Labor Management in the Hospitality Industry continued

Scheduling Systems: Most scheduling systems provide template based standards. There is no assurance that managers are scheduling to the standards. Most importantly, a scheduling system, by definition, does not tell you whether people worked to a standard. The program may help you schedule 16 rooms a day, but it doesn’t tell you after the fact whether the work was completed at a pace of 16 rooms a day.

Excel Reports: Many organizations have a variety of Excel reports to tell them how many hours were used. And some compare hours to standards. But they don’t offer scheduling and provide limited, if any, assistance in planning. Most Excel reports we’ve seen are tools for senior management but not viable as a Management Information System which helps line managers understand and critique performance. And unless you have an automated means of bringing data into these reports there is a high risk of input errors as well as the inefficient use of manpower.

The last point to make is that it’s also important that a system be modular so that you aren’t forced into replacing existing systems/processes that work for the organization. Instead, the correct method is to be able to purchase a system that has modules that can complement your existing applications. For instance, you may have a system that can generate realistic volumes, perhaps even restaurant covers. Therefore, you would want to be able to import this data into the LMS instead of relying solely on its own generated forecast. Consequently, the organization should spend time realistically evaluating its needs before it goes out searching for a system and ends up buying functionality that is not needed.

Implementing the LMS Program

Over the years, our industry has acclimated itself to PMS systems, POS systems, and Back Office systems. We’ve computerized the phone system, the catering system and, in some cases, the maintenance system. All of these programs have changed the way people work and manage. However, most of the systems above have been implemented for use by a portion of the organization’s departments. PMS systems require front desk staff to be trained; POS affects the restaurant, and so on. LMS implementations affect everyone and change the way people manage. Thus, effectively implementing an LMS system requires as much attention to the impact on culture as it does to teaching managers how to use the technology.

The essence of the LMS is that it increases accountability. Properly set up, managers will welcome the opportunity to review and critique performance in the short term and they will appreciate not having to wait until the end of the month to see the P&L to know how they’re doing. But if the LMS is viewed as a stick with which managers can be hit when they’re off standard, the management team will resist it for as long as they can and for as many reasons as they can conjure. They will tell you that the system doesn’t help on the days when the kitchen floods. They will tell you that it’s simply not possible to establish standards for their department as there are too many variables. They will tell you that they never have enough well trained staff to meet the established standards. They will tell you everything short of “the dog ate my standards.” They’ll just never admit that they don’t want to have to critique their performance on a daily basis and they don’t want their bosses to be able to critique their performance that often either.