Punctuality and frequency ......................... 56 Table 14: Results of the Anova and T-test: Special adaptations for disabled people ..... 57 Table 15: Results of the Anova and T-test: Comfort and safety on board ..................... 58 Table 16: Results of the Anova and T-test: Wi-Fi connection ....................................... 59 Table 17: Results of the Anova and T-test: Information provided by the audio-guide .. 60 Table 18: Results of the Anova and T-test: Favourite information sources ................... 61 Table 19: Results of the Anova and T-test: The image of the country ........................... 63 Table 20: Results of the Anova and T-test: Past experience .......................................... 64 Table 21: Results of the Anova and T-test for the variables with different means: Sightseeing expectations and Who do you travel with? ................................................. 66 Table 22: Results of the Anova and T-test for the variables with different means: Sightseeing expectations and What is the purpose of your visit? ................................... 69 Table 23: Summary of the Hierarchical Regression Analysis for COE variables predicting Sightseeing general expectations ................................................................... 73 vii Table 24: Summary of the Hierarchical Regression Analysis for COE variables predicting Sightseeing partial expectations .................................................................... 75 Table 25: Summary of the hypothesis and results .......................................................... 77 Index of Figures Figure 1: Three Levels of Uniqueness in Mental Programming .................................... 7 Figure 2: Overall Customer Satisfaction – antecedents and consequences .................... 13 Figure 3: Antecedents of service expectations................................................................ 17 Figure 4: The influence of national culture in the formation of expectations ............... 28 Figure 5: The impact of the national culture on Sightseeing expectations ..................... 31 Figure 6: The antecedents of the Sightseeing expectations ............................................ 83 1 1. Introduction With the increasing growth of transnational companies and the development of culture related issues, cultural differences have an important role in terms of explaining the behaviour of consumers (Hsieh & Tsai, 2009). Thereby, the globalization of business activities provides a valid reason for understanding the customers’ cultural context (Maheswaran & Shavitt, 2000) that is needed to successfully compete in the 21st century. In order to satisfy the quality expectations of consumers from different cultures and reduce the cultural shock and the gap between consumers’ expectations and perceptions of service quality, it is imperative for managers to understand how the needs of consumers from various cultures differ (Hsieh & Tsai, 2009). There are many authors who have been studied about customers’ expectations on services (Oliver & Winer, 1987; Zeithaml et al., 1993; Armstrong et al., 1997; Clow et al., 1997; Douglas & Connor, 2003). However, there have been insufficient discussions on the impact of the national culture on expectations. Previous studies have yet to provide evidence of how customers from different cultures evaluate services (Maheswaran & Shavitt, 2000; Hsieh & Tsai, 2009; Lin et al., 2013). Even though there are some studies that have shown the influence of cultures on service quality expectations, they have some weaknesses. For instance, these reviews have been unable to distinguish between will and should expectations and to evaluate the impact of the Country of Origin Effect on customers’ expectations. Moreover, in most of the reviews about national cultures, the authors have chosen to follow the Hofstede’s (1983) cultural dimensions theory. So, in order to bring a new approach to the literature and to analyse the expectations according to space, time and communication, this dissertation focuses on Edward Hall’s (1990) typology. The intense competition that all companies confront today forces those which want to gain competitive advantage to deliver high quality services so as to satisfy their customers (Sureshchandar et al., 2002). The biggest issue that we are dealing now is to know what customers from different cultures expect from a given service. The aim of this study is to analyse the impact of the national culture on service expectations. There are two sorts of service quality expectations, but on this research the 8 et al., 2007) and it can help marketers to understand more easily the differences among nationalities (Kim et al., 1998), adjusting the strategies according to the culture. In high-context cultures, characterized by intimate relationships and social hierarchy, people are deeply involved with each other. Communication requires much more attention to understand what they really mean, so people have to pay attention to the implicit and non-verbal cues (Kim et al., 1998; Nguyen et al., 2007). “A high context communication or message is one in which most of the information is already in the person, while very little is explicit” (Hall & Hall, 1990, p. 6). On the other hand, a low context communication implicates a more explicit code. “Twins who have grown up together can and do communicate more economically (high-context) than two lawyers in a courtroom during a trial (low-context)” (Hall & Hall, 1990, p. 6). In low-context cultures, where there is a little involvement with others, people are highly individualized and slightly fragmented. People in these societies attach more meaning to the message itself, so “what is said is what is meant” (Kim et al., 1998; Nguyen et al., 2007). Secondly, Hall (1990) was concerned about space and the relationship within it. Space is another approach of communication and it can transmit power. “A corner office suite in the United States is conventionally occupied by the brass, and a private office in any location has more status than a desk in the open without walls” (Hall & Hall, 1990, pp. 10-11). Personal space is very important to have in consideration in the communication process. It is another form of territory. Everyone has an invisible space bubble and it can be larger or smaller depending on numerous factors: the relationship with others, the person’s psychological state of mind, cultural background and what they are doing at the time. People need to respect an individual’s personal space. Not everyone has permission to invade this space and if they do so, it is only for a short amount of time (Hall & Hall, 1990). Finally, the same author includes on his typology the importance of time, agreeing that in the intercultural communication process it is important the way individuals interpret 9 the use of time. There are many kinds of time systems in the world, but two are the most important to international business: monochronic and polychronic time. The characteristics that distinguish one from another are summarized in the table 1. Monochronic time grasp the idea of concentrating on doing one thing at a time. Oppositely, polychromic time implicates an individual having multitasking skills. According to Hall & Hall (1990), the two systems cannot mix. The understanding of these two cultural theories is significant because when services have a plenty of communication between customers and workers, cultural elements have a greater control (Furrer et al., 2000). Table 1 Differences between monochronic and polychronic cultures Monochronic culture Polychronic culture do one thing at a time concentrate on the job take time commitments (deadlines, schedules) seriously are low-context and need information are committed to the job adhere religiously to plans are concerned about not disturbing others; follow rules of privacy and consideration show great respect for private property; seldom borrow or lend emphasize promptness are accustomed to short-term relationships do many things at once are highly distractible and subject to interruptions consider time commitments an objective to be achieved, if possible are high-context and already have information are committed to people and human relationships change plans often and easily are more concerned with those who are closely related (family, friends, close business associates) than with privacy borrow and lend things often and easily base promptness on the relationship have strong tendency to build lifetime relationships Source Hall & Hall (1990, p. 15) 10 So, it is essential to understand these different typologies among cultures in order to create satisfied customers. The research of Furrer et al. (2000) determines that there are specific services that cannot be standardized at the global level anymore, but must be adapted to local cultures instead. The authors show that the relative importance of the service quality dimensions varies from one culture to another. 2.2 Service quality Services are intangible things that cannot be touched, seen or felt. Although they may include a tangible final, the most part, the whole service is represented to the client through a series of intangible processes (Zeithaml et al., 2013). Besides this characteristic, services also tend to be more heterogeneous and more difficult to evaluate than goods (Zeithaml et al., 2013). Sasser et al. (1978) categorized service performance into three levels: material, facilities and personnel, suggesting that evaluation of service quality should be based on the way the service is provided. Grönroos (1984) proposed two types of service quality: technical quality and functional quality. Technical quality is what customers receive from the service and functional quality refers to the way services are delivered. Both psychological and behavioural aspects have influences on the accessibility to the provider, the employees’ competences when completing the task, how they communicate and the way the service is fulfilled. Consequently, technical quality can be evaluated more objectively than functional quality (Caruana, 2002). However, Grönroos (1984) suggests that functional quality is more important than technical quality concerning perceived service, because a particular service can be very similar amid firms in the marketplace. So, it is through their “how to do” (functional quality) that they can make the difference. The same author also claimed that service quality could be described in terms of “professionalism and skills, attitudes and behaviour, accessibility and flexibility, reliability and trustworthiness, service recovery, servicescape, reputation and credibility” (Kueh & Ho Voon, 2007, p. 659). 11 Lovelock & Yip (1996) list three categories of services: (1) people-processing services, that implicate a high degree of contact with service personnel; (2) possession-processing services, that involve tangible actions to physical objects; and (3) information-based services, that depend on data to create value. In today’s competitive business environment, service quality is very important to attract and retain customers. So that, businesses need to be able to satisfy customers, meeting their expectations of service quality and, consequently, achieve competitive advantage and be more profitable (Gagliano & Hathcote, 1994; Bhat, 2005). Therefore, service quality is crucial if a business wants to create a bond between him and its clients (Phiri & Mcwabe, 2013). Lehtinen & Lehtinen (1991) draw a conclusion that service quality is created through the interaction between customers and the organisation. Lately, Caruana (2002, p. 814) defined customers’ perceived quality as “the result of the evaluation they make of what was expected and what was experienced, taking into account the influence of the organisation’s image”. Goetsch and Davis (1997, cited by Douglas and Connor, 2003) maintain that quality is a central aspect of a business and it is without a doubt an emotional experience for the client. Customers have a necessity to feel positive about what they buy and to feel that they have received high quality service. If a company has a high quality image, customers will be proud to be associated with it. Service quality and customer satisfaction issues are particularly important if firms want to differentiate their services and compete efficiently in the marketplace. In today’s world of extreme competition, the key to preserve competitive advantage lies on delivering high quality services that will result in satisfied customers (Shemwell et al., 1998; Kau & Loh, 2006). In other words, it is generally recognised that customer expectations have a significant influence upon assessments of service quality (Clow et al., 1997). Customer satisfaction can be defined as the result of good customer experiences minus the bad ones. Following this perspective, customer satisfaction is achieved when the gap between customers’ expectations and their consequent experiences is closed (Meyer & Schwager, 2007). Meyer & Schwager (2007) define customer experience as a subjective reaction customers have to any contact (direct or indirect) with a company. Firstly, direct contact 12 is started by the consumer and generally occurs in the course of purchase and use of the service. Secondly, indirect contact consists of word-of-mouth recommendations or criticisms, advertising and reports and most frequently involves unplanned encounters with representations of a company’s services. 2.3 Customer satisfaction Customer satisfaction is critical to the competitiveness of the firm. The company may understand its customers’ requests in order to deliver perceived quality services (Zeithaml et al., 2013). The most widely accepted idea of quality describes it as being subjectively perceived, in other words, quality is a customer’s perception, not an absolute characteristic (Tomassini et al., 2008). Perceived service quality is defined by Parasuraman et al. (1988) as a global judgement concerning the superiority of the service. Zeithaml et al. (1993) argue that perceived service quality is a comparison made by customers of what they think about a company and what it is in reality, concerning service performance. Customer perceptions of service quality are multidimensional and involve perceptions concerning to “reliability, responsiveness, tangibles, assurance and empathy” (Kelley & Davis, 1994, p. 53). Douglas & Connor (2003) defines reliability as the skill to perform the promised service accurately; responsiveness is the readiness to help customers and to provide quick service; assurance is the politeness of employees and their ability to convey trust and confidence; empathy is the facility of caring individualised attention to consumers; finally, tangibles refer to the appearance of physical facilities, equipment, personnel and communications materials. At this moment, the idea that services are heterogeneous in their performance seems to be generally accepted. Consequently, the degree to which customers are disposed to accept heterogeneity is defined as zone of tolerance - a range of service performance that a customer considers satisfactory (Zeithaml et al., 1993; Johnston, 1995). A performance below the zone of tolerance zone will create customer frustration and decrease customer loyalty. On the other hand, a performance level above the tolerance zone will positively surprise customers and fortify their loyalty to the service (Johnston, 13 1995). Then, the concept is inserted in a system of cause and effect relationship (illustrated in Figure 2), which makes it the centrepiece in a chain of relationships running from the antecedents of overall customer satisfaction – perceived quality, perceived value and customer expectations – to the consequences – customer complaints and customer loyalty (Fornell et al., 1996). Figure 2 Overall Customer Satisfaction – antecedents and consequences Source Fornell et al. (1996, p. 8) From the research conducted by Zeithaml et al. (1993), it shows that customers’ expectations play a strategic role in the evaluation of service quality and understanding customers’ service quality expectations is the key to delivering service quality (Bebko, 2000). Martin (1986, cited by Hsieh & Tsai, 2009) claims that a service can only be considered excellent if it completely fulfils the customers’ expectations. The crucial idea is that customer is “always right”. Customers’ evaluation of the service quality is influenced by their expectations. So, knowing the specific expectations of a customer segmentation ensure that “the right quality goes to the right customer” (Johnson & Mathews, 1997, p. 290). Pitt & Jeantrout (1994, cited by Johnson & Mathews, 1997) concur that it is possible to divide the 14 market and implement segmentation strategies according to the customers’ similar expectations. The difference between customer expectations and perceptions is known as customer gap (Tan & Pawitra, 2001). Customer expectations are standards that customers bring into their service experiences and customer perceptions are subjective assessments of the real service experience (Zeithaml et al., 2013). “For example, when you visit an expensive restaurant, you expect a high level of service, one that is considerably superior to the level you would expect in a fastfood restaurant. Closing the gap between what customers expect and what they perceive is critical to delivering quality service; it forms the basis for the gaps model” (Zeithaml et al., 2013, p. 35). At this point, the importance of the culture in services is reached. Understanding customer perceptions of services is essential to international marketers because such perceptions are influenced by culture. That is, the same service can be perceived and classified differently depending on the culture (Cunningham et al., 2005). Customers in different cultures usually have different levels of service expectations and take part in different relational behaviours. For instance, in the United States, where “time is money”, automated banking service has been measured as a good service, while in Asia, where one of the most vigorous principles is the personal contact, the same service is not appreciated (Donthu & Yoo, 1998). Customers’ expectations have as primary source their own culture and socialization and when they are in different cultures, they evaluate and perceive service quality differently (Pikkemaat & Weiermair, 2001; Zhang et al., 2008). Zhang et al. (2008) introduce the concept of “cultural service personalities” which they define as “the overall characteristics, tendencies or desires related to consumer service experiences within a specific culture” (p. 220). These authors propose a framework of their view of the effects of culture on consumers’ service experience – firstly the consumers’ expectations, then their evaluations of the service experience and finally their reactions 15 to the service experience. Customer expectations are commonly defined as “pre-trial beliefs about a product that serve as standards or reference points against which product performance is judged” (Zeithaml et al., 1993, p. 1). In the second stage, the consumer will confirm or disconfirm aspects of the service performance based on expectations, which will influence their level of satisfaction with the service provider. In the last stage, customers will demonstrate their reactions to the service. Consequently, if it is a poor service, the customer may complain or switch to another one; on the other hand, a satisfying service may lead to the formation of an ongoing relationship between the parties (Zhang et al., 2008). The same authors also believe that by incorporating value and belief systems, communications systems and material culture on the components of the culture, we can capture the richness of culture and its impact on consumer service experiences. There are many uncontrollable factors that one needs to keep in mind when analysing service expectations, from customer’s past experiences with other companies and their publicity to a customer’s state of mind when the service is provided. Due to their education, values and experiences, customers’ expectations will differ. So, an advertisement that implies personal service to one person, may be a promise that a firm cannot keep to another (Davidow & Uttal, 1988). In other words, this second customer believes that it is too good to be true. Thus, expectations depend on the customers’ origin, their nationality. This means, national culture that is correlated to customers’ education and experiences inside the community have a strong impact in the formation of expectations. 2.4 Will and Should Expectations Boulding et al. (1993) list two kinds of service delivery expectations, namely will expectations and should expectations. According to them, will expectations refer to what customers believe will happen during the service delivery system. In turn, should expectations correspond to what ought to happen. Nevertheless, other researchers have used different terms to refer the same difference. Zeithaml et al. (1993) suggested a 16 conceptual model which distinguishes between two types of expectations: adequate service expectations (that corresponds to will expectations) and desired service expectations (that corresponds to should expectations). Desired service is defined as the level of service the customer hopes to receive before encountering a service (Zeithaml et al., 1993; Tan & Pawitra, 2001). Although customers hope to reach their service desires, they keep in mind that it is not always conceivable. Thus, they hold a lower level of expectations for the threshold of acceptable service, i.e., the adequate service, the level of service the customer will accept (Zeithaml et al., 1993). Zeithaml and her colleagues (1993) list the antecedents for the two types of service expectations (Figure 3). The level of desired service depends on two factors: (i) enduring service intensifiers and (ii) personal needs and values. The customer’s level of adequate service is influenced by five factors: (iii) transitory service intensifiers, (iv) perceived service alternatives, (v) self-perceived service roles, (vi) situational factors and (vii) predicted service (Zeithaml et al., 1993). In their turn, Beales et al. (1981) believe there are two main information sources about service quality that affect both desired and predicted service: external and internal sources. The external sources are (viii) explicit and implicit service promises, (ix) word-of-mouth (WOM) and (x) third parties. The internal sources are (xi) motivational effort and (xii) past experience (Kelley & Davis, 1994; Kalamas et al., 2002). Another antecedent that is not included in the study of (Zeithaml et al., 1993) but Clow et al. (1997) attribute a great importance is the role of (xiii) firm image. 17 Figure 3 Antecedents of service expectations Source Srinivasan (2012, p. 117) adapted from Zeithaml et al. (1993) (i) Enduring service intensifiers Enduring service intensifiers are individual and stable factors that lead the customer to a high sensitivity to how a service should be best provided (Zeithaml et al., 1993) and because of the different expectations that each culture has about service quality, the best service provided to one nationality is not necessarily the best to another. (ii) Personal needs and values Personal needs are intrinsic to the consumer, i.e., the essential conditions that leads to his well-being. “A customer with a high social and dependency needs may have relatively high expectations for a hotel’s ancillary services – hoping, for example, that the hotel has a bar with live music and dancing” (Zeithaml et al., 1993, p. 7). Generally, we will expect that people from high-context cultures, who are much more involved in relationships with each other than those from low-context cultures, have this kind of social needs and values. 24 Table 2 Literature Review - Similar Studies Services Cultures Conclusion Year Authors Hotel industry in Hong Kong Tourists from 28 countries (3 cultural group clusters) Expectations are significantly different for each cultural group. 1997 Armstrong et al. (1997) Service recovery North America South America Western Europe Eastern Europe Southern Europe Asia and Australia Culture has an impact on service recovery expectations. 2005 Kanousi (2005) - Commercial airline services - Hospital services - University education - Dry cleaning services - Banking services - Spectator sports - Fast food restaurants - Movie theatres - Plumbing services - Legal services - Public transit South Korea Taiwan USA Consumers see services on the basis of whether the service is personalized or standardized. 2005 Cunningham et al. (2005) 25 - Fine restaurants - Appliance repair Attractions, hotels and restaurants in Hong Kong Asian Western Tourists from different cultural backgrounds have different perceptions of relational quality. 2007 Tsang & Ap (2007) International tourist Hotels in Taiwan Taiwan USA Consumers show significant differences in their evaluation of service quality. 2009 Hsieh & Tsai (2009) Transportation, convenience stores, restaurants, healthcare and banking in Taiwan Western Cultures (USA, Australia, Norway, UK) Eastern Cultures (Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Malasya, Mongolia, The Philippines, South Africa, South Korea, Thailand, Vietnam) Western cultural customers have more negative perceptions of local services than Eastern customers. 2013 Lin et al. (2013) Source Own elaboration 26 2.7 Conclusion Several authors (Weiermair, 2000; Pikkemaat & Weiermair, 2001; Kalamas et al., 2002; Zeithaml et al., 2013) agree that culture influences the expectations and the perceptions of consumers and, consequently, their buying behaviour. Within this context, international companies need to understand the cultural differences of international consumers in order to be successful in the current globalized market. If businesses intend to satisfy customers from around the world, they should meet their specific expectations of service quality, because the same service can be perceived and classified differently depending on the culture. There are many categories of services, but one is especially important in this study: the information-based services. This kind of services corresponds to the Sightseeing service because it depends on the information provided to the tourist to create value. A simplistic definition of an information-based service is the one which provides information to customers. Although the Sightseeing is a touristic transportation service, it main purpose is to give information about the city to the tourists. Tourists come from different cultures and countries, so they have different levels of service quality expectations. Moreover, if the company wants to compete efficiently in the marketplace it must be aware that service quality and customer satisfaction are more and more connected. Perceived service quality corresponds to the comparison of what customers wish to receive from services and what they really receive. Their evaluation of the service quality is influenced by their expectations and some of them are really based on personal needs and values, explicit and implicit service promises, word-of-mouth, past experience and firm image. So, the aim of this study is to connect these antecedents of expectations (will and should) with the impact of the national culture (figure 4) Therefore, there are a lot of aspects connected to service expectations that differ according to the national culture, namely, the level of acceptance of uncertainty; the different perceptions they have about service quality; there are nationalities that belong to high-context cultures and others to low-context cultures; some national cultures focus 27 on explicit communication while others are characterised by implicit communication; there are cultures more likely to rely on third parties and others that give more reliability on official sources; the Country of Origin Effect, i.e., the impact of the image that people from different countries have about the country and people where the service is provided also influences the expectations about it. Finally, it is important to distinguish between will and should expectations. While will expectations refer to what customers believe will happen when experiencing the service, should expectations are the ones customers hopes to happen. Both of them are influenced by many factors, some of them mentioned above. 28 Figure 4 The influence of national culture in the formation of expectations Source Own elaboration 29 3. Methodological considerations The purpose of this study is to analyse the specific expectations each culture has about the Sightseeing service, based on Edward Hall’s typology (figure 5). This anthropologist explains that every culture is affected by the manner in which time, context (communication), and space are handled. Adapting the Hall’s theory to the Sightseeing service, time expectations include punctuality, frequency, performing service in que promised time, convenience of the time schedule, waiting queues and acceptance of eventualities; space expectations embrace accessibility, comfort and safety on board, cleanliness, provision and availability of seats, Wi-Fi connection, quality of the equipment and relevance of the itinerary; communication expectations comprise language adaptation, interest in solving tourists’ problems, willingness to help tourists’ questions, understanding individual needs, clear information, favourite information sources and the image of the country. Hereupon, the conceptual framework is constructed and able to answer the research question: how the national culture influences the expectations of Sightseeing? More precisely, the aim is to know the influence of time, space and communication on expectations across cultures. To analyse the impact of the national culture on expectations about the Sightseeing buses in Porto, a quantitative method was adopted, preceded by an exploratory qualitative research. So, it was decided to use a mixed methodology. “A mixed method study is one that juxtaposes or combines methods of different types (qualitative and quantitative) to provide a more elaborated understanding of the phenomenon of interest and, as well, to gain greater confidence in the conclusions generated by the evaluation study” (Johnson et al., 2007, p. 119). Due to “cultural, linguistic, business practice, and communication differences” of the respondents, intercultural researchers face many challenges (Matveev, 2002). So, combing quantitative and qualitative methods seems to be the best option to prevent some of these challenges. Divided into two stages, a more complete and reliable information was reached. In the first stage some exploratory interviews were done. They helped to understand the expectations of the tourists concerning the service. These interviews were directed to five different nationalities – French, British, Spanish, German and Brazilian – that, 30 according to Porto and North of Portugal Tourism Association, belong to the top 5 of the nationalities that most visited Porto in 2014. The interviews were done in the corresponding mother-tongue of each nationality, except with German tourists that were done in English. From the research conducted by Piekkari & Welch (2006, p. 571), it shows that “being a foreigner and speaking a foreign language may be an advantage in a sense that interviewees are more open and willing to talk to somebody who is not part of their social and professional circles locally. In this sense, being an outsider from the academic world and a foreigner may jointly contribute to generating trustworthy and credible data”. After the exploratory interviews it was done a content analysis. It allowed to organize some categories which were then reversed in a survey, distributed in a tourist service point in Porto. Qu & Dumay (2011, p. 238) agree that “the interview method is employed often as a pilot study to gather preliminary data before a survey is designed”. This second stage is a confirmatory analysis which allows to find out if it exists significant differences between expectations of tourists according to their national culture. In other words, while the qualitative method is a “primary instrument of data collection” and the first exploration of the theme, the quantitative research is a “confirmation, theory/hypothesis testing (…) and statistical analysis” (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004, p. 18) 31 Figure 5 The impact of the national culture on Sightseeing expectations Source Own elaboration 32 4. Qualitative Approach Using a qualitative approach in the first stage allows to obtain a more realistic sense of the world that cannot be experienced in the statistical analysis used in quantitative research (Matveev, 2002). Moreover, it offers the possibility of interaction between researcher and research subjects that can be crucial in the development of the investigation. The qualitative research is the tool to address how questions rather than how many (Pratt, 2009), therefore follows the research question: how the national culture influences the expectations of Sightseeing? Consequently, some exploratory interviews were done in order to learn about the problem with the participants and to guide the research in a way to obtain the information needed to afterwards progress to the quantitative approach. So, the purpose of the interviews was to collect primary data to better understand the problem. 4.1 Sample selection The aim of the interviews is to identify the expectations of each national culture concerning the Sightseeing service in Porto. Hence, the sample does not aim to be representative of the population, as the goal is to obtain insights of some particular cases regarding the research question. Consequently, it was established that will be enough one interview of each nationality – French, British, Spanish, German and Brazilian. However, some of the nationalities have two interviews. The number of samples, per se, is irrelevant in this first stage, because the essential at this point is to collect preliminary data. The respondents’ profiles are summarized in the Table 3. 33 Table 3 Respondents profiles (interviews) No. Nationality Gender Age Education 1 Brazilian F 28 University 2 Spanish F 23 University 3 Brazilian M 24 University 4 German F 23 University 5 French M 68 High School 6 German F 25 University 7 British M 29 University 8 Spanish F 25 University Source Own elaboration 4.2 Data procedures The interviews took place in a tourist point in Porto, where tickets for the Sightseeing buses are sold. The interviews were achieved between the 8th and the 16th of March 2015. A semi-structured interviewing was adopted. With the support of a paper-based interview guide which implied a list of questions and topics, the aim of the interviews was to engage a conversation, in a particular order which provides the opportunity for identifying new ways of seeing and understanding the topic. Most of the interviews were recorded and then transcript, but some of them were answered by e-mail. Both resulted in interesting points of view. However the ones answered by e-mail provided more data. The interview guide can be found in appendix I and was structured in three main categories that correspond to the classification of the cultural typology of Edward Hall (1989) – time, space and communication. The results were obtained though the coding process supported by NVivo software. 40 Table 5 The Sightseeing space expectations by national culture Source Own elaboration SPACE Expectations National Cultures Accessibility 1. Every buses should be accessible 2. Ramps and stroller space 3. Special stops for disabled people 4. Written tour guide for deaf people 5. Moral and economic issues Quality of the equipment 1. Should be clean and well-equipped 2. Quality attracts more tourists 3. We pay for it Sit alone or next to another tourist 1. Alone 2. It does not matter 3. Next to another tourist Seating arrangements 1. Adequate legroom 2. Seats near to each other 3. Single seats 41 Table 6 The Sightseeing communication expectations by national culture Communication Expectations National Cultures Audio-guide Audio-guide or guide? 1. Guide (anecdotes and interaction) 2. Audio-guide (more languages) Information providing 1. Storytelling 2. Direct information Driver languages 1. English is enough 2. English and another foreign language 3. Sympathy and willingness to help is more important 4. Tourism assistant task 42 Source Own elaboration Individual questions 1. Drivers must only give information about the city 2. Drivers must answer all individual questions Socialization 1. Talk with other tourists if they share the same nationality 2. Usually do not talk with others on the bus. Information sources 1. Informal sources (tripadvisor) - opinions and ratings 2. Official sources (company’s website) - timetable and route information - opinions are subjective and official sources are objective 43 5. Quantitative approach Using a quantitative approach in this second stage allows counting and measuring the expectations of the tourists and performing the statistical analysis. According to Morgan & Smircich (1980) the functional paradigm that leads to the quantitative method of survey is based on the assumption that social reality has an objective structure. Moreover, quantitative research is deductive and formulates the research hypotheses, verifying them empirically (Frankfort-Nachmias & Nachmias, 1992). Matveev (2002) lists the strengths of the quantitative method: testifying the research problem objectively; identifying both the independent and the dependent variables under investigation; following the original research goals, achieving more objective conclusions; reaching high levels of reliability due to mass surveys and reducing the subjectivity of judgment. Consequently, the purpose of the surveys is to test if the expectations differ according to the five national cultures under investigation through statistical analysis. Moreover, we aim to investigate if the Country of Origin Effect has influence in the tourists’ expectations. The survey is divided into two parts: the first is the profile of the respondent and the second includes the questions about the Sightseeing expectations. The questions of the survey, the source and the purpose are illustrated in table 7. A Likert Scale of 7 points was used in the survey which corresponds to an ordered scale from which respondents choose one option that best aligns with their view. It was asked the extent to which they agree or disagree with particular statements concerning the Sightseeing expectations. The scale was: 1) strongly disagree, 2) disagree, 3) somewhat disagree, 4) neither agree nor disagree, 5) somewhat agree, 6) agree, and 7) strongly agree. In order to analyse the data statistically it was used the software SPSS Statistics and the ordinal variables was transformed in scale variables. According to Maroco (2014), qualitative variables, as the Liker Scale, can be analysed with parametric methods when they have more than 5 ordinal categories. 44 Table 7 Questions of the survey – source and purpose Second Part: Questions about the Sightseeing expectations Source Purpose Time - Punctuality is the Sightseeing most important aspect. The frequency should be every 30 minutes. The waiting time cannot exceed the frequency time. I accept delays in case of eventualities (traffic or bad weather). Hall and Hall (1990) Becker and Murrmann (1999) Weiermair and Fuchs (2000) Interviews (opinions and suggestions) To determine time expectations according to each culture (monochronic and polychromic); To evaluate the level of acceptance of unexpected situations. First Part: Profile of the respondent Source Purpose 1. Sex 2. Age 3. Nationality 4. Level of education 5. First time visitor to Portugal? 6. First time visitor to Porto? 7. Who do you travel with? 8. What is the duration of you visit in Porto? 9. What is the purpose of your visit? 10. How often do you travel during the year? 11. How often do you use the Sightseeing? Le-Klähn (2013) To know the sample. To identify the differences and similarities of the respondents 45 Space Buses should be adapted with ramps and space for wheelchairs. Buses should have space for strollers. There should be special stops for disabled people. Buses should have written tour guides for deaf people. I only travel on the bus if the seats are comfortable. Security is the most important aspect. I prefer to travel on a bus with free Wi-Fi connection. I expect the service has an app for smartphones. The cleaner the bus, the more tourists it will attract. I prefer to sit alone rather than next to another person. Travelling on the window side is better than on the hallway side. The convertible buses offer better sights than the covered ones. I prefer the front seats. The service should be standardized. Hall and Hall (1990) Cunningham et al. (2005) Interviews (opinions and suggestions) To evaluate the influence of the cultural background on space preferences; To understand how each national culture deals with their personal space; To analyse the different expectations about the itinerary; To highlight the role of marketing in the standardization or adaptation of the service. 46 Communication The communication established between the tourist assistant/ bus driver and me is crucial to evaluate the service quality. The tourist assistant job is to communicate and the bus driver job is to drive. Buses should have a guide rather than an audio-guide. The information provided by the guide should be direct. The information provided by the guide should be like a storytelling. The bus driver should speak foreign languages. The tourist assistant should speak, at least, 3 foreign languages. The informal sources (tripadvisor) are more reliable than the formal sources (website of the company). Grönroos (1984) Hall and Hall (1990) Lehtinen and Lehtinen (1991) Clow et al. (1997) Kalamas et al (2002) Meyer and Schwager (2007) Chattalas et al. (2008) Interviews (opinions and suggestions) To evaluate the role of the interaction between customers – company in the creation of service quality expectations; To realize if the expectations about the way the information is provided vary across high-context and lowcontext cultures; To evaluate the different opinions each culture has about the Portuguese ability to speak languages; To understand how each national culture deals with their personal space; To analyse the impact of the customer past experiences with the company on the creation of expectations. To determine if the image that customers have of the company and the country has a direct positive impact on their future expectations. 47 Country of Origin Effect I have high expectations about the Sightseeing quality. The experience I had in other cities influences my expectations regarding the same service in Porto. I have a positive image of Portugal and the Portuguese. I have the idea that the Portuguese are punctual people. I have the idea that the Portuguese are able to speak foreign languages more easily than others. I have the idea that the Portuguese are hospitable. Wright (1975) Chattalas et al. (2008) Nagashima (1970) Piron (2000) To evaluate the impact of the tourist’ country of origin on his expectations; To analyse if the past experience of the same service has any effect on expectations in another city; To recognize what tourists think about Portugal and the Portuguese. 48 5.1 Sample selection The sample of the survey comprises tourists of the five nationalities that most visited Porto in the last year, namely French, British, Spanish, German and Brazilian. It is an opportunistic sample, based on the population that interests in this research. The sample size is 262 (43 Spanish, 39 British, 68 French, 54 Germans and 58 Brazilians). A complete description of the respondents’ profiles can be found in Appendix II. Since the aim of the study is to analyse the impact of the expectations about the Sightseeing buses amid the five nationalities descripted above, the surveys were only distributed to these nationalities. 5.2 Data procedures The surveys were distributed in paper to the tourists in two main places: in a tourist point in Porto, where tickets for the Sightseeing buses are sold, and aboard the Douro cruises that goes from Porto to Pinhão. The surveys were circulated between the 4th of May and the 3rd of June 2015. It was divided into two parts: the first one corresponds to the profile of the respondents and the second part consists of questions about the Sightseeing service expectations organized in a Likert Scale of 7 points (Appendix III) concerning the Edward Hall’s typology (dimensions of time, space and communication) and also the impact of the country of origin effect. The impact of the national culture on Sightseeing expectations was evaluated with the software SPSS Statistics through an Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) on the correlation matrix, with the extraction of factors by the method of principal components analysis and the rotated component matrix by the method of Varimax rotation with Kaiser Normalization. In order to evaluate the validity of the EFA, the Kaiser-MeyerOlkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy was applied with the criteria of classification defined by Maroco (2014), as well as the Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity. The purpose of the analysis was to reduce the 34 variables of the survey, so it was done an EFA to each one of the four categories of the survey (time, space, communication 49 and country of origin effect). Therefore, for time variables it was verified a KMO = 0,700 that corresponds to an average recommendation for the Exploratory Factor Analysis. For space variables it was verified a KMO = 0,756 which is also an average recommendation. For communication variables KMO = 0,676 that corresponds to a mediocre recommendation, but it is still acceptable for the study. Finally for country of origin effect variables it was observed a KMO = 0,703 (average recommendation). The Bartlett’s Test shows a p-value of 0,000 for the test H0: ∏=I vs. H1: ∏ ≠I, so rejecting H0 we conclude that all the variables are positively correlated. After the Factor Analysis it was done an Analysis of Variance for examining the differences in the mean values of the independent variable associated with the factors. So, in order to evaluate if the 5 nationalities have significant differences on Sightseeing expectations concerning each one of the variables it was used a one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). For the variables that show significant differences in at least one of the nationalities it was applied the t-test to analyse the means of two nationalities at a time in order to find out which nationalities present different means. Before doing this hypothesis tests it was also proved the normal distribution with the KolmogorovSmirnov Test of Normality and Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances. For the variables whose results of the test rejected a normal distribution, the Central Limit Theorem, according to Maroco (2014) ensures the normality of the distribution based on the large number of the sample, in other words, because each sub-populations have more than 30 samples. According to the Rotated Component Matrix, made with the method of Varimax rotation, all the variables of Time Expectations can be reduced in only one, as illustrated in the table 8. All the four variables have a representative weight and the new variable is titled Punctuality and frequency. 56 Table 13 Results of the Anova and T-test: Punctuality and frequency The results of time expectations suggest that the two nationalities with the most different means are the British and the Spanish. According to Hall and Hall (1990), the British belong to a monochromic culture, i.e., they take commitments (deadlines, schedules) seriously. On the other hand, the Spanish belong to a polychronic culture because they consider time commitments an objective to be achieved if possible. Consequently, the British tourists “agree” that the punctuality is the most important aspect, while the Spanish only “somewhat agree”. Nevertheless, the British are more likely to accept delays than the Spanish tourists. Although these are the two nationalities whose expectations most differ, the difference are not so significant since the mean of the answers of the Spanish is “somewhat agree” and the British is “agree”. F1. Punctuality and frequency ANOVA: 0,002 Brazilian Spanish French British German Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Brazilian 0,591 0,000 0,100 0,308 0,557 0,872 0,085 0,123 Spanish 0,325 0,005 0,906 0,001 0,265 0,040 French 0,460 0,324 0,784 0,555 British 0,385 0,161 * Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances (sig.) ª. T-Test for Equality of Means (sig.) Nationality 1 Nationality 2 Mean difference (1-2) Std. Error difference p-value ≤ 0,05 Spanish Brazilian -,714 ,172 ,000 Spanish French -,543 ,188 ,005 Spanish British -,745 ,209 ,001 Spanish German -,429 ,206 ,040 57 5.3.1.2 Space The results of the category F2 Special adaptations for disabled people indicate that there are two pairs of groups whose means differ significantly, namely Germans - Brazilians and Germans – French and the biggest difference lies on the first pair (table 14). So, the Germans and the Brazilians tourists do have different expectations on the following aspects: (1) Buses should be adapted with ramps and space for wheelchairs; (2) Buses should have space for strollers; (3) There should be special stops for disabled people and (4) Buses should have written tour guides for deaf people. Table 14 Results of the Anova and T-test: Special adaptations for disabled people The variable F3 Comfort and safety on board is also not unanimous among nationalities, and the t-test announces that the Spanish tourists have different expectations compared with the others four nationalities as well as the British (table 15). The most significant difference is amid the Spanish and the Brazilian nationalities, concerning the following questions: (1) I only travel on the bus if the seats are F2. Special adaptations for disabled people ANOVA: 0,001 Brazilian Spanish French British German Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Brazilian 0,575 0,058 0,963 0,679 0,374 0,200 0,033 0,000 Spanish 0,550 0,091 0,684 0,710 0,133 0,099 French 0,323 0,288 0,016 0,001 British 0,386 0,066 * Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances (sig.) ª. T-Test for Equality of Means (sig.) Nationality 1 Nationality 2 Mean difference (1-2) Std. Error difference p-value ≤ 0,05 German Brazilian -,707 ,192 ,000 German French -,643 ,177 ,001 58 comfortable; (2) Security is the most important aspect; (3) The cleaner the bus, the more tourists it will attract; (4) I prefer the front seats; (5) The service should be standardized. Table 15 Results of the Anova and T-test: Comfort and safety on board The results of the category F5 Wi-Fi connection reveal a significant difference on the expectations in the Brazilian, the Spanish and the British nationalities and the most significant difference lies on the Brazilians and the British (table 16). These two national cultures have different expectations concerning the following issues: (1) I prefer to travel on a bus with free Wi-Fi connection and (2) I expect the service has an app for smartphones. F3. Comfort and safety on board ANOVA: 0,001 Brazilian Spanish French British German Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Brazilian 0,959 0,000 0,166 0,074 0,353 0,000 0,199 0,053 Spanish 0,158 0,000 0,304 0,042 0,182 0,000 French 0,730 0,006 0,979 0,814 British 0,757 0,014 * Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances (sig.) ª. T-Test for Equality of Means (sig.) Nationality 1 Nationality 2 Mean difference (1-2) Std. Error difference p-value ≤ 0,05 Spanish Brazilian -1,225 ,170 0,000 Spanish French -,925 ,177 0,000 Spanish British -,389 ,188 0,042 Spanish German -,883 ,184 0,000 British Brazilian -,836 ,183 0,000 British French -,535 ,190 0,006 British German -,493 ,197 0,014 59 Table 16 Results of the Anova and T-test: Wi-Fi connection Concerning the space expectations, based on the findings there is a possibility that all the five nationalities have the same expectations concerning the personal space. So, the results do not provide evidence about the “size” of the invisible space bubble that surrounds each culture. These findings suggest that all the nationalities give permission to invade their space, in other words, it would not be a problem to seat next to another tourist on the bus. However, the expectations about the special adaptations for disabled people on the bus are different among the tourists, especially between the German and the Brazilian nationalities. The first ones, for instance, “somewhat agree” with the possibility of special stops for disabled people and do not expect written guides for deaf people. On the other hand, the Brazilians “strongly agree” that buses should be adapted with ramps and space for wheelchairs. The category about space in the Sightseeing with a most significant difference between nationalities is the one about comfort and safety F5. Wi-Fi connection ANOVA: 0,000 Brazilian Spanish French British German Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Brazilian 0,075 0,000 0,001 0,000 0,016 0,000 0,002 0,000 Spanish 0,166 0,154 0,564 0,020 0,244 0,592 French 0,458 0,308 0,844 0,368 British 0,585 0,073 * Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances (sig.) ª. T-Test for Equality of Means (sig.) Nationality 1 Nationality 2 Mean difference (1-2) Std. Error difference p-value ≤ 0,05 Brazilian Spanish ,724 ,154 0,000 Brazilian French ,996 ,157 0,000 Brazilian British 1,20 ,163 0,000 Brazilian German ,829 ,160 0,000 Spanish British ,477 ,200 0,020 60 on board. While the Spanish “somewhat disagree” on traveling on the bus only if the seats are comfortable, the Brazilians “somewhat agree” that will only do the Sightseeing if it is comfortable. Moreover, the Brazilians give more importance to the security of the service than the Spanish, maybe because of the different levels of development between Brazil and Spain. Whereas citizens from Spain, a developed country, see security as an ordinary subject, the Brazilians face every day many problems concerning security in their country. Regarding the expectations about the Wi-Fi connection inside the buses, the Brazilian and the British do not have the same mean as others nationalities. The Brazilians expect more than the British that the service offers an app for smartphones and also free Wi-Fi connection. 5.3.1.3 Communication The results of the category F7 Information provided by the audio-guide reveals some pairs of nationalities with different expectations, namely French – Brazilian/ British and German – Brazilian/ Spanish/ French. The nationalities whose expectations are the most different from the others are German – French (table 17). The variables included on this category were: (1) Buses should have a guide rather than an audio-guide and (2) The information provided by the guide should be direct. Table 17 Results of the Anova and T-test: Information provided by the audio-guide F7. Information provided by the audio-guide ANOVA: 0,000 Brazilian Spanish French British German Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Brazilian 0,095 0,491 0,178 0,005 0,176 0,789 0,381 0,036 Spanish 0,503 0,080 0,719 0,406 0,391 0,015 French 0,793 0,007 0,732 0,000 British 0,607 0,115 * Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances (sig.) ª. T-Test for Equality of Means (sig.) 61 The results of the category F8 Favourite Information Sources show that the Spanish do not have the same expectations as the French and the British. The most significant difference is between Spanish and British nationalities (table 18). This category includes the following questions: (1) The tourist assistant job is to communicate and the bus driver job is to drive; (2) The information provided by the guide should be a storytelling and (3) The informal sources (tripadvisor) are more reliable than the formal sources (website of the company). Table 18 Results of the Anova and T-test: Favourite information sources Nationality 1 Nationality 2 Mean difference (1-2) Std. Error difference p-value ≤ 0,05 French Brazilian -,474 ,165 0,005 French British ,526 ,191 0,007 German Brazilian ,375 ,177 0,036 German Spanish ,510 ,205 0,015 German French ,850 ,173 0,000 F8. Favourite information sources ANOVA: 0,016 Brazilian Spanish French British German Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Brazilian 0,482 0,005 0,567 0,371 0,147 0,907 0,161 0,057 Spanish 0,772 0,023 0,511 0,008 0,574 0,234 French 0,255 0,467 0,301 0,244 British 0,887 0,081 * Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances (sig.) ª. T-Test for Equality of Means (sig.) Nationality 1 Nationality 2 Mean difference (1-2) Std. Error difference p-value ≤ 0,05 Spanish French -,442 ,192 0,023 Spanish British -,580 ,214 0,008 62 The results of the communication expectations of the service support the theoretical assumptions of Edward Hall with reference to the contrast high-context vs. low-context cultures. Except for category 6 in which all the nationalities have the same expectations, the other two categories about communication reveals significant differences between a high-context culture and a low-context culture. The five national cultures seem to expect that the bus driver speaks foreign languages as well as the tourist assistant speaks, at least, 3 languages. They also agree that the communication established between the tourist assistant/bus driver and the tourist is crucial to evaluate the service quality. However, the expectations differ about the audio-guide. The French tourists are more likely to expect a live guide on the bus, while the German prefer an audio-guide. Additionally, both agree that the information provided by the guide should be direct. The first variation can be explained by the difference that exists between Germany – a low-context culture – and France – a high-context culture. French are more committed to people and human relationships than German, so what, they prefer a person giving information about the city, rather than headphones. Furthermore, in high-context cultures people are deeply involved with each other, so communication requires much more attention to understand what they really mean (Kim et al., 1998; Nguyen et al., 2007). Oppositely, the Germans are more committed to the job and they are accustomed to short-term relationships. People in these societies attach more meaning to the message itself, so “what is said is what is meant” (Kim et al., 1998; Nguyen et al., 2007). Concerning the favourite information sources the differences are not so significant and although these are the two nationalities whose expectations differ it is possible to conclude that the Spanish and the British agree that the informal sources (tripadvisor) are more reliable than the formal sources (website of the company). These results confirm the claims made in previous researches where some authors agree that the experiences of others carry higher weight than other information sources. Consequently, third parties perform in the interest of the customer and have a positive impact on their expectations (Beales et al., 1981). 63 5.3.1.4 Country of Origin Effect The results of the category F9 The image of the country suggest that the Germans are the ones who have different expectations from Brazilian/ Spanish/ French. The pair of nationalities who show the most different mean is the Germans and the Brazilians (table 19). The category consist of four variables: (1) I have a positive image of Portugal and the Portuguese; (2) I have the idea that the Portuguese are punctual people; (3) I have the idea that the Portuguese are able to speak foreign languages more easily than others and (4) I have the idea that the Portuguese are hospitable. Table 19 Results of the Anova and T-test: The image of the country As mentioned in the previous chapters, country of origin effect is “the picture, the reputation, the stereotype that businessmen and consumers attach to products of a specific country” (Nagashima, 1970, p. 68). This effect can also be applied to services and this is the last category studied in this research. The Brazilians have a more positive image of Portugal than the Germans and these results are probably influenced by two F9. The image of the country ANOVA: 0,029 Brazilian Spanish French British German Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Brazilian 0,629 0,349 0,758 0,509 0,517 0,262 0,606 0,002 Spanish 0,477 0,776 0,347 0,757 0,376 0,037 French 0,705 0,570 0,833 0,013 British 0,850 0,133 * Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances (sig.) ª. T-Test for Equality of Means (sig.) Nationality 1 Nationality 2 Mean difference (1-2) Std. Error difference p-value ≤ 0,05 German Brazilian -,579 ,182 0,002 German Spanish -,413 ,195 0,037 German French -,465 ,185 0,013 64 conditions: first, the connection that the Brazilians have with the Portuguese is much higher; second, these two nationalities are high-context cultures, so they share similar characteristics. Finally, the last category is F10 Past experience and is the one with more differences among the five nationalities. However, the pair which reveals the most significant differences is between the Spanish and the British nationalities (table 20). This category was about: (1) I have high expectations about the Sightseeing quality and (2) The experience I had in other cities influences my expectations regarding the same service in Porto. On the appendix IV it can be found charts that illustrate the most significant different means of the answers between nationalities. Table 20 Results of the Anova and T-test: Past experience F10. Past experience ANOVA: 0,000 Brazilian Spanish French British German Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Levene* T-Testª Brazilian 0,109 0,000 0,698 0,010 0,301 0,963 0,758 0,031 Spanish 0,238 0,010 0,030 0,000 0,228 0,006 French 0,213 0,018 0,945 0,741 British 0,240 0,043 * Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances (sig.) ª. T-Test for Equality of Means (sig.) Nationality 1 Nationality 2 Mean difference (1-2) Std. Error difference p-value ≤ 0,05 Brazilian Spanish ,963 ,198 0,000 Brazilian French ,435 ,165 0,010 Brazilian German ,376 ,172 0,031 Spanish French -,528 ,200 0,010 Spanish British -,971 ,214 0,000 Spanish German -,586 ,210 0,006 French British -,443 ,183 0,018 British German ,385 ,187 0,043 65 Regarding the past experience, the expectations differ between the Spanish and the British. Past experience indicates that customers have experienced the same service in another city and is defined as “the customer’s previous exposure to service that is relevant to the focal service” (Zeithaml et al., 1993, p. 9). Additionally, the firm image is also relevant since it has a direct impact on the tourists’ expectations. If a firm has a positive reputation, it is difficult to point out poor service performance, no matter what. On the other hand, a negative image of a service company will be difficult to change, even if the service is exceptionally good (Clow et al., 1997). With regard to this topic, the British are more likely to be influenced with the experiences in other cities than the Spanish and the British have more high expectations about the Sightseeing quality than the tourists from Spain. Further conclusions about the COE will be discussed later. After analysing the different expectations among nationalities, other one-way ANOVA and t-tests were done in order to find out if the expectations also differ in the following circumstances: 1) who the tourists travel with and 2) what is the purpose of their visit? The results about the influence of who the tourists travel with on the Sightseeing expectations shows that there are only significant differences in five categories, namely F3 Comfort and Safety on board - tourists who travel alone have different expectations from the ones who travel with friends/ relatives; F5 Wi-Fi connection – like the previous category, tourists who travel alone have different expectations from the ones who travel with friends/ relatives; F7 Information provided by the audio guide – people who travel alone have different expectations compared with tourists who travel in organized groups; F8 Favourite information sources – the tourists that travel with their partner have different expectations from the ones who travel with friends/ relatives; F9 The image of the country – tourists who travel with organized groups have a significant different image of the country from the ones that travel with friends/ relatives. The results are illustrated in the following table (table 21). 72 5.3.2 Hierarchical Regression: Predicting expectations from COE The hierarchical regression is a type of multiple regression used to examine the relationships between a set of independent variables and a dependent variable, after controlling for the effects of some other independent variables on the dependent variable. The purpose of this analysis is to evaluate the influence of the Country of Origin Effect (COE) on the Sightseeing expectations, predicting this impact through some factors. In other words, the goal of this analysis it to find out whether the Image of the Country and the Past Experience (independent variables) predict the Sightseeing general expectations (dependent variables), taking into consideration that other variables like sex, age, nationality, the frequency that tourists travel and the frequency they use the Sightseeing (control variables) might be associated with both Country of Origin Effect (image of the country and past experience) and the Sightseeing expectations. This last statistical analysis is divided into two stages: firstly the dependent variable is the Sightseeing general expectations. With the question of the survey “I have high expectations about the Sightseeing quality”, it is possible to find out the expectations each tourist has about the service in general. Later, the same analysis was done for the three specific expectations under investigation: time, space and communication. Hereupon, it was possible to evaluate the influence of the Country of Origin Effect in the Sightseeing expectations as a whole and afterwards to analyse partially each one of the expectations. So, in the last chapter we analysed the impact of the nationalities on the expectations. At this moment, the aim is to study the impact of the Country of Origin Effect on the Sightseeing expectations, regardless of the nationality. Concerning the image of the country that the tourists have about Portugal as well as their past experience (independent variables) the R Square Change statistic for the increase in R² associated with the added control variables (sex, age, nationality, the frequency that tourists travel and the frequency they use the Sightseeing) explains an additional 66,5% of the variation in Sightseeing general expectations (dependent variable). The probability of the F statistic for the overall regression relationship for all independent variables is 0.00, less than the level of significance of 0.05, so the null 73 hypothesis that there is no relationship between the set of all independent variables and the dependent variable is rejected, i.e., the results suggest that there is a statistically significant relationship between the set of all independent variables and the dependent variable. Concerning the variable “The image of the country”, the probability of the t statistic (5.956) for the b coefficient is 0.000, so we reject the null hypothesis that the slope associated with the image of the country is equal to zero (b = 0) and conclude that there is a statistically significant relationship between the image of the country and the general expectations. For the independent variable “Past experience”, the probability of the t statistic (24.746) for the b coefficient is 0.000 too, therefore we also conclude that there is a statistically significant relationship between the past experience and the general expectations. All the results are summarised in the next table (table 23). Based on these findings we could see that the expectations are in some way the result of the image that the tourists have about Portugal as well as their past experience. So, we conclude that the Country of Origin Effect (COE) has a significant impact on the expectations. Along the research, it seemed not possible to analyse the will expectations, but only the should expectations, since the questions of the survey were focused on the level of service the customer hoped to receive. Besides which, the literature demonstrated that sometimes it is difficult to distinguish one sort of expectations from another. Nevertheless, with the last questions about the image of the country and the past experience we could get information about these two kinds of expectations. So, these findings allow us to conclude that the expectations influenced by the COE match the will expectations – the ones that refer to what customers believe will happen during the service delivery system. Table 23 Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for COE variables predicting Sightseeing general expectations General expectations Regression Sig. R Square Change Sig. F Change t Sig. Image of the country .000 .665 .000 5.956 .000 Past experience 24.746 .000 74 The previous analysis revealed that the COE has a significant influence on the general expectations. Additionally, we can also evaluate the impact of the COE on the partial expectations - time, space and communication. The variables under investigation are consistent with the ones get from the factor reduction. Thus, it is important to recall that time expectations have one variable (punctuality and frequency); space expectations consist of four variables (special adaptations for disabled people, comfort and safety on board, seat preferences and WiFi connection); and finally communication expectations are constituted by three variables (language skills, information provided by the audio guide and favourite information sources). From the table 24, looking at the Sig. values it is possible to see that it exists a statistically significant relationship between the COE and almost all the specific expectations. Only two variables present values above 0.05, namely, “Seat preferences” with respect to “The image of the country” and “Wi-Fi connection” in regard to the “Past experience”. The results mean that does not exist a significant relationship between these two specific expectations and the COE. On the other hand, all the other expectations are significantly influenced by both image of the country and past experience. 75 Table 24 Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for COE variables predicting Sightseeing partial expectations 1. Punctuality and frequency Regression Sig. R Square Change Sig. F Change t Sig. Image of the country .000 .240 .000 8.444 .000 Past experience 4.743 .000 2. Special adaptations for disabled people Regression Sig. R Square Change Sig. F Change t Sig. Image of the country .000 .202 .130 7.368 .000 Past experience 3.803 .000 3. Comfort and safety on board Regression Sig. R Square Change Sig. F Change t Sig. Image of the country .000 .069 .000 3.321 .001 Past experience 4.058 .000 4. Seat preferences Regression Sig. R Square Change Sig. F Change t Sig. Image of the country .000 .048 .001 .889 .375 Past experience 3.640 .000 5. Wi-Fi connection Regression Sig. R Square Change Sig. F Change t Sig. Image of the country .000 .019 .064 2.146 .033 Past experience 1.048 .296 6. Language skills Regression Sig. R Square Change Sig. F Change t Sig. Image of the country .000 .118 .000 4.113 .000 Past experience 4.406 .000 7. Information provided by the audio guide Regression Sig. R Square Change Sig. F Change t Sig. Image of the country .000 .047 .002 2.064 .040 76 Past experience 3.060 .002 8. Favourite information sources Regression Sig. R Square Change Sig. F Change t Sig. Image of the country .000 .119 .000 2.339 .020 Past experience 5.582 .000 It is important to remember that customers hold two different types of expectations about service: the highest are should expectations – “the wished for level of performance” and the lowest can be termed will expectations – “the level of service the costumer will accept” (Zeithaml et al., 2013, p. 57). For example, someone may book a short holiday to Porto in summer and buy an online ticket to do the Sightseeing. What are his expectations of the service? Probably he wants to travel on the bus on a precise time of the day and see that specific spots he has already check on the web – because this is what he hopes and wish for. However, he probably also sees that demand in summer may constrain the availability of buses seats. Besides, he has a preconceived idea that the Portuguese are not punctual. In this situation and in general, customers hope to achieve their service desires but recognize that this is not always possible. This is the difference between should and will expectations. So, the findings also show that there is a strong link between the Country of Origin Effect and the Sightseeing expectations and because of this it is possible to connect them to will expectations. The results indicate that the acceptance of the quality of the service is affected by the image that people have about the country where the service is provided. So, given these findings, we can conclude that the Country of Origin Effect predicts the expectations that tourists have about the service. Although all the questions of the survey about time, space and communication expectations on the Sightseeing in Porto seemed to be only able to address the should expectations, the last questions about the image the respondents have about Portugal and the Portuguese connected with the Sightseeing expectations helped us to draw a conclusion about will expectations. In other words, if expectations are influenced by the COE, somehow the tourists adapted their expectations to the country, pointing the level of service that they think Portugal can transmit. 77 5.4 Conclusion Regarding the initial research question (how the national culture influences the expectations of Sightseeing?), the results show that different nationalities mean different expectations. So, the national culture has an impact on the Sightseeing expectations and a summary of the results of the hypothesis analysed can be found in the table 25. Table 25 Summary of the hypothesis and results Hypothesis Rejected or accepted? Explanation The five nationalities have the same expectations about punctuality and frequency. Spanish ≠ Brazilian Spanish ≠ French Spanish ≠ British Spanish ≠ German The five nationalities have the same expectations about special adaptations for disabled people. German ≠ Brazilian German ≠ French The five nationalities have the same expectations about comfort and safety on board. Spanish ≠ Brazilian Spanish ≠ French Spanish ≠ British Spanish ≠ German British ≠ Brazilian British ≠ French British ≠ German The five nationalities have the same expectations about seat preferences. The five nationalities have the same expectations about Wi-Fi connection. Brazilian ≠ Spanish Brazilian ≠ French Brazilian ≠ British Brazilian ≠ German Spanish ≠ British The five nationalities have the same expectations about language skills. The five nationalities have the same expectations about information provided by the audio-guide. French ≠ Brazilian French ≠ British German ≠ Brazilian German ≠ Spanish German ≠ French 78 The five nationalities have the same expectations about favourite information sources. Spanish ≠ French Spanish ≠ British The five nationalities have the same image of the country. German ≠ Brazilian German ≠ Spanish German ≠ French The five nationalities have the same past experience. Brazilian ≠ Spanish Brazilian ≠ French Brazilian ≠ German Spanish ≠ French Spanish ≠ German Spanish ≠ British British ≠ German 79 6. Conclusion More and more cultural differences are the key to understand the behaviour of consumers in a globalized world. So, it is imperative for international managers to keep in mind that customers from different countries have different needs and preferences (Hsieh & Tsai, 2009; Maheswaran & Shavitt, 2000). If the companies want to create high quality services and satisfied customers it is really important to fulfil their expectations (Sureshchandar et al., 2002). Consequently, they need to know what each specific nationality expects from the service and this is the biggest issue. So, the purpose of this investigation was to analyse the impact of the national culture on service expectations through the empirical case of the tourist service Sightseeing, in Porto. The findings obtained from this study can help international companies, in general, and the Sightseeing service, in particular, to gain competitive advantage. In order to answer to the research question, tourists from five different countries – Spain, France, U.K, Germany and Brazil – were interviewed and submited to a survey in Porto. These five belong to the top of the nationalities that most visited Porto in 2014. The aim was to study their different expectations concerning the Sightseeing in the light of the Edward Hall’s typology about time, space and communication. Moreover, after analysing the impact of the national cultures on expectations it was also done an analysis on the country of origin effect in order to evaluate if it also influences the expectations. With the first analysis it was possible to study the antecedents of should expectations - the level of performance customers wish to receive – and with the second it was possible to study the will expectations – the level of service the costumer will accept, once being in Portugal. So, the expectatios that tourists thought to be should expectations turned into will expectations with the effect of the country of origin. So, the same service to the same customers can be subjected to different expectations according to the country where it operates. In Figure 6 it is possible to see that the nationality influences both expectations. Adittionaly, also the travel partner and the purpose of the visit have a significant impact on the tourist should expectations and the sex, the age, the frequency that tourists travel and the frequency they use the Sightseeing influences the will expectations. 80 The results of this study seemed to agree that expectations do differ according to the nationality of the tourist. The findings showed that for the majority of the Sightseeing expectations for each category (time, space and communication) there are at least two nationalities which have strongly different expectations. The results gathered from the study were consistent with the cultural typology of Edward Hall (1990)o since the biggest differences were observed between a high-context vs. a low-context culture. The findings about the relationship between national cultures and expectations confirmed the claims made in previous researches where Donthu and Yoo (1998) and Cunningham et al. (2005) maintained that customers from different cultures or countries have different expectations concerning service quality which differ because of the cultural patterns of behaviour and attitudes. So, the Sightseeing service is expected differently from culture to culture. Additionally, we also concluded that expectations not only differ according to the nationality, but they also change according to the travel partner and the purpose of the visit. In a last analysis, the findings also revealed that there is a strong link between the Country of Origin Effect and the Sightseeing expectations in order that the acceptance of the quality of the service is affected by the image that people have about the country where it is provided. In summary, the Hall’s typology helped to organize and analyse the different service expectations. Regarding time expectations, the five nationalities do not expect the same bus frequency, they do not give the same importance to punctuality, they have different views about the waiting times and some nationalities accept more easily delays than others. Concerning space expectations, the five national cultures do not share the same expectations as well. They do not give the same importance to comfort, security and cleanness on the bus, as well as the seat preferences. Furthermore, there are nationalities that expect the service has free Wi-Fi connection and app for smartphones, while others do not expect that. With regard to communication expectations some nationalities expect a live guide, while others expect audio-guide. Moreover, some tourists expect direct information, while others prefer a storytelling; some nationalities believe that the informal sources, like tripadvisor, are more reliable than the formal sources, as the website of the company. So, the tourist cultural background has a significant impact when evaluating all these expectations. 81 However, not only the nationality influences expectations. The country of origin effect has also a significant impact on tourists’ expectations about the Sightseeing in Porto. The tourists, regardless of their nationality, believe the service will be provide in a certain way, with good or bad quality, based on the image they have about Portugal and the Portuguese. So, although the tourists’ expectations about time, space and communication about the Sightseeing correspond to what they want to happen (should expectations), they have already a preconceived idea about the country that influences what they believe will happen during the service delivery system (will expectations). The results presented can provide useful information for managers of Sightseeing service. The results suggested that the national culture has an impact on service expectations as what one nationality expects does not coincide with others nationalities. The data gathered from the interviews and the surveys suggested a lot of aspects that normally managers of the Sightseeing do not think about. In reality this is the great contribution of this investigation. This study offers the opportunity for Sightseeing companies, not only in Porto, but worldwide, to keep in mind that just as there are different cultures, there are also different expectations. As Furrer et al. (2000) proposed if companies want to gain competitive advantage, services cannot be standardized anymore. This study is a first step in connecting national cultures with Sightseeing service expectations and hence has some limitations that need to be recognized when interpreting its findings. First, from a methodological perspective, the sample is opportunistic and its size compromises the possibility for generalization on a wider scale and the number of respondents is not the same for each nationality. Second, the focus has been on the influence of the top five national cultures that most visited Porto in 2014, but it would be useful to replicate the study with other non-Western cultures and other countries which have stronger differences over each other. Third, this work focuses on should expectations and it would be interesting to study the will expectations. Fourth, it would be convenient to study not only the expectations, but also the perceptions of services, as well as the customers’ complaints. Fifth, it would be interesting to replicate the study regarding another service. Finally, there are other 88 Meyer, C., & Schwager, A. (2007). Understanding customer experience. Harvard business review, 85(2), 1-12. Morgan, G., & Smircich, L. (1980). The case for qualitative research. Academy of management review, 5(4), 491-500. Nagashima, A. (1970). A comparison of Japanese and US attitudes toward foreign products. The Journal of Marketing, 68-74. Nakata, C., & Sivakumar, K. (2001). Instituting the marketing concept in a multinational setting: the role of national culture. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 29(3), 255-276. Nguyen, A., Heeler, R. M., & Taran, Z. (2007). High-low context cultures and priceending practices. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 16(3), 206-214. Oliver, R. L., & Winer, R. S. (1987). A framework for the formation and structure of consumer expectations: review and propositions. Journal of Economic Psychology, 8(4), 469-499. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. (1988). SERVQUAL: a multi-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64, 13-40. Park, S., Kim, K., & O’Neill, M. (2014). Complaint behavior intentions and expectation of service recovery in individualistic and collectivistic cultures. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 8(3), 255-271. Parrish, P., & Linder-VanBerschot, J. (2010). Cultural dimensions of learning: Addressing the challenges of multicultural instruction. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 11(2), 1-19. Phiri, M. A., & Mcwabe, T. (2013). Customers' expectations and perceptions of service quality: the case of pick N pay supermarket stores in Pietermaritzburg area, South Africa. International Journal of Research in Social Sciences, 3(1), 96104. Piekkari, R., & Welch, C. (2006). Reflections on using qualitative research methods in international business. Liiketaloudellinen aikakauskirja, 4, 565. Pikkemaat, B., & Weiermair, K. (2001). The importance of cultural distance in the perception of evaluation of service quality. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 2(1-2), 69-87. 89 Piron, F. (2000). Consumers’ perceptions of the country-of-origin effect on purchasing intentions of (in) conspicuous products. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 17(4), 308-321. Pratt, M. G. (2009). From the editors: For the lack of a boilerplate: Tips on writing up (and reviewing) qualitative research. Academy of Management Journal, 52(5), 856-862. Prugsamatz, S., Pentecost, R., & Ofstad, L. (2006). The influence of explicit and implicit service promises on Chinese students’ expectations of overseas universities. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 18(2), 129-145. Qu, S. Q., & Dumay, J. (2011). The qualitative research interview. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 8(3), 238-264. Reisinger, Y., & Turner, L. (1997). Cross-cultural differences in tourism: Indonesian tourists in Australia. Tourism Management, 18(3), 139-147. Robbins, S. S., & Stylianou, A. C. (2002). A study of cultural differences in global corporate web sites. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 42(2), 3-9. Sasser, W. E., Olsen, R. P., & Wyckoff, D. D. (1978). Management of service operations: Text, cases, and readings: Allyn and Bacon Boston, MA. Shemwell, D. J., Yavas, U., & Bilgin, Z. (1998). Customer-service provider relationships: an empirical test of a model of service quality, satisfaction and relationship-oriented outcomes. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 9(2), 155-168. Soares, A. M., Farhangmehr, M., & Shoham, A. (2007). Hofstede's dimensions of culture in international marketing studies. Journal of business research, 60(3), 277-284. Sorrells, K. (1998). Gifts of Wisdom: An Interview with Dr. Edward T. Hall. Retrieved 23/09/2015 http://people.umass.edu/~leda/comm494r/The%20Edge%20Intervie w%20Hall.htm Srinivasan, R. (2012). Services marketing: the Indian context: PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd. Sureshchandar, G., Rajendran, C., & Anantharaman, R. (2002). The relationship between service quality and customer satisfaction–a factor specific approach. Journal of services marketing, 16(4), 363-379. 90 Tan, K. C., & Pawitra, T. A. (2001). Integrating SERVQUAL and Kano’s model into QFD for service excellence development. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, 11(6), 418-430. Tomassini, R., Aquino, R., & de Carvalho, F. A. (2008). Expectativas e percepções em seqüências de serviço. RAE-eletrônica, 7(2), 1-25. Tsang, N. K.-F., & Ap, J. (2007). Tourists’ perceptions of relational quality service attributes: A cross-cultural study. Journal of Travel Research, 45(3), 355-363. Usunier, J.-C., & Lee, J. (2005). Marketing across cultures: Pearson Education. Weaver, G. R. (1998). Culture, communication, and conflict: readings in intercultural relations: University Press of Mississippi. Weiermair, K. (2000). Tourists’ perceptions towards and satisfaction with service quality in the cross-cultural service encounter: implications for hospitality and tourism management. Managing Service Quality, 10(6), 397-409. Weiermair, K., & Fuchs, M. (2000). The impact of cultural distance on perceived service quality gaps: the case of alpine tourism. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 1(2), 59-75. Wright, P. (1975). Consumer choice strategies: Simplifying vs. optimizing. Journal of Marketing Research, 60-67. Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1993). The nature and determinants of customer expectations of service. Journal of the academy of Marketing Science, 21(1), 1-12. Zeithaml, V. A., Bitner, M. J., & Gremler, D. D. (2013). Services marketing: Integrating customer focus across the firm. New York: McGraw Hill. Zhang, J., Beatty, S. E., & Walsh, G. (2008). Review and future directions of crosscultural consumer services research. Journal of Business Research, 61(3), 211224. 91 Appendices Appendix I: Interview guide Interviewee Profile 1. Gender 2. Age 3. Education 4. Nationality 5. How often do you travel (per year)? How often do you use the Sightseeing? 6. Is this the first time that you visit Porto? 7. What is the duration and the purpose of the visit? In your opinion, what should happen with the Sightseeing service concerning: 1. TIME 1.1 – punctuality 1.2 – bus frequency 1.3 – waiting time 1.4 – in the case of eventualities (bad weather or traffic) 2. SPACE 2.1 – accessibility 2.2 – seats disposition 2.3 – do you prefer to seat next another tourist or alone? 2.4 – quality of the equipment and cleanliness 3. COMUNICATION 3.1 – Should the driver speak your mother-tongue? 3.2 – Should the driver have time and knowledge to answer all the individual questions? 3.3 – Do you usually speak with other people on the bus? 3.4 – About the audio-guide, do you prefer direct information or a storytelling or just guidelines? 3.5 – The bus should have audio-guide or a guide? 3.6 – Do you give more credibility to official sources (sites) or informal ones (tripadvisor)? 4. Do you think that what should happen is what will happen? Why/ why not? 92 Appendix II: Sample description (surveys) 2. Age Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent ≤18 1 ,4 ,4 ,4 18-29 90 34,4 34,4 34,7 30-39 37 14,1 14,1 48,9 40-54 59 22,5 22,5 71,4 55-64 46 17,6 17,6 88,9 ≥65 29 11,1 11,1 100,0 Total 262 100,0 100,0 1. Sex Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Male 109 41,6 41,6 41,6 Female 153 58,4 58,4 100,0 Total 262 100,0 100,0 3. Nationality Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Spanish 43 16,4 16,4 16,4 British 39 14,9 14,9 31,3 French 68 26,0 26,0 57,3 German 54 20,6 20,6 77,9 Brazilian 58 22,1 22,1 100,0 Total 262 100,0 100,0 4. Level of education Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Primary school 21 8,0 8,0 8,0 High School 53 20,2 20,2 28,2 93 5. First time visitor to Portugal? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Yes 123 46,9 46,9 46,9 No 139 53,1 53,1 100,0 Total 262 100,0 100,0 6. First time visitor to Porto? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Yes 192 73,3 73,3 73,3 No 70 26,7 26,7 100,0 Total 262 100,0 100,0 7. Who do you travel with? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Alone 31 11,8 11,8 11,8 Partner 99 37,8 37,8 49,6 Friends/ relatives 116 44,3 44,3 93,9 Organized group 16 6,1 6,1 100,0 Total 262 100,0 100,0 8. What is the duration of your visit? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent 1 day 7 2,7 2,7 2,7 2-3 days 110 42,0 42,0 44,7 4-6 days 86 32,8 32,8 77,5 7-14 days 32 12,2 12,2 89,7 ≥15 27 10,3 10,3 100,0 Total 262 100,0 100,0 University 188 71,8 71,8 100,0 Total 262 100,0 100,0 94 9. What is the purpose of your visit? Frequenc y Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Visite friends/ relatives 24 9,2 9,2 9,2 Vacation 202 77,1 77,1 86,3 Business 2 ,8 ,8 87,0 Study 24 9,2 9,2 96,2 Other 10 3,8 3,8 100,0 Total 262 100,0 100,0 10. How often do you travel during the year? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent 0 1 ,4 ,4 ,4 1 29 11,1 11,1 11,5 2 91 34,7 34,7 46,2 3 59 22,5 22,5 68,7 4 31 11,8 11,8 80,5 ≥5 51 19,5 19,5 100,0 Total 262 100,0 100,0 11. How often do you use the Sightseeing? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Never 70 26,7 26,7 26,7 Rarely 70 26,7 26,7 53,4 Sometimes 76 29,0 29,0 82,4 Almost always 35 13,4 13,4 95,8 Always 11 4,2 4,2 100,0 Total 262 100,0 100,0 95 Appendix III: Survey Survey to the tourists about the Sightseeing service expectations First Part: Profile of the respondent Instructions: Please, mark with a [X] the desired response. 1. Sex ( ) Male ( ) Female 2. Age ( ) ≤18 ( ) 18-29 ( ) 30-39 ( ) 40-54 ( ) 55-64 ( ) ≥ 65 3. Nationality ( )Spanish ( ) British ( ) French ( ) German ( ) Brazilian ( ) Other________ 4. Level of education ( ) Primary education ( ) High-School ( ) University 5. First time visitor to Portugal? ( ) Yes ( ) No The questions of this survey aim to obtain data for an investigation under the Master of International Business at the Faculty of Economics, University of Porto, about the impact of national cultures on service expectations. The survey is divided into two parts: - In the first part I intend to identify the profile of the respondents; - In the second part I aim to get the tourists’ opinions concerning the Sightseeing service, in Porto. The responses of this survey will be kept anonymous and are only intended for my master dissertation Thank you for your participation! Fabiana Cristina Santos Oliveira [email protected] 96 6. First time visitor to Porto? ( ) Yes ( ) No 7. Who do you travel with? ( ) Alone ( ) Partner ( ) Friends/Relatives ( ) Organized group ( ) Others 8. What is the duration of your visit in Porto? ( ) 1 day ( ) 2-3 days ( ) 4-6 days ( ) 7-14 days ( ) ≥ 15 days 9. What is the purpose of your visit? ( ) Visit friends/ relatives ( ) Vacation ( ) Business ( ) Study ( ) Other 10. How often do you travel during year? ( ) 0 ( ) 1 ( ) 2 ( ) 3 ( ) 4 ( ) ≥5 11. How often do you use the Sightseeing service? ( ) Never ( ) Rarely ( ) Sometimes ( ) Almost always ( ) Always 97 Second Part: Questions about the Sightseeing service expectations Instructions: Please, circle the most appropriate number of each statement which corresponds most closely to your desired response. To what extent do you agree (from 1 to 7) with the following statements? Strongly Uncertain Strongly disagree agree 1. Punctuality is the most important aspect. 2. The frequency should be every 30 minutes. 3. The frequency should vary according to the season. 4. The waiting time cannot exceed the frequency time. 5. I accept delays in case of eventualities (traffic or bad weather). 6. I expect a reward in case of eventualities. 7. Buses should be adapted with ramps and space for wheelchairs. 8. Buses should have space for strollers. 9. There should be special stops for disabled people. 10. Buses should have written tour guides for deaf people. 11. I only travel on the bus if the seats are comfortable. 12. Security is the most important aspect. 13. I prefer to travel on a bus with free Wi-Fi connection. 14. I expect the service has an app for smartphones. 15. The cleaner the bus, the more tourists it will attract. 16. I prefer to sit alone rather than next to another person. 17. Travelling on the window side is better than on the hallway side.