Galetzka, Mirjam

Mobach, Mark P.

Pruyn, Ad

van Hagen, Mark

Vos, Martijn

English

Hanze UAS repository

Companion Proceedings103Vos, M.C., Galetzka, M., Mobach, M.P., van Hagen, M., Pruyn, A.T.H. (2020) Cleaning with services and spaces: effects of seating materials and architectural clutter on perceived cleanliness, In the Companion proceedings of the European Facility Management International Conference 2020, EFMIC 2020, 1 October 2020, online conference.Citation:Cleaning with Services and Spaces: Effects of Seating Materials and Architectural Clutter on Perceived Cleanliness Martijn C. Vos1, Mirjam Galetzka2, Mark P. Mobach3, Mark van Hagen4, and Ad T.H. Pruyn5ABSTRACTBackground and aim – How do customers determine the cleanliness of their surroundings? Research and practice typically focus on the quality of cleaning services while ignoring the role of other environmental stimuli. The aim of this paper is to explore the effects of seating materials and architectural clutter as determinants of customers’ perception of cleanliness. Methods / Methodology – The perception of cleanliness was operationalized using the dimensions: cleaned, fresh, and uncluttered. Effects of seating materials and architectural clutter were examined in three separate experiments in train stations. A field experiment was used to examine the effects of seating materials (N = 544) and a photo experiment evaluated the effects of architectural clutter (N = 220).Results – Smooth seating materials and uncluttered architecture were found to positively influence different dimensions of perceived cleanliness.Originality – This study provides deeper insight into the concept of perceived cleanliness and related dimensions by demonstrating that perceived cleanliness may be influenced by other determinants than cleaning quality only. Practical or social implications – The results may allow facility managers to improve decision making. Instead of solely increasing cleaning frequencies to improve customers’ perception of cleanliness, facility managers may decide to invest in replacing or refurbishing seating materials and/or uncluttering architecture. Type of paper – Research paper.KEYWORDSArchitectural clutter, cleaning, facility management, perceived cleanliness, seating materials, trains, train stations.INTRODUCTIONAs one of the key topics in facility management, cleanliness research grew over the last decade. Whereas most of this research typically focusses on the organizational and financial side of cleanliness, we are interested in the customer perspective on cleanliness. More specifically, we will tap into how customers perceive cleanliness and how it may be influenced by properties of services and spaces designs. Customers’ perception of cleanliness is determined by the total (holistic) configuration of services and spaces, including cleaning quality (e.g., dust, stains). Although it is without much doubt that customers use environmental stimuli to make sense of service environments, it remains unclear how this works for perceived cleanliness. A systematic exploration and evaluation of how services and spaces influence perceived cleanliness seems appropriate to further the professional and academic field of cleanliness. In this context, we have set up experiments that help unveiling the relationship between services, spaces, and customer perception of cleanliness. The results of these experiments are preliminary and part of a 1 Hanze University of Applied Sciences / Netherlands Railways / University of Twente/ Hago Rail Services, The Netherlands, e-mail: m.c.vos@pl.hanze.nl2 University of Twente, The Netherlands3 Hanze University of Applied Sciences / The Hague University of Applied Sciences, The Netherlands4 Netherlands Railways, The Netherlands5 University of Twente, The NetherlandsCompanion Proceedings104larger research project. More extensive discussion of related results will soon be published. LITERATURE STUDYDimensions of perceived cleanlinessWhat is perceived cleanliness? Available definitions and operationalizations mainly focus on how customers perceive the cleanliness of specific interior elements (i.e., windows, bathroom) while ignoring other dimensions, including the aesthetic quality of a service environment (Barber & Scarcelli, 2010). Also, the existing measurement instruments are predominantly intended for specific settings, such as restaurants and hotels (Barber & Scarcelli, 2010; Lockyer, 2003), which complicates generalisability to other service settings. Recently, this void was filled by the introduction of the cleanliness perceptions scale (CPS), this instrument offers a more holistic take on perceived cleanliness by distinguishing three dimensions: cleaned, fresh, and uncluttered (Vos, Galetzka, Mobach, van Hagen, & Pruyn, 2019a). The (1) cleaned dimension focusses on determinants related to the cleaning process (e.g., cleaning quality, visibility cleaning staff), the (2) fresh dimension on the smell of an environment (e.g., pleasant, unpleasant, related to cleanliness or not), and the (3) uncluttered dimension focusses on the architectural clutter in an environment (i.e., organisation, coherence of architectural design). In our two experiments, we measured perceived cleanliness using the CPS.  Determinants of perceived cleanlinessSince knowledge on determinants of perceived cleanliness is scattered and dominantly accumulated in practice, we used a systematic literature review (Vos, Galetzka, Mobach, van Hagen, Pruyn, 2018a) and a qualitative study (Vos, Galetzka, Mobach, van Hagen, & Pruyn, 2018b) performed in the facilities management industry to select determinants for our experimental studies. Inspired by this previous research, determinants were categorized using Bitner’s (1992) environmental dimensions (i.e., ambient conditions, space/function, and signs, symbols, & artefacts). As we wanted to further literature on environmental dimensions of perceived cleanliness, the focus of the study was on the space/function dimension. As such, the effects of seating materials (i.e., upholstery) and architectural clutter were tested in two separated experiments.  Seating materialsThe tactile and visual experience of materials (e.g., dull vs. shiny, cloth vs. leather) has been associated with perceived cleanliness. For instance, researchers demonstrated that people sitting at a table with a shiny (vs. dull) table top had more positive perceptions of cleanliness and showed more cleaning behaviour (Broeders, Lakens, Midden, & Ham, 2011). In an explorative study, scholars found that rail passengers generally prefer smooth materials, such as leather and vinyl over less smooth materials, such as cloth, due to cleanliness concerns (Pepper, Spitz, & Adler, 2003). We will further test the idea that smooth materials may be used to positively influence perceived cleanliness. Architectural clutterClutteredness and cleanliness may be approached from a non-aesthetic and aesthetic perspective (Leddy, 1995). The non-aesthetic perspective refers to the physical properties of a cleaned or uncluttered environment; cleaning (by using a cleaning cloth) or uncluttering a service environment (by restructuring objects such as document or clothing) may reveal and clarify the underlying objects or structures. Illustrated by metaphors, such as having clean lines, the concepts of cleanliness and clutteredness are used as aesthetic qualities in design. In this study, we tested the idea that the degree of clutteredness of an environment influences peoples’ perception of cleanliness. The concept of clutteredness was defined by the number of objects present, variation between objects (e.g., colour, form), and their coherence (Olivia, Mack, Shreshta, & Peeper, 2004; Orth & Wirtz, 2014).METHODThe effects of seating materials and architectural clutter on perceived cleanliness were tested in two separate experiments in the context of public transport.Seating materialsEffects of seating materials were evaluated in a field experiment. A total of 544 customers of a Dutch Companion Proceedings105railway company (56.1% female, Mage = 33.86, SDage = 17.01) participated in this experiment. Participants were travelling in a train with either smooth (i.e., vinyl, n = 283) or non-smooth (i.e., cloth, n = 261) seating materials (Appendix 1, Figures 1-2). Except for the seating materials, the trains, train trajectories, and cleaning program of the train were identical. Seated passengers were invited to fill out a questionnaire that contained items related to the cleaned, fresh, and uncluttered dimensions of perceived cleanliness measured on a 10-point Likert scale.Architectural clutterEffects of clutteredness were evaluated in an online photo experiment. A total of 220 members of an online customer panel of a Dutch railway company (female = 41.9%, Mage = 59.69, SDage = 22.46) evaluated three photos of a waiting room at a train platform that only differed with respect to their architectural clutteredness, ranging from uncluttered to cluttered (Appendix 1, Figures 3-5). Participants were randomly assigned to one of the three photos (Figures 3-5) and instructed to evaluate the cleaned, fresh (i.e., I think this station smells fresh), and uncluttered dimensions of perceived cleanliness using a 7-point Likert scale.RESULTSSeating materialsThe results of our seating materials experiment show that smooth seating materials positively influence the cleaned (F[1, 533] = 44.41, p < .001) and uncluttered (F[1, 522] = 13.45, p < .001) dimensions of perceived cleanliness, no meaningful differences were found for the fresh dimension (F[1, 523] = 1.02, p = .18). Train compartments with smooth seating materials were perceived as more cleaned (M = 7.17, SD = 1.20) and uncluttered (M = 7.52, SD = 1.24) compared to compartments with the non-smooth seating materials (M = 6.31, SD = 1.74; M = 7.08 SD = 1.45).Architectural clutterThe results of this experiment only showed effects for architectural clutter on the uncluttered dimension of perceived cleanliness (F[2, 217] = 2.86, p = .05). The uncluttered station (Figure 3) was perceived as most uncluttered (M = 5.70, SD = 0.83), followed by the lightly (Figure 4, M = 5.38, SD = 1.07), and heavily cluttered station (Figure 5, M = 5.30, SD = 1.30). No effects were detected for the cleaned (F[2, 217] = 0.32, p = .69) and fresh (F[2, 217] = 0.06, p = .91) dimensions of perceived cleanliness.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONWith the current study, we showed that perceptions of cleanliness is not only influenced by the design of services, but also by the design of spaces. More specifically, the use of smooth materials and uncluttered architecture were demonstrated to positively influence dimensions of perceived cleanliness. These findings confirm and complement previous research stating that perceived cleanliness may be influenced by other determinants than cleaning quality only (e.g., Vos et al., 2018a, Whitehead, May, & Agahi, 2007). The presence of smooth seating materials and uncluttered architecture as primes that make the concept of cleanliness more accessible in customers through an associative and affective process. Exposure to these stimuli may not only be experienced as pleasant but will also activate associations related to the concept of cleanliness (i.e., smooth = clean). Based on these insights, facility managers may reconsider the way in which perceived cleanliness is managed. Instead of solely increasing cleaning frequencies to improve customers’ perception of cleanliness, facility managers might, for example, consider to invest in replacing seating materials, uncluttered architecture, but also in more visible cleaning, scent, and bright colours. A repaint or more visible cleaning staff will have adverse effects when an environment is unclean, so the above interventions should in all cases complement existing cleaning services.REFERENCESBarber, N. & Scarcelli, J. (2010). Enhancing the assessment of tangible service quality through the creation of a cleanliness measurement scale. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, 20 (1), pp. 70-88. https://doi.org/10.1108/09604521011011630Bitner, M. J. (1992). Servicescapes: The impact of physical surroundings on customers and employees. Journal of Marketing, 56(2), pp. 57-71. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299205600205Companion Proceedings106Broeders, R., Lakens, D., Midden, C., & Ham, J. (2011). An embodied cognition approach to litter reduction: the grounding of clean in shininess. Presentation at the Environment 2.0: the 9th Biennial Conference on Environmental Psychology, September 26-28, 2011, Eindhoven, the Netherlands. Leddy, T. (1995). Everyday Surface Aesthetic Qualities: Neat, Messy, Clean, Dirty. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 53(3), pp. 259-268. http://doi.org/10.2307/431351 Lockyer, T. (2003). Hotel cleanliness—how do guests view it? Let us get specific. A New Zealand study. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 22(3), pp. 297-305. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-4319(03)00024-0Orth, U. R., & Wirtz, J. (2014). Consumer processing of interior service environments: the interplay among visual complexity, processing fluency, and attractiveness. Journal of Service Research, 17(3), pp. 296-309. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670514529606Olivia, A., Mack, M. L., Shrestha, M., & Peeper, A. (2004). Identifying the perceptual dimensions of visual complexity of scenes. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 26, pp. 1041-1046. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/17s4h6w8  Pepper, J., Spitz, G., & Adler, T. (2003). Customer perspectives on multilevel coaches for increasing rail system capacity. Transportation research record, 1838(1), 19-29. https://doi.org/10.3141/1838-03Vos, M. C., Galetzka, M., Mobach, M. P., van Hagen, M., & Pruyn, A.T.H. (2018a). Cleanliness unravelled: a review and integration of literature. Journal of Facilities Management, 16 (4), pp. 429-451. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFM-06-2017-0025Vos, M.C., Galetzka, M., Mobach, M.P., Van Hagen, M. and Pruyn, A.T.H. (2018b). Exploring cleanliness in the Dutch facilities management industry: a Delphi approach, Facilities, 36 (9/10), pp. 510-524. https://doi.org/10.1108/F-09-2017-0092Vos, M. C., Galetzka, M., Mobach, M. P., van Hagen, M., & Pruyn, A.T.H. (2019a). Measuring perceived cleanliness in service environments: Scale development and validation. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 83, pp. 11-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.04.005Vos, M. C., Sauren, J., Knoop, O., Galetzka, M., Mobach, M. P., & Pruyn, A. T. (2019b). Into the light: effects of the presence of cleaning staff on customer experience. Facilities, 37 (1/2), pp. 91-102. https://doi.org/10.1108/F-10-2017-0105Whitehead, H., May, D., & Agahi, H. (2007). An exploratory study into the factors that influence patients’ perceptions of cleanliness in an acute NHS trust hospital. Journal of Facilities Management, 5 (4), pp. 275-289  https://doi.org/10.1108/14725960710822268Companion Proceedings107APPENDIX 1: SEATING MATERIALS AND ARCHITECTURAL CLUTTERFigure 1 Photo of the train compartment with (smooth) vinyl seating materials.Figure 2 Photo of the train compartment with (non-smooth) cloth seating materials.Figure 3 Original photo of the waiting room (uncluttered condition).Companion Proceedings108Figure 4 Manipulated photo of the waiting room (lightly cluttered condition).Figure 5 Manipulated photo of the waiting room (heavily cluttered condition).Companion ProceedingsProf. Mark Mobach and his research team would like to gratefully acknowledge the honour of receiving Delta Prize (in Dutch ‘Deltapremie’) handed by Ingrid van Engelshoven, Minister of Education, Culture and Science, in The Netherlands in November 2019. The authors of the papers in companion proceedings of the European Facility Management International Conference 2020 are grateful to acknowledge the support of the Netherlands Association of Universities of Applied Sciences and the Dutch Taskforce for Applied Research. They also thank EuroFM for the collaboration and the possibilities for sharing their results and ideas with the EuroFM community.DeltapremieThe ‘Deltapremie’ or Delta Prize is a new leading research prize in the Netherlands focusing on practice-oriented research by professors. The prize is developed for professors who have managed to repeatedly make a special difference with the social impact of their research over the years. It shows where practice and research can come together in an innovative way. Practice-oriented research has acquired a solid place in Dutch society. Almost 700 professors and more than 3,000 teacher-researchers are currently involved. The starting point of the research is always to find solutions for practice-based problems, also by partnering with practice. In this way, practice-oriented research provides applicable solutions to societal challenges. An independent selection committee selected the winners. The committee consisted of six experts from Erasmus University Rotterdam, Innofest, Delft University of Technology, Netherlands Study Centre for Technology Trends, and the Association of Netherlands Municipalities. In the report the selection committee tributes Mark Mobach and his research group for the impact that they have on the crossroads of various domains from public transport to mental health. Mobach: “We see the prize as enormous encouragement to continue our research into space and organisation in healthcare, education, offices, and cities together with our partners. We extend our research to areas where there are perhaps fewer financial possibilities, such as research with the arts and frailty.”Research focus areaWith his research group, Prof. Mobach wants to contribute to the best buildings for people and organisations. He does so by devising better space and services in a multidisciplinary setting together with students, lecturer-researchers, Ph.D.-students, and postdocs. Better spaces and services for education, offices, and even cities that stimulate healthy behaviour, better healthcare buildings that reduce stress, but also prisons and stations that better meet the needs of society.ACKNOWLEDGEMENT S

Cleaning with services and spaces::effects of seating materials and architectural clutter on perceived cleanliness

https://research.hanze.nl/files/34990787/Vos_etal_EFMIC2020_4.pdf

Cleaning with services and spaces::effects of seating materials and architectural clutter on perceived cleanliness

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Hanze UAS repository