The interesting thing about all of these sites is that, while some still focus on retail, they all have experience based ‘deals’ available.  Upscale and luxury hotels and spas are more prevalent on the sites like Gilt, Haute Look and Rue La La with vacations offered at well-renowned resorts and featured with amazing deals on various dates.  Groupon has a different concept altogether as, if enough participants do not purchase, the deal is off.  The deals are centered around the local market and most often are experiences including restaurants, spas and other activities. 

As a spa director, restaurant owner or hotelier there are some considerable pros and cons.  First, while the exposure of such a promotion will be broad, client retention is a gamble at best.  Also, while the deal may draw traffic in a short period of time (a plus if done over slow periods), the lower profit margin may simply not be worth it.  You have to ask yourself as well if these really are the customers you want.  If they don’t buy wine, or use your restaurant, your lowered margins may be smaller than you think.  They definitely are if you new guest leaves your guestroom littered with food packaging they brought from outside, or brings three friends along to use your facilities. 

Finally, is your discount-seeking guest your guest?  There is an unquantifiable, but real cost when your well-heeled, corporate-rated business traveler ends up waiting for an elevator only to have Donny Discounter and his inebriated and ever animated posse spill out.  If you have a lounge, this can take a more direct effect.

Also, many skeptics say that it may create a new consumer altogether; one that follows deals and does not become loyal to any one spa, restaurant or brand. 

From the consumer perspective, myself included, Groupon has encouraged me to try experiences at establishments I most likely would not have visited.  Some have gained me as a loyal customer while others have failed to impress.  Unfortunately, when the motivation to buy is strictly ‘art of the deal’ you get what Walter Kirn in this week’s NY Times Magazine aptly calls “procedural voyeurism” which can be described as a fixation on “a compulsive preoccupation with transactions instead of actions and with negotiating maneuvers instead of outcomes.”

So is it the experience your organization provides that the consumer wants, or is your business just the next scene in the consumer’s epic and heroic journey of fantastic deal-making? I know for certain that if it was the deal, the buyer thought they were getting what you offer non-discounted buyers.  So, when a group of college students roll to the front desk of your 4-Star Hotel in flannel shirts and back-packs, they expect and deserve the 4-Star experience. 

That’s the deal.

I appreciated his emphasis on the importance of really creating a salon space in the spa, not just adding a few chairs.  The reality of salon smells and noise need to be considered before these services are provided in a spa setting. 

In providing salon services, spas have a unique opportunity to provide relaxation to more clients.  Salon services are often seen as more of a necessity than spa services, and spas can use that opportunity to provide the additional amenities that turn a basic service into a spa experience. 

While living in Indonesia, I took every opportunity to receive a cream bath treatment at a salon.  This was a deep conditioning hair treatment that included a thorough head, arm/hand massage, a brief pressure back massage and steam.  This was a relaxing treatment that was enjoyed by men and women.  As it was provided in the salon setting, it seemed to be more of a beauty enhancing treatment with long term benefits for my hair than a relaxation only treatment, although it provided both. 

If more salons were able to add such services, providing stress-relieving treatments with beauty benefits, they may be able to expand their clientele to salon loyals.

As demonstrated in the table above, 83% indicated that an email from a spa manager or concierge to check on satisfaction would be welcome.  65% indicated that an email with special offers would also be acceptable.  41% also stated that an email from the therapist or service provider would be a preferable way to follow up.  While the method that appears to be most prominent in spas is a telephone follow-up, today’s spa consumer seems to prefer the unobtrusive email over a phone call.  This indicates that they want to have an easy means to respond on their own time if they see fit.

As a spa professional, instead of guessing or worrying about who you will offend by following up, why not provide an addendum to the medical questionnaire you already have the client filling out and asking how they prefer to be contacted post-treatment.  This way, we once again please the consumer by identifying their needs and customizing service to them.

In best spa experiences, post-spa results were mentioned 24% of the time and in worst spa experiences, they were mentioned 10% of the time.  As shown in the charts above, the reasons for each were quite similar.  In poor experiences, guests felt pain, a lack of relaxation, a sense that the treatment was ineffective, a lack of pampering, allergic reactions and not feeling rejuvenated.

On the contrary, in positive guest experiences, relaxation, effectiveness of the treatment, rejuvenation and stress reduction were all mentioned.  Relaxation was the number one response for best experiences while being in pain and a lack of relaxation were the top two in negative experiences.   Unlike many other businesses, the spa is held responsible for how their customers felt the next day.

It is understandable that not every treatment will go as planned and not every therapist is the right match or practices the appropriate communication for every guest.  Instead of letting a guest leave the spa and experience pain the next day while blaming the therapist, or not getting the benefits they expected out of the massage, why not find out about the problem first-hand and try to remedy it?

Check out our next blog post to see what the consumers had to say about post-visit follow-up.

This is all positive news.  As we learned in the previous sections of this report, the educated consumer is doing their research ahead of time and selecting a spa based on their research.  They are probably making a purchase within a range they think is reasonable and, as long as they get what they pay for and their expectations are met, price is not the issue.  That is not to say, however, that the savvy consumer is not shopping your competitors and determining where the best prices are.  Once they have selected your spa, though, if you deliver value with quality service and product, they should be content.

When looking at negative spa experiences, atmosphere was the most mentioned reason.  This stemmed mainly from noise, temperature, a crowded feeling, a bland/sterile or lack of relaxing atmosphere, disruptive guests or bad lighting.  These things are all relatively easy to change and/or monitor more carefully in the spa.  Atmosphere also accounted for the most positive mentions with things like a relaxing/soothing environment, general atmosphere, music and quiet being provided as top responses.

On another positive note, cleanliness, arguably the easiest thing to change, was mentioned second most when guests recounted negative experiences.  Though it is disturbing that cleanliness came up this frequently, it is positive that spas can rectify such issues more readily and with minimal-to-no capital investment.

The absence of amenities such as water, snacks, wine, spa products, robes and other features were mentioned third most frequently in worst experiences.  Again, positive for the spa professional as these things are moderately difficult to change.  Guests mentioning their best experiences found these things really do add value to the experience.

Facilities, the most difficult to change, were only mentioned in 6% of spa worst experiences.  They were, however, mentioned in 22% of spa best experiences.  This indicates that, while expensive and more intense to modify, facilities such as spa features, pools, cafes and relaxation rooms are truly enhancing guest experiences at spas on a positive level.

1. Inappropriate pressure/touch (21%)
2. Staff not listening/not responsive (12%)
3. Too much conversation (10%)
4. Treatment felt rushed (9%)
5. Pushy sales (8%)
6. Unfriendly/not personable staff (6%)

On the contrary, when guests were recounting their best spa experiences, ‘People’ were mentioned only 49% of the time.  The most prevalent praises included:

1. Well qualified/well trained staff (23%)
2. Friendly/personable staff (18%)
3. Professional staff (12%)
4. Personalized service (8%)
5. Intuitive service/paid attention to needs (8%)
6. No pushy sales (8%)

As indicated by the attributes mentioned most, much of the positive or negative experience was attributed to the skill and technique of the therapist or provider.  Again, customization appeared high on the list, as did the staff demeanor and delivery.  This is also evident in the following chart, where the departments relevant to treatments or services were generally mentioned more heavily than the support team.

Also, as seen in the chart above, most mentions were general, however of the best and worst experiences, massage was still the most mentioned at 29% for both best and worst experiences.

As it is understood that massage is the most frequently experienced treatment at the full-service level, this makes sense, however those spa professionals that overlook massage, thinking that there is limited training necessary, should beware.  Ensuring that customers receive consistent, quality massages is perhaps more important than all the extra training on the specialty treatment on the menu.

In Coyle’s Best/Worst Experience survey, we asked which spa provided the best experience and which one provided the worst experience. We then asked ‘Why?’ After creating a carefully calibrated scorecard, we saw three main categories emerge that caused both great and bad experiences: People, Product and Price.

As seen in the corresponding charts above, when spa guests mentioned their worst experiences, people came up most often.  When mentioning their best spa experiences, guests cited product most often.  Interestingly, in both best and worst experiences, price was mentioned the least, suggesting that price is not what makes an emotional impact on most guests.

We will take a look at each individually in upcoming posts.

It is this last reason that brings up perhaps the most interesting point.   Should the initial booking interaction be static, or should it be collaborative, a human-to-human exchange?

Our data shows that some consumers prefer the person-to-person contact.  The data also showed that consumers like having all of their questions answered, and they really appreciate a sense of customization; a feeling that the offerings have been crafted for them, guaranteeing a delightful outcome.   We have learned that some clients really prefer calling over booking online and some spas don’t have any other option.

So with all the limitations a telephone call presents (with limited hours to accept reservation calls dictated by the spa’s operating hours) shouldn’t the process be outstanding?  At least it should do what the internet can not yet do, which is conduct dialogue in the way that dialogue is most effective.

In nearly 100 calls made to spas worldwide, we measured the interactions and asked impressions about the best and worst parts of the call.

In addition to asking evaluators to respond to specific yes/no questions, Coyle also asked on a scale of 1 to 10 (1 being extremely unfavorable and 10 being extremely favorable) how the evaluator would rate their impression of the spa based on the reservation call.  Below, we have taken those responses and provided the scores for each standard overall (not considering the rating); for the very unfavorable calls (ratings of 1-2); and for the very favorable calls (ratings of 9-10).

In the Global Spa Survey, Coyle asked consumers what treatments they have booked and would be willing to book online.  The findings are as follows:

Interestingly, nearly half of the respondents confirmed that they have booked a massage online.  The percentages decline for the other services, but the decrease in frequency seems to mirror demand and sales mix for these modalities as well.

For those who would not be willing to book a treatment online, we asked ‘Why?’  The most prevalent responses from those surveyed were that they would prefer to be able to ask specific questions about the service or treatment or they would just prefer to speak with a ‘live’ person (11% for each).

Specific questions about the provider were also cited (5%).  Interestingly, 4% said that they would need to visit the location before booking a treatment online.  This dovetailed with those who wanted to get a ‘feel for the spa’ through a phone call.  Other respondents stated that they simply would never book online because they would never use anyone but the person they know.  This is interesting, particularly since many online booking portals offer the ability to select the provider.

It seems likely that by providing additional information to the online shopper like staff bio/specialties, list of contraindications, description of benefits or other details relevant to the treatment they are selecting, could convert those ‘on the edge’ to being online bookers.  Also, a bit of education for repeat guests, advising them of online booking capabilities, could save phone time for both the spa and consumer.

Either way, it is clear that the stated resistance to book online was fairly low, and again we see an opportunity for the resourceful spa operator given that only 30% of the spas evaluators researched offered online booking.