Hallenges In The Imperial Hotel

Introduction

After 100 years, The Imperial Hotel still encounters managerial problems and challenges believed to have hampered the growth of the organization. The most problematic area includes the poor team working and poor communication network within separate departments. While the front of house staff is expected to play the customer-facing role, the relevant departments seem to have had problems with communication. The presence of the Property Management System and the Micros Fidelio Reservation were meant to avail the real-time updates and data management. However, this seems not to be the case at The Imperial Hotel which has witnessed conflicting scenarios that involved the reception staff. Some of the issues being fronted include misinformation with regards to details attached to guests and the availability of rooms. Besides, the reception staff members have consistently been blamed for not updating the housekeeping section over the new arrivals. The same goes to the banqueting and conference staff who lamented on the improper data regarding the meeting as well as the conferences. With all these complains in place, it is evident that the reception department needs a boost due to laxity in running the most key and critical functions of the organization. The worsening level of the blame culture within the department is said to have attracted the attention of the General Manager, who is expected to resolve the animosity and conflicts. Therefore, key problems include failure to make the proper use of the available technology, failure to coordinate different teams working in separate departments, demotivated staff which leads to cases of laxity, and failure to meet proper managerial needs.

Analysis of a poor team working and inefficient use of IT systems including the reservation and property management systems

In big organizations such as The Imperial, the backbone will always revolve around the management and the style used. The study of management theory reaffirms the fact that the management of an organization questions the connection between managers, and the knowledge one has towards organizational goals (Geisler and Wickramasinghe 2015). A recap of the problems at The Imperial also invokes a revisit on implementation of goals and means used in motivating employees with regards to meeting the highest standards of performance. While reviewing the environment at The Imperial, it could be noted that the outgoing manager encountered different managerial problems. The turnover rate of 80%, poor staff morale, a series of departmental and inter-departmental conflict and poor business returns are all signs that can be attached to autocratic management style. Perhaps, the reception staff never put up a better performance due to the kind of management exercised by the outgoing General Manager. The autocratic style suggests that all decisions should emanate from one person while leaving the rest of the member to have an insignificant impact on business performance. The style suggests that managers are the ones to make choices on the basis of their judgment and ideas (Bratton and Gold 2017). Such choices can be irrelevant when assessed against the challenges affecting the performance of the hotel. The scale of resentment realized in the context of poor performance of the reception staff implies that employees are never given a chance to decide or work based on their knowledge.

The reception of Peter Farnsworth as the new General Manager of The Imperial marks the beginning of a change process that introduces a new management style. The Kurt Lewin’s model indicates the most significant steps in developing change while realizing the framework of the new management (Shirey 2013). First, the unfreezing step shows resistance towards change, which calls for the new management to create awareness (Block 2016). This implies that employees need to be informed on the imminent change as they try to ponder about their past and the necessity of considering the new move. Based on incidents witnessed among the reception staff, members seem to have been used to conflicts and laxity. As Farnsworth thinks about change and eliminating the autocratic way of doing things, he has to communicate his ideas regarding a review of the bonus schemes and the building exercises. Lewis also indicates changing as the second important step in converting the management style to democratic style (Northouse 2018). Change takes note of the transition process as people are left to struggle with the prevailing or planned reality. Under this step, support, time, communication and education become critical elements meant to remind employees about the reasons for change. While the front office staffs focus on team dynamics and the essence of having the right attitude, the new departmental head is in a better position of sharing reasons of having teamwork within the organization (Kaminski 2011). The Lewin’s final stage is referred to as refreezing, which means solidifying or getting used to the new state after the expected change has already occurred (Burnes and Cooke 2013). Farnsworth believes that staff members need to be motivated and this forms the reasons as to why he planned to review the bonus schemes as well as the cross-team building exercises.

With the entire process attracting the efforts of Peter Farnsworth, Lewin’s seem to point at adoption of the democratic style of management. It is of note that The Imperial Hotel aims at reducing the turnover rate while boosting the teamwork spirit (Fernandez and Moldogaziev 2011). In addition, the new departmental head of front office has to ensure coordination of teams in ensuring better results are achieved at the end of the day. All these changes suggest the deployment of the democratic style of management. The style informs on participative leadership where workers are given freedom to make contributions while focusing on a positive change (Berry et al. 2016). This style drives the sense of commitment and group ownership as staff members end up more productive than before. The assertion perfectly resonates with the demands made behind the management theory, which demands that productivity is essentially determined by the extent of motivation impacted on employees. Henri Fayol, as one of the developers of management theory, indicates that managerial effectives are normally determined through a number of principles (Peretomode 2012). One of the principles revolves around the unity of direction, which demands that the entire organization should focus on a common goal. The unity of direction also attracts the idea of centrality, which out to be a natural order reflected in different functions.

As much as the management theory tries to channel resources towards a desirable output, the animosity among the staff members is a new problem that needs attention. Building a better team needs a better approach that will make employees more spirited towards teamwork across all functions of The Imperial. It is worth noting that the competing values framework gives a better option of selecting from a range of priorities and values believed to influence the organizational culture (Hartnell et al. 2011). Based on the situation in the front office or across the reception staff and their relationship to other departments, the framework proposes utilization of the rational goal model. The model insists on evaluating what is accomplished and what was planned. The model also allows the organization to develop subsystems such as the ability of the entire system. Under this subsystem, the team is allowed to decide, perceive and interpret what seems to be right for the organization and workers’ welfare. For instance, the resuscitation of the bonus scheme can be an idea meant to boost the morale of employees as they work towards organizational goals (Lincoln 2010). The contribution made by the competing values framework finds a connection to management theory, which fosters achievement of organizational goals by motivating the workforce. F.W Taylor indicates that the management should strike the best interests that can attract the efforts of both the managers and workers as far as productivity is put into consideration (McNamara 2015). This also coincides with Fayol’s believe of a management theory that focuses on human relations while attracting values that can enhance a single purpose.

On the basis of management theory, the question of competency and skills among workers still resurfaces. While the PMS system is meant to boost communication across departments, the reception staffs does not indicate the required potential to run the system (Nezakati et al. 2010). The conflicting incidences witnessed at the hotel can only amount to misinformation and unaccountability. Peter Farnsworth expressed interests of training the reception staff members on IT skills, which is meant to enhance their productivity and motivate them to stay longer at The Imperial. The democratic management style, proposed under the management theory, essentially fosters possible means that can enhance employee retention while addressing both long term and short term goals (Davidson et al. 2010). The key tools that determine the desired longevity of employees at the workplace is training.

As much as the conflicting incidences of misinformation have been cited in the context of The Imperial, this can be due to incompetence noted across the reception staff. Training is the key solution to problems associated to running the communication and the available technology (AlBattat and Som 2013). Besides, Peter Farnsworth proposed on cross-team building exercises, which can build friendship across staff from different departments. It is of note that reception staff members had differences with those from the conference and banqueting section. The reception staff members also had conflicts with other incoming teams. The management theory suggests that workers form single resources that should work undivided. This means that unity among workers is an important aspect. Therefore, the cross-team building exercise is a commendable measure that can check on the amicability of the departments, and relationships employees create from one department to another. Lastly, a revisit on the revision of bonus scheme centrally aims at boosting the morale of the employees (Kim and Jogaratnam 2010). This means that Farnsworth planned to increase the tokens staff members received for working extra time, or being engaged in an extra activity (Lutgen-Sandvik and McDermott 2011). Motivation is a key component of management theory, which also concentrates on the effects of worker’s effort in the organization as proposed by Fayol.

The situation at The imperial Hotel can further be corrected through provision of opportunities for advancement by the management. This means that employees would want to have a future even after the job. Some of them end up pushing for welfares or work through unions for personal development. Others would want to climb the career ladder for the purposes of enjoying better positions in their respective professional fields. Perhaps, lack of welfare programs is likely to be the reason as to why the reception staffs are unwelcoming and hostile to other employees due to frustrations (Peretomode 2012). The management theory, as asserted by George Mayo, indicates that the management has to pay attention to the physical environment around workers. Mayo concluded that employees can be productive when management gives them attention even on family issues. Therefore, Farnsworth should come up with a welfare program that can take care of worker’s beyond their working environment. Lastly, the management is expected to extent incentives to employees as an addition to the bonus scheme. While the bonus scheme identifies individuals, the incentives should recognize individuals within the working environment (Northouse 2018). The management theory asserts that despite the fact that motivating employees is expensive, it is always worth it given that trust is too expensive to be bought. Farnsworth should capture the meaning and extent the incentives in terms extra time off, gift cards and even bonus pay.

The ineffective use of PMS and laxity noted among the reception staff members, noted as problem 5, form part of many problems facing The Imperial Hotel. For example, problem 6 talks about the uncooperative Spanish staffs, who want to isolate themselves from the non-Spanish staffs. The question of employee relations and managerial impact can also be noted in problem 4, which cites complains raised by guests over daily housekeeping and the kind of reception. This confirms the negative attitude among workers and supervisors. Problem 5 can also be extended to problem 3, which talks more about a negative work culture citing poor attendance and increased rates of sick leaves (Berrey et al. 2012). With such a working culture, it is justifiable if the hotel experiences the worsening turnover rates that inconvenience the organization’s long term goals. Problem 2 touches on high turnover rates among employees, which cites poor employee relations that are also noted in problem 5. Therefore, potential ways through which problem 5 relates to other problems is through poor employee relations and poor managerial performance (Kusluvan et al. 2010). However, Problem 1 talks about poor satisfaction among the guests. This creates the perception of poor services delivered by employees. The assertion can also be connected back to problem 5 that takes note of misinformation and poor coordination that turns into poor services.

Conclusion

The subject of management and management system covers a wide range of activities that have a direct impact on the performance of a company. Based on this argument, the discussion explores managerial problems facing The Imperial Hotel. First, the discussion captured the background of problem 5, which is said to have impeded the performance of the company. Problem 5 notes poor teamwork and ineffective use of the IT systems in impacting the communication flow. Problems emanated from the reception staff, which ignored the role of passing the right information to other staff members working in the kitchen, and the conference halls. The resenting reception staff also behaved rudely to other staff members and developed animosity. With such problems at hand, the discussion justifies the fact that an autocratic style of management must have been used before by the outgoing General Manager. However, the management theory proposes the use of a democratic style of management, which will impact a new moral on the spirited employees. This will bring in a new change as discussed by Kurt Lewis. Other proposals include training the reception staff on IT skills, encouraging cross-team building exercises and reviewing the bonus scheme. It has also been shown that problem 5 can be connected to other problems through the scope of employee relations and the managerial performance.

Continue your exploration of Habitat Directives in UK with our related content.

References

• AlBattat, A.R.S. and Som, A.P.M., 2013. Employee dissatisfaction and turnover crises in the Malaysian hospitality industry. International Journal of Business and Management, 8(5), p.62.
• Berrey, E., Hoffman, S.G. and Nielsen, L.B., 2012. Situated justice: A contextual analysis of fairness and inequality in employment discrimination litigation. Law & Society Review, 46(1), pp.1-36.
• Berry, A.J., Broadbent, J. and Otley, D.T. eds., 2016. Management control: theories, issues and practices. Macmillan International Higher Education.
• Bratton, J. and Gold, J., 2017. Human resource management: theory and practice. Palgrave. Burnes, B. and Cooke, B., 2013. K urt L ewin's Field Theory: A Review and Re‐evaluation. International journal of management reviews, 15(4), pp.408-425.
• Davidson, M.C., Timo, N. and Wang, Y., 2010. How much does labour turnover cost? A case study of Australian four-and five-star hotels. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 22(4), pp.451-466.
• Fernandez, S. and Moldogaziev, T., 2011. Empowering public sector employees to improve performance: Does it work?. The American Review of Public Administration, 41(1), pp.23-47.
• Geisler, E. and Wickramasinghe, N., 2015. Principles of Knowledge Management: Theory, Practice, and Cases: Theory, Practice, and Cases. Routledge.
• Hartnell, C.A., Ou, A.Y. and Kinicki, A., 2011. Organizational culture and organizational effectiveness: a meta-analytic investigation of the competing values framework's theoretical suppositions. Journal of applied psychology, 96(4), p.677.
• Kaminski, J., 2011. Theory applied to informatics-Lewin’s change theory. Canadian Journal of Nursing Informatics, 6(1). Kim, K. and Jogaratnam, G., 2010. Effects of individual and organizational factors on job satisfaction and intent to stay in the hotel and restaurant industry. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & Tourism, 9(3), pp.318-339.
• Kusluvan, S., Kusluvan, Z., Ilhan, I. and Buyruk, L., 2010. The human dimension: A review of human resources management issues in the tourism and hospitality industry. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 51(2), pp.171-214.
• Lincoln, S., 2010. From the individual to the world: How the competing values framework can help organizations improve global strategic performance. Emerging Leadership Journeys, 3(1), pp.3-9.
• Lutgen-Sandvik, P. and McDermott, V., 2011. Making sense of supervisory bullying: Perceived powerlessness, empowered possibilities. Southern Communication Journal, 76(4), pp.342-368. McNamara, C., 2015. Historical and contemporary theories of management. Retrieved, 4(20), p.2015.
• Nezakati, H., Asgari, O., Karimi, F. and Kohzadi, V., 2010. Fostering organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) through human resources empowerment (HRE). World Journal of Management, 2(3), pp.47-64.
• Northouse, P.G., 2018. Leadership: Theory and practice. Sage publications. Peretomode, V.F., 2012. Theories of management: Implications for educational administration. Benin City: Justice Jeco Printing & Publishing Global.
• Shirey, M.R., 2013. Lewin’s theory of planned change as a strategic resource. Journal of Nursing Administration, 43(2), pp.69-72.