A Report On

Theory of Planned Behavior to green hotel choice: Testing the effect of environmental friendly activities

Course Code: MST-326

Course Title: Entrepreneurship Development and Business Environment

Submitted To
Dr. Mohammad Muzahidul Islam
Professor & Chairman
Department of Management Studies
Faculty of Business Administration & Management
&
Abdulla Al-Towfiq Hasan
Assistant Professor
Department of Marketing
Faculty of Business Administration & Management

Submitted By
Md. Tazwarul Islam Tasnim
On behalf of Group A
Id No:1703013; Reg No: 07654
Level-3, Semester-2
Session: 2017-18
Faculty of Business Administration and management

Date of Submission: June 05, 2021

Patuakhali Science & Technology University

Dumki, Patuakhali-8602
 Faculty of Business Administration and management
Patuakhali Science & Technology University

Attendance Report
Level : 3
Semester : II
Course code : MST-326
Course title : Entrepreneurship Development and Business Environment

Group Members Details

Id No. Reg. No. Name Signature

1703001 07642 Ehsanul Hasib Pranto
1703002 07643 Sk. Khalid Uz-Zaman
1703003 07644 Golam Rabbani Rasha
1703009 07650 Faysal Mahmud
1703010 07651 Md. Sakil Ahmed
1703013 07654 Md. Tazwarul Islam Tasnim
1703014 07655 Nafis Fuad
1703016 07657 Mehedi Hasan Anik
1703017 07658 Anindita Rai
1703018 07659 Chanda Mehzabin
1703023 07664 Md. Ibrahim Howlader
1703024 07665 Apurba Das Dipta
1703026 07667 Ahmmed Rezwan
1703028 07669 Partho Pratim Adhikary
1703029 07670 Md. Abrar Shahriar Khan
1703030 07671 Ataure Rahman

Page | 2
1. Introduction
Concerns about the environment have steadily increased over the previous few decades
(Kalafatis, Pollard, East, & Tsogas, 1999; Laroche, Bergeron, & Barbaro-Forleo, 2001).
Consumers have acknowledged the influence of their purchasing choices, which are strongly
linked to environmental problems, in an increasingly environmentally conscious economy
(Laroche et al., 2001). Customers that care about the environment are increasingly seeking out
and purchasing eco-friendly products over alternatives, sometimes even paying extra for them
(Laroche et al., 2001). Customers' desires for green establishments have been gradually
expanding in the hotel business, which is consistent with this phenomenon. Many hotel guests
are now looking for hotels that follow eco-friendly practices, as they are aware of the
environmental damages (e.g., emissions released into the air, water, and soil) and the
wasting/harming of environmental resources (e.g., excessive consumption of non-durable goods,
energy, and water) caused by hotels (APAT, 2002; Manaktola & Jauhari, 2007). As a result,
marketers in a variety of lodging establishments have grown more proactive in implementing
green practices and promoting environmental programs and initiatives (Brown, 1996; Chan &
Wong, 2006).
Green hotel is an environmentally friendly lodging establishment that uses eco-friendly programs
and practices by saving water and power, reducing solid waste, and saving costs to help protect
our world (GHA, 2008). As a green hotel is increasingly looking for green businesses, it can
form a basis for strong marketing strategies in that its environmentally friendly activities may
help to position it differently in the competitive arena (Manaktola & Jauhari, 2007). Green hotels
eventually benefit from a competitive lead and distinguish from similar, but non-green
operations and meet the needs of our customers for approximately mentally friendly hotels e.g.,
reductions in energy consumption and operational costs, improved image, coping with
government regulations and positive public performance in the future (APAT, 2002; Enz &
Siguaw,1999; GHA, 2008; Penny, 2007). The green hotel company is regarded to be a niche in
the competitive accommodation market today (Manaktola & Jauhari, 2007).
In terms of lodging industry, little is known from previous. But, customers have chosen the green
strategies. Green hotel follows customers thinking, needs and social factors. Theory of Planned
Behavior (TPB) helps to get customer good relation and customer behavior. Theory of Reasoned
Action focuses on individual’s intention formation (Ajzen, 1985 & Park 2003). Customers need

Page | 3
depends on social and cultural factors. Green hotel plans for cultural and social factors on which
the hotel can satisfy and make space in customers mind. Proper steps should be taken for
permanent customer. Green strategy is standard for hotel.
Overall, the goal of this study was to see if TPB could be used to explain why hotel guests
choose to stay in a green hotel. The study's precise goals were to: 1) identify key belief items for
each predictor construct of intention to stay in a green hotel (attitude, subjective norm, and
perceived behavioral control), 2) compare TRA, TPB, and modified TPB models, and 3)
examine correlations between study variables. As an additional analysis in the TPB model, this
study looked at the impacts of environmentally friendly activities (EFAs) on the relationships
between antecedents of intention and intention. According to previous study, environmentally
conscientious customers who regularly practice EFAs in their daily lives are more likely to
engage in environmentally beneficial purchase behaviors (Kalafatis et al., 1999; Roberts, 1991;
Shabecoff, 1993). As a result, the strength of the pathways was evaluated between high and low
EFA groups. This was primarily founded on the hypothesis that consumers with high EFA as
daily habits have a different tendency to establish a desire to choose a green hotel than customers
with low EFA. TRA, TPB, and the conceptual framework that supports the research hypotheses
are described in the next section. Procedures for identifying belief items, developing measures,
and collecting and analyzing data are illustrated in the methodology section. Finally, the results
and discussion sections address the study's findings, consequences, and recommendations for
further research.

2. Conceptual Framework:
2.1 Two Theories: TRA (Theory of Reasoned Action) and TPB (Theory of Planned
Behavior)
The idea of intention is central to TRA, as defined by Ajzen (1985), “it is a person’s motive that
drives him to make a conscious decision to exert effort in completing certain behavior. “As
majority of human behaviors are volitional and influenced by intention, they can be predicted”,
as mentioned in TRA (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). In other words, when it comes to making a
decision, people control their volitional behavior more strictly and thus make reasonable
decision. Lam & Hsu (2004); Lee (2005); Sheppard, Hartwick, & Warshaw (1988) all stated that
the Theory of Reasoned Action has been widely used to forecast factors like behavioral
intentions, behaviors in marketing sectors and behavior of consumer due to its great predictive
Page | 4
potential. TRA claims that behavioral intention is determined by two factors: attitude toward
conducting a behavior and subjective norm (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975).
These two determinants of behavioral intention are linked to behavioral and normative ideas,
respectively.
Ajzen (1985, 1991) explained, “TPB is an addition to TRA.” However, there is a vivid
distinction that differentiates the two theories. TPB includes an extra dimension called perceived
behavioral control. It has the role of foreseeing behavioral intention and TRA does not have this
function. This function is connected to CBs (Control Beliefs). TPB broadens the scope of
volitionally controlled TRA. It is done by adding a new factor, belief factor. The belief factor is
about having the necessary resources and chances to conduct a certain behavior (Madden, Ellen,
& Ajzen, 1992). Ajzen (1985); Park (2003) revealed, “The application of TRA has been under
question as the behavior of and individual can be influenced by some non-volitional elements
like resources. TRA is unable to anticipate a person's purpose or conduct in this condition.
Example: A hotel customer can have a positive attitude toward green hotels and perceives
general pressure of society to do so, the customer will not be able to stay there if the price is
unreasonably high, if he or she is encouraged to visit a specific hotel by the travel expense
bearing company, or if the hotel’s location is unfavorable. In this case, TPB would be a far better
choice for anticipating the behavior of hotel guests'. It is obvious that numerous non-volitional
variables might influence accommodation customers' decision-making, thereby reducing their
chance of making an ecologically good option to stay in a green hotel. As a result, the study's
conceptual framework is based on TPB. The conceptual framework provides a fairly precise
structure that enables a complete exploration of the origin of consumers' green hotel purchase
intentions while taking both volitional and non-volitional aspects into account.

2.2.1 Attitude:
Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) posits that behavioral intention is determined by three
conceptually distinct determinants: attitude toward an activity, subjective norm, and perceived
behavioral control. First and most essential factor influencing behavioral intention is attitude,
which can be defined as ‘‘the degree to which a person has a favorable or unfavorable evaluation
or appraisal of the behavior in question’’ (Ajzen, 1991, p. 188). Perspective toward an action is
thought to be a consequence of one's normative belief (i.e., behavioral beliefs (BB)), which
represent the activity's anticipated outcomes, and one's assessment of their importance (i.e.,

Page | 5
outcome evaluation (OE)) (Eagry & Chailen, 1993). BB was defined by Ajzen and Fishbein
(1980) as one's subjective likelihood that engaging in an activity will result in specific outcomes.
In our situation, guests could associate staying at a green hotel with having a healthy,
environmentally friendly guestroom (or facilities), eating fresh, healthy cuisine, and being more
socially responsible, among other things. When deciding whether or not to engage in a certain
conduct, a person is likely to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of doing so (Cheng, Lam,
& Hsu, 2006). When the results are favorably assessed, people have a more positive attitude and
are more inclined to engage in that action (Ajzen, 1991; Cheng et al., 2006; Lee, 2005). Simply
stating, a person's favorable attitude toward a certain conduct boosts his or her desire to engage
in the conduct (Ajzen, 1991).

2.2.2 Subjective norm:

Subjective norm is proposed as a second determinant of behavioral intention (revisit intention),
in TPB's model which is also a non-volitional factor. Subjective norm is described by Ajzen
(1991). That is "the perceived social pressure to perform or not to perform the behavior". In other
words, this is the opinion of whether the majority of people approve or disapprove of the
behavior. This has to do with a person's ideas regarding whether or not peers and important
individuals (for example, relatives, good friends, work colleagues, or business partners) in his or
her life think he or she should partake in the behavior. (Hee, 2000).

According to Ajzen & Fishbein, (1980) subjective norm is mainly a function of a person's
normative beliefs (NB). That is about what salient referents believe he or she should (or should
not) do, as well as his or her motivation to comply with those referents. In 1993 NBs were
defined by Eagry and Chailen as "perceptions of significant others' preferences regarding
whether or not one should engage in a behavior". In other words, it is concerned with the
likelihood of key referents approving or disapproving of the behavior. In marketing and
consumer behavior, the importance of subjective norm as a driver of behavioral intention has
been widely documented (Baker, Al-Gahtani, & Hubona, 2007; Cheng et al., 2006; East, 2000;
Laroche et al., 2001; Lee, 2005). As a result, in our environment, when significant others believe
that staying at a green hotel is an appropriate behavior, one's perceived social pressure to visit a
green hotel will rise along with his or her willingness to comply.

2.2.3 Perceived behavioral control

Page | 6
Perceived behavioral control is refers to the perception of the difficulty of initiating a behavior.
According to Ajzen (1991) Perceived behavioral control can be portray as ‘‘the perceived ease or
difficulty of performing the behavior’’. Perceived behavioral control is the third determinant of
intention (revisit intention), which is also a non-volitional factor. It is the key difference between
the Theory of Planned Behavior and the Theory of Reasoned Action. Perceived behavioral
control is discussed to be a function of accessible control beliefs of an individuals perceived
claim of the resources and opportunities to carry out a particular behavior on a priority basis
(Chang, 1998). An individuals perceived behavioral control in TPB should be greater when
he/she has enough resources and opportunities (Madden et al., 1992). Perceived behavioral
control depends on the function of control beliefs and perceived power (Han & Kim, 2010).
Control beliefs refers to the perceived presence or absence of resources and opportunities that
facilitate or impede performance of a particular behavior. On the other hand, the perceived power
of each control refers to individual assessment of the importance of the resources and
opportunities in achieving behavioral outcomes (Ajzen and Madden, 1986; Chang, 1998). In a
majority of studies, it has been demonstrated that people’s intention is positively influenced by
their self-confidence in their ability to perform the behavior (Baker et al., 2007; Cheng et al.,
2006; Conner & Abraham, 2001; Taylor & Todd, 1995). The findings of these studies argue that
holding a little control over performing a certain behavior because of the lack of availability of
required resources (e.g., costs or time), the behavioral intention will be lower in spite of the fact
of having positive attitude/subjective norm concerning the intended act (Han et al., 2010).

Page | 7
Reference:
1. Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl, & J.
Beckman (Eds.), Action-control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11–39). Heidelberg:
Springer.
2. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
3. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitude and predicting social behavior.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
4. Ajzen, I., Madden, T., 1986. Prediction of goal-directed behavior: attitude, intentions, and
perceived behavioral control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 22, 453–474.
5. APAT. (2002). Tourists accommodation EU eco-label award scheme – Final report. Rome:
Italian National Agency for the Protection of the Environment and for Technical Services.
6. Baker, E. W., Al-Gahtani, S. S., & Hubona, G. S. (2007). The effects of gender and age on
new technology implementation in a developing country: testing the theory of planned
behavior (TPB). Information Technology & People, 20(4),352–375.
7. Brown, M. (1996). Environmental policy in the hotel sector: ‘‘Green’’ strategy or stratagem.
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 8(3), 18–23.
8. Chang, M. K. (1998). Predicting unethical behavior: a comparison of the theory of reasoned
action and theory of planned behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 1825–1834.
9. Cheng, S., Lam, T., & Hsu, C. H. C. (2006). Negative word-of-mouth communication
intention: an application of the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism
Research, 30(1), 95–116.
10. Conner, M., & Abraham, C. (2001). Conscientiousness and the theory of planned behavior:
towards a more complete model of the antecedents of intentions and behavior. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(11), 1547–1561.

Page | 8
11. Eagry, A. H., & Chailen, S. (1993). Psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich.
12. East, R. (2000). Complaining as planned behavior. Psychology & Marketing, 17(12), 1077–
1095.
13. Enz, C. A., & Siguaw, J. A. (October 1999). Best hotel environmental practices. Cornell
Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 72–77.
14. Fishbein, M. A., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction
to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
15. GHA. (2008). What are green hotels?. Retrieved May 10, 2008, from Green Hotel
Association (GHA) Web site. http://www.greenhotels.com/whatare.htm.
16. Han, H., & Kim, Y. (2010). An investigation of green hotel customers’ decision formation:
Developing an extended model of the theory of planned behavior. International journal of
hospitality management, 29(4), 659-668.
17. Han, H., Hsu, L. T. J., & Sheu, C. (2010). Application of the theory of planned behavior to
green hotel choice: Testing the effect of environmentally friendly activities. Tourism
management, 31(3), 325-334.
18. Hee, S. P. (2000). Relationships among attitudes and subjective norm: testing the theory of
reasoned action across cultures. Communication Studies, 51(2), 162–175
19. Kalafatis, S. P., Pollard, M., East, R., & Tsogas, M. H. (1999). Green marketing and Ajzen’s
theory of planned behavior: a cross-market examination. Journal of Consumer Marketing,
16(5), 441–460.
20. Lam, T., & Hsu, C. H. C. (2004). Theory of planned behavior: potential travelers from China.
Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 28(4), 463–482.
21. Laroche, M., Bergeron, J., & Barbaro-Forleo, G. (2001). Targeting consumers who are
willing to pay more for environmentally friendly products. Journal of Consumer Marketing,
18(6), 503–520.
22. Lee, M. J. (2005). Effects of attitude and destination image on association members’ meeting
participation intentions: development of meeting participation model. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Manhattan, KS: Kansas State University.
23. Madden, T., Ellen, P. S., & Ajzen, I. (1992). A comparison of the theory of planned behavior
and the theory of reasoned action. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18(2), 3–9.

Page | 9
24. Manaktola, K., & Jauhari, V. (2007). Exploring consumer attitude and behavior towards
green practices in the lodging industry in India. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, 19(5), 364–377.
25. Park, J. (2003). Understanding consumer intention to shop online. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Columbia, MO: University of Missouri.
26. Penny, W. Y. K. (2007). The use of environmental management as a facilities management
tool in the Macao hotel sector. Facilities, 25, 286–295.
27. Roberts, J. A. (1991). The development of a profile of the socially responsible consumer for
the 1990s and its marketing management and public policy implications. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska.
28. Shabecoff, P. (1993). A fierce green fire: The American environmental movement. New
York, NY: Hill and Wang Publishers.
29. Sheppard, B. H., Hartwick, J., & Warshaw, P. R. (1988). The theory of reasoned action: a
meta-analysis of past research with recommendations for modifications and future research.
Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 325–343.
30. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. (1995). Assessing IT usage: the role of prior experience. MIS
Quarterly, 19, 561–568.
31. Verma, V. K., & Chandra, B. (2018). An application of theory of planned behavior to predict
young Indian consumers' green hotel visit intention. Journal of cleaner production, 172,
1152-1162.

Page | 10