TOURISM Original scientifi c paperOleksandr P. Krupskyi / Oleksii Dzhusov / Nataliіa Meshko / Igor Britchenko / Artem Prytykin Vol. 67/ No. 1/ 2019/ 34 46 UDC: 338.488.2:640.41 Oleksandr P. Krupskyi / Oleksii Dzhusov / Nataliіa Meshko / Igor Britchenko / Artem Prytykin Key sources when formulating competitive advantages for hotel chains Abstract Th is paper's purpose was to identify the key sources when formulating competitive advantages of hotel chains. Th e research assessed the fi nancial activities performance included in annual hospitality industry reports and on their offi cial websites; questioning of loyal and potential customers; the fi ve-point Likert scale and the Pearson correlation coeffi cient were applied to understand the possible consumer reaction to a certain competitive advantage or its absence. Th e paper confi rms the eff ectiveness of key sources used by management to win and retain competitive advantages: despite strong dependence on the economic cycle phase etc., after the devastating crisis of 2007, 2008, but also to achieve sustainable growth. All the networks examined over the last decade have expanded their presence in international markets, diversifi ed the portfolio of brands, increased the number of jobs and profi ts. It was also proved that the opinion of the fi nal consumer is still not suffi ciently taken into account in the assessment of the Pearson correlation coeffi cient (the latter allowed the authors to propose their own defi nition of the competitive advantage in the industry). Th e paper attempts for the fi rst time to consider the competitive advantages of hotel chains from the point of view not only of theorists and business practitioners, but also with the view of the opinion of the services consumer; there were identifi ed the discrepancies, which consideration would allow to increase the level of guest satisfaction and, accordingly, the effi ciency of the hotel business. In future papers, the authors plan to verify the existence of a correlation between the degree of guest loyalty to a particular hotel network and the main fi nancial results of its activities. Key words: competitive advantage; sustainable competitive advantage; hotel chains; hospitality industry; organizational culture Oleksandr P. Krupskyi, PhD, Associate Professor, Oles Honchar Dnipro National University, Ukraine; E-mail: krupskyy71@gmail.com Oleksii Dzhusov, PhD, Professor, Oles Honchar Dnipro National University, Ukraine Nataliіa Meshko, PhD, Professor, Oles Honchar Dnipro National University, Ukraine Igor Britchenko, PhD, Professor, State Higher Vocationa School Memorial of Prof. Stanislaw Tarnowski in Tarnobrzeg, Poland Artem Prytykin, graduate student, Oles Honchar Dnipro National University, Ukraine Introduction Any enterprise, regardless of the industry that it represents, does its utmost to get and retain a longterm advantage in the market (for the hotel, in particular, it means off ering a service of a higher quality or one that is not available from a competitor (Enz, 2015)). In the hospitality industry, the task is signifi cantly complicated by the volatility of demand for its services and the instability of the business environment; variability and diversity of consumer tastes; threat of the emergence of new products from rivals (İplik, Topsakal & Doğan, 2014, p. 16); processes of mergers and acquisitions, the lack of possibility to regulate them properly (İplik et al., 2014, p. 17) and predict the fi nal results; relative limitations of the services portfolio (accommodation, food and beverages); "short-term" success: the implementation of any creative idea (an ability to generate it is the necessary skill of the entrepreneur), even if it leads to a competitive advantage (CA), then it is not long (Lee-Ross & Lashley, 2009). 001-96 Tourism 2019 01ENG.indd 34 28.3.2019. 15:00:42 35TOURISM Original scientifi c paperOleksandr P. Krupskyi / Oleksii Dzhusov / Nataliіa Meshko / Igor Britchenko / Artem Prytykin Vol. 67/ No. 1/ 2019/ 34 46 At the same time, it is diffi cult to overestimate the contribution of the hospitality industry to the social and economic development of individual countries and the world as a whole. Only in 2016, the industry provided the global economy $ 878 billion, 4.3 million new jobs, 739,000 operating enterprises (businesses); has maintained a stable growth rate of 3.2% over the past fi ve years (IBISWorld, 2017). Such success, of course, actualizes the study of factors that contribute to it as a whole; competition as a driving force for increasing quantitative and improving qualitative indicators of development, in particular. Analysis of recent research and publications A variety of aspects of competition have attracted the attention of both theorists and business practitioners for a long time; while a signifi cant part of the researchers focused on factors that contribute to the achievement of success in the struggle for getting and retaining (the attention) of the buyer. For example, Amit and Schoemaker (1993) attributed this to the ability of a fi rm to place and combine resources (tangible and intangible) in the production process to produce the desired result (increasing productivity, strategic fl exibility and protecting the end product) (Amit & Schoemaker 1993, p. 35). Salgado (2003) found that the company's stable success in a changing environment depends on the strategic methods of Human Resource Management (HRM) and organizational identity: by recruiting employees based on their emotional capabilities, respectful attitude to their subordinates. It is expressed in ensuring the development of skills and a fair attitude of management, establishing transparent rules that stimulate behavior which brings benefi ts to the consumer, a synergistic eff ect is achieved. At the same time, Velychko and Velychko (2017) points out that contemporary logistics as well as supply chain management should also be seen as parts of competitive advantage of operation systems in the fi eld of services. Teece, Pisano and Shuen (1997) insisted on the fact that dynamic abilities (DA) can lead to the emergence of a sustainable competitive advantage (SCA), both on their own and in conjunction with other resources; while the infl uence of the former and the latter is mutually reinforcing. In the case of the presence of DA, enterprises are able to really adapt their competencies to specifi ed market conditions; Coyne (1986) added that the diff erence in these abilities also can be a source of SCA. a) functional diff erentiation (the ability to do specifi c things), b) cultural (rooted in the organizational culture (OC)), c) regulatory (confi rmed by patents, property rights, trade secrets, etc.) and d) positional (refl ecting the history of decisions and depending on the distance traveled) were assigned to such diff erences. DA of tourism enterprises were studied by Bogodistov and his colleagues (Bogodistov, Presse, Krupskyi & Sardak, 2017) and Krupskyi and Grynko (2018), however, in their studies the researchers did not mentioned hospitality enterprises. Michael Porter, the guru of strategic management based SCA winning on the size of the value that the fi rm creates in the process of providing the service. Th e author emphasized the importance of choosing one of the three main strategies for achieving success − diff erentiation, price leadership and concentration. He warned that throwing between them would lead nowhere (Porter, 1980); later he stressed the importance of a) a lower price, b) unique quality the customer will be willing to pay considerable amount of money c) the degree of attractiveness of the industry. Also, he has identifi ed fi ve forces that determine the level of competition (Porter, 1985) and the interrelation of the organization's actions, which signifi cantly reduces the opportunity and probability of imitation. Th e author of the theory insisted that eff ective positioning implies a "fi tting" of three orders: the fi rst (individual actions or functions are well coordinated with the overall strategy); the second (individual steps reinforce each 001-96 Tourism 2019 01ENG.indd 35 28.3.2019. 15:00:42 36TOURISM Original scientifi c paperOleksandr P. Krupskyi / Oleksii Dzhusov / Nataliіa Meshko / Igor Britchenko / Artem Prytykin Vol. 67/ No. 1/ 2019/ 34 46 other); the third (coordination and information exchange within the framework of activities help to eliminate redundancy and minimize wasted eff orts). Th e contribution of the second and the third components is more signifi cant; even if the competitor can adopt some elements, he will have problems with replicating, solutions integration into other divisions, and the lack of systematic in approach (Porter, 1996. pp. 73-74). Th e importance of unique quality creating that would diff er not only in the novelty of technology, but also in the complexity of reproduction (repetition) were emphasized by the authors of the resource theory by Barney (1991) and Grant (2016). Globalization changes that aff ect all branches of human life led to the transformation of ways of social development (Sardak, Korneyev, Simakhova & Bilskaya, 2017) which in transformation of ways clients form their priorities. It also transformed competitive advantages of international enterprises. Akkermans (2001) as CA considered three types of logic: technological (the company's ability to accept and use technology); market (the ability to understand the target audience, assess its needs and behavior in the future); business (awareness of production processes and the place of the company in chain of the values created by industry as a whole). Also, experts highlighted the contribution made by the knowledge management to the common task solution (Ruhanen & Cooper, 2004). Th ey have mentioned Internet, fi rst of all, Web-resources as a global and inexpensive source of direct information (Gratzer & Winiwarter, 2003, p. 1); bench-marketing as an incentive to changes (Price Waterhouse Change Integration Team, 1995). In particular, it allows to ensure a continuous process of implementing improvements through experience gained from others; an objective approach to the construction of interaction systems, rather than focusing on fi nding errors and guilt; consideration of each separate task in its interrelation with the others; evaluation of results, recognition and remuneration (Bogan & English, 1994); leadership and cost diff erentiation (even for the industry outsiders) (Hallowell, 1997). All of the above is inherent to companies specializing in recreation. However, there are other tools in their arsenal: • enterprises create and develop brands, change the design of premises, provide unique experience and innovations to improve the guest's satisfaction, the degree of his loyalty and profi tability of activities through the value creation (Bishop, 2014, p. 1); • eliminate the existing gap between individual brands within the network by introducing new products (Bill Xu & Chan, 2010); • involve all the resources from which the fi rm can make a profi t: fi nancial, material (land, buildings, equipment, location, infrastructure); human (skills, experience, level of managers and employees training, communication between them; knowledge acquisition and corporate (reputation, brands, patents, contracts and relations with outsiders) (Enz, 2010, p. 8). • direct eff orts to increase the staff 's ability to translate guest`s wishes, understand and accept common goals, choose the location of the establishment, take into account the level of tourism support in the region as a whole (Bernini, 2009); • conduct regular monitoring of the brand total value (brand equity) using it with new goods and services (brand extension) (Kwun, 2010); • investing in shares in stock markets (Dzhusov, 2013); • assess the adaptability of the strategy (Custis, 2012); 001-96 Tourism 2019 01ENG.indd 36 28.3.2019. 15:00:42 37TOURISM Original scientifi c paperOleksandr P. Krupskyi / Oleksii Dzhusov / Nataliіa Meshko / Igor Britchenko / Artem Prytykin Vol. 67/ No. 1/ 2019/ 34 46 • combine and restructure the portfolio (in the case of hotels, we mean the geographic or product expansion of the housing style that best suits the guest's taste) (Morrow, Sirmon, Hitt & Holcomb, 2007); • introduction of high-tech services (Meshko & Shitov, 2016); • do not forget about market segmentation, which ensures customer loyalty (Sirmon, Hitt & Ireland, 2007); • apply the "blue ocean" strategy through the creation of innovative proposals for unoccupied niches (Bowonder, Dambal, Kumar & Shirodkar, 2010); • create guest experience through the use of tangible and intangible tools, such as thematic design of premises, color scale and palette of fragrances, the opportunity for a client to be directly involved in the production process, etc. (Ivanov & Zhechev 2011; Oh, Fiore & Jeoung, 2007); • attract to the strengthening of the organizational culture not only employees, but also guests (Mangan & Collins, 2002; Han, 2012; Kalnitskaya, 2015); • to be clearly aware of their position in the market, their own core competencies, trends in consumer behavior and changes in the issues related to the environment (Hard, 2002); • entrepreneurial abilities which supported by university-level education (Olsen & Mykletun, 2012, p. 5); • understand the importance of low prices for hotels (Yonghee, 2010, p. 72); • increase labor productivity and reduce costs; achieve a synergy eff ect in the case when information technology takes into account resources, business strategy and marketing policy; improve the organizational structure and competence of managers (Cho, 1996); • improve the qualifi cation taking into account the learning curve of employees; invest in technology (in particular, Mariott created advanced information systems of booking and demand management); use outsourcing provided that there is eff ective coordination and control (Enz, 2015, pp. 16-17); acquire, develop and manage resources with potential and ruthlessly get rid of ineffi cient ones (Enz, 2015, p. 18); • carefully select the staff for recruitment, training and motivation of other employees who meet to the organization goals and ensure the productive operation of the hotel (Ofobruku & Iheabunike, 2013). Moreover, as review of the research literature made by the authors of this article demonstrated the majority of works on the topic concerned the organization management in general. If they addressed the tourism industry, they were mainly focused on the restaurants activities and small / medium-sized hotels. Th e proposed study will expand the existing theoretical basis and motivate further research and discussion. Th e purpose of the study is to identify the factors that lead to the acquisition of sustainable competitive advantages by hotel chains. Methodology of the study To achieve this goal, a statistical analysis of the fi nancial reporting provided by the industry leaders was carried out; a questionnaire was used, including open and closed questions (the results were evaluated using the fi ve-point Likert scale and the Pearson correlation coeffi cient). 001-96 Tourism 2019 01ENG.indd 37 28.3.2019. 15:00:42 38TOURISM Original scientifi c paperOleksandr P. Krupskyi / Oleksii Dzhusov / Nataliіa Meshko / Igor Britchenko / Artem Prytykin Vol. 67/ No. 1/ 2019/ 34 46 Results of the study Th e analysis confi rmed the ability of industry giants to develop and expand their presence in the market, including foreign ones; to maintain stable or even improve performance indexes. It is an extremely diffi cult task in the condition of the high-level competitive struggle which is characteristic for the industry (Table 1); quickly recover after global economic, in some cases very signifi cant, shocks. For example, the net profi t of Marriott International in 2008 was $ 362 million (-94% compared to the previous year), in 2009 − a loss of $ 346 million was recorded (-196%), and in 2010 the company has already resumed a positive trend ($ 458 million, +232%) (Marriott, 2018b) For the ING group, the decline was less dramatic, but more prolonged (in 2008 − 262 (-43%), 2009 − 214 (-18%), 2010 − 280 (+31%) (IHGPLC, 2018b). Hyatt Hotels Corporation in the corresponding period declared $ 168 million (-38%), -43 (-126%), 66 (+ 253%) (Hyatt Hotels, 2018b); Wyndham Worldwide − -1074 (-366.5%), 293 (+ 127.3%), 379 (29.4%) (Wyndham Destinations, 2018); Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. − -5663 (-1090%), -532 (+90.6%), 128 (+124) (relative to 2006) (Hilton Worldwide Holdings, 2018b); Choice Hotels International − 100.2 (about -10%), 98.3 (-1.9%), 107.4 (+9.25) [Choice Hotels International, 2018b]; AccorHotels Group − 613 million euros (-32.8%), -265 million euros (-143%), 3,610 million euros (+1462%) (AccorHotels, 2018b). Table 1 The main indicators of the leading hotel chains Year RevPar, USD. OCC, % ADR, USD. Number Net income, $ million Brends Countries (≈) Staff Accommodation Buildings Rooms Marriott International (Mar) 2007 121.34 73.5 165.19 23 68 151,000 2,999 535,093 696 2016 113.50 72.5 156.53 30 122 226,500 6,080 1,190,604 780 2017 131.40 73.7 178.02 30 127 177,000 6,520 1,257,666 1,372 InterContinental Hotels Group (ING) 2007 153.131 75.231 199.961 7 100 10,366 3,949 585,094 463 2016 79.52 71.36 111.33 12 100 350,000 5,174 767,135 434 2017 81.67 72.07 112.44 13 100 350,000 5,348 798,075 593 Hyatt Hotels Corporation (Hyatt) 2007 117.00 67.7 173.00 7 45 45,000 381 113,230 270 2016 174.00 76.7 226.00 12 56 45,000 657 171,133 204 2017 176.00 76.9 229.00 14 58 35,309 719 182,913 249 Wyndham Worldwide (WYN) 2007 36.48 53.7 67.96 11 100 33,200 6,500 550,000 403 2016 36.67 54.4 67.44 15 110 37,800 8,035 697,600 612 2017 37.63 55.1 68.24 17 110 39,200 8,422 728,000 872 Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. (Hilton)2 2006 148.19 74.0 200.13 9 72 105,000 2,935 501,000 572 2016 107.65 75.0 143.63 14 104 169,000 4,922 804,097 364 2017 109.27 75.5 144.78 14 105 163,000 5,284 856,115 1,264 Choice Hotels International, Inc. (Choice) 2007 65.50 63.2 103.64 11 40 115,000 5,570 452,027 111.3 2016 51.00 61.7 82.64 11 36 133,000 6,514 516,122 139 2017 52.25 62.2 84.02 14 40 6,800 500,000 115 001-96 Tourism 2019 01ENG.indd 38 28.3.2019. 15:00:42 39TOURISM Original scientifi c paperOleksandr P. Krupskyi / Oleksii Dzhusov / Nataliіa Meshko / Igor Britchenko / Artem Prytykin Vol. 67/ No. 1/ 2019/ 34 46 Year RevPar, USD. OCC, % ADR, USD. Number Net income, $ million Brends Countries (≈) Staff Accommodation Buildings Rooms AccorHotels Group (Accor) 2017 конс, c. 77 EUR EUR EUR million 2007 47.77 68.9 68.33 14 100 150,000 4,000 500,000 912 2016 57.00 67.1 85.00 18 95 250,000 4,200 528,690 265 2017 61.00 68.8 89.00 25 99 250,000 4,283 616,000 441 1 average for the group 2 as for 2006 Source: AccorHotels (2018a); AccorHotels (2018b); Choice Hotels International (2018a); Choice Hotels International (2018b); Hilton Worldwide Holdings (2018a); Hilton Worldwide Holdings (2018b); Hyatt Hotels (2018a); Hyatt Hotels (2018b); IHGPLC (2018a); IHGPLC (2018b); Marriott (2018a); Marriott (2018b); Wyndham Destinations (2018a); Wyndham Destinations (2018b). Th e results of the hotel business activity leaders described above and given in Table 1 can also trace by the dynamics of the common shares market prices of the companies which we are analyzing. Below, in Fig. 1, price charts of the stock prices movement for Marriott International (MAR), InterContinental Hotels Group (IHG), Wyndham Worldwide (WYN) and Choice Hotels International (CHH) are shown. Dynamics of market prices of shares of Hyatt Hotels Corporation (H), Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. (HLT) and AccorHotels Group are very similar to the price charts of shares of MAR, WYN, IHG and CHH. Th erefore, we do not present them here. Figure 1 Dynamics of market prices of companies shares MAR − Marriott International, Inc. IHG − InterContinental Hotels Group WYN − Wyndham Worldwide Corporation CHH − Choice Hotels International, Inc. For the period from 2006 (for IHG − from 2009) to 26/03/2018. On the ordinate of graphs − the price of shares in US dollars; on the abscissa − years. Source: MarketWatch (2018). Diagrams clearly show a descending tendency that continued till 2009, then stable ascendant tendency was formed and it continues to the present day. Diagrams also clearly distinguish some correction in 2015 and also partly in 2016, but it wasn't able to turn a stable ascendant tendency, and shares of all MAR IHG WYN CHH Table 1 Continued 001-96 Tourism 2019 01ENG.indd 39 28.3.2019. 15:00:42 40TOURISM Original scientifi c paperOleksandr P. Krupskyi / Oleksii Dzhusov / Nataliіa Meshko / Igor Britchenko / Artem Prytykin Vol. 67/ No. 1/ 2019/ 34 46 the companies under consideration have increased by now (compared with 2009) from 170% (IHG shares) to 3,150% (WYN shares). Such an impressive result couldn't have been achieved without a deep understanding of sources of their origin. Th eir analysis is an integral part of a senior manager work. It also shows that the whole line of the factors is common for industry leaders (Table 2); there're also ones that can be considered as unique. Table 2 Competitive advantages of hotel networks Advantage Mar ING Hyatt WYN Hilton Choice Accor Strong recognizable brand + + + + + + + Wide geographical coverage + + + + + + Highly qualifi ed management and staff + + + + + Strong capital base + + Stable fl ow of availability, fi nancial discipline + + + + Work in prestigious segment + + + + + Coverage of other price categories + + + + + + + Diversifi ed approach to recruitment + + + + + Well-established system of knowledge exchange and increasing qualifi cation + + Stable connection with partners, participation in strategic alliances + + + + + + Personalization / high quality of services +/+ +/+ +/+ +/+ +/+ +/- -/+ Price policy + + + Economy on scales + + Using of newest technologies (including online booking system) + + + + + + + Eff ective loyalty program + + + + + Corporate culture + + + + Source: AccorHotels (2018a); AccorHotels (2018b); Choice Hotels International (2018a); Choice Hotels International (2018b); Hilton Worldwide Holdings (2018a); Hilton Worldwide Holdings (2018b); Hyatt Hotels (2018a); Hyatt Hotels (2018b); IHGPLC (2018a); IHGPLC (2018b); Marriott (2018a); Marriott (2018b); Wyndham Destinations (2018a); Wyndham Destinations (2018b). So, apart from those shown in table, Marriott network gets its competitive advantages on account of: • Team of owners and franchisees, targeted on success; • Concentration on openness and communication; • Mostly imposing in brand portfolio branch (30 – in accordance with principle "right brand on the right place"; • Leadership in amount of numbers in control; • Acknowledgment of innovation "DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) of the company" (primacy in off er of Apple Pay mobile registration (Marriott's Automated Reservation Systems for Hotel Accommodations); instrument of audit Property Guest Object Oriented System, entrance without a key and Heavenly Bed, exclusive bed – top of an engineering idea; app for virtual trips; feedback with the help of «Guest Satisfaction Survey», the main target of which is making unrepeatable impressions for the client); • Focus on optimization of investments in people, processes, systems, elimination of authority duplication; use of innovative methods of price formation; 001-96 Tourism 2019 01ENG.indd 40 28.3.2019. 15:00:42 41TOURISM Original scientifi c paperOleksandr P. Krupskyi / Oleksii Dzhusov / Nataliіa Meshko / Igor Britchenko / Artem Prytykin Vol. 67/ No. 1/ 2019/ 34 46 • Preferences of franchising and administrative contracts for minimization of investments and risks, that are connected with ownership of own real property (Marriott, 2018a) (accent on this, as on its strong side, makes also Accor; group also adds high speed of expansion to it – every 36 hours new institution opens (AccorHotels, 2018); infrastructure, that was admitted as best by experts; readiness to adapt to market conditions (AccorHotels, 2018). Hilton's leadership in its turn, came to a conclusion, that strong real property portfolio in ownership allows to save money on rent and serve as assistance in case of emergence of crisis situation and thread of bankruptcy; staff loyalty, considerable expenses on promotion, revealing of hidden reserves and attractive price policy strengthen the gotten eff ect (out of all viewed hotels, an approach "fi nd cheaper – get 50" is used also in Choice) (Choice Hotels International, 2018b; Marriott, 2018a). Except this, last one mentioned, highlights importance of maximization of investment return and income security for shareholders and franchisee (Choice Hotels International, 2018b; Marriott, 2018a). In IHG-network asset – the ability to support relations with client during the entire life; straight channels of distribution that are letting to save money on expenses; leadership of online registration system in organization, paying tribute to digital technologies (Crown Plaza – entirely electronically-controlled brand); leadership of business trips and meetings in organization (IHGPLC, 2018a; IHGPLC, 2018b). Wyndham Worldwide sees recipe for success in unique complex strategy in digital marketing (absent from competitors) (Wyndham Destinations, 2018a); Hyatt Hotels – in experience of introduction of new products, company integration (including technological); in high productivity level in new markets, attracting extra income fl ow and decreasing of risks at their expenses; in a reliable distributive network, in successful strategy Go To Market for their production; in strong position on markets with high speed of growth (China, India, Near East); in eff ective vertical knowledge exchange system, mentoring and support; in unconditional honesty towards clients and suppliers; in unacceptance of facts distortion by company representatives during negotiations (Hyatt Hotels, 2018b); in achieving a signifi cant level of client satisfaction (IHGPLC, 2018a). His preferences are changeable and not always predictable. In order to understand them better, questioning was lead; 264 took part in it (98 men, 166 women; 81.23% out of total number of guests). Considering the fact, that questionnaire was in public access during one month, feedbacks disintegrated the following way: 51 reply (19.3%) – were sent by e-mail; 72 (27.3%) – were received from random internet respondents a 141 (53.4%) – through personal interview. Questionnaire looked like list of questions, which became basic for highlighting factors not only of competitive ability, but also of general hotel reputation. 325 people were invited to participate in questioning; 264 provided answers (98 men and 166 women), which formed 81.23% of planned amount. Questionnaire was in free access in Internet during 1 month; 72 feedback were received over there (27.3%). 51 fi lled form were send by e-mail (19.3%); other 141 (53.4%) of questionnaire were fi lled during personal interview. Conclusions were based on ranking method as the importance of indicator and feedback decreases according to Likert's fi ve-point scale (1 – factor doesn't aff ect, 2 – aff ect insignifi cantly, 3 – any eff ect is not noticeable, 4 – minor infl uence, 5 – infl uence is signifi cant). Closed questions were summarized and conditionally separated in two groups: one matched Table 1 rows, another – Table 2 rows. Herewith, authors had a task to defi ne how important are those indicators for consumer, who is making a decision, choosing the place for having rest (leading business negotiations, training, conference). Results were kind of paradoxical. First of all, big part of respondents highlighted, that CA, on which companies' accent, are too general, unclear and indistinct for respondents (68%). Herewith, "very 001-96 Tourism 2019 01ENG.indd 41 28.3.2019. 15:00:43 42TOURISM Original scientifi c paperOleksandr P. Krupskyi / Oleksii Dzhusov / Nataliіa Meshko / Igor Britchenko / Artem Prytykin Vol. 67/ No. 1/ 2019/ 34 46 recognizable/ recollected brand" was pretty signifi cant factor for men – Pearson correlation coeffi cient was 0.59 (further − Rpm), for women – 0.66 (Rpw), error probability for the fi rst (pm) and the second (pw) was 0.1. "Wide geographical coverage" turned out to be less important: Rpm = 0.41, Rpw = 0.35 (Rpw), pm = 0.1, pw = 0.1 respectively; highly qualifi ed management and staff − 0.6, 0.71, 0.01, 0.1; "strong capital base" − 0.42, 0.27, 0.1, 0.05; "stable fl ow of availability, fi nancial discipline" − 0.34, 0.18, 0.05, 0.1; "work in prestigious segment" − 0.4, 0.36, 0.1, 0.1 (situation was seriously diff erent only in a group with high income − Rpm = 0.76, Rpw = 0.68); "coverage of other price categories" − 0.53, 0.65, 0.05, 0.1; "diversifi ed approach to recruitment" − 0.13, 0.21, 0.01, 0.01 (signifi cant deviation was for those, busy in tourism area − Rpm = 0.46, Rpw = 0.39); "well-established system of knowledge exchange and increasing qualifi cation" − 0.18, 0.1, 0.01, 0.1; "stable connection with partners, participation in strategic alliances" − 0.08, -0.14, 0.1, 0.1; "personalization / high quality of services" − 0.55, 0.76, 0.01, 0.01; (however most of the questioned – 78% − considered such statements as indistinct); "price policy" − 0.66, 0.78, 0.05, 0.05; "economy on scales" − 0.2, 0.06, 0.1, 0.01 (with ability to make fi nal product cheaper this indicator was connected only by 13% of respondents); "using of newest technologies (including online booking system)" − 0.71, 0.68, 0.1, 0.1; "eff ective loyalty program" − 0.29, 0.33, 0.1, 0.01 (for well-off clients − Rpm = 0.61, Rpw = 0.65); "corporate culture" − 0.37, 0.45, 0.1, 0.01. Feedbacks according to off ered by authors criteria were united in two main groups – accommodation and nutrition (related services, like transfer to hotel, didn't show signifi cant connection – Table 3). Table 3 Results of the questionnaire Criteria Rp m Rp w Accommodation • Reputation 0.63* 0.68 • Corporate culture 0.37 0.45** • Room conditions (convenience, availability of built-in bath, conditioner, autonomous heating system, refrigerator etc.) 0.61* 0.70* • Service level according to expectations 0.58 0.75 • Ratio price-quality 0.76** 0.89 • Fast management reaction on emergency problems (noisy guests, misunderstandings with booking etc.) 0.43 0.51* • Ability of operating personnel to eliminate defects (cleaning, leakage, laundry etc.) 0.36* 0.40** • Staff friendliness (faithfulness, trust, empathy, helpfulness) 0.47 0.65** • Extra facilities (swimming-pool, spa, gym, bar, shops, tennis courts; ability to organize activities for children or business meetings; entertaining program) 0.71* 0.90 • Loyalty program (fi rst of all discounts or free children accommodation) 0.48 0.51** • Internet access; computer and/or Xerox 0.72 0.77 • Interior, design, general atmosphere, location 0.39* 0.54 • Tee/coff ee during the day 0.23** 0.35 • Convenience of online service and apps for smartphones 0.48 0.41 Nutrition • Ability to eat on the terms of "all inclusive" 0.83 0.81* • Only breakfast included in price 0.35** 0.39 • Food quality (usefulness for health, presentation, freshness) 0.27** 0.38 • Service level 0.4 0.55 • Variety and preference accounting (children dishes, dietary menu etc.) 0.29 0.61** • Location of eating stations 0.18* 0.25 • General atmosphere, interior design, purity, space, music 0.31 0.42 • Product diff erentiation by price (calculation for clients with diff erent income level) 0.11 0.37** 001-96 Tourism 2019 01ENG.indd 42 28.3.2019. 15:00:43 43TOURISM Original scientifi c paperOleksandr P. Krupskyi / Oleksii Dzhusov / Nataliіa Meshko / Igor Britchenko / Artem Prytykin Vol. 67/ No. 1/ 2019/ 34 46 Criteria Rp m Rp w • Trust to the institution 0.44 0.63* • Working hours 0.29* 0.19 ρ < 0.10 * ρ < 0.05 ** ρ < 0.01 Surely, there are signifi cant diff erences between various analyzed segments. However, some resemblance was also noticed. So, statement "reputation" was associated by most of the questioned (82%) with personal experience and feedbacks of referent groups, more than with informational or advertising materials, located in mass-media. For residents of developing countries (120 people, three quarters out of them live on territories of previous soviet republics) is ratio price-quality the most important factor – 93% (41% admitted, that they are ready to change their initial plans, in case competitor has more profi table proposition); 76% representatives of this category voted for "all-inclusive" (out of remaining people, 19% preferred not to be tied to a particular eating place because of provided excursions, 3% − intended to try national food in all its diversity, 2% were not sure about their answer). Herewith, for example, points of view about criteria of extra facilities had much bigger diff erences (mostly because of diff erentiation on income level). In particular middle and higher-class women attach high importance to spa-procedures (it was admitted as extremely important by 84%) and ability to do sports (67%), quality of products (91%). Th ose, whose income is lower, found Wi-Fi a serious advantage (55%) and tee-coff ee during breaks between main meals (47%). Herewith, women-mothers of the fi rst and second group were close in their desire to provide their children with an interesting and independent leisure (74% and 82% respectively; those, who wasn't included into this amount either worked out their own activity program in advance, or didn't want to give their kid to unknown people). Men also weren't indiff erent to an extra-service, but their priorities were put diff erently: for those, whose income was higher than middle for their country of residence, principled were "Internet Access" (84%), "fast management reaction in case of emergency problems" (69%), loyalty program (35%); for those, who earn less, foreground were nutrition "all-inclusive" (83%) and free swimming-pool (41%). In other words, it can be noticed, that supplier's and client's understanding of hotel service and sources of forming CA signifi cantly diff ers. Taking this conclusion into account, authors off er to understand competitive ability of an institution as a set of attributes and hotel characteristics, which are infl uencing perception of consumer and helping him to make a fi nal decision in favor of the particular enterprise. Conclusion Identifi cation of key sources, formation and retention of competitive advantages is the key to the success of any organization. In the hotel business, which is diff ered by a high level of competition and dependence on the phase of the economic cycle, the need to solve the respective tasks is not only exacerbated but also becomes more complicated; in such conditions, to achieve success, organizations need a sustainable competitive advantage over their rivals (İplik et al., 2014, p. 17). Leaders of the industry − Marriott International, InterContinental Hotels Group, Hyatt Hotels Corporation, Wyndham Worldwide, Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc., Choice Hotels International, AccorHotels Group − are aware of the complexity of the situation, and make persistent and continuous eff orts to consolidate their positions in the market: media and offi cial websites of companies make public domain of information about received professional awards, developed strategic programs, technological innovations and breakthroughs, eff orts to strengthen the organizational culture and social corporate responsibility. Table 3 Continued 001-96 Tourism 2019 01ENG.indd 43 28.3.2019. 15:00:43 44TOURISM Original scientifi c paperOleksandr P. Krupskyi / Oleksii Dzhusov / Nataliіa Meshko / Igor Britchenko / Artem Prytykin Vol. 67/ No. 1/ 2019/ 34 46 Such communication helps the company to make the brand remembered; forms an image; attracts qualifi ed staff ; in some cases − directly stimulates the purchase. It also becomes a defi nite guide for the development in the host countries not only of the hotel industry, but of society as a whole. For example, in the states-leaders of the world economy, sustainable development is not a slogan, but a matter of every citizen. Tourists are increasingly concerned with environmental issues, saving resources, providing decent jobs, preserving cultural heritage. Th e relevance or disparity of a particular hotel with these requirements has a signifi cant eff ect on the degree of its appeal to the guest. Equally important is the organizational culture, whose functions become more diverse as competition becomes more intense, and the role is signifi cant. However, as had shown the analysis of Russian and Ukrainian-language sites, their content is limited to providing a price calculation for a specifi c date, a brief list of services provided (often the same for hotels of the same status); possibly − information about vacancies and photos. In general, the guest had to make a conclusion, I'm guided, in fact, by the only criterion-price. And this choice is always far from optimal. References AccorHotels. (2018a). AccorHotels Group. Retrieved 10 July, 2018 from AccorHotels Group: https://www.accorhotels. group/group. AccorHotels. (2018b). Annual and half yearly information. Retrieved 10 July, 2018 from Offi cial site AccorHotels Group: https://www.accorhotels.group/en/investors/events-and-announcements/annual-and-half-yearlyinformation#nd-0. Akkermans, H. (2001). Intelligent e-business: from technology to value. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 16(4), 8–10. DOI: 10.1109/5254.941352. Amit, R. & Schoemaker, P. J. H. (1993). Strategic assets and organizational rent. Strategic Management Journal, 14(1), 33–46. DOI:10.1002/smj.4250140105. Barney, J. (1991). Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120. DOI:10.1177/014920639101700108. Bernini, C. (2009). Convention industry and destination clusters: Evidence from Italy. Tourism Management, 30(6), 878–889. DOI: 10.1016/j.tourman.2008.12.004. Bill Xu, J. & Chan, A. (2010). A conceptual framework of hotel experience and customer‐based brand equity. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 22(2), 174–193. DOI:10.1108/09596111011018179. Bishop, J. S. (2014). An Analysis of the Relationship Between Hospitality Culture and Customer-Based Brand Equity in the Lodging Industry. A Dissertation. Capella University. Bogan, C. E. & English, M. J. (1994). Benchmarking for Best Practices: Winning Through Innovative Adaptation. New York: McGraw-Hill. Bogodistov, Y., Presse, A., Krupskyi, O. P. & Sardak, S. (2017). Gendering Dynamic Capabilities in Micro Firms. Revista de Administração de Empresas, 57(3), 273-282. DOI:10.1590/s0034-759020170308. Bowonder, B., Dambal, A., Kumar, S. & Shirodkar, A. (2010). Innovation Strategies for Creating Competitive Advantage, Research-Technology Management, 53(3), 19–32. DOI:10.1080/08956308.2010.11657628. Cho, W. (1996). A Case Study: Creating and Sustaining Competitive Advantage through an Information Technology Application in the Lodging Industry. А Dissertation. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Choice Hotels International. (2018a). Corporate Informatiom. Retrieved 05 August, 2018 from Offi cial Site Choice Hotels International, Inc.: https://www.choicehotels.com/about. Choice Hotels International. (2018b). SEC Filings − Choice Hotels International, Inc. Retrieved 12 August, 2018 from Offi cial Site Choice Hotels International, Inc.: http://investor.choicehotels.com/sec-fi lings. 001-96 Tourism 2019 01ENG.indd 44 28.3.2019. 15:00:43 45TOURISM Original scientifi c paperOleksandr P. Krupskyi / Oleksii Dzhusov / Nataliіa Meshko / Igor Britchenko / Artem Prytykin Vol. 67/ No. 1/ 2019/ 34 46 Coyne, K. P. (1986). Sustainable Competitive Advantage − What It Is, and What It Isn't. Business Horizons, 54-62. DOI:10.1016/0007-6813(86)90087-x. Custis, C. (2012). The role of business intelligence within the hospitality industry's information systems strategy: Historical concepts and future trends. Journal of Management Policy and Practice, 13(3), 82-94. Dzhusov, O. A. (2013). Investing in shares on international stock markets. AV Akademikerverlag GmbH & Co. KG, Saarbrücken (Germany): LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing. (in Russian) Enz, C. A. (2010). Competitive Dynamics and Creating Sustainable Advantage [Electronic version]. Retrieved 10 July, 2018 from Cornell University, School of Hospitality Administration site: http://scholarship.sha.cornell.edu/articles/349. Enz, C. A. (2015). Competing Successfully with Other Hotels: The Role of Strategy. The Cornell School of Hotel Administration on Hospitality, 207–226. DOI:10.1002/9781119200901.ch15. Grant, R. M. (2016). Contemporary strategy analysis: Text and cases edition. John Wiley & Sons. Gratzer, M. & Winiwarter, W. (2003). A framework for competitive advantage in e-tourism. ENTER 2003: 10th International Conference on Information Technology in Travel & Tourism. Hallowell, R. (1997). Dual Competitive Advantage in Labor-Dependent Services. A thesis. Harvard University, Graduate School of Business Administration. Han, H. (Spring). (2012). The Relationship among Corporate Culture, Strategic Orientation, and Financial Performance. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 53(3), 207–219. DOI:10.1177/1938965512443505. Hard, A. (2002). Developing Marketing Strategies for Tourism Destinations in Peripheral Areas of Europe: the Case of Bornholm. A thesis. Bournemouth University. Hilton Worldwide Holdings. (2018a). About us Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. Retrieved 12 August, 2018 from Offi cial Site Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc.: https://cr.hilton.com/. Hilton Worldwide Holdings. (2018b). SEC Filings Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. Retrieved 02 August, 2018 from Offi cial Site Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc.: http://ir.hilton.com/fi nancial-reporting/sec-fi lings. Hyatt Hotels. (2018a). Investor Relations. Retrieved 03 August, 2018 from Offi cial Site Hyatt Hotels Corp.: http://investors.hyatt.com/investor-relations/default.aspx. Hyatt Hotels. (2018b). SEC Filings Hyatt Hotels Corp. Retrieved 10 August, 2018 from Offi cial Site Hyatt Hotels Corp.: http://investors.hyatt.com/investor-relations/sec-fi lings/default.aspx. IBISWorld. (2017). Global Hotels & Resorts – Global Industry Research Reports. IHGPLC. (2018a). Offi cial Site InterContinental Hotels Group PLC. Retrieved 14 July, 2018 from Offi cial Site InterContinental Hotels Group PLC: https://www.ihgplc.com/about-us. IHGPLC. (2018b). SEC Filings InterContinental Hotels Group PLC. Retrieved 14 July, 2018 from Offi cial Site InterContinental Hotels Group PLC: https://www.last10k.com/sec-fi lings/ihg/0000950123-11-034472.htm. İplik, F. N., Topsakal, Y. & Doğan, O. (2014). Strategic innovation: An empirical study on hotel fi rms operating in Antalya region. Advances in Hospitality and Tourism Research (AHTR), 2(1), 16-29. Ivanov, S. & Zhechev, V. (2011). Hotel Marketing. Varna: Zangador. Kalnitskaya, M. (2015). The infl uence of organizational culture on the innovational potential of the company. European Journal of Management Issues, 23(5), 60-70. DOI:10.15421/191522. (in Ukrainian) Krupskyi, O. P. & Grynko, T. (2018). Role of Cognitive Style of a Manager in the Development of Tourism Companies' Dynamic Capabilities. Tourism and Hospitality Management, 24(1), 1-21. DOI:10.20867/thm.24.1.5. Kwun, D. J. (2010). How extended hotel brands aff ect the Lodging Portfolio. Journal of Retail & Leisure Property, 9(3), 179–191. DOI:10.1057/rlp.2010.7. Le e-Ross, D. & Lashley, C. (2009). Entrepreneurship and Small Business Management in the Hospitality Industry. Butterworth-Heinemann is an imprint of Elsevier. Mangan, E. & Collins, A. (2002). Threats to brand integrity in the hospitality sector: evidence from a tourist brand. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 14(6), 286–293. DOI:10.1108/09596110210436823. 001-96 Tourism 2019 01ENG.indd 45 28.3.2019. 15:00:43 46TOURISM Original scientifi c paperOleksandr P. Krupskyi / Oleksii Dzhusov / Nataliіa Meshko / Igor Britchenko / Artem Prytykin Vol. 67/ No. 1/ 2019/ 34 46 MarketWatch. (2018). Big Charts. Retrieved 27 July, 2018 from Offi cial Site MarketWatch: http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/. Marriott. (2018a). About Marriott International. Retrieved 04 August, 2018 from Offi cial Site Marriott International, Inc.: https://www.marriott.com/marriott/aboutmarriott.mi. Marriott. (2018b). SEC Filings Marriott International, Inc. Retrieved 10 August, 2018 from Offi cial Site Marriott International, Inc.: https://marriott.gcs-web.com/fi nancial-information/sec-fi lings. Meshko, N. & Shitov, D. (2016). Knowledge intensive services as innovation driver of the world economy under conditions of global economic integration. European Journal of Management Issues, 24(6), 87-96. DOI:10.15421/191609. (in Ukrainian) Morrow, J. L., Sirmon, D. G., Hitt, M. A. & Holcomb, T. R. (2007). Creating value in the face of declining performance: fi rm strategies and organizational recovery. Strategic Management Journal, 28(3), 271–283. DOI:10.1002/smj.579. Ofobruku, S. A. & Iheabunike, O. B. C. (2013). Assessment of Recruitment Practice on Organization Performance: Empirical Study of Hospitality Businesses in Abuja. Tourism and Hospitality Services. European Scientifi c Journal, 9(29), 1857-7431. Oh, H., Fiore, A. M. & Jeoung, M. (2007). Measuring Experience Economy Concepts: Tourism Applications. Journal of Travel Research, 46(2), 119–132. DOI:10.1177/0047287507304039. Olsen, M. K. & Mykletun, R. J. (2012). Entrepretality: Entrepreneurship education in the hospitality industry [Electronic version]. Retrieved 10 July, 2018 from Cornell University, School of Hospitality Administration site: http:// scholarship.sha.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1033&context=articles. Porter, M. (1980). Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors. New York: Free Press. Porter, M. (1985). Competitive Advantage. New York: Free Press. Porter, M. (1996). What is Strategy? Harvard Business Review, Nov-Dee, 61-78. Price Waterhouse Change Integration Team. (1995). Better change: Best practices for Transforming Your Organization. New York: McGraw-Hill. Ruhanen, L. & Cooper, C. (2004). Applying a Knowledge Management Framework to Tourism Research. Tourism Recreation Research, 29(1), 83–87. DOI:10.1080/02508281.2004.11081434. Salgado, S. R. (2003). Fine Restaurants: Creating Inimitable Advantages in a Competitive Industry. A Dissertation. New York University. Sardak, S., Korneyev, M., Simakhova, A. & Bilskaya, O. (2017). Global factors which infl uence the directions of social development. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 15(3), 323-333. DOI:10.21511/ppm.15(3-2).2017.02. Sirmon, D. G., Hitt, M. A. & Ireland, R. D. (2007). Managing Firm Resources in Dynamic Environments to Create Value: Looking Inside the Black Box. Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 273–292. DOI:10.5465/amr.2007.23466005. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G. & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533. DOI:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199708)18:7%3C509::aid-smj882%3E3.0.co;2-z. Velychko, O. & Velychko, L. (2017). Logistical modelling of managerial decisions in social and marketing business systems. Journal of International Studies, 10(3), 206-219. DOI:10.14254/2071-8330.2017/10-3/15 Wyndham Destinations. (2018a). About Wyndham. Retrieved 28 July, 2018 from Offi cial Site Wyndham Worldwide Corporation: http://www.wyndhamdestinations.com/wd/home.page. Wyndham Destinations. (2018b). Sec Filings Wyndham Worldwide Corporation. Retrieved 18 July, 2018 from Offi cial Site Wyndham Destinations: http://investor.wyndhamdestinations.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=200690&p=irol-sec. Yonghee, K. (2010). Competitive Dynamics and Strategic Pricing Decisions: Observations from the Lodging Industry. A Dissertation. The Pennsylvania State University. Submitted: 20/08/2018 Accepted: 10/12/2018 001-96 Tourism 2019 01ENG.indd 46 28.3.2019. 15:00: