“ Hospitality in the image of small family accommodation businesses ”

Small and micro businesses form the largest group of entities offering services to tourists in tourist destinations. A majority of them are family businesses accommodation facilities. The study tests the hypothesis that the family nature of a business offering accommodation services can be a source of real competitive advantage being of significance for a certain group of clients. The advantage can be shaped by creating an image based on the owner’s involvement and hospitality. As the literature research indicated, in the case of the businesses described, it is relatively easy to develop a bond between the facility’s manager and their clients. The deliberations were extended by an empirical study conducted on a group of young people from Poland and Ukraine. Its results have indicated that accommodation services are significant elements of the satisfaction among the clients surveyed, and that in the group surveyed, the key reason for a trip is the intention to “experience and learn” and not comfort. It has also been confirmed that the determinants of accommodation services related to broadly defined hospitality are significant, however, not key in the group analyzed.


INTRODUCTION
Tourism is a significant element of the global economy. In a number of regions it is one of the key sources of income and an important factor in their development. Studies of the World Tourism Organization indicate that the industry in question is responsible for 10% of the gross world product, it creates every eleventh job, and it is responsible for 7% of the world export. Moreover, 2015 was another year in a row with an increase in the number of journeys, amounting to 1.186 million international tourist trips (compared with 25 million in 1950). It is expected that this number will be growing over the following years up to 1.8 billion. International tourism receipts in 2015 reached the value of 1.26 billion dollars (UNWTO, 2016). The above numbers are only estimates, however, they are definitely significant. The scale of benefits derived from tourism is indisputable, and so its development has become one of the most significant objectives of policies in many countries. At the same time, competitive processes on the tourist market are intensifying. Countries, regions and towns compete for tourists and their money, just like entrepreneurs whose number is growing, particularly in the case of accommodation facilities. On account of the above, it is recommendable to look for any potential sources of competitive advantage of a business operating on the tourist market, which is the purpose of the deliberations presented. They attempt to answer the question: Can family nature of a tourist business offering accommodation services can be a source of advantage for young people from Poland and Ukraine? A consequence of this question is the following research hypothesis: family nature of a business offering 1. LITERATURE REVIEW 1.1. Regional tourism product The basis for seeking answers to the research questions is understanding the essence of a destination's tourism product. It has to be emphasized that such a product can be understood in two ways. First of all, it can be defined as goods, services or their combinations created by tourism entrepreneurs (Panasiuk, 2014). On the other hand, tourism product is often treated more broadly as an area where tourists stay. In such a case, it becomes a structurally complex, spatial and multi-dimensional category (Panasiuk, 2014). Thus, understood tourism product is called a destination. It is assumed that a destination is successful in attracting tourists when it meets three conditions: it is attractive, available and it has a developed infrastructure (Holloway, 2002). The literature offers a number of definitions of a destination. One of them was proposed by McIntyre who said that it is "the location of a cluster of attractions and related tourist facilities which a tourist or tour group selects to visit or which providers choose to promote" (McIntyre, 1993). As indicated earlier, this notion should also be understood to include an area along with all its attractions and infrastructure used by tourists.
The basic characteristic distinguishing this product from others is its complexity. In the source literature, one can even find claims that it is the most complex and multi-dimensional consumer product (Vinh & Long, 2013). It consists of a great number of elements, which translates into its high internal complementarity and a variety of problems related to its management. There are several groups of entities co-creating this product, for example, accommodation facilities, tour operators or communication companies (Vanhove, 2012). These are all kinds of organizations and enterprises offering narrowly-defined tourism products. Their offer is complementary, so a significant element of building their competitive advantage can be cooperation and development of product packages offered to tourists.
Tourism industry sectors such as attraction, accommodation, communication, tour operators, tourism organizations are also the basic elements of a destination product. The key element of building its competitiveness is tourist attractiveness. Das, Sharma, Mohaparta, and Sarkar (2007) emphasize that attractions form the basis for stimulating tourists' decisions to come. It is difficult to question this statement. What determines potential tourists' interest in a destination and, to a large extent, their decision to choose the destination are its attractions. Of course, one should remember that perception of attractiveness is highly subjective. The same elements can be assessed differently depending on the tourists' preferences. For example, in the case of people preferring skiing, the key issue will be the number of ski runs and lifts, which will not matter or will even be perceived negatively by those preferring mountain hikes. In practice, there are different types of attractions distinguished, serving as the basic stimulus to the demand among tourists. The classical division includes natural attractions, anthropogenic attractions and various social and cultural events. It seems that natural and anthropogenic (man-made) attractions connected with the historical heritage are of the greatest significance to the development of tourism. These attractions are difficult to copy and they can generate constant demand unlike all kinds of events that generate only short-term demand.
Another element of the area-related tourism product is infrastructure. While attractions are the reason for visiting a given destination, the auxiliary sphere mostly determines the comfort of the stay and, in consequence, has a great impact on the client's satisfaction. Destination's infrastructure mostly includes accommodation, catering and communication facilities, including the possibility of going around the destination and its availability. All three groups of services focus on the three basic tourists' needs that need to be met: a place to sleep, food and communication. Also, each tourist area has a number of other units servicing visitors, such as travel agencies and souvenir sellers.
One has to remember that tourists coming to a given place or region also use services offered by other units established to serve inhabitants. Thus, a tourism product can be treated even more broadly, including the sphere that one could refer to as tourism-related. Its elements are not created in order to directly improve the competitiveness of the region, however, tourists use them, and so they can become significant supplements to the product offered, e.g. healthcare and stores, which in some situations even become elements of the tourist offer (Getz, 2011). For example, Pearce (2013) treats shopping infrastructure as one of the five main areas of the destination's attractiveness.
The last element of the destination product includes inhabitants of a given place or region. They are to a large extent responsible for such characteristics of the product as hospitality and safety. This group is also a link between other elements of the destination. Inhabitants work in businesses and other organizations responsible for the destination's constituents, with some of them owning such facilities. Inhabitants also elect local authorities who have the greatest power to influence the area's product, and they become the authorities themselves. Thus, this is a group that should not be omitted when analyzing the specificity of the product discussed.
As was already emphasized, a tourism product of a place is highly complex. It includes offers of a variety of individual units and there is no unit with ownership rights to all its elements, which is why this product is so difficult to manage. Managerial activities are also complicated because of another characteristic of this product: many of its constituents are services the quality and perception of which are to a large extent determined by intangible assets, which are harder to create than tangible factors (Gursoy, Baloglu, & Chi, 2009). However, the specificity of the product in question translates into strong specificity of the operations and competition of units co-creating it, including businesses offering accommodation services, which are of interest for this work.
The complexity and nature of a tourist destination product also influence the possibility of developing its competitiveness. This issue has been tackled by many researchers in their works. They point to the high complementarity of factors impacting on the destination's competitiveness and they draw attention to the significance of resources and proper management (Vanhove, 2002;Dwyer & Kim, 2003; Mehinda, Swrirat, Papaijit, Lertwannawit, & Anuwichanon, 2010; Crouch & Ritchie, 1999). One of the most comprehensive and popular models of the destination's competitiveness is the one developed by Ritchie and Crouch (2005). In their works, they draw attention to factors within the destination and those external to it.
The model shows the issue of building a destination's competitiveness in a very comprehensive way. The authors do not want to focus on this, however, there are a few issues that should be paid attention to.
First, as was already emphasized, destination's competitiveness depends on a number of variables and many units. These are often organizations fiercely competing with one another as they offer close substitutes, e.g. guesthouses offering accommodation services. However, their managers should not forget that even though they are competitors, they have the same aim, which is to build a strong competitive position of the destination in order to increase the number of visitors to the area and thus bring benefits to them all.
Second, tourism products making up the destination's products are highly complementary. In consequence, when managing a single unit, one should not ignore the environment as other organizations can offer products that might diversify and enrich the offer of a given company. For example, a guesthouse owner may derive benefits from cooperation with owners of restaurants, ski lifts and other services offered to tourists. As a result, cooperation between stakeholders becomes of key significance to the development of individual businesses and the destination in general.
Another important issue is the fact that individual entrepreneurs co-create the destination's product, thus determining its competitiveness, while the region's attractiveness becomes a factor building the competitiveness of local businesses operating in the industry in question, and particularly of those offering accommodation services. This is another argument in favor of the need for their participation in the development of the destination perceived as a whole.
In their model, Crouch and Richie (1999) not only emphasize diverse resources of a destination and its infrastructure, but they also draw attention to issues related to the destination management with regard to its different areas and the existence of a variety of macro-and micro-economic factors that impact on the development of tourism in a given area. For example, the economic situation connected with the financial crisis of 2008 more than clearly demonstrated the significance of external factors and their influence on the tourism demand.
Apart from the already listed characteristics of the development of the destination's competitiveness, in the context of these deliberations, it is also worth paying attention to two issues that to a large extent reflect the specificity of the tourism demand and can also be referred to business. Most of all, one of the basic resources is hospitality, while other significant enhancing factors include the image, or the way the region or a business is perceived, as this is typical of making purchase decisions in tourism. On account of the above, these characteristics seem to be potential competitive advantages based on which also a business operating on the market in question may build its position.

Hospitality as an element
of building competitive advantage of small family accommodation business As was already indicated, the structure of drivers of tourist destination products includes a variety of units offering diverse products, e.g. accommodation, catering, transport and entertainment services, and souvenirs. Undoubtedly, in the case of many places, the largest and key group consists of units offering accommodation services, and in many instances the basis for these accommodation services, is formed by family businesses. Getz, Carlsen, and Morrison (2004) draw attention to the fact that in many areas, family businesses are the basic elements of the destination's competitiveness. Thus, this is a group worth an in-depth analysis and seeking diverse sources of competitive advantage.
The notion of a family business has no legal definition and is ambiguous from the managerial point of view. The category of family businesses includes both small family units and large enterprises controlled by one family. However, in the group of small and micro enterprises, family businesses are overrepresented in comparison with large and medium business entities. There are no clear criteria for distinguishing family businesses. Usually, the following elements are indicated (Handler, 1989): • family ownership structure of an entity; • strategic control maintained by a family; • family members' part in management; • involvement of more than one family generation in the company's operations.
Shanker and Astrachan (1996) draw attention to the fact that definitions of a "family business" are very diverse. The broadest definitions provide a general and vague description of a family business based on such criteria as control of strategic decisions and an intention to leave the company under the family's control. According to slightly narrower definitions of a family business, the owner or their descendants run the company that remains under the ownership control of family members. And finally, the narrowest definitions, apart from the already mentioned criteria, require direct involvement of more than one family member in the company management and multi-generational nature of the business. Depending on the definition chosen, family businesses generate 12%, 30% or 49% of the U.S. national income. The differences are large, however, even with a narrow definition of a family business, the group of business entities is considerable.
The most significant criteria allowing to classify a business unit as a family business include: ownership, management, family's involvement in the company's operations, and family succession. This is connected with the following criteria: • self-definition as a family business; • majority interest, i.e. family holds most shares in the company; • functional elements, i.e. family's involvement in the company's management and operations; • succession, i.e. intergenerational transfer of ownership or power.
In the largest Polish study into small family businesses in Poland, a family business was defined as a small business entity in which (Sulkowski & Marjanski, 2010): • at least two family members are employed; • at least one family member has a significant influence on management; • family members hold a majority interest.
Undoubtedly, when discussing the issue of family businesses on the tourism market, one has to emphasize that a characteristic of a family capital is its low mobility. This characteristic is a result of the owners' origin, as in many countries, local companies operating in a given destination are run by persons connected with a given place.
In consequence, businesses of this type involve a high probability of investment in a given tourist region, minimizing attempts to find new locations. Thus, it can be assumed that family capital, particularly in the case of families that have been living in a given place for generations, will be more strongly connected with the place. Also, if a company owner is a person who comes from a given town, having been born and raised there, they have potentially strong relational capital with a number of other people, including entrepreneurs and representatives of local authorities coming from the same place. In many cases, these relationships may bring significant advantage over "external" entrepreneurs.
Family ownership of many tourist companies is characterized by a number of positive aspects, however, one cannot ignore significant weaknesses and limitations typical of many micro-enterprises, which result from their specificity. One could indicate the following negative elements characteristic of their operations (Petric, 2003): 1) no research is conducted; 2) the fact that it is easy to start a business encourages people without any formal qualifications, which results in a lack of professional managers and managerial knowledge; 3) expenses are not always aimed at development; It can be assumed that most of the limitations indicated is typical of micro-businesses and is a consequence of their size and scale of activity. They have smaller financial resources than medium and large enterprises, which translates into, among other things, poorer access to qualified human resources. As Popczyk (2014a) notes, a factor that can partly compensate for deficiencies in the competence of a family business is the so-called moral and emotional intelligence. The same author draws attention to the fact that this advantage may be difficult to copy by competitors. This mostly concerns moral intelligence that builds the company's reputation, confirms the respect for ethical and moral standards, and thus leads to a positive perception of the company in its environment consisting of customers and all business partners (Popczyk, 2014b). This effect is indicated by, for example, the definition of moral intelligence saying that it is "the capacity to understand right from wrong, to have strong ethical convictions and to act on them to behave in the right and honourable way" (Beheshtifar, Esmaeli, Moghadan et al., 2011).
Maintaining ethical standards can be a source of competitive advantage of family businesses, however, this is not always the case. As was already mentioned, illegal activities might occur quite frequently in such entities. On the other hand, family nature of ownership might be seen by entities from the microenvironment as a signal that persons responsible for the operations of such entities are not connected with them only temporarily based on, for example, employment agreements. Such owners or founders of companies are more emotionally involved and, in most cases, they probably see their future there in the long run. As a result of the above, it is worth considering how value for tourists is created, particularly from the perspective of businesses offering accommodation services.
As presented in Figure 1, tourists' satisfaction with the stay depends on several correlated variables, with an accommodation facility and its product being only two of them. It can be assumed that the dominant element of satisfaction with the stay is the destination, and particularly its attractiveness and tourist infrastructure. However, one cannot forget about independent elements such as the weather and all kinds of acts of God, as a result of which even holiday spent in an attractive place and facility of high qualitative parameters will not evoke positive memories. An entity offering accommodation services is only one of many entities that co-create the destination product.
As Panasiuk (2014) suggests, there are three approaches that one can adopt in relation to the quality on the tourist market: 1) quality of tourist services; 2) service quality; 3) quality of the area's tourism product.
This approach can also be adopted in relation to the diagram presented, and particularly to elements of accommodation facilities. Their quality can be viewed from the perspective of the quality of services which is determined by the facility parameters and service quality. In the case of micro-businesses, particularly family-owned, the owner/manager of the facility is of key significance to the second parameter, and, in this context, the previously mentioned moral intelligence may be a source of competitive advantage. Thanks to the potential involvement, the owner may be used as a kind of a warrantor of quality, particularly in relation to service, and it seems that it is worth using the owner in order to build the facility's image based on trust, relationships and broadly defined hospitality.
When dealing with the issue of hospitality and its influence on the customer's satisfaction and the creation of the image of a tourist company, one should think about the meaning of this term. Melissen (2013) draws attention to the fact that both hospitality and hospitality management are terms used in the literature with quite different meanings. It seems that with regard to the issues described, the essence of hospitality is conveyed by the approach according to which this is "act of kindness in welcoming and looking after the basic needs of guests or strangers, mainly in relation to food, drink and accommodation" (McKenzie & Chan, 2009). It cannot be assumed that these characteristics can only be attributed to family businesses, however, it seems that owners of accommodation micro-businesses, thanks to their involvement, frequent contacts with customers, and using themselves and their families to create a kind of a brand, have considerable potential in this field, which large hotels lack. There was also another term proposed for the intangible assets of the group of family businesses discussed, ensuring their unique nature: familiness (Presas, Munos, & Guia, 2011). This term very clearly refers to the significance of the family in the business management. Habbershon and Williams (1999, as cited in Monroy, Ilian, Solis, Rogelio, & Rodriguez-Aceves, 2015) defined it "as the unique bundle of resources a particular firm has because of the systems interactions between the family, its individual members, and the business". One should remember, however, that building competitive advantage based on this characteristic requires strong involvement and frequent contacts with customers, which might lead to a disruption in family life and a negative impact on it.
The above understanding of "familiness" does not refer to the tourist market and the functioning of tourist companies. It is a more general term referring to relationships between a family and a company, and is studied as such (Sharma, 2008; Minichili, Corbetta, & MacMillan, 2010). On the other hand, it is frequently pointed out that this phenomenon is very difficult to study empirically due to its non-material nature (Minichili et al., 2010). It seems, however, that interactions described as familiness can also be understood as involvement, moral and particularly emotional intelligence, which in turn translates into quality elements related to customer service. Such behavior is directly connected with the creation of a hospitable atmosphere in a company offering accommodation services.
On the other hand, a term that can describe direct relationships between family business owners and their customers on the tourist market is "familiarity". In the context of an accommoda-tion business, it can be understood as acquaintance or brand awareness, but also the existence of some relationships between the service provider and the customer. In consequence, one can expect that when the reason behind a trip is leisure (tourists are willing to return to the already visited place), tourists will use services of providers they know and with whom they have established good relationships.
The significance of "familiarity" to purchase decisions in tourism is also a subject of empirical studies. For example, Marinao, Vilches-Montero, and Chasco (2015) dealt with the issue of impact of being familiar with the destination on its reputation as perceived by tourists. The survey conducted on a group of 750 participants indicated that familiarity is responsible for the destination's reputation in 40% of cases. On the other hand, Lee and Tussyadiah (2011), indicating the significance of being familiar with the destination to the tourists' decision, based on the studies conducted, advanced the thesis that an important element in the case of this factor is the visitor's specificity. For example, teenagers preferred popular destinations, whereas more experienced people looked for less frequently visited places. The above examples only refer to empirical studies whose authors focused on the issue of familiarity. Analyses mostly concerned destinations and concentrated on being familiar with them. As was already suggested, being aware of a brand is one of two possible understandings of the state described as familiarity. It seems that in the context of companies, and particularly family businesses, analyses can go even further and one can consider to what extent hospitality and owners' involvement building a positive image of the entity can influence friendly relationships with customers. The source literature lacks monographs on this issue, and so the work presented is an element filling this gap.

Young people as tourist market participant
As was already indicated, the tourist market is characterized by high competitiveness, which is why both business owners and managers are looking for diverse tools for building advantage. One of them can be segmentation of the market and striving after addressing the needs of specific tar-get groups. Undoubtedly, one of the most attractive groups are business customers; another group, particularly frequently analyzed, whose significance is growing along with changes in the demographic environment are seniors (Ryu, Hyun, & Shim, 2015; Ferrer, Sanz, Ferrandis, McCabe, & Garcia, 2016). At the same time, the segment that may be underestimated but is attractive due to its specificity are young people. These customers are characterized by unique features concerning both needs related to tourism and the ways they satisfy these needs. As Zelazna and Górska-Warsewicz (2013) emphasize, this group has specific needs and adopts defined attitudes on the market. One cannot forget about unique communication channels with young consumers. In consequence, it is worth considering this group individually, performing separate analyses.
The key issue for further deliberations is defining and describing the group of "young people". According to Ajejziak (2011), the youth are "a community of individuals who are only beginning to assume the roles of adults". From the perspective of tourism, this description is vague. The basic problem is to indicate specific age ranges that would allow to qualify a person as young. WYSE (World Youth, Student and Educational Travel Confederation) suggests they are people aged 15-29 years who travel alone, i.e. without their parents or other legal guardians (Ghete, 2015). In 2014, according to estimates, young people in this age range constituted 23% of all travellers. What is more, they spent on average 2,160 USD on their trips, compared with the average of 1,097 in the case of international tourists. Nearly twice as high amount is mostly related to the length of trips made by young people (Global, 2016). At the same time, one should strongly emphasize that the significance of young people for tourism is growing. In 2009, it was estimated that the value of the international youth travel market was USD 190 billion, and, in 2014 it was already USD 286 billion, which proves strong dynamics of changes. According to forecasts, this tendency will continue and in 2020 this value will amount to USD 400 billion (Global, 2016).
It is indicated that the so-called Y generation is more active in terms of tourism than their predecessors (Vukic, Kuzmanovic, & Stankovic, 2015).
This mostly results from changes taking place in the modern world called globalization, which manifests itself in, among other things, removal of political and communication barriers that used to limit possibilities of travel. However, one should also take into consideration the specificity of young people. They have more than average amount of free time, which allows them to make longer trips, a consequence of which are frequently (as already indicated) expenses above average. In the case of young people, education is one of the most important aims of trips. Nevertheless, the literature demonstrates that there are also cases of giving up studies or work during its initial period in order to travel (Yoon, 2014).
A popular stereotype about young people is that they have fewer financial resources. One should not forget, however, that young people often travel for the money they receive from their parents. Moreover, representatives of this group often have no responsibilities related to a family or the need to support themselves. As a result, even though they earn less, they can spend more on fulfilling their tourist needs. One should also remember that one of the key reasons for travelling is getting to know the world, which is why tourists in many cases do not return to places they have already visited. However, in the case of young people, the situation is different in this respect as the probability of coming back is relatively higher due to the potentially longer life than in the case of older generations. Young people are also willing to seek novelties, and so they become pioneers discovering new destinations. Representatives of the group in question are not easily discouraged from travelling in the face of social unrest, diseases, natural disasters or risk of terrorist attacks (Vukic et al., 2015), which might be particularly significant in 2017 for such destinations as Turkey and Egypt.
As demonstrated above, young people are a unique group having its own characteristics, which is very important for the functioning of the tourist market. Moreover, according to forecasts, its significance will be growing. Thus, it has to be assumed that this segment is also an attractive study subject, while getting to know it may become a source of competitive advantage of a company or a destination.

METHODS
As was already indicated, young people form a significant group from the perspective of creating tourism demand. For the purposes of this monograph, the definition of young people should be made more specific. WYSE's definition refers to the age range of 15-29 years. Such an approach is very broad, as a result of which the segment in question includes both minors and employed people, often having families. Thus, one can distinguish a few groups within this approach, with not necessarily all possessing characteristics referred to above. This is why the authors decided to assume that in the research part of the monograph they will focus on students aged up to 25 years. Thanks to this decision, a more homogeneous research group can be obtained, which will be the subject of an in-depth analysis. The target group included Polish and Ukrainian students. In the case of both communities selected, it can be assumed that a significant factor behind travel-related decisions is the cost. According to the Eurostat data, in 2015 the GDP per capita in Poland was 69% of the average value for 28 EU member states (ec.europa…, January 3, 2017). In 2015, this was 14,650.12 USD in Poland. In Ukraine, this indicator was much lower: 2,825.85 USD (www.tradingeconomics. com..., January 23, 2017). Moreover, in the case of Ukraine, one has to consider the political situation, which limits tourist activity, with one significant exception: more and more young people are leaving the country also to study. Despite this, it is estimated that tourism is responsible for 7. • what are the reasons for tourist trips in the target group surveyed? Finding an answer to this question is significant as it should indicate issues managers of accommodation facilities should pay attention to. Also, the reason for a trip is mentioned as a key factor behind building relationships between tourists and hosts by studies conducted by, for example, Celeste and Carneiro (2012) on a group of students; • what are the factors behind the selection of an accommodation facility in the case of tourist trips? The respondents were asked to assess selection criteria in a situation when they go somewhere for the first time and potential determinants that encourage them to return to a given place. Out of many factors selected from multiple-choice answers, many concerned potential sources of competitive advantage of a family business, e.g. hospitality, being familiar with the owner or trust between the tourist and the owner; • what are the determinants of a positive assessment of a trip by tourists? The aim of this question was to assess the significance of accommodation and selected elements related to it for the young tourist's satisfaction with the trip. One should remember that the positive effect related to hospitality or the already mentioned familiarity is of significance to the stimulation of a possibility of returning, which, to a certain extent, is a consequence of the first stay in a given place. For the positive effect in this respect to occur, the tourist needs to be satisfied and the manager of the accommodation facility should be aware of the elements that contribute to this satisfaction.
Consequences of the above research questions are the following research hypotheses: H1: Key reasons behind students' trips are the intention to "experience and learn" and education, whereas leisure is less significant.
The first hypothesis is a response to young people's expectations in relation to tourism. They do not feel the need to rest yet and they are mostly interested in seeing new places and spending their time in a pleasant way. Such a situation, if confirmed, would not be advantageous for owners of accommodation facilities. This would mean that tourists spend relatively less time in a facility, but mostly feel less inclined to return to a given destination, and so a given facility. As indicated earlier, positive effects related to hospitality only occur after the first stay in a given place. On the other hand, one cannot forget that other positive effects of the tourists' satisfaction are recommendations and whisper marketing.
H2: Broadly defined hospitality is an important but not key factor for young people's assessment of an accommodation facility.
In the case of this hypothesis, one cannot expect that non-material elements of the accommodation service will be key for tourists. Such elements will probably be comfort and price. However, one should remember that on the tourist market, particularly in relation to accommodation services, competition is really intense. When many offers are comparable in terms of material elements, factors such as the owner, hospitality, service quality and involvement may create significant added value. At the same time, it is worth noting that young people often have lower requirements than, for example, middle-aged consumers. Thus, young people's expectations about accommodation do not have to be very high.
H3: A number of factors determining tourists' satisfaction with the trip are factors external to the facility offering accommodation services, however, accommodation is a significant element of the overall assessment of the trip.
The aim of this hypothesis is to assess factors behind tourists' satisfaction. It can be assumed that weather will be of great significance, which is an independent factor that determines a number of other activities. What also matters to tourists are elements related to the place's attractiveness, external to accommodation facilities. If tourist are satisfied with them, they most probably will not have any reservations about the accommodation. At the same time, it has to be assumed that on account of a large amount of time spent in the accommodation facility during the trip it will be a determinant influencing tourists' satisfaction to a large extent.
In total, 400 filled-in questionnaires were collected, with 319 qualified for further analysis. A large majority of rejected questionnaires were filled in incorrectly or incompletely. Due to a limited number of respondents and non-random sample selec-tion, the results obtained should be treated with caution. Still, they allow to draw a few interesting conclusions.

RESULTS
As it is presented in Table 1, survey results were drawn up based on answers provided by 319 respondents. 70% of the participants were Poles, and 30% were Ukrainians. As a result of differences in the size of these two groups, Poles should be treated as the dominant group, with many more representatives. All respondents fulfilled the basic requirement, namely, they were below 25 years of age. The average age was 20.55 years, with Ukrainians nearly 2 years younger than Poles. It seems that the respondents can be treated as active tourists as they indicated more than 3 tourist trips a year and nearly 19 days spent on holiday each year. Being active in this respect can be of significance to answers given to substantive questions and might indicate greater awareness of the assessments made. The last issue characteristic of the respondents is their place of residence. A large percentage of the respondents, and particularly Poles, came from the country. This does not change the fact that a great majority of people taking part in the survey live in cities, mostly big ones. The situation can be of significance from the point of view of the an-swers given. When making tourism-related choices, such people might be more interested in spending time in calm places, attractive due to their natural environment.
The analysis conducted concerns micro family businesses on the tourist market. On account of the above, it was necessary to identify preferences of the respondents with regard to facilities offering accommodation services. Definitely, the most popular among the respondents were private accommodation and guest rooms. This result should not come as a surprise. These forms of accommodation are relatively cheap and staying there is typical of young people who do not have any considerable amounts of money for tourist trips. The second place, with much fewer answers, was occupied by hotels of a higher standard. Thus, it can be said that young people also include those who can afford a stay in luxurious facilities. It can be assumed, based on what was indicated earlier, that, in such cases, wealthy parents pay for the holiday. This mostly concerns Ukrainians, as their percentage in the case of both answers was similar. The result of hotels, however, does not change the ultimate result as a large majority of the respondents said that during tourist trips they usually stay in small facilities, most of which are probably family-owned. This is significant information from the perspective of the analysis of answers to further questions.
Hypothesis 1 indicated that the main reasons for trips in the case of young people are the intention to "experience and learn" and education, whereas leisure and comfort related to it are less significant. Confirmation of this hypothesis would be a positive sign for micro-businesses offering accommodation services. The infrastructure of such facilities is usually limited in comparison with hotels, and they can offer tourists fewer possibilities of spending their time. The results obtained provide arguments in favour of accepting this hypothesis. The intention to "spend nice time with friends" was definitely ranked the highest. The following places were occupied by "having an adventure" and "fun", and such reasons behind a trip definitely fall into the "experience and learn" category. It is similar in the case of "sightseeing" and "visiting friends". These results show that young people travel in order to develop their relationships, they want to spend time with other people during the trip, and this time has to be spent in an attractive way. However, they do not mean to escape from the city or have a rest involving a low level activity, which is probably typical of mature tourists.
Analyzing Table 3, it is also worth paying attention to the fact that the respondents from Ukraine ranked the same factors as Poles the highest, but the average in the case of the three first answers is much lower. Also, people from Ukraine ranked such reasons as "education" and "learning foreign languages" much higher, which might be a result of the political and economic situation in their country. When they travel, having a rest matters to them less than acquiring competencies that might help them improve their professional situation.
Following questions in the questionnaire were directly related to the subject of this work. Hypothesis 2 drew attention to the fact that for young people broadly defined hospitality is an important but not key factor when selecting accommodation. Moreover, it can be assumed (although verification of this statement would require another survey) that for young people this factor is of relatively lower significance than for older tourists. Table 4 presents the assessment of determinants of selecting an accommodation facility in the case of  Note: The respondents ranked the significance of each factor on a scale of 1-5. can draw a conclusion that might be a premise in favor of hypothesis 2 -significant determinants of selecting a facility are recommendations and opinions, whereas a key element of an opinion is hospitality.
The aim of the following question was to deepen the contents concerning the significance of hospitality. It referred to factors that make tourists go back to a given place. Issues such as hospitality in the facility, being familiar with owners and high service quality matter the most in the context of potential return to a given business. Considering the specificity of tourism and mostly the reasons for trips, one has to remember that to many people the key element is getting to know the world, which is why they go to different places, and so even if they are highly satisfied with the stay, they are unlikely to return to a given facility. The above reason is also important to young people, however, in their case, as it was indicated earlier, the key elements are spending time with their friends and having fun. These elements do not exclude a possibility of returning to a given facility. Moreover, one has to remember that tourists' satisfaction may translate into returning to a given facility, but it may also lead to giving positive recommendations, which, as it was already demonstrated, are significant for the decisions made by other people. Table 5 presents the assessment of factors that might encourage tourists to return to a given facility. The elements that ranked the highest were physical elements of the accommodation service: cleanliness, location and comfort. Further places (but still ranking above 4.0) are occupied by factors that might be classified as consequences or constituents of hospitality. This result is in accordance with hypothesis 2, which assumed that broadly understood hospitality is a significant but not key determinant of a possibility of returning to a given facility. The respondents gave particularly high notes to three factors: "atmosphere of the place", "service quality" and "friendliness and availability of the owners". It seems that the last of these three points may be particularly strong as competitive advantage of a micro family business offering accommodation services. Thanks to their involvement, owners/hosts of the facility may build the image of their business based on themselves and all kinds of associations with themselves. This might include friendliness, trust, readiness to help, acquaintance, etc. Larger facilities, and particularly hotels, have no possibility of doing this.
And finally, answers to the last question of the survey listed in Table 6 were directly related to the third research hypothesis. From the perspective of an owner of a business offering accommodation services, a significant source of competitive advantage is the ability to encourage customers to return to a given facility, to repeat their purchases. According to hypothesis 3, this does not only depend on the facility's manager. A tourist product, as was already mentioned, is a complex product consisting of a number of elements, with accommodation being only one of them. During their trips, tourists consume a variety of elements, most of which are external to individual entrepreneurs. Still, they determine the tourists' satisfaction with the trip, and so their willingness to return.
Analysing the data presented in Table 8, it is easy to see the key significance of accommodation for the satisfaction with the trip. Elements directly re-lated to accommodation, such as its price or comfort, were ranked high. However, respondents also pointed to determinants that are indirectly dependant on the accommodation and its manager. For example, cleanliness can be understood as a characteristic of a town or region, but it may also be determined by the facility's condition. It is similar in the case of the trip cost. Its significant constituent is the price tourists pay for accommodation services. It is also worth drawing attention to the "hospitality of people" and "accommodation atmosphere" elements, as they form the basis for these deliberations. The data presented in Table 6 thus confirm the previous assumptions concerning considerable but not key significance of hospitality for tourists.

CONCLUSION
The main hypothesis formulated at the beginning of this monograph assumed that the family character of a business offering accommodation services can be a source of real competitive advantage being of significance for a certain group of clients. It seems that both an analysis of the literature and the survey results presented herein have provided arguments in favor of its confirmation. In particular, one should pay attention to several issues that seem key from the perspective of these deliberations: • a significant characteristic of family businesses is a high level of moral and emotional intelligence; in the case of tourist businesses, and particularly those offering accommodation services, emotional involvement of the owner and their family becomes especially important; it may be a significant characteristic (in contrast with hotels) that guests will appreciate and, in consequence, they will start identifying themselves with the owner; • in the case of tourist micro businesses offering accommodation services, it is relatively easy to establish relationships between the owner and the customers; this can be called familiarity, and its consequences should be customers both returning to a given facility and recommending it to others; • in the opinion of the respondents taking part in the survey presented, the key reason behind their trips is "the intention to experience and learn", but they also want to spend time with their friends; "comfort and leisure" is of lower significance to them, which is a positive signal for micro businesses, which frequently do not ensure the highest comfort of the stay; • in their answers, the respondents often pointed to such elements as hospitality and the owner as significant for their perception of accommodation services and their satisfaction with the stay; • accommodation services are among key factors determining tourists' satisfaction with the trip.
Thus, one can come up with a general conclusion or recommendation in accordance with the main hypothesis of this work. One should use the elements of hospitality, the owner and their family to build the image of micro-businesses offering accommodation services. Making use of these associations should translate into the creation of an atmosphere of confidence and stronger relationships with potential customers of a facility. At the same time, it has to be emphasized that limitations resulting from the survey conducted and the results obtained indicate that it is necessary to continue research in the above field. This particularly concerns the reasons behind certain kinds of behavior, as well as comparing the behavior of young people with the behavior of other age groups.