CAHE 572

Assessment Report

Fall 2018
Aaron Carlson Chris MacMartin
Alex Barr Sean Vinson
 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Dining Services at Northern Illinois University is a large, complex operation. Dining
Services consists of residence hall dining, retail restaurants, cafes, nutrition and dietician
services, catering, and partnerships with off-campus retailers. There are four residential
dining halls, approximately eight retail locations spread throughout campus, and a student-run
restaurant. The assessment team’s campus partner, Executive Director of Dining Dan
Koenen, tasked the team with creating an assessment project that did not consume a heavy
amount of resources, could be done again in the future, and looked at some form of usage
and satisfaction data. Through reflexive assessment practice, the project originally assessed
satisfaction, but ultimately ended up measuring usage, with a focus on how satisfaction and
engagement via social media drive or decrease usage. To fit the context of what Dining
Services needed assessed most critically, the assessment team decided to study University
staff/faculty usage and social media engagement with these groups. Graduate Students and
commuter students were also included in some aspect of the assessment as a more non-
traditional group.
This assessment project studies Dinning Services at Northern Illinois University during
the Fall 2018 semester. The assessment includes three focus groups, three e-interviews and
a benchmarking study of fellow Mid-American conference (MAC) institutions. The focus
groups and e-interviews look into why or why not faculty, staff and graduate students are
eating at the dining locations, while also looking into ways to improve the overall experience
and customer satisfaction. The variables of satisfaction and usage reinforce each other to
ultimately increase both ratings through complimentary relationship. Benchmarking is used to
study social media activity and engagement, as well as to investigate pricing and different
dining options on various campuses. The overall goal of the assessment project is to find
improvements that are financially sound, while also creating a process of assessment that
can be done again in future semesters.
The assessment findings yielded several recommendations for Dining Services. The
team’s strongest recommendation was to implement a “to-go” option at one or more
residence dining halls. This could include utilizing “to-go” containers or serving pre-made
meals to-go. This recommendation is supported by all three focus groups and the
benchmarking data. Ozzi reusable containers are one existing option that could be
investigated using benchmarking with fellow MAC institutions. A second recommendation is
to increase the use of promotion, themed dining, and alternative seating areas to incentivize
 3

use of the dining halls over off-campus retailers. Two focus groups and e-interview data
backed up the need for this from faculty/staff. A third recommendation is to increase access to
dining for athletic groups based on the west-side of campus. As this group and others in the
focus groups stressed how time, location, and convenience are critically important factors
when deciding where to eat, something similar to the “to-go” option or a quick-service option
further west on campus could have the potential to drive traffic and usage by certain targeted
populations. The fourth most prevalent recommendation is to utilize more efficiently and
effectively social media platforms to reach and engage Dining Service’s customers. Instagram
is currently one of the most popular platforms and also yields some of the highest returns on
time and investment. NIU Dining Services is behind some of its MAC peers in social media
activity, so increasing this is an almost guaranteed method to increase engagement
satisfaction and usage.
The assessment team hopes this report is helpful in driving new traffic, increasing
usage, and improving the NIU community’s involvement and engagement with Campus
Dining Services.
 4

HISTORY OF DINING: AN INTRODUCTION

AND REVIEW OF LITERATURE
In order to perform an assessment of Dining Services, it is important to first understand
college dining’s transformation overtime and some of the literature surrounding customer
service, usage, and satisfaction. The first dining hall at an American university belonged to
what is the oldest institution of higher education in the United States: Harvard
University. Founded in 1636, more than a century before the establishment of the United
States of America, college students attending Harvard, emulating English tradition, dined in a
common dining hall, named College Hall, as well as both Harvard Halls that replaced it in
1679 and 1766 (The History of Food and Dining at Harvard, 2016). This leaves one to infer
that some sort of on-campus dining has always accompanied institutions of higher education
in America. Interestingly, however, this is not the case. At Harvard, the practice of on-
campus dining was abandoned in 1849 as a result of very few students dining in commons
and did not resume until 1874 with the creation of the Harvard Dining Association (The
History of Food, 2016). Even though the founding of Harvard was nearly four hundred years
ago, similar elements have transcended four centuries worth of change and are still
demanding imperative alterations within the symbiotic relationships of dining halls, residence
halls, and campuses as a whole.
Like Harvard, students and their wants and needs serve as the driving force behind
modifications made in today’s dining halls around the entire country. In conjunction with
student demands, increasing health concerns and quality of food are becoming more
important to students. A 2012 study found that 98% of college student respondents were in
favor of making nutrition information for foods served in dining halls available to students,
while 96% preferred that the information appeared in the dining halls themselves or both in
the dining halls and online. Of these students, 88% said the labels would affect their food
choices at lease sometimes (Martinez, Roberto, Kim, Schwartz, & Brownell). On Northern
Illinois’ campus, a group of students created a food committee in 2011 to improve the
experience in the residential dining halls on the NIU campus. The committee met every
Monday and discussed different ways on-campus dining could improve. Some key points, to
name a few, were “adjustments to the ‘late night’ menu”, “reporting on ‘theme dinners’”,
“addressing when and where there are service concerns so they are addressed”, “addressing
portion control”, and “focus on offering more nutritionally focused items” (Grosz, 2013).
 5

One negative aspect of college campuses serving healthier and more nutritious food is
that it is more expensive for the students, and this could be a problem for freshman attending
NIU who are required to live on campus and have a meal plan. College students who have
meals plans spend up to 85% more per day on food than they would if they cooked all their
meals at home (Martin, 2017). Although there are other reasons why the prices of meal plans
are going up, such as labor, facilities, and profit, one of the key contributors is high quality
food. The food is changing, and “many campuses even cater to niche diet restrictions,
regularly providing vegan and gluten free options” (Martin, 2017). Further, for some
universities, “outstanding dining options are also a major draw for prospective students”.
Even though there is a high demand for high quality and healthier foods to be served in
university dining halls, that does not necessarily mean students will take advantage of the
revised options. One study found that university dining hall snack food purchases become
less healthy every week that goes by in the semester (Wansink, Cao, Saini, Shimizu, & Just,
2012). This means that there is an increased demand for unhealthy snack food among
college students as the semester progresses, especially towards the end. This is probably a
result of increased stress on students. To counteract students choosing unhealthy snacks,
dining halls should make an effort to promote healthy alternatives during the last weeks of the
semester (Wansink, et.al, 2012).
Intimately tied to Dining Services customer retention and usage is customer
satisfaction with the department. Joung, Lee, & Kim et al. (2014) defines dining satisfaction as
being tied to service quality, food quality, staff performance, perceived price fairness, and
ambiance. The researchers noted that “customer satisfaction is influenced not only by service
quality perceptions but also by personal and situational factors and price” (p. 105). Further,
the researchers determined that properties of the food itself were the most important element
affecting customer satisfaction, and that this depends most on “the quality of meals, diversity
of food, food hygiene and environment” (Kim, Moreo, & Yeh, 2004, p. 105).
Nadzira et al (2013) conducted a similar research study on user dining choice in
University systems and defined four factors during the data coding process: service
delivery, servicescape, product, and technology application. These four categories, along with
the relevant definitions and contributing factors, can be utilized in the research as a baseline
for broader areas to investigate. Additionally, there is overlap in three of the four categories
with the Joung, Lee, & Kim et al. (2014) study, the only unique category being technology and
application.
 6

The first category from Nadzira et al. (2013), service delivery, takes place during the
interaction between customers and frontline dining employees. Factors leading to higher
perceived customer service include attentiveness, pleasantness, and response to
needs. Estepa, Shanklin & Back (2005) found that this factor saw the highest expectations
from customers. The second, servicescape, refers to the general atmosphere inside the
dining space, including layout, ambience, cleanliness, lighting, and décor. Bitner (1992)
defines servicescape as “all of the objective physical factors that can be controlled by the firm
to enhance (or constrain) employee and customer actions” (p.45). Choi et al. (2011) found
that within the servicescape category, customers ranked social environment and atmosphere
as the most important factors to satisfaction within the broader category.
The third, product, includes “the physical items, services or symbolic effects that
offered to fulfill the needs of customers” (Nadzira et al., 2013, p. 1460). Estepa et al. (2005)
found a direct relationship between perception of food quality and levels of satisfaction.
Brumback (1998) also found that perceptions of freshness and quality of food products were
the most important reasons for customer satisfaction. Shanka & Taylor (2005) reaffirmed
these findings in a study on cafeteria foodservice at a large University. The final category,
technology and application, includes support and maintenance systems that utilize
technology in improving the other three categories. Durocher (2001) highlighted technology’s
ability to ensure safe and correct food cooking. Stein (2005) highlighted the ability for
institutions to save costs and improve perceived convenience by utilizing a point-of-sale
(POS) system and Identification Card tracking systems to improve service speed.
In this specific study, the population of the sample matched with ratios of the general
institutional population (90% students and 10% faculty/staff). When conducting the research
for Dining Services, it will be important to determine whether the target sample structure
should be equivalent to the institution, as a whole, or the user profile of campus dining
services at Northern Illinois University. Additionally, it will be important to define applicable
terms that relate to dining services and/or the populations studied. A benchmark for this can
be found in the Reale (2000) study on student expectations of campus dining services.
Nadzira et al (2013) uncovered that “a pattern of higher negative perception towards
university foodservices was observed, which is consistent with the findings of Johnston (1994,
p. 99), who stressed that ‘the impact of negative experiences is stronger than that of positive
experiences and situations are easier to be recalled when things did not go as expected’” (p.
1462). Of all the specific satisfaction metrics mentioned by study participants, ‘cleanliness of
environments’ was the most frequently mentioned. These studies are helpful in creating an
 7

evidence-based categorical system for areas of assessment. The categories, definitions, and
findings from these relevant studies can be combined with the input from the Executive
Director of Dining Services at NIU to best make important decisions on selecting and defining
the assessment categories that will yield the best plan of action at the end of assessment.
 8

ASSESSMENT DESIGN
Focus Groups

In order to aggregate qualitative data, focus groups were utilized as a method of

assessment. This method was used as a means to elicit unfiltered, narrative responses. The
goal was to get genuine and authentic responses to overall satisfaction with Dining Services
and to gauge patterns, trends, and thoughts surrounding usage by faculty, staff, and graduate
students. Focus groups allowed the team the opportunity to record open ended responses
that would not be as easily collected in the form of a survey. Focus groups were conducted
with 2-4 people at a time from various departments on campus. The goal was to target and
access different areas of campus, with the possibility that the different “regions” would have
different types of input and feedback. The team targeted Athletics, Recreation & Wellness,
and Graduate Students in the Adult & Higher Ed program, many of whom work and attend
class on the east side of campus. The questions for the focus group were designed with a
similar purpose in mind to the e-interviews and data studied via benchmarking. The team
wanted to assess usage patterns and how they trend for different populations, at different
location, and how satisfaction influences usage within these groups. The questions utilized
were:

1. What has your experience at each dining hall that you have visited been like?
2. What do you enjoy about the dining hall experience? What do you not enjoy?
3. If you do not visit the dining halls, where you eat between work/classes? What factors
influence your decision to eat elsewhere?
4. Tell me about what changes would NIU Dining Services could make to be a first option
for your meals on campus?
5. What are your thoughts about carry-out/to go box options?

The first staff focus group was conducted on November 8, 2018, with four fulltime
employees from University Recreation and Wellness. Two employees are Associate Directors
and two are Assistant Directors. Each of the employees works in a different functional area of
the department, so they each have varying routines related to lunch and their daily
schedule. Participants were briefed, signed consent waivers, and then the focus group began
(Appendix D).
 9

The second focus group was conducted on November 12, 2018, with staff members of
both the men’s and women’s basketball team. There was a head coach present, a director of
basketball operations as well as a graduate assistant. The basketball teams on both sides
utilize campus dinning in different ways, which made this focus group interesting and useful.
The third focus group conducted was comprised of three graduate students at Northern
Illinois University and was conducted on November 29, 2018. The three graduate students
are in the Adult & Higher Education program at Northern Illinois University. One participant
was a Hall Director, with unlimited access to dining in the residence halls. One participant
spends most of their work day in Altgeld Hall, while another spends most of their time in the
Campus Life Building. The researchers found it important to include students with diverse
roles and different levels of frequency of visiting dining locations. The researchers were
interested in gathering feedback from this population of students due to the assumption that
they each attended night classes and were more of a non-traditional group, each of the
students holding an employment relationship with the institution in the form of a Graduate
Assistantship. Participants were given an overview of how the focus group would be
conducted, presented with consent waivers, the participated in the question and answer
segment.

Benchmark Study
Benchmarking was used in this assessment to find factors dealing with social media
presence that can have positive benefits for receiving customer feedback, promoting dining
services, and sharing information, and Mid-American Conference (MAC) Universities’ Dining
Websites. To help gather and organize this information, the research team created a
spreadsheet to compartmentalize data (Appendix B). For every MAC school, the team
compiled data from Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook in order to see how prevalent each
dining service is on various social media forums.

For twitter, areas of focus were:

• number of followers
• number following
• total number of posts, total number of images
• date of last post (as of November 16, 2018)
 10

For Facebook they were:

• number of followers
• number following
• total likes of page
• date of last post (as of November 16, 2018)

For Instagram, areas of focus were

• number of followers
• number following
• total number of posts
• date of last post (as of November 16, 2018)

After compiling data, it is clear that the social media presence of NIU Dining is behind
every other university in the MAC. Of the three social medias this assessment method
assessed, Northern Illinois was the only university that did not have a dining account for two
of the three; it only had a Facebook page. There were only three universities that had two of
the three, all lacking an Instagram account for dining: Bowling Green State University,
Eastern Michigan University, and University of Akron. Every other university utilized all three
social media platforms.
The research team expanded on the spread sheet in order to pick up both similarities and
differences between each institution’s dining website. This process allowed us to benchmark
the different institutions based on their websites. The overall objective of this assessment
method was to find incentives other universities offer to potential customers, primarily
faculty/staff and commuter students, that can promote usage of NIU dining. For this section,
we collected information on meal plan options for faculty/staff, meal plan options for
commuters, retail locations listed on the website, traditional dining halls listed on the website,
if the institution utilizes technology via having an equivalent to Huskie Bucks or Flex Dollars,
and any findings of interest. Every dining service has a website across the board and are set
up in similar ways.

E-Interviews
Individual interviews were used to gauge what Directors and Marketing administrators at
the benchmark institutions believe is going well or proving a challenge at their respective
institutions. Structuring this data collection method proved challenging, as the research team
 11

wanted to be accommodating and flexible for other institutions, as we are not members of
their community and they do not have any obligation to take time from their schedule to
participate in the project. Upon completion of the benchmarking study, an email was sent to
the Dining Director and Marketing Manager, or equivalent, at each of the benchmark
institutions (Appendix C). The email gave a brief context to the assessment project and listed
the exact questions to which the research team was seeking input. The team wanted to make
sure the administrators knew it would be very short and that there would be no tricks or
surprises in our questioning. The questions asked were as follows:

1. How do you market to faculty, staff/administrators, and commuter students?

2. Do you offer any special programs, offers, or incentives to increase usage?
3. Do you have any advice on how to increase usage among these three groups?
4. How do you engage with customers through social media and have you faced any
challenges or encountered successes in doing so?
5. Are there any numbers/data you can give us for our benchmarking study?

The research team did offer in the email to conduct interviews over the phone or to take
answers over email. The team wanted to make sure that if administrators did not have the
time to participate that they could still give me any feedback or information they wanted to
quickly and efficiently.
The primary purpose in utilizing this data collection method was to get qualitative data
that could reinforce findings from the quantitative benchmark data. In designing the three
methods, the team wanted to ensure that each source of data reinforced the other two so that
trends and themes would be strong and provable with multiple pieces of evidence. The e-
interview questions were designed to garner overall feedback on social media and
faculty/staff usage, the GAP’s two primary areas of study under the benchmark and focus
group methods. The team also asked for quantitative data to supplement the options the
representative was providing.
 12

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Staff Focus Group #1
The strongest themes in this focus group with University staff were food quality and
competition. The food is perceived as “bland” and lacking taste by all group members. While
the amount of options is good, the group seems to be disappointed repeatedly by the taste of
the food when they get it. The second issue with use is that there is a lot of off-campus
competition that is perceived as higher quality and runs regular specials or promotions. Price,
convenience of location on campus, and student presence in the dining halls did not seem to
be heavy influencers in the staff’s decision whether to use the dining halls. The group of staff
use payroll deduction for their dining hall access and purchase packages of 15 swipes at a
time.

Staff are incentivized by the number of food options but are dissatisfied with taste and time.
• Participant One indicated that she liked that it was “buffet style” and that you can “try
multiple things”.
• Participant Two said that the food is “terrible” and that “it was a lot of food. I try it and I
don’t like it, so I resort back to chicken fingers, fries, and salad”.
• Participant Two indicated the food is “boring” and the taste is “bland”.
• Participant One said the options are great but that sometimes the specialty bars can
“take 7-10 minutes” which is a lot of time to the work lunch hour. They said the system
is “disorganized and that perhaps they should switch a numbering system or a system
where they call your name when you food is ready so you don’t have to stand around
and wait for so long”.
• Participant Two then said the price is good and that there is “value”. They did not “hate
it” and would probably buy swipes again because “it is just so cheap”.
• Participant Four indicated the they agreed with P2 that the food is “bland but edible”.

Staff want more promotions and specials to get excited about; otherwise, they choose to go to
quick-service restaurants that are running specials, promotions, or deals.
• Participant One indicated the swipe package is good “for a random Wednesday if I
don’t have a lunch or want to go out”. They said that “the price is reasonable and that
the swipe plan is a good backup”.
 13

• Participant Two said the main reason to not go off-campus is “when they are feeling
poor”. They also said that “we haven’t gone to the dining hall in a while so it isn’t on
the forefront of our mind. There is nothing exciting about going”. Participant Four said
the dining hall experience at NIU “feels like a dining hall” and that it is not exciting
enough to keep you come back.
• Participant Four said “hype” would get them to use dining more, such as if dining had
some “signature items” or “did something fun”. They referenced that if they go off-
campus they get excited over “BOGO at Potbelly or small mental things like
that”. They said that “the different types of seating, themed decors for the different
cuisine stations” are exciting and make the dining hall more of a restaurant
experience.

Staff want ‘to-go” options or the ability to take items back to work with them.
• All participants talked about the fact that customers are "not allowed to take any food
from the dining halls”. All participants expressed heated discontent with this and said
that even if they could take something small like a piece of fruit or ice cream cone that
it would not feel as restricted.
• Participant One thought "to-go" options were “a great idea and convenient”.
• Participant Three said that it would be very helpful for “students who are on the go and
don’t have time to wait at the dining hall or cook at home”.
• Participant Four said they did a la carte in college and that it was not worth a
membership alone but that it would be helpful if incorporated into the price of a dining
package.

Staff do not engage with Dining social media but do check weekly menus online.
• Participant Three made one of their only comments to the group about “options” and
that the options and meals “are hard to find beforehand”.
• Participant One and Participant Two said that they “check the website before we go” to
see the meal options and that they “have gone to different dining halls to get different
items”.
• Participant Three and Participant Four indicated that they check the website menu
“every time we go”. All participants said that they do not engage at all with Dining
Services on social media.
 14

Staff Focus Group #2

All the players from the men’s team have an unlimited meal plan. While this is not the
case on the women’s side, they do have team meals at New Hall, which is how they utilize
campus dinning. In terms of the usage, working in athletics call for a lot of hours, so each of
the individuals have busy schedules and different daily routines, especially around lunch,
which provided good insight on campus dinning. Participants were briefed, signed consent
waivers, and then the focus group began.

Athletics staff and students frequently rely on Dining Services and do have an enjoyable
experience.
• Each and every participant has only been to New Hall to eat, P1 has been to the
different dining hall but has only ever eaten at New Hall.
• Referring to the women’s basketball team P2 stated “They are given 20 swipes with
their huskie bucks, so we schedule those 20 swipes as team dinners together. Usually
timed up with a late practice or night before home game.”
• P1 said “I enjoy the cleanliness, and the convenience of how new hall is set up, I am
able to experience a variety of food easily. From pizza to pasta to philly’s and grilled
chicken. The one suggestion I would have would be to go containers.”
• All of the participants said that they thought it was clean and organized.
• P3 – “This is my first semester at NIU, so my time at the dining hall has been limited but
right away I liked the variety of food that new hall offered, and it was good!”

Athletics staff and students would benefit from the convenience of “to-go” or even quick-
service options located further West. Adding an option might incentive more traffic and usage
from Athletics.
• Every participant loved the idea of “to-go” options. Each of them said something about
it prior to asking the question.
• The overwhelming answer to selecting where to eat was the location – all the
participants are located in the convocation center.
• P1 has a meal plan, he uses it to eat breakfast with the guys sometimes, or on
occasion will eat dinner there if he must stay late. He lives 15 minutes away so
sometimes it is hard for him to make it home and come back if he has obligations late.
 15

• P1 Location, somehow creating a space in the convocation center would be ideal, but
Stevenson would services, it would need to be easily accessible within Stevenson.
Somehow getting options down the hall or in the Yordon center would be ideal.

Graduate Student Focus Group

Researchers presumption was that this population may have strong desires for more
accessible options near the start time of their classes and a high interest in carry-out options.
Many responses from the participants displayed a general displeasure with the variety of food
options offered at each dining hall. A frequently expressed concern was that retail dining
options were not conveniently close enough for the group members. It is important to note
that each group member takes classes in either Graham Hall, Gable Hall, or DuSable
Hall. Proximity of dining options, especially in bad weather, proved to be an essential concern
for the participants. In addition, each participate cited the Blackhawk dining (currently under
renovation) area as a favorite due to its low traffic, higher quality selections, and most
important, the option to take food out in carry-out containers.
The most reported concerns that were expressed by graduate students surrounded a
perception of lack of variety, inconvenient hours of operation, and non-accessible
locations. Due to the closing of the very popular Blackhawk dining location, graduate
students reported feelings of frustration with the lack of to-go options. Contrary to the
perceptions of focus group one, this focus group was not pleased with the variety of options in
the dining halls, or from the retail locations. Many cited local restaurants as superior
alternatives to campus dining. Most frequent reasons surrounded affordability thanks to
discounts, speedy service, and smaller crowds of guests.

Blackhawk and Gilbert provide the best dining experiences for convenience, quality, and
cost.
• Participant One (P1) cited Gilbert as her favorite on-campus dining choice for variety.
• Participants Two (P2) and Three (P3) quickly named Blackhawk as their top choice for
its affordability and smaller crowd size.
• P2 stated, "I chose the Blackhawk because it was less crowded, and it had an open
dining area in the back. If I wanted to do work in there, it was peaceful."
• All participants expressed discontentment with Blackhawk's current hiatus. Other areas
are overcrowded, making time more of a constraint.
 16

Graduate students often eat at local businesses due to time constraints, discounts, and
service.
• While explaining while she often chooses nearby fast food options,
P1 stated, "Sometimes it's really hard to sit down and eat between your GA hours and
go to class at the same time."
• Participants seek out specials and discounts.
• P2 stated, "I often go to Potbelly's. They always got BOGO deals if you got the app."
• P3 said, "If I need something quick, I got to Potbelly's, Chipotle,
Pita Pete's sometimes... Nothing close by is open by the time we have class."
• P1 offered, "The primary reason that I would eat outside of the dining halls
is because it's fast. Sometimes it's not even the quality of the food that I have a
problem with, but the slow service."

Graduate students desire an increase in carry-out options, especially at night.

• P1 said, "I'm sure parking is a factor. Like it would be nice if there was like a little pull-
up takeout place to-go. Like they have at McDonald's."
• P3 complained, "The building that we're in (Graham Hall), we don't even
have food options at that time of night. We can't even get fresh coffee."
• Overall, graduate students expressed discontent with lack of nearby options for
students on the move, particularly at night.

Benchmark Study
Social media. Based on the data, there is an overall positive correlation between number of
posts made and number of followers each social media page has. Of the 11 dining services
that had a Twitter account, there was a total of 19,279 followers, an average of 1,752.64
followers per account. The total number of posts was much larger. It totaled 42,245, or an
average of 3,840 per account. Each Twitter post yields, on average, .456 followers. When
looking at individual accounts, it is clear to see that when an account has fewer overall posts,
every new post yields a higher number of followers than when an account has more
posts. For example, Western Michigan Dining Twitter account has 164 followers and 104
posts, while Miami of Ohio has 2,223 followers and 8,617 posts.
On Facebook, the only social media account of the three that NIU Dining Services
uses, they rank 9th in both number of followers and number of likes on their page with 764
followers and 751 likes. The only institutions that trail NIU are Ohio University, University of
Akron, and Western Michigan University. Although NIU does not rank last in this data, they
 17

are substantially below the average, which amounts to 2,008.33 followers per page and
2,040.75 likes per page. The silver lining, however, is that NIU Dining’s Facebook page
seems to be on the right track. The most recent post was the day before the research team’s
last day of data collecting, meaning it was posted on November 15, 2018.
Eight of the 12 dining services had an Instagram account. With the total number of
followers tallying 7,885 and averaging 985.625, and the total number of posts totaling 4,124
and averaging 515.5, Instagram seems to be the most effective way to gain followers based
on average number of followers per post, which is 1.912. This is much higher than the
average number of followers per post of Twitter. However, the total number of followers found
on Instagram is significantly lower than both Twitter and Facebook. Instagram, because of its
high post to follower relationship, however, may be the best social media platform for NIU
Dining Services to invest in because it demands little resources.
Of the eight institutions that specifically listed dining options for faculty/staff, there
seems to be a consensus across the board, with few differences, for how to cater to their
dining needs. The most popular options available to faculty/staff significantly decrease
the number of swipes available to them in dining halls or retail locations (at universities that
have meal exchange), if not completely getting rid of them, and offer an increased amount of
what is equivalent to Huskie Bucks or Flex Dollars, depending on the university. A common
incentive among some universities is to offer Huskie Bucks or Flex Dollars at a discounted
rate. For example, Ohio University offers $150 of Flex Points for $135. This is an incentive,
because if a faculty/staff member plans on using campus dining, it will save them money in
the long term.
Another creative and innovative incentive for faculty/staff is being done by Kent State
Dining Services. In addition to two other faculty/staff meal plans, both including primarily
Dining Dollars, they have a third that is a punch card. Every meal purchased by the
faculty/staff member at the dining hall will get their card punched, and if they buy four they get
a fifth for free. This may be effective in getting those who do not want to commit to
semester a long meal plan and who would otherwise forego the dining halls completely to use
the dining hall more often than they originally would.
Simplicity can be key to get faculty/staff to use campus dining. At least four
universities in our study allow online payroll deduction to pay for plans. This is a simple use of
technology that makes the process more efficient. Even more universities allow for their
equivalent to Huskie Bucks/Flex Dollars to be purchased or reloaded online
 18

Commuter dining options. Again, the options for commuter dining plans across the MAC are
very close in nature and are like meal plans offered to faculty/staff, because, like faculty/staff,
commuter students do not live on campus and do not rely heavily on university dining. There
are some differences however. While some institutions have the same exact options for
faculty/staff as do commuting students, others trend to offer packages of more value and
higher cost. For example, one of Western Michigan’s dining options for commuting students is
100 visits a semester for $958, and an Ohio University meal plan option is $450 in Flex Points
for $427 a semester. The most Flex Points Ohio offers in a meal plan to faculty/staff is $150,
showing the higher value and cost of meal plans offered to commuter students.
Similar to faculty/staff meals plans, Ohio offers their Flex Points to commuters at a discounted
rate, using this as an incentive for commuting students to dine on campus. Another interesting
incentive can be found at the University of Akron, who allots 5 guest swipes per
semester. Also, Buffalo allows meal swipes to be used as meal credits at other campus
locations

Retail locations vs traditional dining. The data collected shows that the number of retail
locations on campus greatly outnumber the amount of traditional dining halls, showing that it
is beneficial to have retail locations on campus. The higher number of retail locations on
campus diversifies food options for potential customers and increases the chances for
customers to find an option they enjoy eating. Add this to an on-campus currency sold at a
discounted rate or meal swipes that can be used at retail locations as well as dining halls and
potential customers will likely be more inclined to utilize on-campus dining more often. The
University of Akron only has one traditional dining hall listed on their website, while they have
19 retail locations listed, two of them being Chick-fil-a. Chick-fil-a, along with Starbucks,
Subway, and Einstein Bros. Bagels, are among the most frequent retail locations on
campus. In comparison to NIU, which has seven retail locations listed and four traditional
dining halls, Akron has many more options for their students and faculty/staff.
Many university websites did not go into much detail about the crossover between traditional
dining swipes and retail locations and when a customer can use a swipe at a retail location,
but Kent State, Toledo, and Western Michigan all allow their customers this option, which
adds diversity to their food choices. Every university in the study also had an equivalent to
either NIU’s Huskie Bucks or Flex Dollars, while most had both. This allows students and
faculty/staff to use preloaded money and their own personal accounts to purchase food both
on and off campus without using swipes.
 19

Interesting finds. There are a few interesting finds the research team found when sifting
through MAC dining websites. The first one from Western Michigan University is a late-
night dining option. Five nights a week, a dining facility will remain open until 10:00 PM to
allow students and faculty/staff to use dining services for extended hours. Late night dining
could be very effective for getting students with late classes (graduate students) and
faculty/staff who teach late classes to use university dining.
A second interesting find is the use of on-campus convenience stores. Many of the
other MAC schools in this benchmarking had some sort of on-campus
convenience store. Here, customers can purchase snacks, drinks, laundry detergent, and
toiletries using Huskie Bucks or Flex Dollars, cash, or a credit/debit card. Instead of having to
run off campus, students could simply use the campus convenience store to buy what they
need. Not only is it more convenient for students, but it is also a way to increase the profits of
dining services.
Lastly, one of the most innovative interesting finds, along with the faculty/staff punch
card, is the use of food trucks on campuses. Buffalo, Ohio, Kent State, and Bowling Green
State University all utilize food trucks on campus. Buffalo, in fact, uses two food trucks that
move around campus. Food trucks allows these universities to be in different locations
around campus at different times, depending on where students are. At NIU this would be
beneficial because it would merge the gap between the residential side of campus and the
academic side of campus.

E-Interviews
A two-week waiting period for interview responses yielded only response containing
data and feedback. The time constraint of the assessment project did not allow the research
team to pursue further data from other institutions or to follow up with benchmark institutions
using phone calls or emails. The research team, in conjunction with the faculty advisor,
decided not to pursue further data and to focus on analyzing focus group and benchmark
data. In the future, an email interview requesting fluid and open-ended input or data for a
benchmarking study could be helpful in finding out what recent best practices some schools
have encountered.
The data that was collected yielded several insightful themes and trends. The full
feedback lists can be found in (Appendix E & F). Although the research team does not feel
comfortable making summative recommendations or conclusions based off of the limited
feedback gathered, it is appropriated to share the trends that did emerge in the feedback from
each of the institutions:
 20

• Dining specials during employee onboarding processes are utilized to attract

customers early in their relationship with the institution.
• Extra incentive each semester for voluntary signups (i.e. cooking classes) is common,
though prove unsuccessful in driving numbers.
• Some institutions provide meeting Space for faculty/staff/groups who want a different
meeting environment and/or special seating area other than the traditional cafeteria or
café setting. This can include meeting rooms, silent areas, or breakout spaces that are
functional for team meetings.
• Benchmark institutions noted that Facebook is trending toward faculty, staff, and
parents, while twitter is utilized by graduate students and Instagram is used by
undergraduate students. The institutional partners discussed there are macro-trends in
who is using different social media platforms and who is engaging the most. A student
position dedicated exclusively to social media is being used to create a consistent
voice/tone in messaging and has helped to increase engagement. One institution saw
a 300% increase in monthly online interactions via creating a student worker position.
• A focus on clear, concise, and fun messaging has been most helpful in engaging
customers through emails and social media. Information needs to be useful, short,
funny (i.e. food puns and jokes), and time sensitive in order to garner the most
engagement.
 21

RECCOMENDATIONS

1. Implement a “to-go” or “takeout” option in the dining halls. This was a common trend
brought up in all three focus groups and is currently being done as comparable
institutions, as shown through the benchmark study.
2. Increase use of specials, promotions, themed cuisine, and programs to attract staff to
the dining halls. The value added through an “experiential” dining meal is strongly
considered by staff when selecting whether to utilize Dining Service’s locations or to go
off-campus for lunch.
3. Add a location closer to the convocation center. Possible sites including the Yordon
Center or the Convocation Center could be considered. Stevenson could be
considered for “to-go” or “quick-service” additions.
4. Invest in Ozzi reusable carry-out boxes for select dining halls, as have been introduced
at Northern Arizona University and Marquette University.
5. Extend hours of operation for centrally located retail locations and Neptune dining hall,
as it is located in the heart of the main campus.
6. Take advantage of social media. Instagram is the best option for NIU because of the
lack of resources it will take to gain followers (highest follower-to-post ratio, see
Appendix B).
7. Have or partner with food trucks to reach the non-residential side of campus.
8. Use punch cards for faculty/staff as an additional incentive to use dining halls.
 22

APPENDIX
Appendix A

Protocol for NIU Dining Services Focus Groups: Adopted from Protocol set by U.S.
Department – Office for Victims of Crime

1. Begin with one facilitator providing introductory comments:

a. Welcome and thank everyone for volunteering to participate.

b. Introduce yourself, the cofacilitator, and the note taker (if applicable).

c. Hand out the consent form.

2. Ask participants to review, ask any questions, and then sign the consent form. Offer a copy
of the consent form (unsigned) to each person. Some will want a copy, others will not, but
always offer.

3. Give a very brief overview of the project and goals for the focus group or interview. For
example, “We are talking to you to find out about NIU Dining Services. We would like to find
out what works and what does not work, and how the department can improve services.”

4. Give participants information about the process, times, breaks, bathrooms, cell phone
expectations and so forth.

5. Distribute name tags for scheduled focus groups (first names only).

6. Provide basic guidelines for the focus group or community meeting, review them with
participants, and consider posting them for everyone to see. Adapt pertinent guidelines for
individual interviews:

a. If you feel uncomfortable during the meeting, you have the right to leave or to pass
on any question. There is no consequence for leaving. Being here is voluntary.
 23

b. The meeting is designed solely to collect information that may help NIU Dining
Services improve its offerings and services.

c. Please keep personal stories “in the room”; do not share the identity of the attendees
or what anybody else said outside of the meeting.

e. Everyone’s ideas will be respected. Be considerate of others’ opinions and

experiences.

f. One person talks at a time.

g. It’s okay to take a break if needed or to help yourself to food or drink (if provided).

h. Everyone has the right to talk. The facilitator may ask someone who is talking a lot
to step back and give others a chance to talk and may ask a person who isn’t talking if
he or she has anything to share.

i. Everybody has the right to pass on a question.

j. There are no right or wrong answers.

k. Does anybody have any questions?

7. Let people know that a recording device will be present and that notes will be taken about
what is discussed, but that individual names or identifying information will not be attached to
comments.

8. An opening question can help break the ice and should be easy to answer. A first question
can be as simple as “What was your first impression of ____ dining hall when you first came
to NIU?”

9. Key questions will allow for open ended answers as opposed to closed binary responses.
a. What has your experience at each dining hall that you have visited been like?
 24

b. What do you enjoy about the dining hall experience? What don’t you enjoy?
c. If you do not visit the dining halls, where do you eat between work/classes?
What factors influence your decision to eat elsewhere?
d. Tell me about what changes would NIU Dining Services could make to
be a first option for your meals on campus?
e. What are your thoughts about carry-out/to-go box options?

10. Let people know when you are going to ask the last question. This cues participants to
share relevant information that may not have come up in answer to your key questions. For
example, “Is there anything else you want to share that we haven’t talked about yet?”

11. Bring contact information. Inform participants that they can contact you should they have
further questions or comments related to the study.

12. Thank all for participating.

Source: https://www.ovc.gov/pubs/victimswithdisabilities/pdf/ProtocolforInterviewsGroupsand
Meetings.pdf
 25

Appendix B

Benchmark chart
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
 35

Appendix C
E-Interview E-mail

Greetings [Insert Administrators]!

I hope all is well. My name is Aaron Carlson and I am a graduate student at Northern Illinois
University pursuing my M.S.Ed. One of my courses this semester, Assessment Methods in Higher
Education, has paired me and three of my classmates with NIU Dining Service’s Director in order to
assess our dining services, find its strengths and weaknesses, and give feedback and
recommendations on how to improve campus dining. One aspect of our research is interviewing. Our
team has researched other Mid-American Conference institutions’ dining services’ social media
presence and dining services offered, with a focus on faculty/staff and commuter student
usage/satisfaction. Below is more information on our study, what universities we are reaching out to,
and a short list of questions.

Population of this study: Buffalo, Miami of Ohio, Ohio, Bowling Green, Akron, Kent State, Western
Michigan, Ball State, Toledo, Eastern Michigan, and Central Michigan Dining Services. (Please note
that all universities were included on our team’s social media research, but every university may not
be contacted for questioning).

Goals: The goal of this assessment is to use the data collected to construct recommendations for NIU
dining services that will increase their number of customers (both faculty and students), share
information with their customers, and receive feedback from customers and non-customers more
effectively and efficiently.

Questions: If you are anybody on your team have any time to provide brief input to the questions or
topic areas below, it would be greatly appreciated, even if it is just a few brief comments! We really are
looking for any recommendations or notes on things that work either really well or did not go as well as
planned.

1. How do you market to faculty, staff/administrators, and commuter students?

2. Do you utilize any special programs, offers, or incentives to increase usage?
3. Do you have any advice on how to increase usage among these three groups?
4. How do you engage with customers through social media and have you faced any challenges
or encountered successes in doing so?
5. Are there any numbers/data you can give us for our benchmarking study regarding social
media engagement or dining satisfaction?
 36

If there are any questions or concerns you may have regarding the above information, please do not
hesitate to ask via email or telephone. If you wish for you and/or your university to remain anonymous
we will meet that request. Thank you for your time and our team looks forward to hearing back from
you soon.

Thank you so very much!

Aaron Carlson
Northern Illinois University
acarlson11@niu.edu
(630) 962-2662
 37

Appendix D

Informed Consent
Principal Investigators: Aaron Carlson, Alex Barr, Chris MacMartin, Sean Vinson
Purpose
This study investigates faculty, staff, and students’ opinions on NIU Dining Services. As part of
this study you will be asked to participate in a focus group and answer structured and open-
ended questions. This study will take approximately 30 minutes.

Participants’ Rights
I understand that my responses will be kept in the strictest of confidence and will be available
only to the researcher. No one will be able to identify me when the results are reported and
my name will not appear anywhere in the written report. Please do not share other people’s
identities or responses from the focus group with others to maintain the anonymity of the
participants outside of the focus group. I also understand that I may skip any questions or
tasks that I do not wish to answer or complete. I understand that the consent form will be kept
separate from the data records to ensure confidentiality. I may choose not to participate or
withdraw at any time during the study without penalty. I agree to have my verbal responses
tape-recorded and transcribed for further analysis with the understanding that my responses
will not be linked to me personally in any way. After the transcription is completed, the tape
recordings will be destroyed.

I understand that upon completion, I will be given full explanation of the study. If I am
uncomfortable with any part of this study, I may contact Dr. Carrie Kortegast, Faculty Advisor
for the project at (815)-753-9200.

I understand that I am participating in a study of my own free will.

Consent to Participate
I acknowledge that I am at least eighteen years old, and that I understand my rights as a
research participant as outlined above. I acknowledge that my participation is fully voluntary.

Print Name: _____________________________________

Signature: ______________________________________ Date: _____________

 38

Appendix E
E-Interview Data

1. How do you market to faculty, staff/administrators, and commuter students?

a. Faculty, Staff, and Administrators
i. Directed email marketing
ii. Targeted Campus Mailings
iii. University sponsored communication system (Campus Update)
iv. Dining Specials during onboarding process through HR
v. Print Marketing
1. Sign holders primarily of various sizes in locations
vi. Social Media
1. Minority of content. Primarily directed at students but some is
still relevant to them.
b. Commuter Students
i. Directed email marketing
ii. University Sponsored Communications System
iii. Social Media
iv. Print Marketing
1. Sign holders primarily of various sizes in locations
v. Collaboration with Off-Campus Services Department
vi. Direct marketing at tables
vii. Speaking to groups including Transfer Orientation and Commuter
Orientation
2. Do you utilize any special programs, offers, or incentives to increase usage?
a. All meal plans are Tax free which is a draw for these groups
b. Discounts are afforded to all meal plans if they include dining dollars
and meal swipes
c. At the beginning of the semester, we usually have some sort of extra
incentive.
i. This past year it was free tickets to our culinary classes at our
Teaching Kitchen but wasn’t very successful.
3. Do you have any advice on how to increase usage among these three groups?
a. Create a story on how food is one thing they all have in common.
 39

i. Gives faculty an opportunity to meet with students

ii. Administration can become closer to campus pulse
iii. Commuters have convenient options that integrate their lives to the
campus scene.
b. Persistence
i. It has taken a long time to build our Voluntary Meal Plans system
and it really takes time
ii. Look at opportunities to bring in campus departments to your
locations.
1. We work to provide meeting areas for Fac/Staff and
Administration who are looking for a different meeting space.
4. How do you engage with customers through social media and have you faced
any challenges or encountered successes in doing so?
a. Social Media is always tough as it is a target that is always
moving. Recently we have moved to much more image and video based
social media content. The best thing we did was create a student
coordinator position within our marketing department who concentrates
entirely on social media. Creating a consistence message and
understanding which social media speaks to which population.
i. We target the following to different campus populations
1. Facebook – Fac/Staff, Admin, Parents, and Community
2. Instagram – Undergrads
3. Twitter – Undergrads and Grads
5. Are there any numbers/data you can give us for our benchmarking study
regarding social media engagement or dining satisfaction?
a. You can find our historic Dining Satisfaction information at the link
below.
i. https://new.bgsudining.com/reports
 40

Appendix F
E-Interview Data

1. How do you market to faculty, staff/administrators, and commuter students?

a. We utilize a bevy of platforms to reach our audiences, including print and digital
advertising, mass emails, direct mail, social media messaging and advertising,
outreach activities, and more. Many of the actions we take depend on the
specific audience and our desired outcomes.
2. Do you utilize any special programs, offers, or incentives to increase usage?
a. We give discount purchasing of dining funds for accounts to university
employees. We also have a specialty area on campus that is available only to
faculty, staff, and their guests during lunch in the week.
3. Do you have any advice on how to increase usage among these three groups?
a. Offer things that cater to those audiences. Sometimes it can be challenging to
do that throughout an entire campus, but focusing at least in one area can help.
Know that eating habits, standard meal hours, and available funds may be
significantly different that those of your general student population.
4. How do you engage with customers through social media and have you faced any
challenges or encountered successes in doing so?
a. We have tremendous success through our social channels with our entire
campus community. We’ve created a very specific tone and personality with our
social channels and into our general emails, and we’ve had both anecdotal
responses praising the approach, but also tangible metrics including 300%
increases in monthly online interactions. The biggest aspect is respecting the
audience’s time: in that we want to make sure that if they’re paying attention to
us, they’ll get a pay-off, typically in the form of useful information and a big
chunk of humor, music, and food puns.
5. Are there any numbers/data you can give us for our benchmarking study regarding
social media engagement or dining satisfaction?
a. Our biggest champions are people who have previously had complaints. We
then amplified those complaints along with ways we were trying to fix said
situations. Those people have been the first to support us going forward and
continually support our efforts. We currently maintain upwards of 100,000
Twitter impressions monthly (sometimes far upward). There seems to be a
strong indicator of success related to how many times you are mentioned
(whether it be Twitter or Instagram)—obviously, that is something you cannot
control. However, if you are maintaining an atmosphere that encourages
discourse and fosters opportunities, that can lead to more mentions, which
means you’re probably doing something right. Facebook is largely worthless for
students, but it is quite important for faculty, staff, alumni, administration, and
parents of students. Use it accordingly. Lastly, listen to student groups on
campus. Find out who has a good grasp on current trends amongst your
campus community and who can tap into those ideas. Reach out, listen to them,
get their thoughts—they’ll help you better your offerings. That’s the whole point of
communication anyways, to have back and forth. It makes a world of difference
in engagement.
 41

Appendix G

Focus Group #2
Transcription
November 12th, 2018

1. What has your experience at each dining hall that you have visit been like?

a. P1 – My experience has been good at the dining halls, in particular new hall. I

sometimes go there for dinner if I’m working late. I have a meal plan so I am

able to eat breakfast with the guys. I like that it rolls over from semester to

semester.

b. P2 – the women’s basketball team uses the dining hall for meals. They are given

20 swipes with their huskie bucks, so we schedule those 20 swipes as team

dinner together. Usually times up with a late practice or night before a home

game.

c. P3- I have not had many experiences with the dining halls, this is my first

semester and the team has only had a meal there a couple of times, I had class

during those times.

2. What do you enjoy about dining hall experience? What don’t you enjoy?

a. P1 – I enjoy the cleanliness and the convenience of how new hall is set up, I am

able to experience a variety of food easily. From pizza to pasta to phillys and

grilled chicken. The one suggestion I would add if that is okay is that they add to

go containers.

b. P2 – From an operations stand point it is really convenience for us to have team

meals. Personally, I’ve never eaten at new hall. For our meals, our girls are able

to get a variety of food, and for me all I have to do is make sure there swipes are

working.
 42

c. P3 – I’ve only ever been to new hall during recruiting visit, it is super nice and

clean and organized. I’m from Saint Francis, and new hall is much better.

3. If you do not visit the dining halls, where you eat between work/classes? What factors

influence your decision to eat elsewhere?

a. P1 – I primary use new hall to eat breakfast with our guys. Last year we noticed

our guys were losing weight, so we decided to go the unlimited meal plan route.

In our eyes this means our guys can eat as much as they want as often as they

want to hopefully help with the weight issue. I will occasionally eat dinner at new

hall as well, I live 15 minutes away so it is nice to be able to go over to new hall

and have a hot meal with desert for cheap.

b. P2 – Our staff does not have meal plans, they often times go out to eat for lunch.

I would think that if they liked the food, or have better options closer, they could

potentially go to new hall for lunch. I would utilize the salad bar if they had to go

containers. but a staff member, either myself, or Chrissy or our strength coach

goes with them to make sure they are making smart decisions with dinner

choices. We do get passes from the business office, which comes out of our

budget. I really like that aspect of it.

c. P3 – I feel like I’m not much help here because of my newness, but I do go out to

lunch every day. Maybe I should look into going to new hall.

4. Tell me about what changes would NIU Dining Services could make to be a first option

for your meals on campus?

a. P1 – I would use NIU dining services more if it was more convenient. I like giving

my money back to NIU. As I said before, to go boxes would be a great help. It

would allow me to eat breakfast and pack a to go box for lunch or dinner.

Ideally, having something in the convocation center would be best for me,
 43

b. P2 – I usually like to pack a salad for lunch. So being able to utilize the salad bar

but then bringing it back to my desk would be perfect. I don’t have time at lunch

usually to sit down and eat. I like to eat at my desk and work. Like “name (p1)”

said, something in the convocation center would be perfect.

c. P3 – I would agree with them, or even having something in the yordon, our girls

lift a lot there so it would be easy to grab food.

5. What are your thoughts about carry-out/to go box options?

a. P1 – I loved the idea, just like I’ve said throughout.

b. P2 – Love it

c. P3 – I agree with them

 44

References

Berg, C. (2013). Sustainable campus dining: How campuses are targeting sustainability
and engagement through dining services initiatives. Retrieved
from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED539858.pdf

Bitner, M.J. (1992). Servicescape: The impact of physical surroundings on customers

and employees. Journal of Marketing, (56), 57-71.

Brumback, N. (1998). Inn style. Restaurant Business, 97(3), 47-59.

Choi, E-K., Wilson, A., Fowler, D., et al. (2011). An analysis of freshmen students
’motivation to eat at on-campus dining facilities. 16th Annual Graduate Education and
Graduate

Student Research Conference in Hospitality and Tourism. Retrieved from

http://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1127&context=gradconf_ho
spitality

Durocher, J. (2001). Backstage pass. Restaurant Business, 100(5), 81-82.

Estepa, A., Shanklin C., & Back, K. (2005). Students’ perceived service quality and customer
satisfaction in a Midwestern university foodservice operation. Journal of Foodservice
Management and Education, (1), 40-61.

Gilbert hall’s east side café to serve Starbucks (2013). Retrieved

from https://niutoday.info/2013/08/21/gilbert-halls-east-side-to-serve-starbucks/

Grosz, B., (2013). So, what’s cooking? Students strive to improve residential dining center
experiences at NIU. Retrieved from https://www.niutoday.info/2013/02/04/so-whats-
cooking-students-strive-to-improve-residential-dining-center-experience-at-niu/

Horacek, T., Erdman, M., & Byrd-Bredbenner, C., et al. (2013). Assessment of the
dining environment on and near the campuses of fifteen post-secondary
institutions. Public Health Nutrition, 16(7), 1186-1196.
doi:10.1017/S1368980012004454
 45

Joung, H.W., Lee, D.S., Kim, H.S., et al. (2014). Evaluation of the On-Campus Dining
Services

Using Importance-Performance Analysis. Journal of Foodservice Business

Research, 17(2), 136-146. doi: 10.1080/15378020.2014.902647

Johnston, R. (1994). Managing the zone of tolerance: some propositions. Proceedings of

International Quality in Services Conference QUIS IV, Selected Presentations, p. 92-
105. USA: Norwalk.

Kim, Y. S., Moreo, P. J., & Yeh, R. J. M. (2004). Customers’ satisfaction factors regarding
university food court service. Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 7(4), 97–
110.

Martin, E. (2017). Like everything else at college, campus dining halls have been
shockingly expensive. Business Insider. Retrieved from businessinsider.com/college-
campus-dining-halls-shockingly-expensive-2017-1

Martinez, O.D., Roberto, C.A., Kim, J.H., et al. (2012). A survey of undergraduate
student perceptions and use of nutrition information labels in a university dining
hall. Health Education Journal, 72(3), 319-325.

Nadzirah et al. (2013). University foodservice: An overview of factors influencing the

customers’ dining choice. Journal of International Food Research, 20(3), 1459-1468.

Reale, A. (2000). University food services: Student dining expectations, needs and wants
versus what is actually received in a mid-size university. Retrieved from
Thesis/Dissertation Collections at RIT Scholar Works.

Shanka, T. & Taylor, R. (2005). Assessment of university campus café service: The
students’ perceptions. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 10(3), 329-340.

Stein, K. (2005). Point-of-sale systems for foodservice. Journal of the American Dietetic
Association, 105(12), 1861.
 46

Stevens, P., Knutson, B., & Patton M. (1995). DINESERV: A tool for measuring service
quality in.restaurants. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 36(2):
56–60.

The history of food and dining at Harvard (2016). Harvard University Archives Research
Guides. Retrieved from: https://guides.library.harvard.edu/hua/Food_Dining

Wansink, B., Cao, Y., Saini, P., et al. (2012). College cafeteria snack food purchases become
less healthy with each passing week of the semester. Public Health Nutrition, 16(7),
1291- 1295.