AD ALTA
JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH
lack of serving coffee. More than 80% of restaurants served
coffee without water; waiters did not use trays for serving
dishes, etc. Beverage and food service was the full competence
of the waiter, and there were no procedures and standards
regarding serving (table 7). Probably, there was a reason why
several times the orders were changed (different kinds of food)
or forgotten (1 ½ hour waiting for a burger, 30 minutes waiting
time for drinks).
Table 7: Order process
Restau-
rant
Salutation
WT
Order
WT
WT for
drinks
WT for
food
Service
Total
points
R1
2
2
2
2
0
8
R2
2
1
0
0
0
3
R3
2
2
2
2
0
8
R4
2
2
1
2
0
7
R5
2
2
1
2
0
7
R6
2
2
2
2
0
8
R7
2
2
2
2
0
8
R8
2
2
2
2
0
8
R9
2
2
2
2
0
8
R10
2
2
2
2
0
8
R11
2
2
1
2
1
8
R12
1
2
1
2
0
6
R13
0
2
2
2
0
6
R14
2
2
2
2
1
9
R15
2
2
2
2
0
8
Note: WT – waiting time
Source: Own elaboration, 2020.
f) Payment process. This category evaluated the behavior of
staff after quest consumption. Waiting time for a receipt is one
of the criteria. The average waiting time for the receipt was
approximately 5 minutes. Two restaurants prepared the
incorrect bills. They charged not ordered food or made other
mistakes. Some of the waiters did not say „Goodbye“. In most
cases, it was due to the overcrowded restaurant (table 8).
Table 8: Payment process
Restaurant
Waiting time for
bill/receipt
Send-off with
guest
Total points
R1
2
1
3
R2
2
2
4
R3
2
0
2
R4
0
0
0
R5
2
2
4
R6
2
2
4
R7
0
0
0
R8
2
1
3
R9
2
2
4
R10
2
2
4
R11
2
2
4
R12
2
1
3
R13
2
0
2
R14
2
2
4
R15
2
2
4
Source: Own elaboration, 2020.
g) Staff – delivery person. The mentioned category evaluated
visage, behavior, professionalism of the waiter. Direct
marketing was also observed.
If we focused on the uniform dress code for staff, we have to
state that 50% of employees were identified with the corporate
identity dress code (a nameplate was an exception). Some of
the waiters wore casual clothes, not different from everyday
guest clothes. Professionalism was not evaluated well. The
majority of the staff did not know the basic rules of serving
drinks and food. Direct marketing as a sales increasing tool was
used in several cases. This type of offer is more common for
hotel restaurants or family business (table 9).
Table 9: Staff – delivery person
Restau-
rant
Visage
Behavior
Professionalism
Direct
marketing
Total
points
R1
1
1
0
1
3
R2
2
1
0
0
3
R3
2
1
1
1
5
R4
1
1
0
0
2
R5
2
1
1
0
4
R6
1
1
0
1
3
R7
1
1
0
1
3
R8
1
0
0
0
1
R9
2
1
0
0
3
R10
2
1
1
0
4
R11
2
1
0
1
4
R12
0
1
0
1
2
R13
1
0
0
0
1
R14
2
1
1
1
5
R15
2
1
0
1
4
Source: Own elaboration, 2020.
According to our research, we can state that better results of
mystery shopping evaluation had the resort restaurants. We
guess the reason is precisely determined corporate quality
standards (figure 6).
Figure 6: The research results (1)
2D Plot of Row and Column Coordinates; Dimension: 1 x 2
Input Table (Rows x Columns): 8 x 5
Standardization: Row and column profiles
hotel restaurant
restaurant
coffee house
canteen
average
very poor
poor
excellent
good
-1,5
-1,0
-0,5
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
Dimension 1; Eigenvalue: ,60699 (41,23% of Inertia)
-1,5
-1,0
-0,5
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
D
im
ens
ion 2;
E
ige
nva
lu
e:
,
518
71 (
35,
23
%
of
I
ne
rt
ia
)
family restaurant
tavern
hotel bar
golf resort restaurant
Between 29 and 26 points had small restaurants with a unique
concept, e.g., little family business with homemade product,
surf restaurant, a tavern with local specialties. The restaurants
that received less than 24 points, were generally overcrowded,
sharing information for guests was confusing. The major
problem was the non-professional staff.
The restaurants with the best evaluation in our rating get around
90% of maximum points. The worst evaluation was 49% of
possible points (table 10). The guest satisfaction is principally
influenced by the behavior of the staff and food quality
(appearance, taste, size, shape, color, gloss, and consistency).
Some specialized equipment is welcomed, and it can increase
guest satisfaction and restaurant attractiveness. Such special
services are kids’ corner, seasonal food offers, local specialties,
fresh fish, etc. We recognized the overcrowded place with noise
as the greatest failure in worse evaluated restaurants. The guests
could not feel the place genius loci in such an atmosphere.
Table 10: The research results (2)
Restau-
rant
Total
points
Note
R11
36
bad English
R14
35
daily menu
R10
35
beautiful place, friendly staff
R15
30
tables very close to one another
R5
29
nice staff
R6
28
unisex toilet/restroom
R3
28
very nice and friendly staff
R9
27
mislabeled toilet/restroom sign
R1
27
little family business
delicious home-made pasta, nice authentic atmosphere
R7
26
no guests, drink forgotten, order changed without informing
the guest
R4
24
overcrowded
R8
23
bad English, staff were not willing to help
R12
20
mislabeled restaurant sign
R13
19
overcrowded, self-service, no necessary information for
guests (opening hours, accessibility, etc.)
R2
19
very slow service, confused order, waiting time for food
more than 1 hour
Source: Own elaboration, 2020.
The restaurant service quality is difficult to evaluate because
the assessments are made on both the service outcome and on
the process of service delivery. Some researchers suggested that
food quality, the physical environment, and service are the
major components of overall restaurant service quality (Dulen
1999; Susskind & Chan 2000; Ryu & Han 2010; in Marković et
- 303 -