that the soft systems approach advocated by Patching (1990) is a useful ... richness of the hotel business using a soft systems approach to help in the unlocking ...
Using soft systems methodology to manage hotels: a case study Hadyn Ingram Professor, University of Action Learning, Colorado KEYWORDS: HOSPITALITY, HOTELS, SYSTEMS METHODOLOGY
Abstract Experts are divided as to whether hotels are special types of business that need sector-specific skills in order to be successful. This paper argues that the complexity and heterogeneity of hospitality operations requires a qualitative methodology to map its richness. It is proposed that the soft systems approach advocated by Patching (1990) is a useful methodology that can help to model and understand the factors at work, and to optimise management decision-making. The paper demonstrates through the use of a fictional case study of the Faraway Hotel, how soft systems analysis can help the owner to think more objectively about improving the business.
Introduction ‘Now it was night. With the hotel, the cycle of another innkeeping day had run its course. This had differed from most, but beneath unprecedented events, routines had continued. Reservations, reception, administration, housekeeping, garage, treasury, kitchens…….all had combined in a single, simple function. To welcome the traveller, sustain him, provide him with rest and speed him on. Soon the cycle would begin again.’ Arthur Hailey, Hotel, Pan Books, London, 1965: p. 413
These words from the final chapter of Arthur Hailey’s best-selling book paint a vivid thumbnail sketch of the complexity and excitement of hotel life; its cyclical, iterative and multi-functional nature. There can be few business scenarios where the operations function is so central and pervasive, and where its activities are so little understood. Some argue that hospitality is a unique industry that requires multi-functionally trained specialists, while others suggest that sound business management principles can apply equally to hospitality. In 1972, Levitt famously argued that: ‘there is no such things as service industries’
Hadyn Ingram 2000
Page 1 of 7
and that such distinctions are spurious. More recently, the main protagonists in the Granada/Forte take-over exemplified these conflicting views in 1995, when they presented their managerial approaches to the Forte shareholders. Gerry Robinson of Granada argued that hotels should be run like any other business, while Sir Rocco Forte felt that hotel companies could be better operated by experienced hoteliers (Teare et al., 1997). The fierce intensity of these opposing viewpoints reinforces the view that there is no general agreement about the business of running hotels, or how best to run them. This article considers the richness of the hotel business using a soft systems approach to help in the unlocking of its secrets, and demonstrates how this technique might be used in practice through a case study.
Hospitality systems Mullins (1992) portrays hospitality operations in terms of a socio-technical system composed of five interrelated sub-systems: task, technology, structure, people and management. This model emphasises the complexity of managing these sub systems, especially in view of the diversity and heterogeneity of hospitality operations. How can any hospitality context be exactly like any other? Further, the lack of research in hospitality precludes definitive conclusions, to the extent that there is no general agreement about what exactly a hotel is, or how many hotels exist in given country. There is much more discussion in the field of hospitality employment, although Wood (1997) comments that here too, available source material is limited and patchy. For example, studies by Stone (1988), Worsfold (1989) and Lashley (1999) suggest that hotel managers can be said to be different from mainstream managers: more assertive, realistic and activist in their learning styles. As for the hospitality industry, a great deal of its richness has been captured by ethnographers such as Whyte (1948), who studied waitresses in a Chicago restaurants, Mars and Nicod (1984) who made astonishing revelations about the world of waiters and Gabriel (1988) who describes hospitality workers as an underclass from exclusive clubs to mass catering. These studies demonstrate how working in hospitality can be a degrading, comic and underpaid activity. Irvin Goffman's (1959) sociological perspective hints at the rich material in the power play relationships between the server and the served, which could occupy many more doctoral theses than his own. Goffman’s ideographic approach emphasises the distinctiveness of the individual’s personal construct in making sense of the world and Clark and Johns (1998) have extended this approach to the tourism industry. This study argues that the tourist experience is affected by mythologies that surround destinations and are interpreted differently by visitors. Much current research in the field of hospitality is utilising qualitative methods because of the growing realisation that positivist methodologies are unable to capture the subtleties of the phenomena at work.
Hadyn Ingram 2000
Page 2 of 7
Hospitality activities are, to a large extent, human activity systems (Mullins, 1992) or socio-technical systems (Trist and Bamforth, 1951) in which operations are a central activity. Kirk (1995) suggests that both that systems theory, with its ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ systems components, is a useful framework for problem solving, decision-making and project planning in hospitality operations management. Johns et al. (1994) argue that the ‘hard’ systems approach is limited in scope because of the assumption that the transfer of tangible items is the main focus of the system. Alternatively, the ‘soft’ systems approach emphasizes the ‘rich picture’, where there is a need to consider every feature of the system being studied. Hospitality operations are complex, and involve much interpersonal contact between staff and customers as well as connection with other systems such as human resources and finance. Accordingly, the ‘soft systems’ approach is particularly appropriate for the study of hotel operations, and enables its richness and complexities to be modelled without preconceptions.
Soft systems methodology Patching (1990) explains how soft systems methodology (SSM) can help to unpack complexity using a mixture of systems thinking in the systems world, and practical activities in the real world. Figure 1 shows the steps involved in soft systems methodology moving from the real world to the systems world and back again to the real world. 1 Problem situation unstructured
6 Change and action to improve
2 Problem situation expressed
5 Real/systems world comparison
REAL WORLD SYSTEMS WORLD 3 Root definition of relevant systems
Figure 1
4 Conceptual models
A simplified model of soft systems methodology (Patching, 1990)
Hadyn Ingram 2000
Page 3 of 7
From an unstructured situation, the problem is expressed in the form of conceptual models, which are compared with reality in order to elicit desirable action. Patching proposes the mnemonic CATWOE to use as a checklist to ensure that the all the components of the root definition are covered: C
Clients or customers
A
Actors who carry out the activities within the system
T
Transformation, or the changes that take place in converting the inputs to outputs
W
Worldview, or how the system is perceived from a particular viewpoint
O
Owner of the system
E
Environment, or the world that surrounds and influences the system.
The Faraway Hotel: a case study Soft systems methodology can be demonstrated in the fictional case of the Faraway Hotel in which the owner, Peter Prentice has a feeling that custom has been slowly falling and he feels that, somehow, profits could be improved. The Faraway Hotel has 20 bedrooms and is located in Grimsdale, a county town that attracts both business and leisure travellers. The restaurant and banqueting facilities are quite popular in the locality and the Prentice family have been comfortably settled in the town for 14 years. Prentice decides to use soft systems to model a rich picture of the Faraway Hotel as a system as shown in Figure 2. He uses the CATWOE mnemonic to identify the components of the root definition: C
Leisure and business residents and local residents
A
The manager, employees and customers
T
Customer needs for food ,drink and socialisation satisfied
W
The hotel is a place in accommodation, food and drink can be had
O
Peter Prentice and his family
E
The local community and other businesses
The system is affected by regulatory bodies such as the Police, Fire Authority (for the statutory fire certificate), Environmental Health Officers, Trading Standards, Regional Tourist Board (for classification and grading).
Hadyn Ingram 2000
Page 4 of 7
Profits
Performance
The hotel as a rich picture
Owner
Unit manager
Community: Green issues Noise
Customers: Residents Non-residents Locals
Regulators: Police, Fire, Tax etc Competitors:other hotels
Figure 2
A rich picture of the hotel
Prentice develops the following root definition of the hotel: The Faraway Hotel is a system owned by Peter Prentice and operated by the employees that satisfies the needs of customers for food, drink, accommodation and socialisation, constrained by regulatory bodies and statutes affecting the provision of the hospitality product and service.
The customer system He identifies that the main hotel system interacts with number of sub-systems, and the main ones are customers and staff. Customers with specific requirements are identified as inputs to the Faraway Hotel as a system and the desirable outputs are work for the employees and income for the Prentice family. Again using the CATWOE checklist he suggests the following root definition for customers: A system owned by the Prentice family, operated by them and the employees and customers, that identifies and satisfies the needs of customers for food, drink,
Hadyn Ingram 2000
Page 5 of 7
accommodation and socialisation, constrained by the regulations that affect the management of hotels.
Further analysis reveals that the hotel appeals to a number of different markets: •
Travellers on business requiring accommodation
•
Tourists needing meals and/or accommodation
•
Local businesses wanting meetings/meals/accommodation
•
Private functions: weddings, parties etc
•
Local residents calling in for food and drink
Prentice recognises that tourists are prepared to pay the full price (rack rate) for accommodation, but the average length of stay is 1.5 nights. Further, the tourist market lasts from April to November, while there is demand from business customers year round. Unfortunately, business travellers like to negotiate a weekly rate that involves a discount, and can be demanding guests. Prentice notices, however, that bar sales are higher when the hotel is full of business clients, but that weekends are quiet. Because Prentice suspects that his customers judge his product in a subjective way, he resolves to conduct a survey to find out how each market segment views the Faraway’s facilities and service.
The employee system Similarly, a root definition is suggested for the employees, because they can affect customer satisfaction, sales and profits. Prentice realizes that he and his family, too, are employees of the Faraway Hotel as a system: A system, owned by the Prentice family, operated by the employees and customers, that satisfies the income needs of the owners and employees in an environment of competition for staff resources, constrained by the regulations affecting employment and taxation.
The town of Grimsdale has high employment and there is a shortage of skilled hospitality workers, especially trained chefs. Because of the seasonal nature of the Faraway’s trade, Prentice takes on extra housekeeping and food and beverage staff during the summer months, but he is aware that good staff are difficult to find and that standards seem to fall at busy times. There are good full and part-time staff available in Grimsdale, but Prentice knows from past experience that they need year-round guaranteed employment. This realisation prompts Prentice to resolve to review the work schedules of the hotel, with a view to using the pool of part-time female labour more effectively.
Hadyn Ingram 2000
Page 6 of 7
Conclusion This article argues that the heterogeneity of hospitality operations confounds the development of clear sectorial definitions and standardised ways of working. Depending upon your viewpoint, hospitality processes are easily visible, but hard to manage because people are involved at every stage in the process. This may account for the popularity of low-service hotel products such as budget hotels, whose standardised products seldom fail to disappoint. Soft systems methodology can be a useful tool in conceptualising and modelling hotel operations in a holistic way, and emphasising the richness of its socio-technical systems. The case study illustrates how a hotelier, necessarily concerned with operational matters, can lose sight of the ‘big picture’, and how the analysis required by soft systems methodology can help in reviewing strategy and solving problems.
References Clarke, V. and Johns, N. (1998), Mythologies: A glimpse into the visitor's experience of Norfolk, Seventh Annual CHME Research Conference, Glasgow, April. Gabriel, Y. (1988), Working Lives in Catering, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London. Goffman, E. (1959), The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, Penguin, London. Johns, N., Ingram, H., Lee-Ross, D. (1994), Operational Techniques for the Hospitality Industry, Cassell, London. Kirk, D. (1995), ‘Hard and soft systems: a common paradigm for operations management?’, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 7 No. 5, pp. 13-16. Levitt, T. (1972), ‘Production-line approach to service’, reprinted in The Management of Service Operations, (eds.) Sasser, W.E., Olsen, R.P. and Wycoff, D.D. (1978), Allyn & Bacon, Boston. Mars, G. and Nicod, M. (1984), The World of Waiters, George Allen and Unwin, London. Mullins, L. (1992), Hospitality Management: A Human Resources Approach, Pitman, London. Patching, D. (1990), Practical Soft Systems Analysis, Pitman, London. Stone, G. (1988), ‘Personality and effective hospitality management’, Proceedings of the International Association of Hospitality Management Schools Symposium, Leeds Polytechnic, November. Teare, R. Eccles, G. Costa, Ingram, H. and Knowles, T. (1997), The Granada take-over of Forte: a managerial perspective’, Management Decision, Vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 5-19. Trist, E.L. and Bamforth, K.W. (1951), ‘Some social and psychological consequences of the longwall method of coal getting’, Human Relations, Vol. 4, pp. 3-38. Wood, R.C. (1997), Working in Hotels and Catering, International Thomson Business Press, Oxford. Worsfold, P. (1989), ‘Leadership and managerial effectiveness in the hospitality industry’. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 145-155. White, W.F. (1948), Human Relations in the Restaurant Industry, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Hadyn Ingram 2000
Page 7 of 7
