|
Organizations must begin to measure all aspects of their achievement of the established standards, both to provide feedback to the staff and to locate problems. Whether the measurements are objective (e.g., data showing the number of completed check-ins compared to the standards) or subjective (e.g., based on customer responses to exit interviews), organizations need to know far more about where they stand than they do at present. Whether the measurement is done by management, an outside observer, or employees themselves, we need, as an industry, to know more than we do at present about what's happening.
Where I have implemented measurement systems that provide direct feedback on operational performance to staff there has invariably been improvement as all involved strive to exceed their previous performance levels. Effective measurement systems contribute to quality and productivity and enable the organization to set, change, and measure performance levels.
Effective systems provide accurate, timely, and usable information for feedback. They reduce time spent on administration while increasing time spent with guests.
Evaluate Performance to Improve Performance
As was the case with measurement, most evaluation is financially driven. Virtually all organizations meet to review the profit-and-loss statement, and most of them go over guest-comment cards. Few, if any, take the information from any other measurement system to evaluate performance and make strategic decisions.
Evaluating performance requires that the organization take the data collected and use it to provide feedback and make decisions. In a meeting with a general manager, I was reviewing the results of kitchen inspections. On the inspection, next to each item, was a reference to the procedure and standard for that item. As the general manager pointed out, summarizing the inspections enabled his staff to determine problem areas, go back to review the problems, and make necessary corrections (retrain, adjust the system), thus improving performance.
Organizations must bring the same detailed attention to new measurement systems that they bring to the profit-and-loss statement. Evaluation supports and enhances the organization's ability to improve performance continually in all areas. Evaluation provides for useful feedback, and helps set goals for achievement. Without careful evaluation, improvements can't be targeted or achievements understood.
Build Reward and Recognition Systems
Effective reward systems are, in general, viewed as equitable, meaningful, and consistent with the efforts and contributions made. However, after numerous interviews with line managers, I concluded that they didn't understand reward systems, considered them unfair, or both. Further, some organizations fail to distinguish between reward systems to provide financial incentives and recognition systems that provide non-financial incentives (awards, plaques, increases in responsibility or authority).
Certainly, rewards are common for sales managers. Occasionally, rewards are provided for servers who sell more wine and desserts, or for reservationists and desk clerks who participate in up-selling programs. Numerous organizations have recognition programs for the "employee of the month" as well as annual holiday parties, award banquets, and staff picnics. All these efforts are well-intentioned and valuable.
What's lacking, however, is consistency of use. Rewards are often implemented when sales are down and employees cannot depend on them as a means of increasing income. Parties and picnics are given every year no matter what (except, perhaps, when business is down and the property can't afford the cost). Employee-of-the-monfh selections are usually made through a democratic process that rarely involves any clear measurement of performance.
Moreover, few if any hotel organizations have implemented a coherent program for financially rewarding back-of-the-house employees for their contributions to cost containment. While gain-sharing is a common solution to improving costs in the industrial sector, it is generally unknown among hospitality businesses. Yet, supply and labor costs represent the single largest opportunity for cost improvement in hotels.
At properties with carefully developed employee-scheduling systems, less time is spent scrambling to recover and more time is spent serving the guest.
More interestingly, virtually all reward and recognition systems—with the exception of executive bonuses tied to profitability—focus on the individual rather than on team performance.
|
Organizations must learn to recognize desired performance and encourage improvement. Programs can be devised to recognize the entire housekeeping department for either improving quality or exceeding established quality benchmarks. Other programs can be developed to reward all restaurant servers for increasing check averages or improving guest comments.
Without in any way denigrating the value of existing reward and recognition systems, hospitality organizations need to get far more sophisticated and creative if they are to retain employees through the coming labor crunch. Programs must be developed that are perceived as fair and equitable and are tied to rewards or recognition based on clear performance criteria. These programs should be available to all members of the organization and be designed to make clear that all members of the organization are respected and appreciated for their contributions.
An Integrated Approach
The ten steps presented above represent an integrated and structured approach to developing and maintaining an environment that fosters success. Without improving the informal organization, changes made to the formal organization will be shortlived. In fact, failure to address all ten components typically results in failed QM efforts overall.
For example, one of the main reasons that quality circles failed in some organizations is that while the circles helped develop certain leadership skills and improve team orientation, management failed to make the additional necessary changes within the formal organization. In organizations where quality-circle efforts have been successful, the efforts are supported by systems, measurement, and rewards that are themselves a valuable component of a quality-assurance effort. But quality circles alone are not a quality-assurance program. In other words, if the formal structure of an organization is not adjusted to support a new approach, management inevitably returns to its old way of doing business.
While one might idealistically suggest that an organization start at point one and work to point ten, the reality is that it is feasible to start at several different points, depending on an organization's greatest needs, and address the other issues at a later time. There are organizations with a clear, well-communicated vision that needs to be translated into clear service standards. There are organizations with well-developed service procedures that need to measure performance more effectively. Moreover, because QM is a process, not a project, organizations must consistently work on the components of the process. There is no point in time at which the organization arrives; it simply progresses and evolves.
One must also recognize and deal with the operating circumstances in which an organization finds itself. Some organizations start by establishing standards and measuring performance. Inevitably, these activities help people become aware of the need to address problems in the informal organization and they begin to work on team building and refining leadership skills. Other organizations begin by defining a QM vision, working on essential cultural issues, then developing systems and measurements to support the vision and change the way people work.
The decision on how to start is made by conducting a needs analysis that highlights strengths and weaknesses and enables an organization to determine the approach that best enables it to develop and perpetuate a successful program.
One factor is essential in understanding and developing quality management. Regardless of the starting point, long-term success requires that each component eventually must be aligned so that all are part of a unified effort. If standards of service are clarified and refined, but crisis management prevails because of poor training, standards will not be consistently achieved. If employees are involved but management cannot effectively handle conflict and disagreement, employees will soon be uninvolved. If quality circles or problem-solving teams are set up but the measurement systems don't demonstrate the value of those efforts and reward systems don't encourage them, performance will not continue to improve over the long term.
Clearly, no organization is going to transform itself in six or twelve months. Implementing all ten points is an on-going process, with continuous improvement the goal. But as we approach the mid-1990s and prepare to compete in a world of shrinking resources and more demanding customers, organizations must begin to address those issues that will distinguish the successful companies from the unsuccessful. As the nineteenth-century reformer John Ruskin wrote more than 100 years ago: "Quality is never an accident, it is always the result of intelligent effort."
CQ
|
