Journal of Promotion Management

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/wjpm20

Perceived Guest House Brand Value: The Influence

of Web Interactivity on Brand Image and Brand
Awareness

Rosemary Matikiti-Manyevere, Mornay Roberts-Lombard & Mercy

Mpinganjira

To cite this article: Rosemary Matikiti-Manyevere, Mornay Roberts-Lombard & Mercy

Mpinganjira (2021) Perceived Guest House Brand Value: The Influence of Web Interactivity on
Brand Image and Brand Awareness, Journal of Promotion Management, 27:2, 250-277, DOI:
10.1080/10496491.2020.1829770

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10496491.2020.1829770

Published online: 11 Oct 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1104

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 5 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wjpm20
JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT
2021, VOL. 27, NO. 2, 250–277
https://doi.org/10.1080/10496491.2020.1829770

Perceived Guest House Brand Value: The Influence of

Web Interactivity on Brand Image and
Brand Awareness
Rosemary Matikiti-Manyevere, Mornay Roberts-Lombard, and
Mercy Mpinganjira
University of Johannesburg College of Business and Economics, Auckland Park, South Africa

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
The purpose of the study was to examine the influence of Web interactivity; brand
web interactivity and brand experience on the perceived awareness; brand image;
brand value of guest houses, and ultimately, affective commit- affective commitment;
South Africa; guesthouse
ment toward guest houses. A questionnaire was used to col-
lect data from guest house customers, yielding a total of 300
responses suitable for analysis. Structural Equation Modeling
was used to test the hypotheses. The results revealed that
web interactive elements of social interactivity, active control
and synchronicity positively influence brand awareness, how-
ever, both social interactivity and active control influence
brand image. Results also confirmed that brand awareness
influences brand image. Brand experience and brand image
also had an influence on perceived brand value, with the lat-
ter influencing affective commitment. Guesthouses owners are
recommended to have websites that allow two-way communi-
cation. Websites should also have embedded features such as
effective navigation tools which allow for active control.

Introduction
The advent of the internet and the rapid evolution of its related technolo-
gies have compelled most businesses to reallocate resources from conven-
tional advertising media to more interactive media such as websites
(Starkov, 2002; Aziz et al., 2011). Most accommodation establishments,
whether large or small, are thus creating their own websites to (i) promote
their services and (ii) facilitate online reservation. These are the two main
objectives of developing websites for accommodation establishments
(Huang & Lin, 2006; Abdullah et al. (2016). Moreover, the growing import-
ance of the internet in business transactions and marketing means that
websites must not only be functional but also attractive (Palla & Zotos,
2017). The ultimate goal of investing in an attractive website is to maximize

CONTACT Rosemary Matikiti-Manyevere [email protected] University of Johannesburg College of

Business and Economics, Marketing Management, PO Box 524, Auckland Park 2006, South Africa
ß 2020 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
 JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT 251

customer experience (Shi & Zhang, 2014). Abdullah et al. (2016) contend
that interactive websites enhance awareness and visibility, creating a clear
image of an accommodation establishment’s brand.
Traditionally, accommodation establishments have focused on personal
customer service and luxury facilities to differentiate themselves from com-
petitors. However, with developments in technology, establishments are
now increasingly looking at how they can capitalize on technology to dif-
ferentiate themselves (Lu et al., 2012). This is due to the fact that customers
are no longer only looking for a place to stay but now wish to maximize
the other elements of their experience. This includes the use of new,
advanced technologies such as interactive accommodation establishments
websites to connect with service providers or friends (Palla & Zotos, 2017).
Web consumers are increasingly using interactivity to evaluate the perform-
ance and quality of websites (Bao et al., 2016). Website interactivity is
based on issues such as engagement, attentiveness and attractiveness, which
are inherent features in most technology-related communities (Palla &
Zotos, 2013). In the hospitality industry, website interactivity plays a pivotal
role in maximizing customer experience (Palla & Zotos, 2017).
Although website interactivity is a crucial aspect of online marketing,
there is scant research on the accommodation industry, investigating the
influence of web interactivity on branding elements such as brand aware-
ness, brand image and brand value (Barreda et al., 2016). Experience-
related research remains underrepresented in the tourism literature (Bennet
et al., 2005). Furthermore, most studies on branding, including in the hos-
pitality industry, tend to focus on large businesses (Barreda et al., 2016;
Gao et al., 2010; Ahmad et al., 2017). This creates a gap which the present
study seeks to bridge by focusing on the guest house sector. A guest house
can be described as a private house which has been converted to provide
accommodation for tourists (Bennet et al., 2005). In South Africa, most
guest houses are owner-managed, small and medium businesses (Elliott &
Boshoff, 2007). The study focused on guest houses because the South
African government is currently putting much emphasis on small and
medium enterprise (SMEs). Guesthouse constitute a bigger part of small
businesses in South Africa; hence it was deemed necessary to investigate
their website performance so as to give proper recommendations on how
they can use websites to improve their awareness and image. To date, there
has been little research on the online experience of guest house customers
in South Africa. Moreover, very few studies have evaluated the effect of
website interactivity on branding elements such as brand awareness and
brand image in the accommodation sector, with a specific focus on guest
houses in South Africa. Thus, the effective branding of guest houses, and
the role of website interactivity in influencing perceived brand value,
252 R. MATIKITI-MANYEVERE ET AL.

remain areas which are largely under-researched. This study examines the
influence of website interactivity as defined by user control, social inter-
activity and synchronicity on perceived brand value through brand aware-
ness and brand image. The study also investigates the relationship between
brand experience and perceived brand value and, in turn, the relationship
between brand value and affective commitment of customers toward
guest houses.
The study contributes to theory in three ways. Firstly, it contributes to
the body of literature on website branding. The ever-increasing use of the
internet by both businesses and customers to connect with each other
means that the internet will continue to play a significant role as a market-
ing platform. Understanding how businesses, including SMEs, can capitalize
on this platform is key to effective online marketing.
Secondly, the study proposes and tests a comprehensive conceptual
model that captures website interactivity and brand experience in explain-
ing perceived brand value and customers’ affective commitment. In exam-
ining website interactivity, the study looks at the impact of website quality
on individual dimensions. This provides insights on the nature and level of
influence of website interactivity on brand value and affective commitment.
Thirdly, by testing the model among guest house customers in the South
African accommodation sector, this study contributes to a relatively under-
researched area in literature. Indeed, Barreda et al. (2016) observes that
research on branding in the hospitality industry has been relatively limited.
Most studies in this sector have been conducted from the perspective of
developed nations (Ahmad et al., 2017; Gao et al., 2010 ).
The next section of this article provides the theoretical grounding of the
study, followed by the hypotheses to be tested and then, the study results.
The study concludes with an account of its theoretical contribution and
managerial implications.

Grounding theory
The study is centered on the principles of interactive theory, which under-
pins the relationships between the constructs of the study. Interactivity the-
ory is centered on the exchange of messages and holds that the perceptions
of individuals can be affected by the ‘supremacy of the interactivity’
(Huang & Yang, 2009). The more reciprocal a message exchange is, the
stronger the perception of interactivity is (Voorveld et al., 2013). Bucy
(2004) mentioned that interactivity in a real online environment involves
participation and interaction via online-mediated and communication
technologies.
 JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT 253

The importance of interactivity theory in online communications has

been emphasized by a number of studies (Liu & Shrum, 2002; Palla &
Zotos 2013; Bao et al., 2016). Interactivity is a multifaceted concept which
requires a clear definition (Barreda et al., 2016). Lilleker and Malag
on
(2010) add that there is no consensus on a universal definition of inter-
activity and how it can be applied to website functionality. Campbell et al.
(2008) define interactivity as an association between two or more people
who, in some conditions, mutually alter their behavior toward one another.
Go and Bortree (2017. p731) indicated that “Interactivity rests on the con-
tingent and responsive (back-and-forth) message exchanges between two
interactants”.
Website interactivity centers on factors such as reciprocity, attentiveness
and attractiveness (Palla & Zotos, 2013). A frequently cited definition by
Steurer, (2000) states that web interactivity is the degree to which website
users can take part in altering the form and content of a technology-mediated
environment in real time. A more comprehensive definition of interactivity
was given by Johnson et al., 2006 which states that it is the extent to which an
actor involved in a communication episode perceives the communication to
be reciprocal, responsive, speedy and characterized by the use of nonverbal
communication. Since this study is focusing on how guesthouse customers
perceive interactivity in technology-mediated environment in real time, the
definition by Johnson et al. (2006) is adopted.
Facets of interactivity which are frequently cited in literature are two-
way communication (reciprocal communication), synchronicity and control
(Liu & Shrum, 2002; Bao et al., 2016; Tan et al., 2018). Website interactiv-
ity can refer to the online interactive techniques such as the interaction
between a business and a customer or interaction between customers
(Bagozzi & Dholakia, 2006). The interaction between a business and cus-
tomers can include online discussion bulletins, games or free customer
calls. Interactions between customers can take place on online platforms or
through communities where customers share their experiences. Customer-
to-customer interactions increase customers’ sense of involvement in the
purchasing process and fulfill their social connection needs. This can lead
to specific brand identification and can enhance a sense of attachment
(Bagozzi & Dholakia, 2006; Dholakia et al., 2004).
This study used the frequently cited web interactivity facets (control, syn-
chronicity and reciprocity) and branding elements to ground the study
hypotheses, which were tested in the accommodation sector focusing on
guest houses. This was done to determine whether interactivity elements
influence the brand awareness and brand image of small accommodation
establishments in an emerging African market. The authors are unaware of
any other study which has applied interactivity theory to understand the
254 R. MATIKITI-MANYEVERE ET AL.

influence of interactivity on brand awareness and future behavioral out-

comes focusing on small accommodation establishments in South Africa.
Additionally, internet-based advertising has been and continue to grow by
leaps and bounds, and companies are now utilizing the website to market
their services. Consumers on the other hand, are not only concerned about
searching products online but are also concerned about their experience
when using the online tools (Palla & Zotos, 2017). Thus, interactivity the-
ory proposes that customers are much concerned about the supremacy of
interactivity. In online environments, in this case when using the website,
customers are much concerned about the facets of interactivity. If consum-
ers are satisfied with all the facets, they are likely to continue interacting
with the company through their website. Thus, it was deemed necessary to
adopt the Interactivity theory since it more applicable to online advertising
tools such as websites.

Theoretical model development

The interrelationship between social interactivity, user control, synchronicity
and Brand awareness
One of the inherent features of website Interactivity is its ability to facilitate
two-way communication or social interactivity (Jiang et al., 2010 ) between
the website users and the brand. Thus, social interactivity allows for recip-
rocal communication which according to Jiang et al. (2010) presented on
websites as communication tools such as emails and live chats that permits
consumers to participate in conversations with a companys online sales
representatives. By doing so, consumers have the ability to ask more ques-
tions about the brand and this in turn enhances brand awareness. Through
interactivity, a strong link among the users, the business and the brands
can be formed. Social interactivity in this study refers to the potential to
exchange information between two or more entities (Jiang et al., 2010).
Control and social interactivity perceptions help to build powerful links
whereby a mutual relationship between customers and brands can be rein-
forced (Barreda et al., 2016). User control can be defined as the degree to
which a person selects the information, timing and flow of communication
(Dholakia et al., 2004; Tan et al., 2018) or the power to choose the content
and direct an interaction. People involved in two-way communication have
the ability to exercise control over how the information is exchanged (Gao
et al., 2010). Some researchers consider user control to be the primary
element of interactivity (Belanche et al., 2017). User control is based chiefly
on the reduction in effort in executing a task and fastness of putting infor-
mation (Heeter, 1989). User control and two-way communication are
regarded as the main elements of interactivity (Jiang et al., 2010). Since
 JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT 255

user control is a critical component that influences user’s interaction with

the website, hence facilitating serious involvement in web navigation (Yoo
et al., 2010 and two-way communication activates the perceptions of inter-
action ease, connection and receptivity ( Jiang et al., 2010). Previous studies
also stressed the importance of Synchronicity in the interactivity concept
(McMillan & Hwang, 2002, Liu, 2003; Tan et al., 2018). Synchronicity
refers to how quickly messages can be conveyed and how quickly people
can process these messages (Gao et al., 2010). Synchronicity can also be
described as a website’s ability to respond quickly and to provide real-time
feedback (Yoo et al., 2010). It is assumed when users are able to get instant
feedback, they might be tempted to continue using the website to search
for more information about the brand. This in turn may also enhances
brand awareness. Thus, it was expected in this study that synchronicity can
significantly influence brand awareness.
When an interaction occurs and users are able to guide the flow of com-
munication, they will remember and identify the brand better compared to
those who did not experience the same interaction (Barreda et al., 2016).
The greater the user control the more likely it is for a consumer to remem-
ber the experience with that branded website. Previous studies revealed that
interactivity specifically assists in developing branding elements to high lev-
els, helps to connect consumers to a specific brand and increases brand
awareness, recognition and recall (Islam & Rahaman, 2017; Barreda et al.,
2016). Since consumers are able to select the content, order of communica-
tion and timing represents distinctive chances to be more aware of the
brand (Gao et al., 2010). The interactivity’s capacity to product research
and knowledge makes it pivotal in brand awareness (Gao et al., 2010. As
well, interactivity can improve a customers’ level of understanding and
comprehension of a brand thus, knowing brand features and benefits
through collaboration and participation in their interaction with the brand
(Jiang et al., 2010). The speed at which users get feedback when interacting
with the website can also improve their understanding of the brand.
However, to date, there has been only a handful of studies on the rela-
tionship between web settings and brand elements, and specifically, brand
awareness and brand image (Barreda et al., 2016; Gao et al., 2010).
Furthermore, these studies did not pay attention to synchronicity, which is
one the important dimension of interactivity, hence this study included this
facet. Barreda et al. (2016) investigated the relationship between social
interactivity and brand awareness as well as social interactivity and brand
image, reporting a positive relationship between these constructs. Gao et al.
(2010) examined the same constructs and concluded that there is a signifi-
cant interrelationship between these constructs. Against this context, the
following hypotheses are proposed:
256 R. MATIKITI-MANYEVERE ET AL.

H1a: Social interactivity has a significant and positive influence brand awareness
H2a: User control has a significant and positive influence on brand awareness
H3a: Synchronicity has a significant and positive influence on brand awareness

The interrelationship between social interactivity, user control, synchronicity

Brand image
As mentioned before, one of the inherent elements of website interactivity
is that it facilitates form of two-way communications (Jiang & Benbasat,
2007) between brands and the users of the website and offers them form of
control over the whole communication process (Kim et al., 2018;
Madhavaram et al., 2005. Control and two-way communication perceptions
assist in establishing a mutual relationship between the brand and its cus-
tomers which enhances strong connections. The more brands know about
their consumers and about the information they seek, the more positive the
brand is perceived by consumers. Madhavaram et al. (2005) propose that
when users perceive that they have control, or they can guide the inter-
action they tend to positively perceive brand image and brand association.
Voorveld et al. (2013) suggest that apart from influencing a more favorable
brand evaluation, website interactivity also influences the formation of posi-
tive perceptions that are in consonance with image portrayed on the
brand’s website. Also, those who perceive that the website has the ability to
provide real time feedback quickly, tend to positively perceive the brand
image (Gao et al., 2010). Based on the above, it is expected that the three
facets; user control, two-way communication and synchronicity can influ-
ence the guest house brand image. Thus, the following hypotheses are
thus formulated:
H1b: Social interactivity has a significant and positive influence on brand image
H2b: User control has a significant and positive influence on brand image.
H3b: Synchronicity has a significant and positive influence on brand image.

The interrelationship between Brand awareness, Brand image and customer

Brand value
Brand awareness can be described as how strong the presence of a brand is
in consumers’ minds and how well a brand name is known (Kim et al.,
2018) or a customer’s ability to recognize (Romaniuk et al., 2017) and
recall (Liebers et al., 2019) a particular brand. It can also be defined as how
consumers can relate the brand to a particular product that they intend to
buy (Sasmita & Suki, 2015). It is also regarded as an outstanding factor
 JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT 257

affecting customers’ purchase decisions (Ansary & Hashim, 2018). In add-

ition, brand awareness plays an important role in ensuring that customers
think about a certain brand when they imagine a certain product (Ansary
& Hashim, 2018).
Kilei et al. (2016) contend that brand awareness with robust relationships
can evolve into an absolute brand image and can be included in consumer
decision-making when purchasing a product or service. Moreover,
Cakmark (2016) indicated that brand awareness which is accepted as the
beginning of brand equity forms the brand knowledge with brand image.
As suggested by (Jalilvand et al. (2017) when customers have high brand
awareness, it may mean that the brand is well known, respected and com-
mon. Thus, a relationship exists between brand awareness and
brand image.
According to Kim et al. (2018), brand awareness is associated with con-
sumer brand value and Esch et al. (2006) also suggest that consumer-based
brand value is partially evaluated in terms of the awareness it evokes. Thus,
brand with an outstanding awareness tend to be valued by customers.
Barreda et al. (2016) investigated the relationship between brand awareness
and brand perceived value and corroborate that a strong link exists
between the two. Barreda et al. (2016) concurs that perceived brand value
is, to some extent, assessed based on the awareness it brings.
Brand image can be defined as concepts that correlate a consumer’s
memory with a specific brand name (Rubio et al., 2014). It can be viewed
as the compound effect of brand associations (Barreda et al., 2016) and is
an essential element of consumer-perceived brand value. Esch et al. (2006)
describe brand image as powerful, appropriate and distinctive brand associ-
ations. These associations can emanate from experience with the brand,
details of the product and its benefits, product price and packaging (Esch
et al., 2006) and the interaction of consumers with the brand can influence
these associations.
The main goal of hospitality establishments is to instill a positive percep-
tion in customers’ minds to gain a competitive edge in the market (Ryu
et al., 2019). Brands with high value tend to have a higher positive brand
image than brands with lower value (Ryu et al., 2019). Davies, Golicic and
Marquardt (2008) tested the relationship between brand image and brand
value in a service context and confirmed that a significant relationship
exists between the two. This is supported by Barreda et al. (2016) who
found a causal positive relationship between brand image and perceived
brand value.
According to Ansary and Hashim (2018), the awareness of a particular
brand leads to its attractiveness. This suggests that there is a relationship
between these two variables. Gao et al. (2010) concluded that a positive
258 R. MATIKITI-MANYEVERE ET AL.

relationship exists between brand awareness and brand value as well as

brand image. . Similarly, Ansary and Hashim. (2018) concluded that a
relationship exists between brand image and brand awareness. Cakmark
(2016) also established a positive significant relation between brand aware-
ness and brand image. From the discussions above, it is assumed that
brand awareness has an influence on brand image and perceived brand
value in the hospitality industry. The following hypotheses are
thus formulated:
H4: Brand awareness has a significant and positive influence on (a) brand image and
(b) customer perceived brand value.
H5: Brand image has a significant and positive influence on customer perceived
brand value.

The interrelationship between Brand experience and customer-perceived

Brand value
Brand experience can be described as general feelings and behavioral
responses induced by brand-related stimuli derived from the design of the
brand, packaging, identity and how the brand is communicated to consum-
ers (Spence et al., 2014). It can also be defined as the customers perception
founded on his or her contacts with the brand (Wulandari, 2016). Today’s
customers are no longer seeking only functional value, but they also desire
the symbolic value of a brand (Walter et al., 2013). Thus, the variations
and distinctiveness of experience can be used as an appropriate competitive
tool by hospitality establishments (Ong et al., 2018).
Brand experience in the new millennium measures the powerfulness of
each experience stimulated by the brand. In the hospitality industry, when
factors such as quality of food, furnishing, interaction with employees and
perceived value are favorable, customer satisfaction is guaranteed (Voon
et al., 2013). Perceived value is elucidated by the customer based on the
benefits the customer gets from using and experiencing the service. That is
how customer perceive they have gained or benefited from the service pro-
vided and whether their expectations and requirements have been met
(Johnston & Kong, 2011). A customer can only be able to tell the benefits
received from a brand after interacting with the product or service. Thus,
brand experience to a certain extent influences how customers perceive
brand value. According to Holbrook (2006), when customer experience lux-
ury hotel brand, their value perception arises from the customer’s own
pleasure. The leisure activities provided by an establishment or personal
services such as complimentary drop-off or pick-up services can lead to
emotions and moods like happiness.
 JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT 259

Customer brand experience is gained from interactions with the product

and the employees of the service establishment (Hussein, 2018). Delivery of
outstanding brand experience results in long-term relationships between
the customer and the hospitality brand, which may give the establishment
a sustainable competitive edge in the market (Ong et al., (2018). Guest
house brand experience in this research was measured using the five
dimensions proposed by Khan and Rahman (2017), although only four
were adopted for the purposes of the study.
Previous studies on the hospitality industry (Ong et al., 2018; Hussein,
2018; Pollalis & Niros, 2016; Cleff, 2014) assessed the relationship between
brand experience and customer loyalty and found a significant relationship
between the two. Cleff et al. (2014) examined the relationship between
brand experience and brand equity. However, studies which attempted to
examine the relationship between brand experience and customer perceived
brand value are scarce. An exception is the work of Wiedmann et al.
(2018) which focused specifically on the relationship between brand experi-
ence and customer perceived value and established a strong relationship
between the two. It is assumed in this study that if brand experience can
influence brand equity and brand loyalty, it can also influence customer
perceived brand value. Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H6: Brand experience has a positive and significant influence on customer-perceived
brand value.

The interrelationship between customer-perceived Brand value and

affective commitment
Affective commitment plays a pivotal role in the development and main-
tenance of relationships in so far as it links consumers to selling organiza-
tions (Coss
ıo-Silva et al., 2016). It is described by Ramirez et al. (2017) as a
long-lasting desire to sustain a relationship with a brand, based on a psy-
chological attachment. There are multiple forms of customer commitment,
such as normative, continuance or affective commitment (Chiu et al.,
2018). Normative commitment can be seen as a moral obligation to com-
mit whereas continuance commitment can be described as the cost of
abandoning the product or service provider (Coss
ıo-Silva et al., 2016; ).
Affective commitment can be described as the customers’ desire to commit
themselves to a product or service. This form of commitment was used in
this study since it is more likely to be related with constructive attitudes
and behaviors than the other two types of commitment (Fazal-e-Hasan
et al. (2018). Other forms of commitment are less likely to influence future
behavior or attitude (Coss
ıo-Silva et al., 2016).
260 R. MATIKITI-MANYEVERE ET AL.

Figure 1. Proposed model.

Several studies have been conducted on the influence of customer-per-

ceived brand value on commitment (Fazal-e-Hasan et al., 2018; Krisnanto,
2017). Krisnanto (2017) asserts that to the customer, perceived value
depends on a number of factors which include functional value, monetary
value, emotional value, adjustment value and relational value. These factors
can influence loyalty and commitment to a brand. Seminal work by
Bretherton , (1985) shows that if customers perceive that the brand con-
tributes to their overall well-being, they may have a positive attitude toward
the brand or may be motivated to continue purchasing the brand. Thus,
customers who perceive the value of the brand in a positive way or feels
that the brand meets their requirements are likely to experience hope to
continuing a positive relationship with the brand. Chiu et al. (2018) estab-
lish that customer-perceived value has an influence on customer commit-
ment. Fazal-e-Hasan et al. (2018) concur, stating that a relationship does
indeed exist between perceived value and customer commitment. Against
this context, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H7: Customer-perceived brand value has a significant and positive influence on
customer affective commitment.

Figure 1 illustrates the theoretical model proposed for this study, show-
ing clearly the study constructs as well as the relationships between them.

Methodology
This study investigated the relationship between website attributes and
guest house brand image and awareness. Quantitative data was collected by
means of a structured questionnaire. Since a model was developed from the
 JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT 261

interactivity theory, a quantitative approach was deemed to be best-suited

to testing the model to see the applicability of the theory (Glasow, 2005).
The target population included individuals in the Gauteng province of
South Africa who had booked into a guesthouse using the guest house’s
website during the past 12 months. Customers who have booked into any
registered guesthouse were included. A period longer than 12 months was
excluded to ensure that respondents could recall their experience at the
establishment as well with the website. To curb measurement errors, all the
measurements were double checked for accuracy and the field workers who
collected data were well trained. Moreover, pilot testing was done on a
small group of people to check if there were no ambiguous statements as
well as checking the memory of the respondents regarding to the website
they have used. Lastly, the questionnaire was constructed in such a way
that all the variables used were measured by three or more scales. A cross-
sectional approach was adopted for data collection, which was gathered
through a questionnaire. The data were thus collected by a professional
data collection company from January to March 2019. The questionnaires
were administered by the company’s field workers and English was the
main language used. A convenient sampling technique was used since a
database of people who have booked into guest houses using could not be
established . In the absence of a definite population, Saunders et al. (2012)
recommend non-probability sampling. Thus, convenient sampling was
used. The field workers distributed the questionnaire to individuals explain-
ing the requirements of the questionnaire and screening question. A total
of 500 questionnaires were distributed and 320 questionnaires were
returned. After inputting the data into SPSS, it was determined that 20 of
the respondents did not fully complete the questionnaire and were elimi-
nated, therefore 300 were left for analysis purposes.
The questionnaire was dived into two sections: the first section elicited
demographic information from the respondents whereas the second section
focused on the variables of the study. The scales used in the questionnaire
were based on previous studies on a similar subject. The scales were
adapted from the following sources: (i) social interactivity and active con-
trol were adapted from Jiang et al. (2010) and Gao et al. (2010); (ii) syn-
chronicity was adapted from Gao et al. (2010); (iii) brand awareness was
adapted from Kilei et al. (2016) and Barreda et al. (2016); (iv) brand image
was adapted from Kilei et al. (2016); (v) guest house brand experience was
adapted from Ahmad et al. (2017); (vi) brand value was adapted from
Barreda et al. (2016) and); and (vii) affective commitment was adapted
from Coss
ıo-Silva et al. (2016) and Fernandez-Lores et al. (2015). A five-
point Likert scale was used to measure each construct, ranging from 1 ¼
“strongly disagree” to 5 ¼ “strongly agree”. The questions used to measure
each construct are presented in Table 1.
262 R. MATIKITI-MANYEVERE ET AL.

Once the data was edited, it was entered into SPSS 23. Descriptive statis-
tics were then used to extract the profile of the respondents and the
responses to the 66 questions contained in the questionnaire. The reliability
of the constructs was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha (Hu & Bentler,
1999) whereas factor analysis was used to check the loading and validity of
the constructs.

Sample
In terms of the respondents surveyed, 52.3% were male and 47.7% were
female. The majority (68.7%) were in the 23–30 age group, followed by
12% in the 31–36 age group, 7% in the 37–41 age group, 4.7% in the
42–48 age category and 3.7% were below 25 years of age. The smallest
number of respondents were in the 49-54 age group (2.3%), the 55-60 age
group (1.3%) and 60 years and over (0.3%). The results revealed that the
respondents had different levels of education. The majority (41%) had a
bachelor or honors degree while a little over a quarter (26%) had a matric
certificate This was followed by 11.3% who had a post-matric certificate or
diploma and 9% who had a master’s degree. Only 0.7% of the respondents
had a doctoral degree. In terms of race, the majority of the respondents
were Black (77.3%), followed by White (9%), Indian (5.7%) and Colored
(5.3%). A total of 2.7% indicated that they were of other races not included
in the questionnaire.
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was used to test the hypotheses in
Figure 1, using AMOS version 23.0. SEM permits the testing of interrela-
tions between constructs (Hair et al., 2014). Confirmatory factor analysis
(CFA) was used to establish the loadings of the constructs. Reliability was
tested using Cronbach’s alpha, while Average Variance Extraction (AVE)
was used to check the validity of the constructs. Table 1 shows the CFA
results. All the factor loadings were above 0.5 which is the cut of point
(Segars, 1997).

Reliability and validity

Table 1 shows that the factor loading for the measures was above 0.5. All
the constructs obtained a Cronbach coefficient above 0.7, which is the cut-
off point confirming internal consistency. Both Cronbach’s alpha (CA)
value and the composite reliability (CR) value should be greater than 0.7
(Hu & Bentler, 1999) for the scales to be considered reliable. The results
therefore had high internal consistency. Convergent validity was also con-
firmed as the AVE values were higher than 0.5. For convergent validity to
be confirmed, the AVE value and factor loading of the items should be
above 0.5 (Hair et al., 2014).
Table 1. Constructs and construct item reliability.
Factor Composite Average Variance
Construct Loading Cronbach’s a Reliability Extraction
Social Interactivity (SI) .856 .973 .567
SI1: This guest house has an online forum which is effective in gathering visitors’ feedback. .811
SI2: This guest house encourages visitors to offer feedback through online communities. .773
SI3: This guest house website provides some links for customers to have conversations with the guest .854
house’s employees.
SI4: This guest house facilitates two-way communication between the visitors and the employees. .781
Active Control (AC) .904 .959 .681
AC1: I felt that I had a lot of control over my visiting experience on the guest house website. .844
AC2: While surfing the guest house website, I felt I could choose freely what I wanted to see. .753
AC3: While surfing the guest house’s website, I had control over what I could do on the site. .782
AC4: While surfing the guest house’s website, I felt my actions decided the kind of experiences I got. .689
Synchronicity (S) .811 .932 .678
S1: While surfing the guest house’s website, I could give my response without delay. .882
S2: While surfing the guest house’s website, I could get desired answers fast when I request for further .598
information.
S3: While surfing the guest house’s website, I could get instantaneous information when I asked something. .775
S4: While surfing the guest house’s website, my input was processed very quickly. .716
S5: While surfing the guest house’s website, I was able to get the information I wanted without delay. .621
Brand Awareness (BA) .861 .843 .712
BA1: After viewing this guest house’s website, I could tell that in comparison to other guest houses, this one .763
was a leading brand in the industry.
BA2: After viewing this guest house’s website, this brand name comes to mind as a top choice when I am .814
thinking of visiting a guest house.
BA3: After viewing this guest house’s website, I can now quickly recognize this guest house’s brand among .782
other competing brands.
BA4: After viewing this guest house’s website, I am aware of this guest house brand. .631
BA5: After visiting this guest house’s website, I can quickly recall some features of this brand. .530
Brand Image (BI) .915 .891 .734
BI1: After viewing this guest house’s website, I could tell that this brand was reliable. .759
BI2: After viewing this guest house’s website, I could tell that this guest house brand was credible. .858
BI3: After viewing this guest house’s website, I could tell that this brand was trustworthy. .714
BI4: After viewing this guest house’s website, I could tell that this brand was dependable. .741
JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT

B15: After viewing this guest house’s website, I could tell that this brand was attractive. .633
Brand Experience
Guest House Location (GL) .798 .931 .567
(continued)
263
Table 1. Continued.
264

Factor Composite Average Variance

Construct Loading Cronbach’s a Reliability Extraction
GL1: The location of this guest house’s brand stimulates my senses. .789
GL2: I find the location of this guest house appealing. .633
GL3: The location of this guest house is convenient and makes me feel relaxed. .811
Guest House Ambience (GA) .844 .767
GA1: The ambience of this guest house is very relaxing to me. .611
GA2: This guest house brand has attractive architectural design. .631
GA3: The cleanliness and deco of this guest house are pleasing. .725
Staff Competence (SC) .801 .811 .691
SC1: The staff at this guest house are friendly and bring out emotions. .712
SC2: The staff at this guest house are helpful. .673
SC3: The way in which the staff at this guest house serves is excellent. .876
R. MATIKITI-MANYEVERE ET AL.

SC4: I feel good at this guest house because of staff attentiveness. .881
SC5: The appearance of this guest house staff is impressive. .793
Guest-To-Guest Experience (GE) .791 .932 .641
GE1: The guests at this guest house valued the privacy of other guests. .655
GE2: The conduct of the other guests at this guest house was gentle. .784
GE3: Other guests at this guest house made me feel comfortable. .715
Brand Value (BV) .881 .861 .623
BV1: This guest house is reasonably priced. .981
BV2: This guest house offers value for money. .873
BV3: I consider this guest house a good buy. .752
BV4: This guest house is good value for money. .891
Affective Commitment (AC) .913 .901 598
AC1: I have developed a strong bond with this guest house. .589
AC2: I am emotionally attached to this guest house. .678
AC3: I remain steadfast in my commitment to this guest house. .736
AC4: My commitment to this guest house is long-term. .687
AC5: I am fond of this guest house. .597
 JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT 265

Table 2. Discriminant validity.

correlations
Latent variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1. Social Interactivity .921
1. Active Control .612 .897
1. Synchronicity .714 .532 .973
1. Brand Awareness .566 .654 .621 .851
1. Brand Image .631 .556 .634 .532 .967
1. Location .604 .542 .531 .542 .713 .877
1. Guest House Ambience .522 .712 .612 .744 .723 .671 .855
1. Staff Competence .655 .684 .571 .631 .631 .567 .754 .839
1. Guest-To-Gest Experience .551 .624 .647 .631 .532 .731 .534 .651 0981
1. Brand Value .643 .725 .613 .725 .632 .643 .651 .731 .661 .897
1. Affective Commitment .711 .638 .561 .614 .672 .512 .543 .734 .593 .671 .966

As recommended by Fornell and Larcker (1981), the Average Variance

Extracted and Shared Variance between the variables were compared to
assess discriminant validity. The AVE of the different variables must be
higher than the squared correlation between variables for discriminant val-
idity to be confirmed (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). The results are presented
in Table 2. All the square roots of the AVE (highlighted in bold) are higher
than the correlations between variables, demonstrating the discriminant
validity of the variables.

Model fitness
Measurement of model fitness
AMOS 23.0 was used to perform confirmatory factor analysis on the 11
constructs and 46 items of model to evaluate its psychometric properties.
The fitness of the model was assessed through chi-square v2 statistics, Root
Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), Tucker-Lewis index (TLI),
normative fit index (NFI), goodness-of-fit index (GFI) and comparative fit
index (CFI). The obtained v2 (chi-square) of 138.26, degree of freedom ¼
115 and p value ¼ 0.00, v2/df ¼1.20 confirmed the fitness of the model.
The v2/df value should be smaller than or equal to 3 for a fit model
(Hooper et al., 2008). The RMSEA was 0.05, TLI was 0.98, NFI was 0.97,
GFI was 0.91 and CFI was 0.91. According to MacCallum et al. (1996), for
a fit measurement model, the TLI and the NFI should be higher than or
equal to 0.9, the RMSEA should be less than 0.06 while the GFI and CFI
should be greater than or equal to 0.90. These values are shown in Table 3.

Structural model fitness

All the fit indices for the different constructs in the study scored values
that were within the recommended value range. RMSEA should be less
than 0.06, GFI and CFI should be greater than or equal to 0.90 (Kline,
266 R. MATIKITI-MANYEVERE ET AL.

Table 3. Measures for goodness-of-fit (measurement model).

CMIN DF P CMIN/DF NFI GFI TLI CFI RMSEA
138.26 115 0.00 1.20 0.97 0.91 0.98 0.91 0.05

Table 4. Measures for goodness-of-fit (structural model).

CMIN DF P CMIN/DF NFI GFI CFI TLI RMSEA
156.46 128 0.05 1.28 0.96 0.91 0.95 0.98 0.05

1998) while TLI and NFI should be more than or equal to 0.95 (Hu &
Bentler, 1999). The measurement model’s v2 value was 156.46, with 128
degrees of freedom and a p value of 0.05, v2/df was 1.28, the RMSEA ¼
0.05, TLI ¼ 0.98, GFI ¼ 0.91, CFI ¼ 0.95, and NFI ¼ 0.96, suggesting
good model fit. The results of the fit indices are shown in Table 4.
The structural model was used to test the hypotheses and coefficient of
determination while R2 was used to assess the model’s explanatory power.
The results indicate that 51% of variance in brand awareness was covered
by social interactivity, active control and synchronicity while 40% of the
variance in brand image was explained by social interactivity, active control
synchronicity and brand awareness. The results also show that 45% of the
variance in brand value was covered by brand experience, brand awareness
and brand image. Lastly, the results reveal that 56% of the variance in
affective commitment was covered by brand value, which is acceptable in
the social sciences (Chin, 1998). Thus, it can be concluded that the model
offers satisfactory explanatory power.
The results of the hypothesis testing are presented in Figure 2.
Figure 2 shows that social interactivity (b¼.48, p<.001), active control
(b¼.12, p<.05) and synchronicity (b¼.29, p<.01) positively influence
brand awareness. Social interactivity (b¼.48) has a strong influence on
brand awareness compared to active control and synchronicity. This result
supports H1a, H2a and H3a. The results also revealed that social interactiv-
ity (b¼.18, p<.05) and active control (b¼.36, p<.01) significantly influence
brand image, supporting H1b and H2b. However, synchronicity (b¼.08,
p<.12) was found not to influence brand image. This result did not sup-
port H3b. Brand awareness (b¼.19, p<.05) significantly influences brand
image whereas brand awareness (b¼.03, p<.17) was found not to influence
brand value. Thus, hypothesis H4a was supported and H4b was not sup-
ported. Furthermore, the results show that brand image (b¼.38, p<.001)
and brand experience (b¼.17, p<.05) both influence brand value, although
brand image (b¼.38) seems to have the greatest impact on brand value.
Lastly, the results show that brand value (b¼.21, p<.01) influences affective
commitment, supporting hypotheses H5, H6 and H7.
Part of the model was hierarchical because one of the constructs (brand
experience) constituted a number of dimensions (Wentzels et al., 2009).
 JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT 267

Figure 2. Hypothesis results.

Four dimensions exist in brand experience, hence, the significance of each

dimension in the production of second-order constructs was also taken
into account. The results in Figure 2 show that guest house ambience (GA)
(.89) displays a value which is statically different and greater than other
dimensions (L, SC & GE). Therefore, GA has the highest impact on build-
ing the second-order construct, brand experience. This is followed by staff
competence (SC) (.71) and guest house location (GL) (.67). The least
important dimension in measuring guest house experience was shown to
be guest-to-guest experience (.54).
Table 5 presents a summary of the hypothesis results. Nine out of eleven
hypotheses could be accepted, determining nomological validity.

Discussion of results
The advent of the internet and its related technologies has forced busi-
nesses, including those in the hospitality industry, to use the internet for
marketing purposes (Aziz et al., 2011). Over the last decade, most hospital-
ity businesses have adopted the internet, and in particular, websites, to
keep pace with these new technology trends. The current study formulated
a model to assess the importance of different website features. The results
are intended to help small accommodation establishments to market their
services more effectively by creating solid brand knowledge in the minds of
their customers.
The results revealed that website features such as social interactivity,
active control and synchronicity influence guest house brand awareness.
This finding is in line with previous studies such as that of Barreda et al.
(2016), who established a positive relationship between web configuration
(active control) and elements such as brand awareness and brand image.
268 R. MATIKITI-MANYEVERE ET AL.

Table 5. Hypothesis results.

Hypothesis Variable Variable b Sig. Supported / Not supported
H1a Social interactivity Brand awareness 0.48 0.001 Supported
H2a Active control Brand awareness 0.12 0.05 Supported
H3a Synchronicity Brand awareness 0.29 0.01 Supported
H1b Social interactivity Brand image 0.18 0.05 Supported
H2b Active control Brand image 0.36 0.01 Supported
H3b Synchronicity Brand image 0.08 0.12 Not Supported
H4a Brand awareness Brand image 0.19 0.05 Supported
H4b Brand awareness Perceived brand value 0.03 0.17 Not Supported
H5 Brand image Perceived brand value 0.38 0.001 Supported
H6 Brand experience Perceived brand value 0.17 0.05 Supported
H7 Perceived brand value Affective commitment 0.21 0.01 supported

Gao et al. (2010) also concluded that a relationship exists between web con-
figurations and brand elements such as a brand awareness and brand
image. In contrast, however, the present study could not establish a rela-
tionship between synchronicity and brand image. The possible reason
might be that the of survey was conducted in a developing market and pre-
vious studies focused on developed markets where technology is highly
advanced, hence the expectations regarding the performance of websites
differs and this also as a bearing on how customers evaluate the image of a
brand. Instead, synchronicity was found to influence only brand awareness.
By designing interactive websites which can be easily used by customers,
guest houses can build a solid brand knowledge through increased aware-
ness levels and brand image.
The findings of this study also support the assumption that brand aware-
ness has an impact on brand image. These findings are corroborated by
Ansary and Hashim (2018) and Barreda et al. (2016). No relationship was
found between brand awareness and perceived brand value. Similarly,
Barreda et al. (2016) also could not establish a relationship between brand
awareness and customer-perceived value. Thus, being aware of a brand or
being able to recall a brand especially in the service industry in which the
products offered are experiential cannot influence the value you attach to
that brand, rather it is the interaction with the brand that enables custom-
ers to attach value. Guest houses would be advised to increase their brand
awareness as it has a bearing on the image of their brand. The results also
confirmed that a strong positive relationship exists between brand image
and customer-perceived brand value. Thus, impression that customers have
about a brand can influence the value they attach to the brand.
The findings validate that brand experience influences brand value. This is
supported by previous research (Cleff et al., 2014)). It is interesting to note
that of the three variables (brand awareness, brand image and brand experi-
ence) which were assumed to influence customer-perceived brand value,
brand image had the greatest impact on brand value. This suggests that guest
houses should make greater efforts to improve their brand image.
 JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT 269

The results also revealed that from the dimensions used to measure
brand experience, guest house ambience (.89) was more important for cus-
tomers in recalling their experience, followed by staff competence (.71).
Thus, customers will recall their stay at the guest house, how the staff
treated them and the general atmosphere of the guest house.
Lastly, a relationship was established between customer-perceived value
and affective commitment. This has been confirmed in previous studies
(Chiu et al., 2018; Fazal-e-Hasan et al., 2018). It can thus be deduced that
the value that a customer attaches to a particular brand will, in turn, deter-
mine their commitment to that brand. Guest houses should therefore
examine ways of influencing customer perceptions of their brands.
From these results, it can be implied that customers who perceive active
control in their communication through the guest house website, experi-
ence two-way communication and are able to obtain the information they
want quickly and instantly, tend to positively perceive brand image thereby
facilitating brand recognition. They may also form a good impression of
the brand which, in turn, influences their perceived brand value, eventually
leading to brand commitment.

Theoretical contribution
This study has contributed to the literature is in several ways. First, it con-
firmed the validity and reliability of the items used to measure the con-
structs used in this study. The proposed model has thus confirmed the
relationships between the constructs in an emerging market. The study also
sheds light on the relations between website configuration, brand elements
and customer-perceived brand value. The present study supports the exist-
ing body of literature (Barreda et al., 2016; Cleff et al., 2014; Chiu et al.,
2018; Fazal-e-Hasan et al., 2018) in which a relationship was established
between web configuration, brand elements, customer-perceived value and
affective commitment. A multi-dimensional model has been developed and
tested which can also be adopted by future studies in the same domain.
Second, the study establishes the applicability of interactivity theory in
online marketing communication environments. The findings revealed that
website features such as two-way communication (social interactivity), user
control and synchronicity influence brand awareness in the hospitality
industry. Since web interactivity is centered on how well website users per-
ceive the communication to be reciprocal, responsive and speedy, these fea-
tures are used by customers to evaluate the image of the brand
(guesthouse) and they enhance brand awareness. Thus, studies focusing on
accommodation establishments websites and branding cannot afford to
ignore the importance of interactivity in enhancing brand awareness and
270 R. MATIKITI-MANYEVERE ET AL.

image. These findings are valuable as they also provide baseline informa-
tion for future studies in the hospitality industry in developing countries.
Third, this study established that brand experience influences customer-
perceived brand value, and area which has been under-researched to date.
Experience emerged as one of the factors that influences one judgment of a
particular brand. This was tested and confirmed, indicating that future
research focusing on branding and its relationship to brand value and cus-
tomer commitment should also include the experience of the customer
with that brand.
The study added to the literature on web interactivity in the hospitality
industry as it focused on small accommodation establishments in an
emerging market. Previous studies focused chiefly on large hotels and in
developed markets (Barreda et al., 2016; Gao et al., 2010; Ahmad et al.,
2017). Thus, the study provides recommendations suited for small accom-
modation establishments in the African hospitality industry.
Last, the results can also be linked to the AIDA (Attention/Awareness,
Interest, Desire, Action) concept of marketing which specifies that a com-
pany has to first ensure that customers know about the existing of a service
or product. The company must advertise its products in such a way that it
attracts the attention of the customers. Thus, social interactivity can attract
the attention of the customers thereby increasing the awareness of a brand.
If people have the control of the information, flow of communication on
the website, and they can get feedback timeously they may develop an
interest to find more about the company. The interest can lead to the
desire to purchase a product or service which eventually leads to the final
decision. Thus, websites can be used as branding ploys to raise
brand awareness.

Managerial implications
Based on the results of the study, the following recommendations can be
made to assist small accommodation establishments to effectively design
their websites.

Improvements in the features of the websites

Guest houses should design websites which offers ways to respond to the
content posted and offer a number of ways for visitors to communicate on
their websites. Customers who experience reciprocal communication with
the guest house through the website are likely to develop positive percep-
tions toward the brand.
 JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT 271

Social interactivity and active control were also established to have an

impact on brand image. Thus, guest houses would be encouraged to consider
user control as an essential component of their website; websites should
therefore be designed in such a way that they allow customers to freely search
for information. Thus, the design of the website should have structures which
give users control and facilitate two-way communication. For instance, having
some structures which allow customers to chat with the guest house employ-
ees or guest-to guest chat facilities would be useful features.
In addition, the provision of opportunities for easy customization and
personalization can assist in improving active control. If customers are able
to easily customize web navigation in line with their needs, they develop a
sense of active control. Aspects such as ‘share’ buttons should be incorpo-
rated into the design for customers to be able to share information
with others.
Finally, if guest houses wish to increase their brand awareness, they
should design websites which can process information rapidly so that cus-
tomers can receive prompt feedback. Guest houses should also have
employees in place who can provide information quickly, for example,
through having a facility for chatting with customers on the website.
Alternatively, automatic feedback facilities can also be used. If web users
obtain information quickly through the website, they can also spread news
to others which, in turn, can enhance awareness of the brand.

Improvements in the image of the establishment

Guest houses should put more effort in improving the image of their brand
so that customers have a positive impression toward the brand. Customers
should be able to rely on the brand to develop a positive impression. This
can be done by offering seamless customer service and having interactive
websites which are user-friendly. Guest houses should be trustworthy in
their dealings with the customers, for example, by providing quality service
that meets the expectations of the customer; website information should
always be up-to-date. It is also important to ensure that all information on
the accommodation, meals and other services is posted on the website and
that customers are not challenged when making a booking. The guest
house should also avoid over-booking the number of guests that it can
accommodate.

Enhancing perceived Brand value through customer experience

Guest houses must have standard facilities and services to ensure that
guests enjoy their stay. For example, room service or Wi-Fi are some of the
272 R. MATIKITI-MANYEVERE ET AL.

services that a guest house could add to increase the satisfaction of its cus-
tomers. The general atmosphere (ambience) of the guest house is also taken
into account by the guest when recalling their experience. Guest houses
should ensure that the lighting, d
ecor, layout and furnishings are attractive
for the guest to enjoy their stay. In addition, having trained and qualified
employees, especially the direct employees interfacing with customers can
help to provide memorable experiences. Staff training should be aimed at
improving communication skills, listening skills as well as conflict reso-
lution skills. A pleasant customer experience has a positive bearing on the
customer’s perception of the value of the brand which in turn, influences
their attachment toward the brand. Also, guesthouse must make use of ele-
ments such as entertainment and wellness activities to create unique and
exclusive experiences for the guests.
Furthermore, a well-crafted website gives a clear picture of the company
through the information that is presented and how it is presented, and the
user experience of the site. Thus, through getting instant feedback, custom-
ers can get a clear picture of the company. A well-developed, website where
users can easily get the information gives an organization a great founda-
tion for an online presence which in turn enhances the companys
brand image.

Conclusion, limitations and areas of further research

The objectives of the study were to investigate the influence of website
interactivity features on brand awareness and brand image. The study also
examined the influence of brand image elements on brand value, and
ultimately, the influence of brand value on affective commitment to guest
houses. The results revealed that web elements such as social interactivity,
active control and synchronicity influence brand awareness. Only two ele-
ments  active control and social interactivity  influence brand image. It
was also revealed that brand value is influenced by both brand image and
brand experience, and eventually, brand value influences affective commit-
ment. Thus, any future research focusing on brand value and customer
commitment should also consider brand experience as it was revealed to be
one of the antecedents of brand value. The study also added to the litera-
ture on web interactivity in the hospitality industry especially in the small
accommodation sector.
It is recommended that website designers take into account the features
of the website which can have a bearing on the guest house image. Guest
houses are also urged to design websites which allow for two-way commu-
nication and have navigation tools which can improve active control. Guest
houses can also put more effort in improving the image of their brand
 JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT 273

through offering seamless services, improving the quality of their websites

and always update information on their websites. Moreover, guesthouse
should also strive to find ways of enhancing customer experience as it has
a bearing on the value of their brand.
The present study has some limitations. The first limitation is that the
research only focused on guest houses, which constitute small accommoda-
tion establishments. The results cannot therefore be generalized to the
entire hospitality industry in South Africa. A cross-sectional approach was
used where data were collected at a particular point in time; no follow-ups
were therefore made to check whether there was an improvement in the
guest house’s websites. A comparative study could be conducted between
smaller accommodation establishments and larger hotel chain brands to
gain a clear picture of online activities of the entire accommodation sector.
Finally, a longitudinal study could be conducted to verify if there were any
improvements implemented by guest houses pertaining to their websites.
However, despite the above limitations, the findings of this study are in
line with previous studies findings.

Disclosure statement
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests.

References
Abdullah, D., Jayaraman, K., & Kamal, S. (2016). A conceptual model of interactive hotel
website: The role of perceived website interactivity and customer perceived value toward
website revisit intention. Procedia Economics and Finance, 37, 170–175. https://doi.org/
10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30109-5
Ahmad, A., Khan, M. N., & Rahman, O. (2017). Exploring the use of internet by university
students for seeking health related information. Interactive Technology and Smart
Education, 14(4), 279–295. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-04-2016-0008
Ansary, A.& Hashim, N. M. H. (2018). Brand image and equity: The mediating role of
brand equity drivers and moderating effects of product type and word of mouth. Review
of Managerial Science, 12(4), 969–1002. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-017-0235-2
Aziz, A. A., Radzi, S. M., Zahari, M. S. M., & Ahmad, N. A. (2011). Hotel website dimen-
sion: Analyzing customers’ preferences. Journal of Tourism, Hospitality & Culinary Arts,
3(3), 85–108.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Dholakia, U. M. (2006). Antecedents and purchase consequences of cus-
tomer participation in small group brand communities. International Journal of Research
in Marketing, 23(1), 45–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2006.01.005
Bao, H., Li, B., Shen, J., & Hou, F. (2016). Repurchase intention in the Chinese e-market-
place. Industrial Management& Data System, 116, 1759–1778.
Barreda, A., Okumus, F., Nusair, K., & Bilgihan, A. (2016). The mediating effect of virtual
interactivity in travel-related online social network websites. International Journal of
Hospitality & Tourism Administration, 17(2), 147–178.
274 R. MATIKITI-MANYEVERE ET AL.

Belanche, D., Flavi
an, C., & P
erez-Rueda, A. (2017). Understanding interactive online
advertising: congruence and product involvement in highly and lowly arousing, skippable
video ads. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 37(1), 75–88.
Bennet, A., Jooste, C., & Strydom, L. (2005). Managing tourism services: A South African
perspective. 3rd ed. Van Schaik.
Bucy, E. P. (2004). Interactivity in Society: Locating an Elusive Concept. The Information
Society, 20(5), 373–383. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240490508063
Bretherton, I. (1985). Attachment theory: Retrospect and prospect. Monographs of the soci-
ety of research in child development. 50(1-2), 3–35.
Cakmark, I. (2016). The role of brand awareness on brand image, perceived quality and
effect on risk create brand trust. Global Journal on Humanities & Social Science, 4,
pp177–186.
Campbell, D. E., Wright, R. T., & Clay, F. (2008). Deconstructing and operationalizing
interactivity: An online advertising perspective. Journal of Information Technology Theory
and Application, 11(4), 29–53.
Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling.
In: G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.) Modern methods for business research (pp. 294–336).
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Chiu, Y.-L., Chen, L.-J., Du, J., & Hsu, Y. T. (2018). Studying the relationship between the
perceived value of online group-buying websites and customer loyalty: The moderating
role of referral rewards. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 33(5), 665–679.
Cleff, T., Lin, C. I., & Walter, N. (2014). Can you feel it? – The effect of brand experience
on brand equity. The IUP Journal of Brand Management, 6 (2), 7–27.
Coss
ıo-Silva, F. J., Revilla-Camacho, M., A., Vega-Vazquez, & Beatriz, P. F. (2016). Value
co-creation and customer loyalty. Journal of Business Research, 69(5), 1621–1625. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.028
Dholakia, U. M., Bagozzi, R. P., & Pearo, L. K. (2004). A social influence model of con-
sumer participation in network and small group-based virtual communities.
International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21(3), 241–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijresmar.2003.12.004
Elliott, R., & Boshoff, C. (2007). The influence of the owner-manager of small tourism
businesses on the success of internet marketing. South African Journal of Business
Management, 38(3), 15–28. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajbm.v38i3.585
Esch, F. R. L., Tobias, S. H., Bernd, H., & Patrick, G. (2006). Are brands forever? How
brand knowledge and relationships affect current and future purchases. Journal of
Product & Brand Management, 15(2), 98–105.
Fazal-e-Hasan, S. M., Ahmadi, H., Mortimer, G., Grimmer, M., & Kelly, L. (2018).
Examining the role of consumer hope in explaining the impact of perceived brand value
on customer brand relationship outcomes in an online retailing environment. Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services, 41(C), 101–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.
2017.12.004
Fernandez-Lores, S., Gavilan, D., Avello, M., & Blasco, F. (2015). Affective commitment to
the employer brand: Development and validation of a scale. Business Research Quarterly,
19(1), 40–54.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobserv-
able variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
Gao, Q., Rau, P. P., & Salvendy, M. (2010). Measuring perceived interactivity of mobile
advertisements. Behaviour & Information Technology, 29(1), 35–44.
 JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT 275

Glasow, P. A. (2005). Fundamentals of survey research methodology. Washington C3 Centre.

Go, E., & Bortree, D. S. (2017). What and how to communicate CSR? The role of CSR
fit, modality interactivity, and message interactivity on social networking sites. Journal
of Promotion Management, 23(5), 727–747. https://doi.org/10.1080/10496491.2017.
1297983
Hair, J. F., Hult, M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A Primer on Partial Least Squares
Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). SAGE Publications.
Heeter, C. (1989). Implications of new interactive technologies for conceptualizing commu-
nication. In J. L. Salvaggio and J. Bryant (eds.). Media use in the information age (pp.
217–235). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cut off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure ana-
lysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A
Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Huang, J. H., & Lin, C. Y. (2006). Empower internet services in hotel industry: A customer
service life cycle concept. The Journal of American Academy of Business, 9(1), 99–103.
Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. (2008). Structural equation modeling: Guidelines for
determining model fit. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53–60.
Huang, S. L., & Yang, C. W. (2009). Designing a semantic bliki system to support different
types of knowledge and adaptive learning. Computers & Education, 53(3), 701–712.
Hussein, S. A. (2018). Effects of brand experience on brand loyalty in Indonesian casual
dining restaurant: Roles of customer satisfaction and brand of origin. Tourism and
Hospitality Management, 24(1), 119–132. https://doi.org/10.20867/thm.24.1.4
Islam, J., & Rahaman, Z. (2017). The impact of online brand community characteristics on
customer engagement: An application of stimulus-organism-response paradigm.
Telematics and Informatics, 34(7), 67–78.
Jalilvand, M. R., Salimipour, S., Elyasi, M., & Mohammadi, M. (2017). Factors influencing
word of mouth behaviour in the restaurant industry. Marketing Intelligence & Planning,
35(1), 81–110. https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-02-2016-0024
Jiang, Z., & Benbasat, I. (2007). Investigating the influence of the functional mechanisms of
online product presentations. Information Systems Research, 4(18), 454–470.
Jiang, Z., Chan, J., Tan, B. C. Y., & Chua, W. S. (2010). Effects of interactivity on website
involvement and purchase intention. Journal of the Association for Information Systems,
11(1), 34–88. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00218
Johnson, G. J., Bruner Ii, G. C., & Kumar, A. (2006). Interactivity and its Facets Revisited:
Theory and Empirical Test. Journal of Advertising, 35(4), 35–52. https://doi.org/10.2753/
JOA0091-3367350403
Jones, B., Bowd, R., & Tench, R. (2009). Corporate irresponsibility and corporate social
responsibility: Competing realities. Social Responsibility Journal, 5(3), 300–310. https://
doi.org/10.1108/17471110910977249
Khan, I., & Rahman, Z. (2017). Brand Experience Anatomy in Hotels: An Interpretive
Structural Modeling Approach. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 58(2), 165–178. https://
doi.org/10.1177/1938965516649055
Johnston, R., & Kong, X. (2011). The customer experience: A road-map for improvement.
Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, 21(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/
09604521111100225
Kilei, P., Iravo, M., & Omwenga, J. (2016). The impact of brand awareness on market
brand performance of service brands: Contextual consideration of Kenya’s banking
industry. European Journal of Business and Management, 8(18), 92–103.
276 R. MATIKITI-MANYEVERE ET AL.

Kim, S., Choe, J. Y., & Petrick, J. F. (2018). The effect of celebrity on brand awareness, per-
ceived quality, brand image, brand loyalty, and destination attachment to a literary festi-
val. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 9, 320–329.
Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Press.
Krisnanto, U. (2017). Empirical study on the relationships of internet banking quality, cus-
tomer value and customer satisfaction. Expert Journal of Marketing, 5(1), 17–27.
Liebers, N., Breves, P., Schallhorn, C., & Schramm, H. (2019). Fluency in commercial
breaks: The impact of repetition and conceptual priming on brand memory, evaluation,
and behavioral intentions. Journal of Promotion Management, 25(6), 783–798. https://doi.
org/10.1080/10496491.2018.1536620
Lilleker, D. G., & Malag
on, C. (2010). Levels of interactivity in the 2007 French presidential
candidates’ websites. European Journal of Communication, 25(1), 25–42. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0267323109354231
Liu, P. (2003). Developing a scale to measure the interactivity of web sites. Journal of
Advertising Research, 43(2), 207–216. https://doi.org/10.2501/JAR-43-2-207-216
Liu, Y., & Shrum, L. J. (2002). What is interactivity and is it always such a good thing?
Implications of definitions, person and situation for the influence of interactivity on
advertising effectiveness. Journal of Advertising, 31(4), 53–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/
00913367.2002.10673685
Lu, J., Wang, L., & Hayes, L. (2012). How do technology readiness, platformfunctionality
and trust influence c2c user satisfaction? Journal of Electroniccommerce Research, 13(1),
50–69.
McMillan, S., & Hwang, J. S. (2002). Measures of perceived interactivity: An exploration of
communication, user control, and time in shaping perceptions of interactivity. Journal of
Advertising, 31(3), 29–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2002.10673674
MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and deter-
mination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1(2),
130–149. [Database] https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.1.2.130
Madhavaram, S., Badrinarayanan, V., & Mcdonald, R. E. (2005). Integrated Marketing
Communication (IMC) and brand identity as critical components of brand equity strat-
egy: A conceptual framework and research propositions. Journal of Advertising, 34(4),
69–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2005.10639213
Ong, C. H., Lee, H. W., & Ramayah, T. (2018). Impact of brand experience on loyalty.
Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 27(7), 755–774. https://doi.org/10.1080/
19368623.2018.1445055
Palla, J., & Zotos, Y. (2017). Does the level of website interactivity affect consumers’ behavior
and online advertising effectiveness?. International Journalism Mass Communication, 4, 1–10.
Pollalis, Y. A., & Niros, M. (2016). Effects of brand experience on brand loyalty: The moder-
ating role of consumer confidence [Paper presentation]. Proceedings of the 4th
International Conference on Contemporary Marketing Issues, Held at Heraklion, Greece.
Ramirez, O. S., Veloutsou, C., & Morgan-Thomas, A. (2017). A systematic literature review
of brand commitment: Definitions, perspectives and dimensions. Athens Journal of
Business & Economics, 3, 305–332.
Romaniuk, J., Wight, S., & Faulkner, M. (2017). Brand awareness: Revisiting an old metric
for a new world. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 26(5), 469–476. https://doi.
org/doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-06-2016-1242
Rubio, N., Oubi~ na, J., & Villase~nor, N. (2014). Brand awareness–brand quality inference
and consumer’s risk perception in store brands of food products. Food Quality and
Preference, 32, 289–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2013.09.006
 JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT 277

Ryu, K., Lehto, X. Y., Gordon, S. E., & Fu, X. (2019). Effect of a brand story structure on
narrative transportation and perceived brand image of luxury hotels. Tourism
Management, 71, 348–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2018.10.021
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2012). Research methods for business students (6th
ed.).Pearson Education Limited. London.
Sasmita, J., & Suki, N. M. (2015). Young consumers’ insights on brand equity: Effects of
brand association, brand loyalty, brand awareness, and brand image. International
Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 43(3), 276–292.
Segars, A. H. (1997). Assessing the unidimensionality of measurement: A paradigm and
illustration within the context of information systems. Omega, 25(1), 107–112. https://
doi.org/10.1016/S0305-0483(96)00051-5
Shi, S. W., & Zhang, J. (2014). Usage experience with decision aids and evolution of online
purchase behavior. Marketing Science, 33(6), 871–882. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2014.
0872
Spence, C., Puccinelli, N. M., Grewal, D., & Roggeveen, A. L. (2014). Store atmospherics: A
multisensory perspective. Psychology & Marketing, 31(7), 472–488.
Starkov, M. (2002). Brand Erosion or How Not to Market Your Hotel on the Web. http://
hospitalitynet.org/news/Market_Reports/ Max_Stakov_-_Hospitality. Accessed 22
September 2018.
Steurer, J. (2000). Defining Virtual reality. Dimensions determining telepresence. Journal of
Communication, 42(10).
Tan, G. W. H., Lee, V. H., Hew, J. J., Ooi, K. B., & Wong, L. W. (2018). The interactive
mobile social media advertising: An imminent approach to advertise tourism products
and services. Telematics and Informatics, 35(8), 2270–2288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.
2018.09.005
Voon, B. H., Jager, J., Chitra, K., Kueh, K., & Jussem, P. M. (2013). Human service matters:
A cross-national study in restaurant industry. Asian Journal of Business Research, 3(2),
1–11. https://doi.org/10.14707/ajbr.130008
Voorveld, H., Van Noort, G., & Duijn, M. (2013). Building brands with interactivity:The
role of prior brand usage in the relation between perceived websiteinteractivity and
brand responses. Journal of brand Management, 20, 608–622.
Wulandari, N. (2016). Brand experience in banking industry: Direct and indirect relation-
ship to loyalty. Expert Journal of Marketing, 4(1), 1–9.
Walter, N., Cleff, T., & Chu, G. (2013). Brand experience’s influence on customer satisfac-
tion and loyalty: A mirage in marketing research?. International Journal or Management
Research and Business Strategy, 2(1), 130–144.
Wentzels, M., Odekerken-Schroder, G., & van Oppen, C. (2009). Using PLS path modelling
for assessing hierarchical construct models: Guidelines and empirical illustrations. MIS
Quarterly, 33(1), 177–195.
Wiedmann, K., Labenz, F., Haase, J., & Hennigs, N. (2018). The power of experiential mar-
keting: exploring the causal relationships among multisensory marketing, brand experi-
ence, customer perceived value and brand strength. Journal of Brand Management, 25(2),
101–118. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41262-017-0061-5
World Tourism Organization (WTO) & European Travel Commission (ETC). (2008).
Handbook on e-marketing for tourism destinations. European World Tourism Organization.
Yoo, Y., Henfridsson, O., & Lyytinen, K. (2010). The new organizing logic of digital innov-
ation: An agenda for information systems research. Information Systems Research, 21(4),
724–735. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1100.0322