As traveler reviews continue to grow in influence and pervasiveness, more hotels are debating, “Should we post reviews on our website? Do we dare?”
Even hotels with rave reviews and top ratings are hesitant. Hotels are highly controlled environments, where everything is “my pleasure” and beds are made for you. Websites work hard to evoke this utopian image. Why expose them to the anarchy of social networks, where people can be irrational, mean-spirited, or a competitor in disguise?
And yet despite the risks, in October Starwood joined a small minority of major international hotel groups and took the bold step of posting raw, unedited guest feedback to its official website. Visit the W London page on Starwood.com and you’ll find a range of opinions, from “Groovy, bling ambience” to “It sucks! Avoid at all cost”.
To willfully allow negative commentary—doesn’t that contravene everything we know about marketing? Or is it a shrewd, forward-thinking move that shows confidence in the product and will ultimately convert more travelers?
Reviews are everywhere these days. Independent properties from B&Bs to boutiques post TripAdvisor widgets and feeds. Online travel agencies have been amassing reviews for years, and recently Expedia announced big plans to go even more social. Even destination marketing organizations like VisitScotland.com and Quebec City Tourism have gotten into the action. On VisitLondon.com and WhistlerBlackcomb.com you can view TripAdvisor ratings, rankings and recent reviews without leaving the site.
But you won’t find reviews on Hilton.com, Wyndham.com, Fairmont.com, Hyatt.com or BestWestern.com, nor on InterContinental, Mandarin Oriental or Taj websites. Many now post Facebook and Twitter links, but feeds of raw commentary are rare.
It’s a particularly complicated dilemma for hotel groups, which must answer not only to guests but to owners, members and franchisees. One black sheep in the family can tarnish the reputation of other properties and the brand as a whole.
And yet an increasing number of travelers won’t book a room before consulting the opinions of other travelers. Reputation has emerged as a major factor in influencing decisions, rivaling price, location and brand. If travelers can’t find reviews on the hotel’s website, they’ll look elsewhere, and they might never come back.
So slowly but surely hotel groups are devising ways to integrate reviews and commentary into their websites. The solutions so far, however, involve compromise.
Choosing to bypass TripAdvisor, Starwood allows guests to post reviews of its brands, which include Westin, Sheraton and W, directly to its website. Reviews are checked for profanity but are otherwise posted warts n’ all. A verification process alleviates concerns about fake reviews.
Will travelers trust reviews vetted by the company that’s trying to sell them rooms or will they continue to seek out independent review sites?
Starwood’s system seems heavily weighted toward members of its loyalty program. Of the 63 reviews of the Westin New York all but one are from Starwood Preferred Guest members. As presumed fans of the brand won’t they be more generous in commentary? My suspicions were quickly confirmed when I encountered one five-star review after another. Then I realized reviews are listed by star rating, with the best first. You can change the default setting, but isn’t this a bit sneaky when we’re used to chronological order on review sites?
Overall Starwood’s system is well organized and detailed, with information about reviewers, rating categories, and the ability to comment on reviews. Management has responded to select reviews of the Westin, but the responses are virtually identical, as though scripted, even in reply to complaints.
On the heels of Starwood’s announcement, Marriott announced it too was going full frontal with guest reviews. But reviews are nowhere to be found on Marriott.com. You’ll find them on the Marriott Rewards Insiders site, and you need to join to post a review. My theory that loyalty club members would be more generous was quickly disproved here, where some commentary is downright nasty. New York’s Marriott Marquis is rated two stars—far below its four-star rating on TripAdvisor.
Unlike Starwood, Marriott doesn’t list the best reviews first, but, bizarrely, lists the oldest reviews first. There are no filters, categories or reviewer details. I couldn’t find any management responses—though I too might be speechless in face of some of these comments. As a whole the system reminds me of reviews on Google Places: sparse, a bit messy and mostly unhelpful.
Of major international hotel groups, France’s Accor was the trailblazer, having integrated TripAdvisor reviews and ratings on Accor.com back in 2010. The move was all the more impressive given that its portfolio includes a range of brands, from economy to midscale to luxury. As Executive Vice President Jean-Luc Chrétien explained to me in an interview in late 2010, “We want to be very transparent and to provide our web visitors with all the information they need to make their decision.”
The most recent hotel company to join the party is Four Seasons, which this week introduced a “Reviews at a Glance” widget on property pages as part of its new (and vastly improved) website. It looks similar to a TripAdvisor widget, with three partial reviews displayed and a TripAdvisor logo and link, along with tabs, links and sample posts for Facebook and Twitter.
If any hotel group can risk total transparency it’s Four Seasons, which goes to great lengths and expense to please its guests. And yet it’s a brave move nonetheless for a company that so carefully cultivates its image. “It really does require that incredible sense of confidence that says we deliver our promise," Executive VP of Marketing Susan Helstab told USA Today’s Barb De Lollis.
Upon closer inspection, however, the reviews, tweets and posts displayed on the site aren’t pulled from a live feed; they’re cherry-picked and glowing with praise. To see all commentary you must click the TripAdvisor, Facebook and Twitter links.
No big deal, right? Well, yes and no. The widget can easily be mistaken for a live TripAdvisor feed, which in my mind diminishes the value and impact of the raw, unedited feeds on other hotel websites. Will travelers notice the difference?
So kudos to these hotel groups for making these leaps toward transparency. But to really earn traveler trust in social media we need to resist meddling in order to ensure our best foot is forward. Social media changes the rules of marketing. Travelers don’t expect perfection, but they do expect transparency and authenticity. The days of glossy brochures with fairytale descriptions and ecstatic supermodels are behind us.
So until a hotel group comes up with a better system, I think I’ll continue to consult third-party review sites before making my purchase decisions.
What do you think? Do you know of other hotels and hotel groups posting reviews or being transparent in other ways? Share your comments here.
Good summary, Daniel. I think that it's still too early to tell about the effects of brand-hosted customer reviews. Agree with you, tend to consult third-party sites for unknown destinations and hotels to gauge the customer reviews and hotel response to negative reviews.
I think there is a niche for a "Gas Buddy" or "Best Parking" type of crowdsourced app when it comes to hotel pricing. Add THAT to a third-party review site, and now there's a lot of reasons to consult before you book.
Now there’s an idea. Will be interested to see any travel apps based on this type of model.
By not integrating guest reviews on brand or hotel websites, hotels are just putting their heads in the sand. Customers can see through heavily managed and manipulated review positings (i.e. not posting any seriously negative reviews). Many customers will seek out unadulterated guest reviews from sites such as TripAdvisor before booking so the absence of guest reviews on the brand site is not preventing the customer reading them. The brand or hotel is then driving the customer off the controlled website onto a site where they are exposed to competitor brands, competitor hotels and higher cost booking channels. The chances of returning to the original site are surely reduced. Where Accor led, other brands will follow. I will be amazed if some of the brands you mention, who currently do not place unmanaged guest reviews on their site, do not change their policy during 2012. The bigger issue is how long unverified guest reviews will continue to be posted on review sites.
Thanks for your comments, Russell. It will be interesting to see how things evolve. I’m not sure the vast majority of hotels and hotel groups are ready for total transparency with guest reviews. So the ones that are will have an advantage. Also, it goes without saying that to post raw reviews comes with a lot of responsibility: managing reviews and using guest feedback to make improvements.
Great summary and insight. It's different when talking about chain hotels and independent ones regarding the reviews widgets, special dedicated sites and including guests reviews into the hotel websites. I suppose it's more SEO strategy than pure marketing and pushing guests coming back to your site. It's about the user generated content, search queries and competition. For loyalty guests it's different, they will come back to your website, they are subscribers to different hotel eNews, but for average traveller still Tripadvisor, or OTAs will be the first stop before purchasing. I would always trust more to "independent site" as Tripadvisor than hotel official website. It's all about business and looking for new promotional and distribution ways.
Hi Martin. Thanks for your comments. I think it’s important to point out that, as far as I understand, posting a basic TripAdvisor feed to a website has no SEO benefits to the hotel – it’s searchable content for TripAdvisor, not the hotel.
Great job as always Daniel and the question whether or not hotels can deliver transparency weighs heavily in the minds of those who depend on guest reviews to make booking decisions.
One of the most transparent review sites that I feel offers the most transparency, and with a complete coverage of the hotel that goes well beyond TripAdvisor guest reviews, is Oyster.com. Although they don't have the "inventory" that TA does they do one heck of a job providing the types of details that I rely on.
Hi Tom, Agreed that Oyster reviews are worth checking out when researching trips but destinations are limited at present and reviews are based on the experience and opinions of one or two travelers, albeit professional reviewers – kind of the old school model, no? Ideally we can combine the wisdom of crowds with experts, friends and locals. Or just call a travel agent.
Hi Daniel.
Great and informative article here.
I also give kudos both to Starwood and Four Season for applying review info on their Hotel Websites like this. No doubt that Reputation Management will play a important role for Hotels in the future.
Our friend Tom Costello also mentioned some concerns related to Four Seasons widget;
When hotels provide prospective customers with a vehicle (TripAdvisor links) that will;
1. send him off the site and
2. deliver him to another site (TA)
3. potentially lose the conversion opportunity to an OTA (costs the hotel up to 8 times more than a direct channel conversion)
And I agree with Tom's point I more see this as great way to adapt Hotel Websites to Social Engagement.
I agree that the Widget on Four Season at the moment is cherry-picking reviews. This is not a unique approach when we see how websites in general utilize Testimonials.
But I agree that the days of he days of glossy brochures with fairytale descriptions and ecstatic supermodels are behind us ( great analogy). And I also believe to fully embrace Social Engagement Hotels will be required to provide more balanced reviews on their websites. Guests that utilize Social Networks are well informed, and in general I believe they make their decision based on balanced reviews,
I agree that this is one important step towards transparency, but there are most definitive room for improvements here.
But I am very happy to see all these changes, and it is the first step in implementing Social Engagement as part of the Booking Process for Hotels.
Cheers..
Are Morch
Hotel Blogger
We included the Tripadvisor reviews widget on our hotel pages about one year ago. It was clear travelers would come to us, look for recommendations and then leave to go see what others had to say, so we just added it. It's a fact of life now and there really is no use trying to avoid it. Better to be brave about it and face whatever comes up. Most people are able to discern an honest review (good or bad) and it also allowed us Mexico Boutique Hotels to monitor the quality of our group.
We're presently redoingour site and it will definitely be incorporated, again.
We work with a portfolio of small luxury hotels and there is not a single guest who walks though the front door of any of these properties that hasn't checked out TripAdvisor first.
So, if they are going to go anyway, why not make it easy? Make sure you open the link to TripAdvisor in a new window.
Sure you're sending them off your site. Sure they will see an ad for an OTA. Hopefully they will see your TripAdvisor Business Listing and your special offer.
The truth is travelers will see plenty of OTA ads and visit numerous competitive sites as they go through the search process. The Cornell University Center for Hospitality Research published a study showing people spend an enormous amount of time researching hotels, performing as many as 150 searches or visiting travel-related sites in excess of 50 times. More information can be found at How People Search For Travel
So hotels that bury their heads in the sand and try to impede people from going to independent review sites are just kidding themselves. They'd be better off improving the quality of their guest experience and encouraging more guests to post reviews.
What about hotels that are trying to manipulate reviews? They will be exposed by people like Daniel Craig and eventually reported on by Barbara Delollis at USA Today.. Nice try fellas, but your reputation will suffer and you will eventually have to change your evil ways.
See you at Marketplace in The Bahamas!
Agree with your assessment and believe we offer a better option. We offer hotels the ability to obtain and display reviews on their website with the additional benefit of having the credibiliy of a third-party processing the reviews.
See GuestBook at http://guestbookreviews.com
Alan Hollander
Hi Alan, In fact I checked out your site when researching this post as I was interested in other review sharing models, but I couldn’t find examples of hotels using your service. Care to share?
I second your final thoughts, Daniel. Kudos to those hotels brave (and smart) enough to start early; the rest will eventually have to follow or lose business to competitors that are more transparent.
"Travelers don’t expect perfection, but they do expect transparency and authenticity. The days of glossy brochures with fairytale descriptions and ecstatic supermodels are behind us."
Exactly. Welcome to the age of new marketing, where the power finally shifts to the consumer. Best regards from Cancun, keep up the great work!
As a small boutique hotel group in Sydney, Australia we recently consolidated the websites of all hotels into one big robust website http://www.sydneylodges.com. When we made the consolidation and created the new website, we included an 'untouched' Tripadvisor widget on each of the 11 property pages which displays the latest 3 reviews for each property. I can say that we effectively doubled our conversion rate of our new website the day the widget was implemented. Our visitors seem to trust us because we are being clearly transparent and honest in showing what people think of us.
THE KEY
The biggest piece of advise I can give is that if you play a passive role as a hotelier towards Tripadvisor, that is just sitting back and letting those who want to review you do so, you'll have a very negative online reputation. We took a more active approach, each guest that checks out of our 11 Sydney properties gets an email 3 days later asking them to review us on Tripadvisor with a direct link to the page where you start to write your review. Since we implemented this, the reviews went from being 80% negative and 20% positive to 95% positive. Make sure you are actively embracing Tripadvisor and not being lazy about it. As much as I don't like to admit it, Tripadvisor is a powerhouse of credibility and you need to be seen to be aligning with it!
Very interesting stats, Dion – thanks for sharing. I’m surprised there was such a dramatic change in positive/negative reviews, which suggests that travelers are more disposed to sharing negative experiences than positive, but will willingly share positive experiences if hotels ask and make it easy for them. I’d be interested to hear about the experiences of other properties.
I guess I'm in the minority, but I don't believe we can trust hotel companies to be unbiased about what they post. Please. Having worked for some of the companies you mention, I have no doubt that enterprising young hoteliers will figure out how to game this for the extra 2% gatekeeper on their annual bonuses. TripAdvisor and, more to the point, Expedia would benefit from figuring out how to verify stays to lock down the trustworthiness factor because travelers want their reviews from a neutral source.
Pingback: Opinie gości na stronie hotelu. Czy to dobry pomysł? | MarketingHotelu.pl
The Wyndham Hotel Group has been doing a trial of posting the Tripadvisor reviews on the Wyndham Rewards website. The feedback has been positive. They have been considering rolling it out to all brand websites.
As part of that group (and having a pretty good Tripadvisor rating), I think that it is a great idea. Yes, there will be negative reviews, but I think that if a potential guest can see how a negative one was handled, and that it is one negative in a sea of positive feedback then it's impact is somewhat lessened.
Will this prompt a wave of hotel generated reviews? Perhaps, but I am told that Tripadvisor has a decent bull-s*%! identifier and they will be taken care of.
In the end, you have to take every review with a grain of salt and make your own decision. But, I really feel strongly that if you are proud of your property, then you should not be afraid to take what comes your way.
Interesting to know about Wyndham’s trial with reviews, Ben – thanks for the heads up. I’ll be sure to keep an eye on them.
Starwood is a joke. I attempted on no less than two occasions to post a comment and each time they came up with nonsensical reasons why they wouldn't post it. The last rationale was that I criticized their posting process in my comment which was utter balderdash. I am a platinum member there and will look for another chain.