Journal of Sustainable Marketing

Location

Observation showed that location seemed to play a very vital role in the amount of security that hospitality and establishment can enjoy. The findings of this research strongly suggest that rural areas have the advantage over urban simply because of the immense difference in the volume of potential attackers. Experts through their eyes rated location as seventh in importance. This does not mean that they don’t respect the role of location in security. Location is highly capable of influencing security, but the implications caused by a bad location can be corrected with the utilization of means such as additional surveillance, CCTV, and lighting. The cost was not always the main concern in the minds of experts.

   Managers on the other hand were more cost-sensitive and were always looking for ways to increase their properties’ protection cost-free. They pointed out that in densely populated areas, security is distracted by multiple potential dangers. The larger the number of people, the harder it is for security to check and control the area as the possibility of criminals hiding in the crowd rises dramatically. On the other hand, rural areas provide better conditions for surveillance. The intentions of a person found wandering in an isolated area near the property can be easily put in question, as the operation tends to mentally extend its frontiers covering the surrounding area.

Adjacent road

Observation revealed that properties in urban or suburban areas, which were not directly neighboring with other facilities, had some sort of open front to fight against. Neighboring with something as long as it was not a source of additional troubles, rendered the operation free from concerns about securing that side, transferring security to the neighbor. Experts rated the existence of adjacent roads as last in comparison to other external factors, pointing to a variety of methods that could enhance perimeter coverage at a relatively high cost.

   The majority of managers believed that roads adjacent to their properties do not consist a threat to providing security. In particular, some of them pointed out that adjacent roads strengthening the natural surveillance. Criminals would be scared of thinking that anybody who passes by could easily see them jumping over or going through the fence. Had there not been a road, it is highly unlikely that people of good intentions would be passing from that point in any part of the day, hence allowing criminals to cross the fence undisturbed.

Number of entrances

In this case, an observation confirmed what common-sense dictated: The bigger the number of entrances, the higher the threat to security. Both managers and experts unanimously agreed to that. Managers expressed their concerns that increasing the number of entry points requires multiple amounts of resources for adequate surveillance. Security experts explained that multiple entrances weaken the possibility of security guards being aware of the number of people on the property at any time. This occurs mainly because people can access the facility from one point and leave from another. Not knowing who is on the property does not allow security personnel to assess possible danger. At the same time, criminals when presented with more ways in or out of the property, have greater chances of discovering a weak point and taking advantage of it.

Fencing

Although observation revealed that fences in some of the sampled properties were not in the best condition, it was a common practice to take additional fortifications in areas that indicated high levels of risk. The panel of experts ranked this variable fourth in the exterior group, indicating the value of its importance in hospitality security. Experts said that there is no way of succeeding in keeping a property crime-free, without some sort of enclosure that will ensure some levels of protection for perimeter sections. For managers, who liked to think that all security threats originated beyond the limits of their operation, keeping unwanted people out came very high in their agenda. They believed that proper fencing was one of the prime things that should be considered when dealing with security in the hospitality sector. The use of flowers bushes and trees to cover the fences also gave a couple of more benefits other than increasing the aesthetics of the construction.

Lighting

Available literature was keen to recognize the fact that higher lighting conditions are a very good means of increasing safety in certain areas that shared characteristics attractive to criminals (Palmer, 1989; Sfiraki, 2019). Experts expressed the notion that criminals do not want to be seen and will go to immense lengths to stay covered until the last moment. High lighting reduces the number of good hiding spots, making it more difficult for criminals to ambush their victims or hideout.

   Managers agreed on that fact and applied lighting as means of increasing security in several cases. However, they indicated that there are some problems when applying increased lighting in hospitality operations. Lighting does not only create a high operational and maintenance cost but it often a source of nuisance for guests as well. As younger properties tend to be squeezed in smaller sites, it is very common for areas that need additional lightings, such as parking lots or loading bays, to be in very close proximity to room areas. This causes intense light to penetrate guestrooms, disturbing the sleep of guests. Furthermore, intense lighting spoils the romantic scenery which most guests are likely to take advantage of in a resort hotel.

Parking lot

Observation showed that hotel parking lots are secondary targets for hotel security. Although literature pointed out that parking lots were an area of high criminality and suggest adequate levels of lighting in the parking areas, this does not apply in the selected location. Neither experts nor managers thought that parking lots are a threat to guest security because parking areas are located within the visual range of the guarded gates. This indicates a brilliant way applied by the industry to achieve better security results and a splendid example that shows how space allocation can directly affect security.

Size of the property

Field observations pointed out a direct connection between property size and security level. Experts admitted that the bigger a property the more recourses are needed to ensure security. Security agents were also keen to underline the fact that modern technology has provided means to countermeasure property sizes, such as motion sensing magnetic fields and radar systems capable of calculating the weight of targets. Nonetheless, managers are unwilling to pay the heavy cost to acquire such technology. Although someone could suggest the obvious solution of positioning more security personnel, operations are unwilling to have large numbers of security guards patrolling their sites, in fear that this will cause insecurity to guests.

Access from the beach

Observation discovered that all properties in areas that allowed for natural beach access had problems with unwanted people using their right to beach access as an excuse to enter the premises. In previous cases, variables were placed lower in the experts’ ranking as they could come up with an array of alternative solutions, some of which might have been more costly than what managers were willing to pay but still applicable. When it came to beach access, experts' esteem of the problem was very high and identify it as the biggest threat to maritime resort hotels. Managers could only apply more manpower to cope with the increasing number of intruders. This almost doubled the cost of security and was one of the reasons that forced some of the properties to outsource security, as internal personnel is incapable of dealing with it. Moreover, the operations’ image is often targeted as guards who are considered to be the public face of the operation, have to protect guests while shielding the interest of the operation, without hurting anybody or causing alarm.

Closed Circuit TV surveillance

Observation showed that hotels that use Closed Circuit TV surveillance to monitor their facilities have an advantage over those that don’t. The certainty that premises are constantly being monitored was enough to discourage potential criminals and create a sense of security for possible victims. Experts, who ranked CCTV top in their list, provided numerous examples where such means may balance security hazards. Yet, managers are reluctant to adopt the extensive use of CCTV surveillance on the premises, mainly because of the legal constraints related to privacy protection and secondly due to its high cost. In addition to these reasons, it was noticed on some occasions, that installation of cameras had caused discomfort to guests.

Neighboring constructions

The type and quality of neighboring facilities have a direct impact on the operation’s security. Neighboring a nightclub will not only produce noise pollution but a great number of heavily drunk barflies as well. Experts ranked threats from neighboring facilities sixth in importance. They focused especially on the type of next-door operation as this often defined the levels of security applied in their premises. As one expert said: “neighboring with a bank and a municipal playground is not the same thing”. Managers also revealed that the type and quality of a neighboring facility influence their levels of security and affect directly criminality levels. They indicated that for a hospitality operation, the next best thing to having no neighbors at all is to neighbor with a similar facility of a superior class, whereas the worst thing that could happen is to operate next to a facility of an inferior class.

Type of building

The observation came across two types of buildings, single or monolithic which had identical multiple floors, and Multiple or spread-out which had a lower building profile and a variety of designs. Concerning security, monolithic constructions are by far easier to secure. This is established by simple facts. The smaller number of entrance points and the simpler the corridor layout, the easier it is to secure the building. Compact, subsequent, identical floor patterns with straight double-loaded corridors require less time and personnel to secure when opposed to corridor mazes spread around single floored, semi-autonomous buildings. Furthermore, the main buildings have several workstations and facilities located on the ground floor. This provides more chances of natural surveillance, as personnel can control in-house areas and exits. Experts rated building type fourth in their evaluation, agreeing with the managers on the fact that the simpler and compact the design of a building is, the easier it is to ensure effective crime protection at low costs. Managers understood the potential of single buildings, however, they were not willing to exchange successful spread out designs for skyscrapers, since guests of resort hotels are in favour of diversification. People that spend the entire year in apartment blocks, surrounded by cement want to escape from the routine caused by typical floor layouts, subsequently repeated floor after floor. Spread-out buildings have the advantage over monolithic constructions since they can host rooms that can provide more privacy and independence.

Number of floors

The observation concerning this variable revealed a contradiction with the literature. Newman (1972) was keen to point out that the higher a building was the higher the criminality rates. This notion was a result of observations on public housing buildings. On the contrary, hospitality facilities enjoy higher levels of security as the distance from the ground increases. The panel of experts was less considered about this factor, ranking it last in its group. Managers did not seem to directly bind floor number and criminality but strongly expressed that their experience indicated that ground floor rooms gathered by far the vast majority of criminal outbreaks, mainly due to ease of access and escape.

Surveillance of entrances/ CCTV

It is very simple for anyone to notice that in almost every hospitality operation the front desk is within sight of the main entrance. This serves multiple purposes. As newly arrived guests enter the building chances are that among the first facilities of the hotel that they are going to use, other than the restroom, is the reception desk. This mainly allows for a better quality of service. At the same time, natural surveillance is also achieved through the correct space allocation. The industry thought that since the reception desk should be close to the main entrance, it would be a good practice to place it facing the door so that desk staff could also keep an eye on people entering the premises. This is a wonderful example of how industry experience utilized natural surveillance. Direct surveillance dramatically decreases the volume of crime over the supervised area. Nowadays technology allows for indirect surveillance wherever natural monitoring cannot be established. Only a few things can deceive the eyes of a CCTV system, rendering it one of the most useful weapons against crime. Based on those assumptions, experts voted it top on their list. As managers we're deeply concerned about outsiders penetrating their facilities, effectively surveilling entrances meant that the core of their operations could be protected. Although adequate surveillance was desired, it was mainly in the younger properties, that the cost of CCTV systems was facilitated.

Access to back of house areas

Generally speaking, observation showed that access to the back of house areas was neglected. This mostly came as a result of increased natural surveillance as personnel by default frequenting these “off-limits” areas could easily pick out unfamiliar faces, whose intentions were directly put in question if not accompanied by another member of the staff. Experts attributed little importance to this variable believing that criminals were rarely bold enough to risk entering so heavily surveilled areas. Managers pointed out that during operational seasons, primarily rooms and secondarily public areas close to the seafront were mostly targeted. This trend shifted to the back-of-house areas when the hotels were closed as this is where valuable items are stored. As there was limited need for access to such areas when the hotels were not operating and due to the value of stored goods, additional measures such as security patrols, complete and constant locking down of entire sectors were applied to prevent crime. As far as operation seasons are concerned, this study points toward the principle that access to the back of house areas is not of significant importance to hotel security.

The lighting of interior corridors

As interior corridors are, by definition of the word, inner parts of the building, there are limited resources that can be utilized to help maintain low criminality rates. Lighting and surveillance are the two most common. Observation showed that hospitality operations tend to employ lighting as a norm. The higher the lighting levels the higher the levels of self-assurance experienced by people using them and the lower the chances of criminal acts taking place in them, as natural surveillance becomes easier. This fact is not only supported by literature but by previously expressed observations and outcomes related to other variables. Experts indicated how important lighting is ranking it third in their preferences, judging those higher combinative results can be achieved by teaming up lighting with CCTV surveillance. Managers understood the importance of lighting in interior corridors and were willing to accept the cost. Under this scope, the researchers believe that adequate lighting is the best possible way of keeping interior corridors crime-free.

Access to floor rooms

This variable was not utilized as it was proven that other variables such as interior corridor lighting, entrance surveillance, and type of buildings overlapped its value. Access to rooms is either included in building access or incorporated in entrance surveillance. The only thing that observation indicated is that access to floor rooms of secondary buildings is often much easier opposed to the central building, as secondary buildings are often unattended.

Accessibility from adjacent balconies

Observation related to this variable revealed that little or no concern was given on behalf of architects to ensure adequate protection from occupants of adjacent rooms. This meant that in the majority of the sampled properties, one could easily jump, or even simply walk from one balcony to another with no particular risk. Experts did not find this variable of particular importance, ranking it third from the end. This low level of importance was also supported by managers who based on their experience, failed to come up with a sufficient number of instances capable of attaching some importance to it. The main reason for this is that although it is particularly easy for one to jump from one balcony to another it is equally easy for others to see that, a scene that would raise suspicions.

Access to rooms with garden

Extensive observation on access to rooms with gardens indicated an extremely weak point in hotel security. Having the advantage of the ground approach, which ensures easy escape, criminals were in many cases challenged to act. Gardens, even though stated as private, were completely open to anyone. The general idea among managers and experts is that although the problem has been identified, little could be done on-site, without turning gardens into private fortresses.

Type of exterior frames

Observation revealed that, even when criminals were able to gain access to the public areas, robust exterior frames made access to rooms extremely difficult if not impossible. Experts believed that the type of exterior frames had a direct psychological impact on the minds of criminals according to the perceived difficulty in breaching their security. But, as managers pointed out, breaking and entry was an extremely rare event in upmarket hotels and had only occurred during the non-operating seasons. Managers saw no security importance in the type of exterior frames and when interviewed stated that the factors that influenced their choices were in order of importance cost, aesthetics, durability, and future maintenance. What was more important than the type of exterior frames was the type of fitted locks and the presence or absence of a viewport. Unfortunately, as these variables were not foreseen, they were not incorporated in the experts’ forced entry grids. Nevertheless, the additional investigation suggested that key card locks offer the highest levels of anticrime security. Viewports were also considered a very good enhancement, unlike safety chains which were considered unnecessary.

Number of exterior frames

The observation did not appear to produce any particular findings related to this variable, the very high number of room variations in the sampled properties, exceeded the limits of this study. The norm was thought that low category rooms which represented the majority in all properties had one entrance door and a wide sliding balcony, which was also used as the entrance in ground floor rooms. Experts underlined the fact that the higher the number of existing exterior frames, the higher the number of entry points from which the criminal can choose. Presenting criminals with an increased variety of choices means that they will be able to choose the weakest or more convenient one, based on available time and skills. Managers highlighted that, based on their experience, in the cases where criminals entered rooms, it was because guests had left a door or window unlocked or wide open. Managers instructed housekeeping and maintenance personnel to check on all doors and windows upon leaving the rooms and lock anything that was found open.

   When it comes to the relative property ranking instrument, it was devised in the hope that, when the researchers talked with people in the sampled hotels, the relative ranking would be reflected in the volume of crime. As the notion that criminal danger derives outside of the operation’s limits illustrates the view of the local industry representatives, two sets of the ranking were produced, one for interior and a second for exterior security, so that it would be possible to make comparisons between levels of exterior and interior security of the sampled properties (Table 7 and Table 8).