Includes bibliographical references.

Effects of Perceived Placeness on Tourists' Authenticity Experience Via the Mediating Role of Flow Experience -- Tourist Inspiration: How the Wellness Tourism Experience Inspires Tourist Engagement -- Booth Attractiveness: Scale Development and Model Testing from a Mental Budgeting Perspective -- Proposing a Cyclic Model of Tourist Decision Making: A Review and Integration of Behavioral and Choice-Set Models -- What's Wrong with Different Empowerment? The Effect of Differentiated Empowering Leadership on Employee Proactive Service -- The Effect of Waiters' Occupational Identity on Employee Turnover Within The Context of Michelin-Starred Restaurants -- The Effects of Unfulfilled Preferential Treatment and Review Dispersion on Airbnb Guests' Attitudes and Behavior -- Transforming Brand Identity to Hotel Performance: The Moderating Effect of Social Capital -- Effects of Abnormal Weather Conditions on the Performance of Hotel Firms -- The Copycat Effect: Do Hotel-Like Features Drive Airbnb Performance?.

[Article Title: Effects of Perceived Placeness on Tourists' Authenticity Experience Via the Mediating Role of Flow Experience/ Yang Yang, Xing Zhou, Lele Fan, Hongmei Yin and Hailin Qu, p.1091-1114]

Abstract: Based on the case of Gaoshanliushui in China, our research empirically examines the mediating effect of tourists’ flow experience on the relationship between perceived placeness and satisfaction as well as their perceived authenticity from the perspective of existential authenticity in the ethnic tourism context. Moreover, we present a moderated mediation model and postulate the role that tourists’ cultural intelligence plays in improving satisfaction and perceived authenticity. We review the way it links perceived placeness to outcomes through the flow experience. The theoretical model and hypotheses were empirically tested using 509 questionnaires collected in July 2019. The theoretical and managerial implications are discussed.

https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480211070039

[Article Title: Tourist Inspiration: How the Wellness Tourism Experience Inspires Tourist Engagement/ Mang He, Biqiang Liu and Yaoqi Li, p.1115-1135]

Abstract: Wellness tourism has undergone rapid development in recent decades. Based on the transmission model of inspiration, this article aims to explore the antecedents and consequences of tourist inspiration in the context of wellness tourism. Survey data (N = 494) from Shizhu county, a well-known China local tourism destination renowned for its health-and-wellness tourism, showed that tourist inspiration can be elicited by a wellness tourism experience, which in turn has a positive influence on tourist engagement. By using openness to experience as a moderating factor, we uncovered significant and positive relationships between experience and inspiration when tourists have high levels of openness to experience. Through this original study focusing on relationship management in wellness tourism, we demonstrated the cruciality of inspiration and its underlying role in creating tourist engagement. Our research results have yielded theoretical and practical findings and outcomes that will benefit both academia and industry practitioners alike.

https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480211026376

[Article Title: Booth Attractiveness: Scale Development and Model Testing from a Mental Budgeting Perspective/ Jingya Wang, Yao-Chin Wang, Lu Zhang and Rachel J. C. Fu, p.1136-1160]

Abstract: Given the importance of booth attractiveness at trade expositions, this study sets out to develop a scale measuring booth attractiveness (Study 1) and to examine its effectiveness in motivating attendees’ purchasing behavior (Study 2). Study 1 includes three steps: (1) item generation through a thorough review of the literature, focus group, and comments from experts, (2) item purification with exploratory factor analysis using 122 samples, and (3) reevaluating items with confirmatory factor analysis using 129 samples. A six-dimensional scale of booth attractiveness was developed in Study 1. Based on the theory of mental budgeting, Study 2 was conducted to examine the effects of booth attractiveness on the mechanism of attendees’ purchasing behavior using 323 samples. Results of Study 2 suggest that booth attractiveness could directly motivate impulse buying or indirectly through mental budgeting. Impulse buying, then, results in post-purchase guilt and anticipated satisfaction. Meanwhile, postpurchase guilt reduces anticipated satisfaction.

https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480211070031

[Article Title: Proposing a Cyclic Model of Tourist Decision Making: A Review and Integration of Behavioral and Choice-Set Models/ Ruizhe Fang, p.1161-1186]

Abstract: Tourist decision studies focus on modeling decision-making behaviors, conceptualizing phases in decision making, and influential factors. Incorporating behavioral and choice-set model strategies, the current study proposes a generalizable cyclic model of tourist decision-making processes with a structure of repeatable behavioral stages integrated with relevant consideration sets. A “decision-making threshold” and “information loop limit” are introduced to control how and when the decision-making process starts or ends. The proposed model makes it possible to represent different decision-making styles by capturing the dynamic repetition of behavioral stages and the revision of consideration sets. The integration allows a novel approach for analyzing the formation of final decisions resulting from decision makers’ limited subjective evaluations and for studying decision rules as the combinations of “evaluation rule” and “information loop limit.” Practical implications and measures are provided for tourism practitioners to better understand and influence potential consumers. Future research questions are also suggested.

https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480211060785

[Article Title: What's Wrong with Different Empowerment? The Effect of Differentiated Empowering Leadership on Employee Proactive Service/ Yanan Dong, Xinyuan (Roy) Zhao, Yuan Yuan, Huijuan Dong and Jing Jiang, p.1187-1214]

Abstract: Differentiated empowering leadership is common in organizations; however, its effect on employee proactive customer service performance remains less understood. Drawing on social comparison theory, this study proposes a multilevel model for how and when differentiated empowering leadership affects employee proactive customer service performance. The study, based on a sample of 228 employees from 77 teams in China, shows a negative relationship between differentiated empowering leadership and employee proactive customer service performance through employee organization-based self-esteem. This indirect relationship is moderated by empowering leadership and employee prosocial motivation. Specifically, the influence of differentiated empowering leadership on employee organization-based self-esteem is more negative when employees receive low empowering leadership, and the relationship between employee organization-based self-esteem and proactive customer service performance is more positive for employees with high prosocial motivation. These findings extend previous knowledge on differentiated empowering leadership and provide practical insights for hotel managers.

https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480221074270

[Article Title: The Effect of Waiters' Occupational Identity on Employee Turnover Within The Context of Michelin-Starred Restaurants/ Maria Jesus Jerez Jerez, I C Melewar and Pantea Foroudi, Huijuan Dong and Jing Jiang, p.1215-1243]

Abstract: Although restaurants employ a high number of employees across the United Kingdom, accounting for 4.5% of total U.K. employment, this figure masks the relatively high degree of employee turnover. There is limited information about work engagement and turnover among waitering staff (servers). This study analyzed which antecedents (e.g., employer brand, extraversion, and stereotype) impact servers’ occupational identity, and how this relationship affects work engagement and employee turnover within a theoretically informed conceptual framework. A sample of servers in London based Michelin-starred restaurants was used (N = 398). Although extraversion and stereotype reactance were not found to be relevant to occupational identity, employer brand was. The notion that the construction of occupational identity has consequences for work engagement and employee turnover was supported, as positive relationships were found. This research has practical implications for restaurant management strategy, and informs further investigations within the field.

https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480211034903

[Article Title: The Effects of Unfulfilled Preferential Treatment and Review Dispersion on Airbnb Guests' Attitudes and Behavior/ Xiaoyun Zheng, Lu Zhang, Nathan Line and Wei Wei, p.1244-1269]

Abstract: In sharing accommodation business such as Airbnb, while the provision of personalized amenities and services may seem like good business, hosts should be aware of the potential unintended consequences when they are not able to deliver what they promise. The present research examines how expectation gaps created by guest reviews interact with different types of preferential services to subsequently affect consumer behavior in the peer-to-peer accommodation economy. Grounded in attribution theory, this study offers new insights on customer responses to unfulfilled preferential treatment. The results suggest that in the condition of utilitarian services (e.g., airport transportation), participants in the low dispersion condition exhibited more negative attitudes, a lower level of repurchase intention, and a decreased willingness to write an online review. Conversely, in the condition of hedonic services (e.g., perform a talent show), expectation discrepancy did not result in different consumer evaluations across the dispersion conditions.

https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480211066960

[Article Title: Transforming Brand Identity to Hotel Performance: The Moderating Effect of Social Capital/ Daisy X. F. Fan, Cathy H. C. Hsu and Andy Xiaofeng Liu, p.1270-1298]

Abstract: Hotel performance is one of the core concerns for managers and investors. However, a clear pathway from investment in branding to hotel performance is scarce. To fill this research gap, the study aims to explore the effects of brand identity, physical facility quality, and brand equity on hotel performance; and to examine the moderating effect of social capital in the brand–performance transformation model in both international and domestic brand hotel settings. Data were collected from 1,201 hotel managers in China, with 757 from international and 444 from domestic brand hotels. Theoretically, this study represents a first attempt to reveal the indirect roles that social capital plays in the hotel financial performance formation. The identified brand–performance pathway also provides implications for hotel practitioners regarding how to boost desirable hotel performance through both internal and external resources.

https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480221074278

[Article Title: Effects of Abnormal Weather Conditions on the Performance of Hotel Firms/ Sung Gyun Mun and Sangwon Park, p.1299-1324]

Abstract: Weather is one of the critical factors that influence tourists’ destination choices and activities. Apart from ambient temperature anomaly, rain anomaly is also an important factor considered by tourists when they plan and modify their vacation and holiday trips. This study confirms the important role of abnormal weather conditions in explaining hotel performance, such as occupancy, average daily rate, and revenue per available room. Moreover, operational performance indicators are observed to exhibit dynamic patterns in response to abnormal weather conditions in accordance with different types/classes of hotels. Evidence indicates that tourists prefer to stay at full-service hotels with complete facilities rather than at hotels with limited facilities and services during an abnormally heavy rain situation. Therefore, the findings of this research suggest a useful determinant (i.e., weather changes) of revenue management practices for hotel firms to maximize their operating performance.

https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480211070211

[Article Title: The Copycat Effect: Do Hotel-Like Features Drive Airbnb Performance?/ Karen L. Xie and Cheri A. Young, p.1325-1337]

Abstract: While touting its distinctiveness from conventional hotels, Airbnb listings are appearing increasingly like hotels with professional features such as “instant booking” and “work collection” distinction. Does such isomorphism provide a financial advantage to Airbnb? Using large-scale Airbnb trajectory data from 10 major U.S. metropolitan areas over 3 years, we find superior financial performance for Airbnb listings that imitate hotels compared with those that do not. Yet, as more Airbnb listings enter a local market, the performance-driving advantage of work collection is attenuated while instant booking becomes stronger. Suggestions for future research regarding a legitimacy-tipping point in institutional theory are provided.
Introduction
In its early days, Airbnb swept into the lodging arena by staking out a unique competitive position, offering homes with distinctive characteristics and authentic experiences not found at conventional hotels. In fact, Airbnb’s disruptive stance was captured in its early tagline: “Book rooms with locals, rather than hotels.” Airbnb consumers responded, attracted to its lower price (Guttentag et al., 2017), sense of community (Tussyadiah, 2016), and authenticity (Mody et al., 2019).
Yet this picture has changed recently. Airbnb appears to be offering more hotel-like features (Li & Srinivasan, 2019) defined as processes, standards, and amenities found in typical conventional hotels but not typically found in residential homes rented out for supplemental income purposes. Two such hotel-like features include “instant booking” (no waiting for an Airbnb host to confirm a reservation from a traveler wishing to book) and “work collection” (a designation for listings that meet certain criteria deemed appealing to business travelers). The exact institution that Airbnb aimed to disrupt is now the imitated.
According to institutional theory, firms end up appearing similar due to an “inexorable push toward homogenization” (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983, p. 148). By mimicking their peers on one or more bases for imitation (Yang & Hyland, 2012)—what is known as mimetic isomorphism—firms garner legitimacy by conforming to existing norms, expectations, and practices (DiMaggio & Powell, 1991). This conformity appears centric to the value proposition of the emerging model of Airbnb services. Although this conformity is thought to increase firms’ chances of survival (Haveman, 1993), whether isomorphism leads to a sizeable increase in financial performance remains unknown (Barreto & Baden-Fuller, 2006).
We fill this gap by investigating how the mimetic isomorphism of Airbnb listings affect their financial performance, focusing on two hotel-like professional features: instant booking and work collection. Additionally, how the effects of these features change as the local market gets crowded with more Airbnb entrants is examined. These issues are explored through two institutional theory lenses: density dependence theory (Hannan & Carroll, 1992) and the localized competition hypothesis (Baum & Mezias, 1992; Greves, 2002). Using unique data collected from Airbnb listings in 10 major U.S. metro areas between October 2014 and July 2017, the findings speak to financial implications of mimicking hotel counterparts for the evolving services of accommodation sharing.
Literature Review
Airbnb started by operating outside the norms and expectations of, and lacked the traditionally favored attributes of, the conventional lodging industry (Guttentag, 2015). The authenticity and sense of community at Airbnb is based on the interaction required between the host—the person renting out their home—and the guest. To reserve an Airbnb unit, a guest makes a “request.” The host reviews the guest’s profile and rating (from other Airbnb hosts’ whose units the guest has rented) and decides whether to accept the reservation. This “host—guest messaging that precedes most reservations . . . requires much more time and effort to book Airbnb accommodation[s] than traditional accommodation[s]” (Guttentag, 2015, p. 1205), but it creates the dialogue between the host and guest. Additionally, Airbnb positions its authenticity as the antithesis of the standardization and consistency of hotels, yet standardization and consistency is precisely what business travelers desire (Grant, 2013). Hence, Airbnb targeted budget-conscious leisure travelers who enjoyed the authentic, unique, and unpredictable “adventure” of staying in someone else’s home rather than the lucrative business travel segment, which represents the “bread-and-butter” of the hotel industry.
Despite entering as a radical departure from conventional hotels, Airbnb listings now appear to be conforming to expectations from conventional hotel guests via isomorphic (mimicking) behaviors. Such isomorphism leads to organizational homogeneity as firms imitate similar competitors (Rhee et al., 2006). Two recent actions initiated by Airbnb are “hotel-like” in their standardization and conformity to travelers’ expectation.
First, Airbnb enabled instant booking whereby individual hosts automatically accept reservation requests without examining the guest’s profile. Hotel guests are accustomed to booking a room reservation without having to wait for permission (Benner, 2017). Additionally, digital discrimination at Airbnb (Cheng & Foley, 2018) surfaced with some hosts using race and sexual orientation to reject guests (Edelman et al., 2017). To counter discriminatory behavior of hosts, Airbnb pushed hosts to accept instant booking (Benner, 2017; Zhu, 2020), adhering to the norms and expectations of the conventional hotel industry “where there are legal safeguards again discrimination” (Cheng & Foley, 2018, p. 97).
Second, Airbnb’s isomorphic features are found in the markets Airbnb targets. Early on, Airbnb targeted leisure travelers willing to share a person’s home to save money. However, it now additionally targets lucrative business travelers (Jet, 2017), the treasured domain of conventional hotels, with its new designation for listings with features attractive to business travelers called “Work Collection.”
Airbnb listings mimicking the attributes of conventional hotels provide initial evidence of institutional theory in action and its focus on isomorphic behavior. When an industry like peer-to-peer shared accommodations is born, differentiation is key to being competitive (Porter, 1996). However, institutional theorists assert that firms ensure higher chances of survival and increased performance by conforming to or imitating peers over time (DiMaggio & Powell, 1991; Haveman, 1993). Such conformity increases firms’ legitimacy and helps them avoid “performance penalties” (Zhao et al., 2017, p. 93) levied for operating outside of norms, expectations, traditions, and so on (Salomon & Wu, 2012). Airbnb listings that do not imitate their conventional hotel peers may be at a disadvantage.
Airbnb has pushed hosts for more standardization and consistency via several hotel-like features over the years, including asking them to accept instant bookings, behave more like hotel employees (i.e., being polite but not engaging in personal and/or lengthy conversations), provide accommodations that conform to work collection requirements (e.g., have hair dryers and provide for self-check-in), and make their bathrooms look more like hotels (Benner, 2017). All are ways in which Airbnb is mimicking the consistency in the guest experience found in hotels. However, the extent of host interactions or the look of their bathrooms are not standard attributes in Airbnb listings; only “instant book” and “work collection” are. Legitimacy can be gained only when a firm’s attributes are visible to a critical audience, and for Airbnb, that audience is the traveling public. The instant book and work collection designations provide visible markers of mimetic isomorphism and the legitimacy that Airbnb is seeking. Hence, we hypothesize that:
Hypothesis 1a: Airbnb listings with instant booking will perform better than those without instant booking.
Hypothesis 1b: Airbnb listings with the work collection distinction will perform better than those not in the work collection.
According to density dependence theory (Hannan & Carroll, 1992), as the number of Airbnb units increases, their legitimacy increases as well. In the beginning, the first listings likely had few competitors nearby, and hence reaped improved performance, at least in the short run (Greves, 2002). Other listings soon followed suit. As the density of Airbnb units increased, their “taken-for-grantedness” or legitimacy increased as well, leading to a self-reinforcing cycle of additional units and improved legitimacy (DiMaggio & Powell, 1991; Haveman, 1993). Yet at some point a climax is reached, with each additional Airbnb unit increasing competitive pressures, resulting in reduced individual unit performance and increased rates of failure.
However, dissatisfaction with the assumptions of the original density dependence theory led to the localized competition hypothesis (Baum & Mezias, 1992; Greves, 2002). It recognizes that geographical proximity plays a role in the competitive landscape. From studies of conventional hotel failure and founding, researchers found “the primary mode of competition is. . . . within relatively compact and well-defined geographic areas” (Baum & Mezias, 1992, p. 585). Hence, rather than assuming all Airbnb listings compete with one another independent of location, we hypothesize that the more geographically close Airbnb listings are (as within the same market), the more likely they are to compete as density (the supply of Airbnb listings in a market) increases, leading to performance decrements (Greves, 2002).
Hypothesis 2: The greater the density of Airbnb listings in a local market, the lower the performance of an Airbnb listing.
Instead of having to fight for legitimacy alongside hotels, Airbnb units in competitively dense, geographically bound markets will likely have to pivot to focus on differentiating themselves from the other Airbnb listings if they want to increase their performance. While Airbnb units that mimic hotels (adopt hotel-like features) gain legitimacy, they may also gain a competitive advantage by differentiating themselves from other Airbnb units that have not adopted these hotel-like features (Porter, 1996). Rather than an either/or dilemma regarding conformity or differentiation, Airbnb listings may attempt to look both like, and different from, their competitors (Durand & Kremp, 2016). For Airbnb listings this means looking both like conventional hotels and different from other Airbnb listings. This “optimal distinctiveness” (Deephouse, 1999) is achieved when firms “manage conformity and differentiation” (Zhao et al., 2017, p. 100). For Airbnb listings in an increasingly dense market the legitimating and differentiating effects of instant booking and the work collection distinction may lead to optimal distinctiveness and a strengthening of the performance.
Hypothesis 3a: As more Airbnb listings become available in a local market, the positive effect of instant booking on the performance of an Airbnb listing is amplified.
Hypothesis 3b: As more Airbnb listings become available in a local market, the positive effect of work collection distinction on the performance of an Airbnb listing is amplified.
Methodology
Our data consisted of the population of 330,365 Airbnb listings in 798 local markets (neighborhoods) of San Francisco, New York, Portland, Los Angeles, San Diego, San Jose, Philadelphia, Washington D.C., Boston, and Seattle. Because these cities are major metropolitan areas and top Airbnb and hotel markets in the United States, they provided an ideal context to study the impact of mimetic isomorphic features. Table 1 shows the distribution of listings across the cities. For each listing, monthly performance (revenue, average daily rate [ADR], and occupancy) as well as property characteristics (number of rooms, room type, etc.) from October 2014 to July 2017 were obtained from Airdna, a company providing trusted data services to leading industry clients such as the Los Angeles Tourism & Convention Board, CBRE Group, Bank of America, Blackstone, and Merrill Lynch (see Table 2). Data from 2014 to 2017 were used because the effect of interest was not confounded by macroeconomic trends such as COVID-19; and the time period reflected when Airbnb had just rolled out these two hotel-like features and permitted the capture of the initial reactions of the markets.
Table 1 Summary of Airbnb in 10 Major Metro Areas
Rank Metro Area Market (Neighborhood) Listing
Number of Listings Instant Bookable (%) Work Collection Distinction (%)
1 New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ-PA 184 152,673 17.34 8.88
2 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA 90 50,200 25.05 12.84
3 San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward, CA 51 30,725 18.25 11.88
4 San Diego-Carlsbad, CA 104 20,193 25.71 13.8
5 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV 99 20,319 26.29 11.67
6 Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD 64 16,201 18.43 9.76
7 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA 79 152,00 25.43 19.58
8 Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA 88 10,790 23.3 17.54
9 Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH 15 7,660 22.78 15.84
10 San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA 24 6,404 23.93 11.07
Total 798 330,365
Table 2 Variable Definition and Summary Statistics (Unit of Analysis: Listing by Year-Month)
Category Variable Definition M SD Minimum Maximum
Listing Performance Revenue Revenue received from a booking 865.83 1898.16 0 250,000
ADR Average booked price in dollar amount 61.83 124.72 0 10,498
Occupancy Ratio of booked days to days available for booking 0.24 0.36 0 1
Hotel-like Features Instant Dummy variable with values of 1 = instant bookable and 0 = otherwise 0.17 0.37 0 1
Business Dummy variable with values of 1 = work collection distinction and 0 = otherwise 0.14 0.35 0 1
Listing Density Supply Number of Airbnb listings in a market 1909.46 2464.38 0 11,212
Host Controls ResRate Fraction of customer inquiries a host responds to within 24 hours 91.71 20.35 0 100
ResTime Average number of minutes a host responds to customer inquiries 262.04 419.66 0.01 1,440
SuperHost Dummy variable with values of 1 = super host[2] and 0 = otherwise 0.13 0.34 0 1
Listing Controls NumReview Cumulative number of customer reviews 20.46 39.41 0 659
AveRating Average customer review rating with values of 1 = Terrible, 2 = Poor, 3 = Average, 4 = Very good, and 5 = Excellent 3.28 2.15 0 5
ListType Listing type with values of 1 = Entire home, 2=Private room, 3 = Shared room 1.46 0.57 1 3
Bed Number of bedrooms 1.25 0.84 0 14
Bath Number of bathrooms 1.23 0.59 0 15.5
Guest Maximum number of guests that can be accommodated 3.14 2.12 1 20
Photo Number of photos displayed 13.14 10.95 0 594
Security Security deposit in dollar amount 183.60 394.62 0 20,000
Extra Fees for additional guest accommodation in dollar amount 11.11 21.55 0 300
Minstay Minimum nights of a stay required 3.78 25.56 0 20,303
Note: ADR = average daily rate.
For Airbnb listing i in month t, we model,

where Performanceit is measured by the three financial performance metrics, respectively. Professionalismi is a vector of features that mimic hotels, including instant booking and work collection distinction. Supplyit denotes the density of Airbnb listings in the market. Zi denotes a rich set of controls such as the listing and host characteristics that likely influence performance, as well as the market and month dummies. Specifically, for the listing characteristics, we control the number of consumer reviews, average review ratings, the listing type (private room, entire room, or shared room), number of beds, number of baths, number of photos, the security deposit, extra guest charge, number of minimal nights of stay, and number of guests allowed. For the hosts’ characteristics, we control their response time, response rate, and the Super Host status. Our market and month dummies are controlled as well because certain markets or time periods may be more attractive to travelers or more populated with listings. ɛit is the random errors. Our primary interest is to estimate the effects of professional features on listing performance {g’} and how the effects change as more listings become available in a local market {b, h’}.
Results
We report the effects of hotel-like professional features in Table 3. Focusing on the effects on revenue performance in Column 1, we find that professional features provide a clear advantage for Airbnb. Listings with instant booking and work collection distinction enjoyed higher revenue premiums than regular listings. Specifically, a listing obtained $257 and $339 more in the total monthly revenue if instant-bookable (256.952***) and work collection distinctive (338.505***), confirming the benefits of conformity implied by institutional theory (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983) and supporting Hypothesis 1a and Hypothesis 1b. It is also clear that listings in our sampled markets are already competing, as predicted by the localized competition hypothesis (Baum & Mezias, 1992) and Hypothesis 2, with a slight but significant decrease in monthly revenue as each new listing grows in the market (−0.006***).
Table 3 Estimation Results Variable
(1) (2) (3)
Revenue ADR Occupancy
Primary variables
 Instant 256.952*** (.000) 8.839*** (.000) 0.057*** (.000)
Business 338.505*** (.000) 16.119*** (.000) 0.016*** (0.000)
 Supply −0.006*** (.000) −0.001*** (.000) −0.000*** (.000)
 Instant × Supply 0.011*** (.000) 0.001*** (.000) 0.000*** (.000)
Business × Supply −0.018*** (.000) −0.002*** (.000) −0.000*** (.000)
Controls of listing characteristics
 NumReview 11.669*** (.000) 0.388*** (.000) 0.003*** (0.000)
 AveRating 91.278*** (.000) 7.390*** (.000) 0.030*** (.000)
ListType
 Private room −349.662*** (.000) −21.364*** (.000) −0.023*** (.000)
 Shared room −458.287*** (.000) −30.413*** (.000) −0.030*** (.000)
 Bed 129.990*** (.000) 9.516*** (.000) −0.010*** (.000)
 Bath 61.750*** (.000) 11.157*** (.000) −0.001*** (000)
 Photo 8.921*** (.000) 0.661*** (.000) 0.001*** (.000)
 Security 0.155*** (.000) 0.018*** (.000) −0.000*** (.000)
 Extra 1.634*** (.000) 0.144*** (.000) 0.000***(.000)
 Minstay −0.339*** (.000) −0.046*** (.000) −0.000*** (.000)
 Guest 112.244*** (.000) 9.381*** (.000) 0.004*** (.000)
Controls of host characteristics
 ResRate −1.080*** (.000) −0.074*** (.000) 0.000*** (.000)
 ResTime −0.139*** (.000) −0.006*** (.000) −0.000*** (.000)
 SuperHost 259.397*** (.000) 16.631*** (.000) 0.065*** (.000)
Market Controls Yes Yes Yes
Month Controls Yes Yes Yes
Constant 74.881*** (.000) 1.640*** (.003) 0.050*** (.000)
Observations 4,506,133 4,506,133 4,506,133
R2 .516 .372 .428
Note: p value in parentheses. ADR = average daily rate.
***
p < .01.
Furthermore, the effects of two professional features show a striking difference as the listing competition in markets increases. Specifically, instant booking is a salient differentiator, as the evidence suggests its positive effect on performance is magnified as the listing supply increases (0.011***), supporting Hypothesis 3a. However, for work collection listings the financial advantage they have over regular listings gets attenuated as the competition increases (−0.018***) not supporting Hypothesis 3b. Such contrary effects indicate that the effect of professionalism is asymmetric in increasingly dense markets.
While instant booking increases financial performance, and continues to do, although to a diminishing degree, as the competition among Airbnb listings increases, work collection benefited listings only when density was not increasing. This demonstrates that not all differentiation is appealing to all travelers. In the beginning, Airbnb listings were competing with hotels and thus mimicking hotel-like features signaled to the greater marketplace the legitimacy of Airbnb as a viable lodging option. Once a certain threshold of legitimacy was established (as indicated in the density of a market), a tipping point may have been reached when Airbnb listings started focusing on competing with one another rather than competing with hotels. Thus, rather than attempting to conform to conventional hotel industry norms to gain legitimacy, Airbnb listings may have switched to differentiating themselves from one another.
In this sense, instant booking was a valued point-of-differentiation for a larger market segment (business and leisure travelers) among Airbnb listings, whereas work collection was a valued point of differentiation solely for business travelers. In markets where the legitimacy of Airbnb is established and listings are competing with one another, work collection may be unappealing for leisure travelers. In increasingly dense markets, Airbnb’s taken-for-grantedness starts to run counter to the company’s original strategy to be a radical departure from the consistency and uniformity of conventional hotel lodging. And in the travelers’ mind, there is nothing more consistent and uniform than a business hotel with its “cookie-cutter” features and lack of authenticity as perhaps conveyed in the work collection attribute. Such findings call for a cautionary use of professional features in operating Airbnb listings with respect to the level of local competition and an extension to institutional theory for a finer delineation of features for mimicry and isomorphism.
We further perform estimations using alternative financial performance metrics, as shown in Column 2 for ADR and Columns 3 for occupancy rate. Similar results are found where hotel-like professionalism features drive the ADR and occupancy performance of Airbnb listings. Consistent findings on the asymmetric effects of these two features as listing density increases further speak to the robustness of our estimates.
Limitations
While the results of this study are robust, the study is not without limitations and suggestions for future research. The analysis focused on major metropolitan areas in the United States where the instant booking distinction may be more attractive, and the performance effect heightened; thus, expanding the geo-scope would permit greater generalizability. Additionally, to more definitively test isomorphism as the cause of the hotel-like professionalism of Airbnb, a longer data period is needed. Finally, this study used data that are 4 years old. Using more recent data could help determine whether hotel-like features are attractive during, and can help Airbnb survive, the COVID-19 pandemic.
Conclusion
This study explores important, yet less researched topics: Is hotel-like professionalism an advantage to Airbnb? Should Airbnb intimate their hotel counterparts? Our findings suggest so but with market-specific adjustments. Hotel-like features led to sizable increases in Airbnb revenue. However, the effect was weakened (less prominent) in more competitive markets, hampering a listing from winning customers from their peer Airbnb listings. By unveiling these effects, our study contributes to the literature and practice of accommodation sharing in several ways.
First, our study reveals the performance implications of Airbnb listings mimicking conventional hotels and provides a quantification of the performance impact of a listing’s isomorphism. While extant research predominantly emphasizes the difference between Airbnb and conventional hotels and its implications for customer decisions (Guttentag et al., 2017), our research investigates the homogenization between Airbnb and conventional hotels and its financial implications.
The potential competition of listings that coexist in Airbnb-dense markets was also identified. Previous studies have primarily spotlighted the penetration of Airbnb listings on conventional hotels (Zervas et al. 2017), overlooking the interplay (mutualism or competition) among Airbnb listings themselves. This study investigated whether Airbnb listing growth in major markets results in a “zero-sum” game that intensifies the competition among listings or provides the opportunities for listings to collectively “make the pie bigger.”
Additionally, our study shows the differential, even contrasting, impacts of instant booking and work collection distinction under competition. Prior literature primarily documents the role of listing features in influencing pricing (Wang & Nicolau, 2017) and customer purchase (Tussyadiah & Pesonen, 2017). However, these studies shed little light on listing feature effectiveness in the presence of peer density. We fill the void by unveiling the financial impact of hotel-like features on the performance of Airbnb using highly granular, listing-level data. Our findings provide implications for product development and innovations (focusing on valuable feature design) to both Airbnb hosts and hoteliers competing with Airbnb.
The different results for instant booking and work collection in increasingly dense markets suggest that standardizing processes (like that of booking) is desired by all Airbnb guests but standardizing amenities (like that of work collection) is not. Forcing guests to forego uniqueness to limit the risks associated with substandard amenities is not desired across all the segments of Airbnb guests (Benner, 2017). Hence, Airbnb hosts may want to focus on imitating hotel-like processes like booking, cancellations, checking-in, and so on that are appealing to both leisure and business travelers but not imitate the look and feel of business amenities and furnishing found in hotels as their appeal is limited solely to business guests. Since no competitive advantage is sustainable forever, Airbnb units will likely have to continuously change and innovate as other Airbnb units adopt instant booking. Consequently, Airbnb hosts may want to consider more automation like that of instant booking, such as providing automated guest messaging that includes information about the unit, how to access it, procedures for checking out, and so on. Such automation facilitates the interactions and provides convenience without affecting the uniqueness of the furnishings and amenities of the unit. For hotels to attempt to compete effectively with Airbnb, they may want to consider less consistency in the furnishing and décor of guest rooms, providing more authentic and local elements beloved by all Airbnb guests.
Finally, whether mimetic isomorphism leads to a sizeable increase in financial performance has remained unknown (Barreto & Baden-Fuller, 2006). This study suggests that mimicry to gain legitimacy results in increased financial performance, lending needed empirical support to institutional theory. However, our results suggest that boundary conditions to ever-increasing financial gains from imitation may exist. When a firm starts out, struggling to gain legitimacy to increase chances of survival, conformity is critical. But what happens when a certain degree of legitimacy has been achieved? Can imitation go too far in industries whose strategic orientation is differentiation? Our results suggest that once a legitimacy-tipping point is reached, further mimicry of certain industry norms and features may actually decrease performance. Future research should explore when this point is reached and how firms manage to stay within the boundaries of legitimacy while also differentiating themselves from those they were intent on copying.
ORCID iD
Cheri A. Young https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3920-5439
References
Barreto I., Baden-Fuller C. (2006). To conform or to perform? Mimetic behaviour, legitimacy-based groups and performance consequences. Journal of Management Studies, 43(7), 1559-1581. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00620.x

Google Scholar
Baum J. A. C., Mezias S. J. (1992). Localized competition and organizational failure in the Manhattan hotel industry, 1898-1990. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(4), 580-604. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393473

Google Scholar
Benner K. (2017, June 17). Airbnb tries to behave more like a hotel. New York Times, BU1.

Google Scholar
Cheng M., Foley C. (2018). The sharing economy and digital discrimination: The case of Airbnb. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 70, 95-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2017.11.002

Google Scholar
Deephouse D. L. (1999). To be different, or to be the same? It’s a question (and theory) of strategic balance. Strategic Management Journal, 20(2), 147-166. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199902)20:2%3C147::AID-SMJ11%3E3.0.CO;2-Q
GO TO REFERENCE
Google Scholar
DiMaggio P. J., Powell W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147-160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101

Google Scholar
DiMaggio P. J., Powell W. W. (1991). Introduction. In Powell W. W., DiMaggio P. J. (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 1-38). University of Chicago Press.

Google Scholar
Durand R., Kremp P. A. (2016). Classical deviation: Organizational and individual status as antecedents of conformity. Academy of Management Journal, 59(1), 65-89. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2013.0767
GO TO REFERENCE
Google Scholar
Edelman B., Luca M., Svirsky D. (2017). Racial discrimination in the sharing economy: Evidence from a field experiment. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 9(2), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1257/app.20160213
GO TO REFERENCE
Google Scholar
Grant M. (2013). Airbnb.com poses only a small threat to hotel industry. Euromonitor International. http://blog.euromonitor.com/2013/03/airbnbcom-poses-only-asmall-threat-to-hotel-industry.html
GO TO REFERENCE
Google Scholar
Greves H. R. (2002). An ecological theory of spatial evolution: Local density dependence in Tokyo banking, 1894-1936. Social Forces, 80(3), 847-879. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2002.0006

Google Scholar
Guttentag D. (2015). Airbnb: Disruptive innovation and the rise of an informal tourism accommodation sector. Current Issues in Tourism, 18(12), 1192-1217. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2013.827159

Google Scholar
Guttentag D., Smith S., Potwarka L., Havitz M. (2017). Why tourists choose Airbnb: A motivation-based segmentation study. Journal of Travel Research, 57(3), 342-359. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287517696980

Google Scholar
Hannan M. T., Carroll G. R. (1992). The dynamics of organizational populations. Oxford University Press.

Google Scholar
Haveman H. (1993). Follow the leader: Mimetic isomorphism and entry into new markets. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(4), 593-627. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393338

Google Scholar
Jet J. (2017, August 22). Are business travelers using Airbnb? Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnnyjet/2017/08/22/are-business-travelers-using-airbnb/?sh=6b215d1a4ddf
GO TO REFERENCE
Google Scholar
Li H., Srinivasan K. (2019). Competitive dynamics in the sharing economy: An analysis in the context of Airbnb and hotels. Marketing Science, 38(3), 365-391. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2018.1143
GO TO REFERENCE
Google Scholar
Mody M., Hanks L., Dogru T. (2019). Parallel pathways to brand loyalty: Mapping the consequences of authentic consumption experiences for hotels and Airbnb. Tourism Management, 74, 65-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2019.02.013
GO TO REFERENCE
Google Scholar
Porter M. E. (1996). What is strategy? Harvard Business Review, 74, 61-78.

PubMed
ISI
Google Scholar
Rhee M., Kim Y.-C., Han J. (2006). Confidence in imitation: Niche-width strategy in the UK automobile industry. Management Science, 52(4), 501-513. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1050.0494
GO TO REFERENCE
Google Scholar
Salomon R., Wu Z. (2012). Institutional distance and local isomorphism. Journal of International Business Studies, 43(4), 343-367. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2012.3
GO TO REFERENCE
Google Scholar
Tussyadiah I. P. (2016). Factors of satisfaction and intention to use peer-to-peer accommodation. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 55, 70-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2016.03.005
GO TO REFERENCE
Google Scholar
Tussyadiah I. P., Pesonen J. (2017). Impacts of peer-to-peer accommodation use on travel patterns. Journal of Travel Research, 55(8), 1022-1040. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287515608505
GO TO REFERENCE
Google Scholar
Wang D., Nicolau J. L. (2017). Price determinants of sharing economy based accommodation rental: A study of listings from 33 cities on Airbnb.com. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 62, 120-131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2016.12.007
GO TO REFERENCE
Google Scholar
Yang M., Hyland M. (2012). Re-examining mimetic isomorphism. Management Decision, 50(6), 1076-1095. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741211238346
GO TO REFERENCE
Google Scholar
Zervas G., Proserpio D., Byers J. W. (2017). The rise of the sharing economy: Estimating the impact of Airbnb on the hotel industry. Journal of Marketing Research, 54(5), 687-705. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.15.0204
GO TO REFERENCE
Google Scholar
Zhao E. Y., Fisher G., Lounsbury M., Miller D. (2017). Optimal distinctiveness: Broadening the interface between institutional theory and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 38(1), 93-113. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2589

Google Scholar
Zhu H. (2020). Why a non-discrimination policy upset Airbnb hosts? Annals of Tourism Research, 87, Article 102984. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2020.102984
GO TO REFERENCE
Google Scholar
Biographies
Karen L. Xie, PhD (e-mail: [email protected]), is an associate professor at the Fritz Knoebel School of Hospitality Management, University of Denver, Denver, CO. Cheri A. Young, PhD (e-mail: [email protected]), is an associate professor at the Fritz Knoebel School of Hospitality Management, University of Denver, Denver, CO.

https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480211035551