Developing and Validating a Sustainable Banquet Service Quality Scale for Full-Service Hotels: The BANQSERV Framework

Abstract

Banquet services are a strategically important yet underexplored component of full-service hotel operations, characterized by event-based delivery and complex coordination. Existing service quality frameworks inadequately capture the operational, spatial, and experiential features of banquet contexts. This study developed and validated a banquet-specific service quality measurement scale for full-service hotels. Using a modified DINESERV instrument, data were collected from 216 U.S. respondents who had attended a hotel banquet within the previous 36 months. Exploratory factor analysis identified four dimensions, Facilities & Operations, Service Performance, Guest Care, and Venue Quality, with acceptable-to-strong reliability. The findings conceptualized banquet services as integrated, episodic service systems rather than transactional dining encounters. Managerially, the scale provides a practical tool for prioritizing hygiene, operational reliability, and venue functionality while supporting sustainable service improvement. This study offers an empirically grounded framework that advances banquet service quality research and practice.

1. Introduction

The banquet service of a hotel does not simply refer to the provision of food and beverages; rather, it represents a comprehensive event management service designed for large-scale functions and special occasions [1]. Hotel banquet services encompass the provision and setup of venues, food and beverage service, event planning and operational support, as well as ancillary and human services for events such as weddings, corporate functions, and academic seminars [2]. These features indicate that banquet services extend beyond conventional dining encounters and instead function as an integrated, multi-layered service system. As such, they embody the nature of “comprehensive event management,” making them, in effect, a complex package service that integrates and delivers the diverse service functions a hotel possesses in a concentrated manner [3].

By understanding these unique characteristics of comprehensive event service, banquet services can be identified essential for revenue development in full-service hotels. Hotel management considers banquet services as a core revenue generator of the MICE (Meeting, Incentive, Conventions, and Exhibition or Events) industry. The banquet services substantially enhance hotel profitability via food, beverage, and room sales [4]. This strategic importance is further reinforced by the rapid expansion of the global events industry. According to Expert Market Research (2025) [5], the industry has shown steady growth from 2018 to 2024, reaching approximately $1.4 trillion in 2024, and is projected to expand at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 5.1% from 2025 to 2034, potentially reaching $2.3 trillion by 2034. Similarly, Allied Market Research (2024) [6] estimated that the global events industry was valued at $736.8 billion in 2021 and is expected to reach $2.5 trillion by 2035. Within this increasingly competitive environment, hotels actively compete for banquet events because they represent a substantial share of overall revenue streams. McCune [7] emphasized the sustained growth of catering and banquet income, underscoring its critical contribution to long-term hotel profitability.

Despite their growing financial and strategic significance, banquet services remain underexamined from a service quality measurement perspective. For example, although a number of studies have explored banquet-related experiences [2,8,9], most have relied on general service quality frameworks that fail to capture the distinctive attributes of banquet operations. This is because banquet services involve a broader and more complex set of interactions, including event planning, spatial configuration, time coordination, and personalized engagement with both event hosts and attendees [10]. These comprehensive attributes make it difficult to apply banquet service quality utilizing both general service quality and DINESERV focusing on merely food quality, employee service quality, and dining environment [11]. Nevertheless, such a traditional service quality measurement and revised DINESERV have been used to evaluate banquet service quality which create several limitations on theoretical and practical perspectives. Accordingly, banquet service quality should reflect the seamless coordination of multiple operational stages as a whole rather than individual customer experience [4].

Therefore, the purpose of this study is not merely identifying the lack of banquet-specific measurement scale, but rather it focuses on the structural inadequacy of existing evaluation scale, which may not sufficiently reflect the complexity and strategic importance of banquet operations. The significance of the study lies in its ability to address a critical gap left by generalized scales, such as SERVQUAL [12] and DINESERV [11], thereby contributing to the hospitality literature by offering an evidence-based instrument tailored to the unique operational characteristics of banquet services in full-service hotels. In this perspective, measuring banquet service quality should not only go beyond just customer experience aspect but also need to be reconfigured to reflect the comprehensive operational characteristics of banquet service management.

2. Literature Review

This literature review examines the theoretical foundation of service quality and reviews the major hospitality service quality measurements (e.g., SERVQUAL, DINESERV, LODGSERV). After that, it analyses the limitation of the existing instruments when applied to banquet service contexts. Finally, the review highlights the need for a sustainability-oriented service quality framework.

2.1. Importance of Service Quality Evaluation and Measurement Scales

Evaluating service quality is essential in hospitality management, with multiple measurement scales established to assess service standards across different industries [13,14,15]. Notwithstanding these developments, a substantial vacuum persists in the literature about banquet service quality. Established frameworks, including Grönroos [16] three-dimensional framework, encompassing corporate image, technical quality, and functional quality, offered a preliminary basis for evaluating perceived service quality. Nonetheless, this approach did not specifically consider the distinctive characteristics of banquet services. The following presents the measurement scales that have been established and applied in research to date.

SERVQUAL. Introduced by Parasuraman and Zeithaml [12], it conceptualizes service quality as customers’ perceived evaluations of service performance, building on earlier conceptualizations of perceived quality proposed by Zeithaml and Gilly [17]. Parasuraman and Zeithaml [12] developed a 22-item measurement instrument, with items classified into five dimensions of service quality identified by Berry, Parasuraman [18]: “tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy” (p. 36).

SERVPERF. It has been applied in retail, banking, and service industries to evaluate customer satisfaction by emphasizing actual service performance rather than expectations [18]. It is a performance-based scale developed to measure service quality. Unlike the SERVQUAL scale, which evaluate the gap between customer expectation and actual performance, SERVPERE assesses service quality solely by measuring customers’ actual service perceptions [19]. Cronin Jr and Taylor [20] argued that SERVQUAL lacked sufficient conceptual and operational evidence to justify the use of expectation scores, thereby questioning its reliability and explanatory power. As a result, SERVPERF departs from SERVQUAL by focusing only on perceived performance across the five service quality dimensions, eliminating the expectation component altogether. Adil and Al Ghaswyneh [21] also suggested that SERVPERF represents a more efficient and effective tool for measuring service quality, as it reduces respondent burden, limits the number of measurement variables, and yields less biased responses.

DINESERV. Stevens and Knutson [11] developed a tool for restaurants to measure service quality labeled DINESERV. The scale was intended to capture customers’ ongoing perceptions of service quality within foodservice settings. Since its introduction, DINESERV has been widely applied across diverse foodservice operations to examine service quality, customer satisfaction, revisit intention, and word-of-mouth outcomes [22]. Conceptually, DINESERV functions as an industry-specific evaluation framework that assesses customer experiences related to restaurant service delivery, physical facilities, atmospheric conditions, and operational processes. As such, it has provided a robust empirical foundation for understanding the relationships among perceived service quality, customer satisfaction, behavioral intentions, and overall business performance within restaurant contexts [23].

LODGSERV. Knutson and Stevens [24] developed LODGSERV, a service quality index specifically designed to assess service quality in the lodging industry. The instrument consists of a 26-item scale intended to measure hotel guests’ expectations of service quality. LODGSERV adapts the five SERVQUAL dimensions to the lodging context, with particular emphasis on expectation-based evaluation. The study also empirically confirmed the applicability of the five service quality dimensions identified by Parasuraman and Zeithaml [12] within hotel settings. Subsequent research has further supported the robustness of the LODGSERV framework across diverse business environments. For instance, Patton and Stevens [25] demonstrated that the validity and reliability of LODGSERV were sustained in international contexts, including Japan, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Australia, and the United Kingdom, reinforcing its utility as a cross-national service quality measurement tool. Similarly, Akbaba [26] provided empirical evidence that the LODGSERV scale can be effectively applied across different national settings within the hotel industry.

2.2. Limitations of Existing Service Quality Scales for Banquet Services

Although existing measurement scales have substantially advanced service quality evaluation in hospitality research, none were explicitly designed to capture the distinctive characteristics of banquet services, thereby creating a critical gap in the literature. The limitations inherent in current service quality instruments highlight the need for a banquet-specific assessment framework that reflects the operational, spatial, and experiential complexities of banquet service delivery.

In the United States, banquet events account for an estimated 70% of total hotel food and beverage revenue, with weddings alone contributing approximately half of this amount [27]. Given this economic significance, understanding the factors that influence banquet venue selection is essential. Lau and Hui [28] found that, for wedding couples, venue selection represents one of the most consequential planning decisions, with employee attitude, cleanliness, and food quality identified as the three most influential attributes.

Trends further illustrate the growing complexity of banquet services. Vatner [29] observed that leading catering teams increasingly emphasize healthy, sustainable, and high-quality cuisine tailored to event planners’ expectations. In response, hotel chefs have adopted small-batch preparation techniques for large-scale banquets to preserve freshness and quality, while leveraging culinary technology to replicate fine-dining standards within banquet settings. These developments underscore the evolving nature of banquet services as experiential, rather than purely transactional, offerings [29].

Despite these distinctive characteristics, commonly used service quality measurement tools remain inadequate for banquet service contexts. For example, SERVQUAL evaluates service quality across five dimensions but does not adequately capture banquet-specific elements such as venue capacity, event coordination, and catering logistics [18]. Although reliability consistently emerges as the most critical dimension across service industries, three of SERVQUAL’s five dimensions are predominantly human-performance-based and fail to capture the operational and spatial complexities intrinsic to banquet service delivery [17].

Similarly, Akbaba [26] argued that the functional diversity of hotel departments limits the applicability of a single service quality instrument across contexts. Banquet departments, as event-based units, exhibit unique temporal and spatial characteristics that are insufficiently reflected in SERVPERF. Al-Ababneh [30] further contended that generalized service quality scales fail to account for the specialized nature of banquet environments, where comprehensive catering, event planning, and venue management play central roles [28,31]. DINESERV, while effective in assessing restaurant service quality, is likewise inadequate for banquet evaluation. Developed under assumptions of individual table service and payment, DINESERV struggles to represent banquet characteristics such as service simultaneity, precise course timing, and the coordinated flow of large-scale service [10]. Moreover, critical banquet success factors, including large-scale spatial configuration, staff routing, service stations, equipment management, safety logistics, and audiovisual integration, are largely beyond the scope of DINESERV [2]. LODGSERV exhibits similar limitations. Designed to assess lodging experiences, it emphasizes check-in processes, room cleanliness, and guestroom facilities, while neglecting banquet-specific attributes such as large-scale event management, spatial layout, audiovisual coordination, lighting design, and synchronized service delivery [10,26,32].

In summary, while numerous instruments exist for evaluating general and hospitality-specific service quality, none sufficiently capture the distinctive operational, experiential, and managerial attributes of banquet services, despite their substantial economic and strategic importance to full-service hotels. The measurement development of banquet service quality directly addresses this gap by incorporating banquet-specific elements such as event management, catering execution, venue functionality, and guest experience. As a specialized measurement framework, the measurement development of banquet service quality offers a more precise and comprehensive approach to assessing banquet service quality, thereby supporting service improvement initiatives and enhancing client experiences within this critical hospitality segment.

2.3. Sustainability as a Core Dimension of Banquet Service Quality

Nowadays, the concept of sustainability has become one of the core managerial strategies across industries. This is because increasing environmental concerns, resource depletion, climate change, and heightened stakeholder expectations have compelled organizations to operate in a more socially and environmentally responsible manner. Hotel industry also cannot be an exception of it. That is, sustainable management positioned not an optional factor for profit, but an essential competitiveness for survive. Many full-service hotels are offering sustainable service through various initiatives such as energy-efficient facilities, using eco-friendly amenities, reducing single-use products, and implementing food waste reduction programs [33]. In particular, the banquet department requires heightened attention to sustainability, as it concentrates resource consumption due to large guest capacities, intensive lighting and climate control usage, and extensive food and beverage production and waste generation [8]. Therefore, sustainability should not be considered merely as an additional image-related attribute but as a core dimension of banquet service quality. It should be measured as an essential quality factor, integrated with operational efficiency, hygiene, and space management.

3. Method

3.1. Study Participants

The questionnaire survey targeted individuals who had attended a banquet event at a full-service hotel in the United States within the previous 36 months and were at least 21 years of age. The 36-month period was chosen to reflect the relatively low frequency of banquet attendance among the general population-often no more than once per year and secure a sufficient number of eligible participants for statistical analysis. Additionally, the study included only participants aged 21 years or older, in accordance with the legal drinking age in the United States, given that banquet events frequently involve alcohol service. Data were distributed and collected using panels of the Qualtrics online survey company. Although 285 responses were initially obtained, data screening and quality checks resulted in a final usable sample of 216 participants.

3.2. Study Instrument

This study modified the DINESERV instrument [10] to create the BANQSERV scale. The BANQSERV scales are developed based on the DINESERV measurement scale to reflect the structural and operational distinctiveness of banquet service. To ensure the reliability and validity of BANQSERV, the process entailed conceptual reframing and domain expansion to reflect the event-based, large-scale, and system-coordinated attribute of banquet service by referring to DINESERV. For example, in original DINESERV, “The restaurant has visually attractive dining area” is re-generated to the BANQWERV scale “A Banquet in a Full-Service Hotel has amenities such audio visual, setup, and equipment available for guests”. Moreover, DINESERV include items such as “The restaurant makes you feel special,” are created to “A Banquet in a Full-Service Hotel gives extra attention to handle special need or request,” which reflect the heightened symbolic and situational importance of banquet event. In last, DINESERV contain limited items could be applied structural or spatial scalability because restaurant serve their service a fixed layout and relatively stable operational configuration. In order to address this gap, BANQSERV generated new item such as “A Banquet in a Full-Service Hotel has capacity to host small and/or large number of people. Restaurant-specified scales such as individual billing item were eliminated. Through these modifications, BANQSERV is positioned not as a simple derivative of DINESERV, but as a contextually reflected measurement instrument for banquet service quality.

This customized tool consists of 33 items specifically chosen to measure service quality within the banquet departments of full-service hotels. Before data collection, the scale was pretested and adjusted according to expert feedback from both hospitality professionals and academic researchers.

The resulting questionnaire, which takes between approximately ten minutes to complete, is outlined in

Table 1. Banquet Service Quality Statement.

A Banquet in a Full-Service Hotel:
1. has visual, secure, attractive parking areas and building exterior to guests a
2. has a great location and accessibility to freeways
3. has capacity to host small and/or large number of people
4. has a visually attractive banquet ballroom
5. has amenities such audio visual, setup, and equipment available for guests
6. has banquet staff members with clean, neat, and proper uniforms
7. has the furnishing and decoration in keeping with its brand and price range
8. has the visually and physical appearance of food quality menus that reflect the standards of the brand
9. has the banquet ballrooms which are comfortable and easy for guests to explore and move around
10. has clean and presentable restrooms
11. has banquet ballrooms that are thoroughly clean and comply with sanitation laws
12. has comfortable seats in the ballrooms
13. serves guests in a reasonable time as promised
14. quickly addresses the complaints from guests
15. provides a service which is dependable and consistent
16. serves the food as guests requested
17. serves drink as requested within a reasonable time
18. during busy season or night, the staff members assist each other to keep speed and quality service
19. provides prompt and quick service
20. gives extra attention to handle special need or request
21. meets the guest’s expectations
22. has staff members who can answer your questions completely
23. makes guests feel comfortable and confident in your interaction with them
24. has staff members who are knowledgeable and willing to give guest information about menu items, their ingredients, and methods of preparation
25. makes guests feel personally safe
26. has personnel who are well-trained, experienced, and competent
27. seems to give staff members support so that they can perform well in their jobs
28. has staff members who are sensitive to your special wants and needs, rather than always relying on policies and procedures
29. makes guests feel special
30. understands guest’s needs and wants
31. has staff members who are sympathetic and show positive attitude toward guests
32. seems to have the guest’s best interests at heart, such as listening to the guests concerns
33. cares about the environment and uses sustainable products

Note. A total of 216 completed the questionnaire survey. ^a Responses were measured using a five-point Likert scale, where 1 = strongly agree, 2 = agree, 3 = neutral, 4 = disagree, and 5 = strongly disagree.

. Each of the 33 items was assessed using a five-point Likert scale, where 1 represented “strongly agree” and 5 represented “strongly disagree.” To provide further context for the findings, the survey also included a section for socio-demographic details, asking respondents to provide their gender, age, education level, and income bracket.

3.3. Study Analysis

Frequency analyses were conducted to summarize participants’ sociodemographic characteristics. Subsequently, an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was employed to identify the underlying dimensions of banquet service quality in full-service hotels. EFA was selected because no established theoretical framework or prior empirical evidence was available to specify the factor structure of banquet service attributes, allowing indicators to load freely across factors.

Prior to factor extraction, the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy was examined to assess whether the correlation matrix was suitable for factor analysis. KMO values of 0.60 or higher were considered acceptable, indicating that the data were appropriate for factor extraction. Eigenvalues were used as the primary criterion for factor retention, representing the proportion of variance explained by each factor relative to the original variables. In accordance with standard practice, only factors with eigenvalues equal to or greater than 1.00 were retained for further analysis.

Factor extraction was conducted using principal component analysis (PCA), which identifies linear combinations of variables that maximize explained variance in a sequential manner [34]. To enhance interpretability, a varimax rotation was applied, minimizing cross-loadings and producing a more parsimonious factor structure, consistent with common practice in social science research. Internal consistency reliability for each factor was evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha.

In addition, a series of one-way analyses of variance (ANOVA) with Tukey’s Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) post hoc tests were performed to examine whether participant characteristics differed significantly across banquet service quality dimensions and to identify specific group differences when significant effects were observed. All statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS version 28.

4. Results

4.1. Profiles of Study Participants

Of the 216 respondents, 50.5% identified as male and 49.5% as female (see

Table 2. Sociodemographic Profile.

Variable	Number of Respondents	Percentage of Respondents
Gender
Male	109	50.5%
Female	107	49.5%
Total	216	100%
Age
21–30	60	27.8%
31–40	67	31.0%
41–50	43	19.9%
51–60	21	9.7%
Over 61 years old	25	11.6%
Total	216	100%
Education
High school or Equivalent	75	34.7%
Some college or associate (two-year) degree	59	27.3%
Baccalaureate (four-year) degree	50	23.1%
Postgraduate studies	32	14.8%
Total	216	100%
Annual Household Income
Less than $40,000	76	35.2%
$40,000–$59,999	48	22.2%
$60,000–$79,999	27	12.5%
$80,000–$99,999	29	13.4%
$100,000 over	36	16.7%
Total	216	100%

). The largest age group comprised individuals aged 31–40 years (31%), followed by those aged 21–30 years (27.8%), while respondents aged 51–60 years represented the smallest proportion of the sample. This distribution indicates that hotel banquet service users were predominantly between 21 and 50 years of age, a pattern likely associated with greater social participation and purchasing capacity within these cohorts. Regarding educational level, approximately half of the respondents reported having either some college or an associate (two-year) degree (27.3%) or a baccalaureate (four-year) degree (23.1%). In terms of income, about one-third of participants reported annual household incomes exceeding $80,000, a level broadly consistent with the U.S. median household income [35]. Nevertheless, the majority of respondents reported earnings below the national median, suggesting a sample somewhat weighted toward lower- and middle-income households.

4.2. Underlying Banquet Service Quality Dimensions

An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted on the 33-item banquet service quality scale. Using varimax rotation with Kaiser normalization, four distinct factors were extracted and labeled as (1) Facilities & Operations, (2) Service Performance, (3) Guest Care, and (4) Venue Quality. These four factors accounted for approximately 57% of the total variance which is considered relatively modest [36]. The internal consistency of each factor was subsequently assessed using Cronbach’s alpha. Two of the four factors demonstrated strong reliability coefficients exceeding 0.80 [37], whereas Guest Care and Venue Quality yielded acceptable reliability values of 0.79 and 0.69, respectively [38]. Following factor extraction, the mean and standard deviation for each factor were calculated to describe overall respondent perceptions. The results of the EFA and reliability analyses are presented in

Table 3. Banquet Service Quality Dimensions in Full-service Hotels: An Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA).

Dimension & Variable	Mean a (SD) b	Factor Loading	Eigen Value	Percentage of Variance Explained c	Reliability (α)
Facilities & Operations			15.086	45.714	0.926
AV, setup & equipment	1.60 (0.771)	0.696
Access to Ballrooms	1.69 (0.791)	0.643
Clean & presentable restrooms	1.51 (0.715)	0.634
Furniture & Décor	1.64 (0.764)	0.617
Clean banquet ballrooms	1.53 (0.727)	0.610
Food Quality	1.66 (0.730)	0.610
Consistent & dependable service	1.66 (0.819)	0.565
Guest safety	1.66 (0.847)	0.543
Teamwork among staff members	1.75 (0.830)	0.521
Staff with clean & neat uniforms	1.61 (0.877)	0.516
Makes guests feel comfortable	1.68 (0.854)	0.489
Attractive ballrooms	1.64 (0.728)	0.487
Support staff members	1.70 (0.844)	0.486
Service Performance			1.357	4.113	0.922
Attention to special needs	1.72 (0.806)	0.755
Staff answers guests’ questions	1.70 (0.794)	0.683
Experience personnel	1.65 (0.822)	0.652
Serves food as requested	1.66 (0.814)	0.624
Meet guests’ expectations	1.71 (0.809)	0.576
Serves drinks as requested	1.70 (0.775)	0.57
Prompt & quick service	1.70 (0.769)	0.546
Serves on reasonable time	1.64 (0.770)	0.537
Positive attitude to guests	1.63 (0.801)	0.526
Staff menu knowledge	1.74 (0.857)	0.474
Comfortable seats	1.69 (0.790)	0.426
Guest Care			1.252	3.794	0.789
Understand guest’s needs	1.76 (0.877)	0.659
Listen to guests concerns	1.75 (0.807)	0.619
Addresses complaints	1.73 (0.809)	0.607
Cares for the environment	2.03 (0.896)	0.57
Makes guests feel special	1.71 (0.814)	0.491
Cares for guests needs & wants	1.79 (0.776)	0.423
Venue Quality			1.121	3.396	0.690
Location & access	1.72 (0.715)	0.804
Aesthetics of property	1.67 (0.818)	0.646
Capacity to host small & large events	1.56 (0.781)	0.545

Note. Thirty-three items were used for analysis. The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) was 0.966. Principal component analysis for extraction and varimax with Kaiser Normalization for rotation were used for this analysis. ^a Responses were measured using a five-point Likert scale, where 1 = strongly agree, 2 = agree, 3 = neutral, 4 = disagree, and 5 = strongly disagree. ^b SD means Standard Deviation. ^c Total variance explained at 57.017.

.

According to the results of the EFA, four banquet service quality dimensions were identified and collectively labeled as “BANQSERV.” Each dimension was defined based on the variables extracted through the EFA and their corresponding measurement items. A summary of the dimensions, definitions, and representative measurement items is presented in

Table 4. A Summary of BANQSERV Dimensions, Definitions, and Example Measurement Items.

Dimension	Definition	Example Measurement Items
Facilities & Operations	The quality and reliability of banquet facilities, equipment, cleanliness, food provision, and coordinated operations that support a smooth and well-managed event.	AV, setup & equipment; Clean banquet ballrooms; Clean & presentable restrooms; Food quality; Consistent & dependable service; Teamwork among staff members; Staff with clean & neat uniforms
Service Performance	The extent to which banquet staff deliver timely, accurate, knowledgeable, and courteous service that meets guests’ expectations during the event.	Serves food as requested; Serves drinks as requested; Prompt & quick service; Serves on reasonable time; Staff menu knowledge; Staff answers guests’ questions; Positive attitude to guests
Guest Care	The degree to which banquet services demonstrate empathy and attentiveness by understanding guest needs, addressing concerns, and making guests feel valued.	Understand guest’s needs; Listen to guests’ concerns; Addresses complaints; Makes guests feel special; Cares for guests’ needs & wants; Attention to special needs
Venue Quality	The attractiveness, accessibility, and capacity of the property to effectively host small and large banquet events.	Location & access; Aesthetics of property; Capacity to host small & large events

.

4.3. Comparison Between BANQSERV Dimensions and Age

A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to examine whether respondents’ age groups differed significantly in their perceptions of the four banquet service quality (BANQSERV) dimensions. Age was categorized into five groups: (1) 21–30 years, (2) 31–40 years, (3) 41–50 years, (4) 51–60 years, and (5) 61 years and older. When statistically significant effects were identified, Tukey’s Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) post hoc tests were performed to determine specific group differences. All statistically significant results are reported in

Table 5. Comparison of Age: An ANOVA test.

	Age
BANQSERV Dimension	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	F Test	Sig.	Post Hoc Test
	(N = 60)	(N = 67)	(N = 43)	(N = 21)	(N = 25)
Facilities & Operations	1.76 a	1.53	1.52	1.37	1.30	3.763	0.014 *	1 < 5
Service Performance	1.81	1.52	1.52	1.42	1.43	3.422	0.025 *	1 < 2, 4
Guest Care	1.88	1.60	1.57	1.68	1.53	3.277	0.067	N/A b
Venue Quality	1.72	1.51	1.55	1.51	1.47	1.529	0.333	N/A

Note. (1) 21–30 years old; (2) 31–40 years old; (3) 41–50 years old; (4) 51–60 years old; (5) Over 61 years old. ^a Responses were measured using a five-point Likert scale, where 1 = strongly agree, 2 = agree, 3 = neutral, 4 = disagree, and 5 = strongly disagree. ^b N/A means Not Available. * p < 0.05.

.

The results revealed statistically significant age-related differences for the Facilities & Operations category, F = 4.007, p = 0.008. Specifically, respondents aged 61 years and older (M = 1.30) reported significantly higher mean scores than those aged 21–40 years (M = 1.53). This finding suggests that older guests place greater importance on operational service excellence and the quality of the physical environment compared with younger guests. Additionally, statistically significant differences were observed regarding the Service Performance. Respondents aged 31–40 years (M = 1.52) and those aged 51–60 years (M = 1.42) reported significantly higher mean scores than participants aged 21–30 years (M = 1.81). These results indicate that middle-aged guests are more sensitive to the quality of direct service interactions between banquet staff and guests during events than younger attendees.

4.4. Comparison Between BANQSERV Dimensions and Education

To examine whether statistically significant differences existed between the BANQSERV dimensions and respondents’ educational level, a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted, followed by Tukey’s Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) post hoc tests. Educational level was categorized into four groups: (1) high school or equivalent, (2) some college or associate (two-year) degree, (3) baccalaureate (four-year) degree, and (4) postgraduate studies. The results of these analyses are presented in

Table 6. Comparison of Education: An ANOVA test.

	Education
BANQSERV Dimension	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	F Test	Sig.	Post Hoc Test
	(N = 75)	(N = 59)	(N = 50)	(N = 32)
Facilities & Operations	1.74 a	1.42	1.54	1.38	4.007	0.008 *	1 < 2, 4
Service Performance	1.77	1.48	1.55	1.38	3.670	0.013 *	1 < 2, 4
Guest Care	1.82	1.59	1.72	1.39	3.578	0.015 *	1 < 4
Venue Quality	1.75	1.48	1.53	1.39	3.252	0.023 *	1 < 4

Note. (1) High School or Equivalent; (2) Some college or associate (two-year) degree; (3) Baccalaureate (four-year) degree; (4) Post-graduate studies. ^a Responses were measured using a five-point Likert scale, where 1 = strongly agree, 2 = agree, 3 = neutral, 4 = disagree, and 5 = strongly disagree. * p < 0.05.

.

The findings revealed statistically significant mean differences across educational groups for all four BANQSERV dimensions. Respondents with postgraduate education consistently reported significantly higher mean scores than those whose highest level of education was a high school diploma or equivalent. These results indicate that more highly educated guests hold more elevated expectations across multiple dimensions of banquet service quality.

Specifically, these guests (post-graduate studies) place greater importance on the effective integration of physical infrastructure, staff coordination, and service reliability to ensure a comfortable, secure, and professionally managed event environment (Facilities & Operations). They also emphasize timely service delivery, clear communication, staff expertise, and a positive, guest-oriented attitude that enhances overall comfort and satisfaction (Service Performance). In addition, highly educated guests expect banquet service providers to move beyond basic functional performance by demonstrating care, sensitivity, and commitment to guests’ broader well-being and values (Guest Care). Finally, they assign greater value to venue accessibility, aesthetic appeal, and spatial flexibility that enable the successful accommodation of events of varying sizes (Venue Quality).

4.5. Comparison Between BANQSERV Dimensions and Gender & Income

Interestingly, no statistically significant differences were found in gender and income groups. With respect to gender, banquet services are characterized as collective, event-based experiences rather than individualized consumption. Moreover, banquet guests typically experience a standardized service environment. Therefore, guests are more likely to evaluate whether the event was smoothly executed overall or not than exhibit structural differences in emotional consumption based on gender. Regarding income level, the nature of banquet service may also explain the absence of difference. Since banquet guests are often not direct payers, which may reduce the influence of income-based expectation difference.

5. Discussion

The results of this study make a unique contribution to the hospitality industry because most prior service quality research has focused on contexts such as retail, lodging, casinos, and restaurants, which were primarily designed to assess transactional or dining-related service encounters [10,12,24,30]. In contrast, banquet services represent a more complex and multifaceted service environment. To date, relatively little scholarly attention has been given to understanding the nature and scope of banquet service quality in full-service hotels, where service delivery extends beyond food & beverage provision to include event coordination, spatial management, and human-centered services associated with social, corporate, and ceremonial events.

5.1. Theoretical Implications

The BANQSERV study offers important theoretical implications. First, this study advances service quality theory by extending it into an underexplored, event-based hospitality context. While dominant frameworks such as SERVQUAL [12], SERVPERF [39], DINESERV [10], and LODGSERV [24] were developed for transactional or continuous service environments (e.g., restaurants, lodging, retail), BANQSERV conceptualizes banquet service as a hybrid service system that integrates foodservice, event management, spatial coordination, and human-centered interaction. This reconceptualization broadens the theoretical boundaries of service quality by recognizing banquet services as episodic, high-stakes, and temporally bounded experiences rather than routine service encounters.

Second, the four-factor structure identified through exploratory factor analysis challenges the assumed universality of the traditional five-dimensional service quality models. The emergence of Facilities & Operations, Service Performance, Guest Care, and Venue Quality as distinct dimensions suggests that service quality perceptions are context-dependent and structurally contingent on service environments. This finding contributes to service quality theory by demonstrating that dimensional structures are not transferable wholesale across hospitality sub-sectors, reinforcing calls for domain-specific scale development.

Finally, this study establishes a foundational theoretical platform for future banquet-focused research. By validating BANQSERV as a multidimensional construct grounded in empirical evidence, the study enables subsequent theoretical testing across cultures, event types, and hotel segments, facilitating theory building rather than mere theory application. In doing so, BANQSERV shifts banquet service quality research from a derivative extension of restaurant models toward a standalone theoretical domain within the hospitality and event management literature.

5.2. Sustainable and Managerial Implications

The findings yield clear managerial and sustainability-focused implications for full-service hotels operating banquet departments. Guest evaluations consistently prioritize fundamental conditions of hygiene, spatial readiness, and operational reliability, suggesting that investments in sanitation, preventive maintenance, and capacity planning remain the most effective levers for improving perceived banquet value. From a sustainability standpoint, maintaining clean, regulation-compliant restrooms and ballrooms through efficient cleaning schedules, environmentally responsible products, and staff coordination not only enhances guest confidence but also supports long-term resource efficiency and risk reduction.

The results further indicate that banquet service strategies should be aligned with client demographics to maximize operational effectiveness. Middle-aged and well-educated clients place heightened importance on seamless execution, professional presentation, and technological readiness. Hotels can respond by emphasizing reliable audiovisual infrastructure, standardized service protocols, and well-trained staff who demonstrate accuracy, and confidence during event delivery. Such targeted service design reduces service failures, minimizes waste associated with last-minute corrections, and improves labor productivity.

From a managerial perspective, the study underscores the importance of integrating sustainability into everyday banquet operations rather than treating it as a peripheral initiative. Efficient room turnovers, coordinated teamwork during event transitions, and proactive equipment checks contribute simultaneously to service consistency and reduced energy, material, and labor inefficiencies. Similarly, visible staff professionalism, supported through appropriate uniforms, training, and organizational support, reinforces brand credibility while fostering employee accountability and service consistency.

Overall, the findings suggest that competitive advantage in banquet services is achieved through disciplined attention to core operational fundamentals, adaptive service customization, and sustainable resource management. Hotels that systematically monitor guest-valued service attributes and translate them into focused operational practices are better positioned to deliver reliable event experiences, strengthen repeat demand, and sustain performance in an increasingly competitive and sustainability-conscious hospitality environment.

6. Conclusions

This study contributes to the hospitality literature by developing and validating BANQSERV, a banquet-specific service quality scale for full-service hotels. Unlike existing service quality models designed for transactional or continuous service settings, BANQSERV conceptualizes banquet services as event-based experiences that integrate foodservice, spatial coordination, and human-centered service delivery. In doing so, the study addresses a critical gap in the literature and establishes banquet services as a distinct domain of service quality research.

The results support a four-dimensional structure, Facilities & Operations, Service Performance, Guest Care, and Venue Quality, demonstrating that service quality perceptions in banquet contexts are structurally different from traditional hospitality models. Guests consistently emphasized tangible and operational fundamentals highly, particularly restroom and ballroom cleanliness, sanitation compliance, and the capacity to host events of varying sizes. These attributes loaded prominently with the factor structure, highlighting the central role of hygiene, operational reliability, and spatial readiness in shaping banquet experiences.

Managerially, the findings suggest that paying consistent attention to core operational standards may be closely aligned with guest evaluation of banquet service quality. Targeted investments in sanitation, preventive maintenance, and reliable event infrastructure appear to correspond with attributes that guest evaluate favorably. Overall, BANQSERV offers hotel managers a practical diagnostic tool to align service delivery with guest-valued attributes, strengthen repeat demand, and sustain performance in an increasingly competitive and sustainability-conscious event market.

Finally, although sustainability was not identified as a prominent factor in this study, its conceptual relevance to banquet service quality warrants theoretical consideration. This is because banquet services are comprehensive hospitality services involving large-scale food production, energy consumption, and huge amounts of water usage. From a system-based perspective, operational efficiency, minimized resource waste, and a reduced footprint are closely incorporated with sustainable resource management. Accordingly, the current finding could be interpreted as preliminary conceptual insight into how sustainability may be operationally embedded within a banquet service system.

7. Limitations and Future Research

Despite its contributions, this study has several limitations that should be considered when interpreting the findings and that offer clear directions for future research, particularly from a sustainability perspective.

This study represents the initial development of the BANQSERV scale through the adaptation of DINESERV, and its psychometric properties should be considered preliminary. Although DINESERV offered a valuable theoretical starting point, it was originally developed for restaurant contexts and does not fully capture the system-based and event-driven complexity inherent in banquet service quality. Accordingly, BANQSERV should be interpreted as an exploratory and foundational measurement framework rather than a fully exhaustive instrument. Future research is encouraged to extend the scale by incorporating additional system-level dimensions and to employ confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) with independent samples to further validate the factor structure and rigorously assess convergent and discriminant validity.

The sample was limited to full-service hotels in the United States and relied on an online Qualtrics panel. While appropriate for exploratory scale development, this sampling frame constrains generalizability. Banquet services in resort hotels, luxury properties, and international destinations may emphasize sustainability-related attributes differently, such as energy-efficient venues, waste reduction, or locally sourced food. Accordingly, future studies should extend BANQSERV to diverse hospitality contexts and cross-national settings to examine cultural and regulatory differences in sustainable banquet service expectations.

Finally, from a sustainability standpoint, although this study acknowledges the relevance of environmental and socially responsible practices, sustainability-related attributes were not fully reflected in the BANQSERV dimensions. As environmental responsibility and social sustainability become increasingly salient in guest evaluations, future studies should examine whether sustainability needs to interact with existing banquet service quality dimensions.