P A R T
• • • •
1
Performance
Management
This part of the book opens with two reviews of performance measurement literature and practices in the hospitality industry; the first refers to the independent hotels, chapter 1, and the second embraces the broader range of productivity measures, chapter 2. The first two chapters serve as an introduction to the core topic of performance management, which is subsequently addressed in a strategic perspective and with reference to traditional and more innovative performance management techniques. The strategic perspective is presented in chapter 3, where an extensive literature review comprises contributions from the generic and the hospital-ity industry literature. Evidence of the use of budgeting as a tradi-tional technique of performance management is then provided in chapter 4, while the last two chapters introduce theoretical reflec-tions on benchmarking in the hospitality industry, chapter 5, and propose an innovative performance management methodology, corroborated by first evidence of application, chapter 6.1 Performance measurement in independent hotels
2 Productivity in the restaurant industry: how to measure pro-ductivity and improve process management
3 Performance management in the international hospitality industry
4 Budgetary practice within hospitality
5 Benchmarking: measuring financial success in the hotel industry 6 Developing a benchmarking methodology for the hotel industry
C H A P T E R
•
•
•
•
1
Performance
measurement
in independent
hotels
Mine Haktanir
Introduction
Performance measurement is an important com-ponent of decision-making processes. As the overall objective of all forms of organization is to provide satisfaction for their stakeholders, developing appro-priate performance measures and interpreting the outcomes are vital issues. With the growth in inter-national travel and therefore, increasing demand in hospitality businesses, performance measurement in the hospitality industry has gained particular importance as a tool for effective decision-making.
Accounting information systems provide formal means of gathering data to support and coordinate the decision-making of businesses in light of overall organizational goals. Although profitability is the most commonly used basis for defining success, other measures, including cost, revenue and asset and liabil-ity accounts, are utilized. The comparison of budgeted and actual results is recognized as forming the basis for evaluating overall performance and helping to
monitor and control operations. In hospitality businesses, ratios, which facilitate benchmarking, are commonly used.
However, these traditional performance measures have been heavily criticized for encouraging short termism, lacking stra-tegic focus, discouraging continuous improvement and for not being externally focused. In an attempt to overcome these criticisms, performance measurement frameworks have been developed, pri-marily to encourage a more balanced view. For example, Lynch and Cross (1991) described a pyramid of measures which integrates performance through the hierarchy of the organization. Fitzgerald et al. (1991) distinguished between the results and their determi-nants. Kaplan and Norton (1992) use the four perspectives of the balanced scorecard (BSC).
Although a number of studies (see Bolton, 1971; Stanworth and Gray, 1991; Jarvis et al., 2000; Marriott and Marriott, 2000) have explored the way performance measurement is perceived and employed in independently owned businesses, there appears to be insufficient detailed research into actual performance measurement practices of such organizations. When hotel businesses are consid-ered, independently owned and managed hotels are considered as the traditional model of hotel operations and understanding the operational characteristics of hotel provision begins with them (Jones and Lockwood, 1989). They are a dominant feature of the hotel industry in many countries and the majority of establishments are independently owned and operated (Morrison, 1998). In con-trast to this, they have received limited attention from researchers (Shaw and Willams, 1994; Main, 1995) where group hotels have been the core of research in the management control and perform-ance measurement literature. With increasing pressure from cus-tomer expectations and growing competition, independent hotels must start to develop effective performance measurement systems in a strategic context. In particular, they require accurate informa-tion in terms of sales and costs for an effective decision-making mechanism (Adams, 1997). Objective financial data are not publicly available and access to performance data is severely restricted for independent, privately held companies (Jogaratnam et al., 1999). Therefore, this chapter largely focuses on the research that has been carried out on performance measurement in independent hotels.
Defining performance measurement
The term ‘performance measurement’ has been in existence for a long time as an important component of the decision-making process, yet it only gained popularity in 1990s, particularly in the development of new management accounting techniques.
Among the many definitions, one suggests performance measure-ment is ‘. . . the process of quantifying actions, where measuremeasure-ment is the process of quantification and action leads to performance’ (Neely et al., 1995:80). There is a range of reasons for utilizing per-formance measures, including:
•
to indicate where more or less effort is required•
to monitor activities in units and/or divisions and through time for diagnosing problems and taking corrective actions•
to carry out planning, monitoring and control functions. Performance measures provide a realistic basis from which to construct plans•
to facilitate continuous improvement in key areas and to pro-mote behaviour in ways that would help sustain competitive advantage•
to support improvements in resource allocation and better decision-making•
to specify responsibilities and to reinforce the accountability of employees and managers and, in particular, to detect ineffi-ciencies with the help of management accounting information•
to provide regular information for staff appraisal, motivationand rewarding. Performance measurement is perceived as one means of motivating people towards achieving organizational goals.
Although there are several reasons for utilization of performance measures, overall it is considered to be an integral part of the management processes, to identify areas of poor performance or opportunities so that better plans can be developed.
Financial measures of performance
Information regarding end results of operations is provided by financial performance measures and there is evidence that, in many countries, financial performance measures are of primary importance. Accounting information systems provide a formal means of gathering data to support and coordinate the decision-making of businesses in light of overall organizational goals. They ‘provide quantitative and common yardsticks to evaluate achieve-ment relative to a plan or to compare parts of the company’ (Emmanuel et al., 1990:222).
Profitability is the most commonly used basis for defining success, such that it is used in the lead tables of performances in Business Week, Management Today and similar journals. Profit sometimes is an absolute measure but more often is a ratio, such as earning per share, return on investment or return on shareholders’ funds, and is presented as a comparison with other companies over a period of time. Traditionally, businesses have relied upon accounting information, such as cost, revenue and asset and liabil-ity accounts, in order to explain the cause and effect relationship that determines the financial outcome of the operations. In recent years, responsibility accounting that provides financial informa-tion and forms the basis for the performance measurement and management control system in many organizations is recognized as a key to management control systems.
Budgets have consistently proved to be an important financial tool to represent a standard for effectiveness and efficiency meas-ures. Performance reports are a common means of providing the key financial budgeted and actual information for each responsibil-ity centre in order to control the organizations’ operations effect-ively. This comparison of budgeted and actual results is recognized as forming the basis for evaluating overall performance, helping control future operations and providing incentives for motivating the staff. The roles of budgets in organizations are diverse: 1 a system of authorization
2 a forecasting and planning tool
3 a means of communication and coordination 4 a motivational device
5 a means of performance evaluation and control 6 a basis for decision-making (Emmanuel et al., 1990).
Although financial performance measures provide objective results and are mainly utilized as a rewarding and motivational tool, there has been increasing recognition that the implementation of financial performance measures on their own were seen to provide a limited perspective on the performance of a company. The main short-comings are:
•
Short termism, in particular of profitability measures, is deter-mined as a handicap for businesses. Measures of share/equity, asset return, bottom line profit and residual income emphasize a ‘short-termist’ approach. However, marketing/sales ratio and profit sales margin would emphasize a longer-term approach.•
The past information provided relative to ongoing operations is inappropriate in the dynamic business environment. Measures that are flexible and that can assist managers to make decisions for the current operations are highly important. It also encour-ages managers to keep minimum variance from the standard rather than continual motivation for improvement.•
Results, rather than ongoing managerial efforts, are reflected with financial measures. Better performance measures are required to cope with the emerging managerial techniques such as total quality management.•
Lack of strategic focus and failure to provide data on quality, responsiveness and flexibility.•
Failure to provide information on the external factors, such as what customers want and how the competitors are performing.Operational measures of performance
Although financial measures of performance are of primary importance for the success of businesses, they can produce better performance information when used in conjunction with non-financial measures. They are valuable supplements to non-financial measures as they are expected to supply information that would improve the financial outcome and support and monitor the strategic initiatives.
New, non-financial measures are needed in order to cope with the changing operational environment, which primarily includes quality, just-in-time delivery and increase in product ranges. These new measures must be flexible, directly related to the strat-egy, non-financial, easily understood and highly responsive to the daily production situation. In addition, performance meas-urement systems require non-financial measures at operational levels, particularly to be used as a tool for motivating employees. It is also noted that ‘. . . day to day control of the manufacturing and distribution operations are better handled with non-financial measures’ (Maskell, 1989:33).
The financial systems were normally used as a feedback mech-anism to report the outcomes and their variance with the planned – once the financial goals were met, some other criteria became important. Other systems that dealt with more critical or uncer-tain areas of performance, for instance customer satisfaction, cycle time improvement and quality, were used in a more inter-active fashion by management.
Operational measures were used in service businesses to a large extent, such that the service quality, flexibility, resource utilization
and innovation were the operational determinants of the competi-tiveness and financial performance outcomes in Fitzgerald et al.’s (1991) performance measurement framework for service busi-nesses. Empirical work in certain businesses has resulted in either dominance of financial outcome measures rather than the means of achieving these outcomes, or more interest in operational measures, resulting in an imbalance between the two dimensions.
Performance measurement in the hospitality industry
The Uniform Systems of Accounts for the Lodging Industry (1996) is
the commonly practised method of recording and analysing accounting data in hospitality businesses. The characteristics of the industry play an important role in utilizing an appropriate approach to accounting and performance measurement. For this reason, the key features of hospitality businesses are reviewed by Harris (1999) to include fixed capacity, perishability, erratic demand, product range, real-time activity, labour intensity, loca-tion, size, production and consumploca-tion, capital intensity and cost structure. It is suggested that the business orientation and the industry context of the business is a key determinant of develop-ing effective accountdevelop-ing, control and performance measurement methods (Kotas, 1975).
The results of financial statements have significance if they are compared with some form of yardstick. The main source of infor-mation for comparison comes from two sources: internal per-formance, which is past results and budget perper-formance, and external performance, which is inter-company results and indus-try studies. There is a considerable degree of consensus among managers in hospitality organizations and academic writers alike that the budgetary control process is a valuable control and man-agement tool in hospitality businesses. Ratios, which facilitate benchmarking, are the most commonly used measures in hospi-tality businesses in order to monitor and control operations. This information is compared and measured against goals to indicate where problems and successes are. Andrew and Schmidgall (1993:58) state that ‘by tracking a selected set of ratios, hospitality managers are able to maintain a fairly accurate perception of the effectiveness and efficiency of their operations’.
The monthly occupancy percentage, the cost of labour percent-age and the cost of food sold percentpercent-age were the three most com-monly used measures in hospitality businesses, however, different groups of users assign different values to the ratios. The main users of ratios are the management, the owners and the creditors. They all rate different measures to be important such that the management uses operating ratios more than others, the owners
consider profitability ratios extensively and the creditors utilize solvency ratios for making decisions. It is believed that the results reflected their natural interest in the business. In another study, it was identified that guest satisfaction measures are the key indica-tors used at operational levels of hotels and financial measures are utilized at the senior management levels (Haktanir and Harris, 2005). In addition to the above common measures, cash flow analysis is important, in particular, its relationship to three major activities of the business: operations, investment and finance.
A Chartered Institute of Management Accountants’ (CIMA) study, carried out by Collier and Gregory (1995), exhibited inter-esting findings for both financial and non-financial measures of performance. Return on investment, which is believed to be the favourite measure in manufacturing businesses, is used only when new investments are undertaken. The most common way of measuring performance is through a comparison of actual with budgeted figures. From the six hotel companies studied, the com-mon performance measures used can be listed as room yield, hotel profit contribution, occupancy rates and labour costs to turnover. Although the importance of measures of quality was well under-stood, a number of different ways of measuring it were captured, such as guest questionnaires, mystery guests and quality stand-ard forms. Rewstand-arding, referred to as a bonus system, is used in two-thirds of the cases studied where the budgeted versus actual results were the basis of the entire system. Overall, hotel per-formance measurement is not only criticized for its high reliance on quantitative measures, but also for its short-termist approach, its focus on efficiency rather than effectiveness measures and its high consideration of internal rather than external analysis.
Although both operational and financial measures are con-sidered in hospitality businesses, in parallel to the developments in generic management accounting, it is stressed that there is high dependence on financial measures, which can lead to lack of bal-ance and strategic focus. Geller (1985a) provided a list of the most commonly used performance measures by US hotel companies, which indicates the majority to be operational measures. A simi-lar study carried out in the UK by Brander Brown et al. (1996) revealed that the users of performance measures consider both financial and operational measures to a high extent but, in con-trast to Geller (1985a,b), they found a high reliance on financial measures, which may imply an unbalanced managerial focus. Further to this, Brander Brown and McDonnell (1995) reported the results of a pilot study designed to apply the BSC approach to the hotel sector. They suggest that the specific nature and value of any BSC would be contingent upon its level (unit or corporate level), context of application (department or functional area) and
the time period/prevailing circumstances during which it is to be used. In addition, the empirical research of Brander Brown and Harris (1998) yielded evidence that achieving a balance of per-formance information, in terms of type, financial-operation dimen-sions and the links between key performance areas are necessary for the design of appropriate performance management systems in full-service hotels. It was also emphasized that effective communi-cation of performance information at all levels, therefore produ-cing and communicating clear and understandable performance information, is a core element of the performance management system.
Performance measurement in independent hotels
A recently completed research project (Haktanir, 2004) provides interesting insights into the complex nature of performance urement in independent hotels. It investigates performance meas-urement practices in the real-life context of independent hotels in order to develop a framework for use in these businesses.
A grounded theory approach was undertaken and a multiple case study approach was adopted. This research strategy facili-tated the development of a rich understanding of the perform-ance measurement practices, through in-depth study of the issue in its own context. The following aspects were developed regard-ing the case selection of the research:
•
The hotels were selected from the population ‘independent hotels in Northern Cyprus’. Statistically, individually owned and managed hotels are some 45 per cent of the total hotel busi-nesses. In addition, a large part of the partnerships, which are 48 per cent of the overall figure, are believed to be independ-ently owned and managed properties. (The figures are obtained from the Ministry of State and Deputy Prime Ministry of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. The information was a tabular listing of properties rather than statistical presentations. The researcher processed the obtained data to come up with the percentage share of each ownership type.) An examination of the hotel industry indicates that independent hotels dominate the hotel industry in Northern Cyprus and, therefore, this research into the performance measurement practices of inde-pendent hotels covers a relevant group within the industry.•
The selected cases represent two groups within the independenthotel category: remotely owned (where the owner is not involved in the management of the business) and owner-managed (where the owner and the manager is the same person) hotels.
•
The property features that are believed to be important for the research are listed below:– the size of the hotel needs to be above 100 room capacity so that the appropriate information and reservation systems would be available
– the four or five star hotels were decided upon to be in the sampling group so that there is a certain level of service and different facilities available to study
– almost all hotels in Northern Cyprus are holiday and resort type, therefore, studying the ‘resort’ hotel group is both eas-ily accessible and more representative.
Eventually, six cases were selected for this research. They are listed in chronological order in Table 1.1.
Case Stars Ownership Room Room & Catering Main type type bed no. type contact
Case I: 5 Remotely Hotel & 392 rooms BB, half, GM Mediterranean owned bungalow 912 bed full
Hotel
Case II: 4 Remotely Hotel 108 rooms BB, half, GM Palm Hotel owned 216 bed full
Case III: 4 Owner Hotel & 133 room BB, half, F&B Hotel Aqua managed bungalow 72 full, Self- manager
bungalow catering 515 bed
Case IV: 4 Owner Hotel 110 room BB, half, F&B Beach Hotel managed 222 bed full manager Case V: 4 Owner Bungalow 105 BB, half, Mother River Hotel managed bungalow full, Self- of GM
290 bed catering Case VI: 5 Remotely Hotel 192 room BB, half, FO Chance Hotel owned 392 bed full manager
BB: Bed and breakfast, GM: general manager, F&B: food and beverage, FO: front office.
Table 1.1
Information about the participant cases
Data were collected from owners, general managers, department managers and employees by using an in-depth semi-structured interviewing method. In addition, observation and documentation
methods of data collection were utilized in order to triangulate the findings and to gain a deeper insight into the real-life processes of the case studies. The informants from each case and the data collection method utilized are shown in Table 1.2.
Informant Case Case Case Case Case Case
I II III IV V VI
Staff – front office I, D, O I, D, O (2) I, D, O (2) I, D, O I, D, O (2) I, D, O (2) Staff – cost accounting I I, O I I
Staff – F&B service I (2) I Staff – administrative I, D (2)
Front office manager I I, D I, O I, D I, D, O I Housekeeping I, D I I, O I I I manager Personnel manager I I, D I Accounting manager I, D I, D I, D I, D I, D I, D Guest relations I, D, O I, D, O I, D manager
Food & beverage I I, D, O I, D, O I (2)1 I, O I, D
manager Assistant GM I, D2 GM I, D, O I, D GM/owner I, D, O I I Regional I I I executive/owner
Source: Adapted from individual case reports. I: interview, D: documentation, O: observation
(2): two informants from the same unit.
1The organizational structure of Case IV did not have one food and beverage manager,
instead, two separate units of kitchen and food and beverage service. Both of these persons were informants.
2Assistant GM was the acting GM at the time of the case study. The researcher was also
informed that the assistant GM has been with the hotel for very many years and he would give better information about the inquired issues.
Table 1.2
The informants and the data collection methods
An inductive data analysis approach was employed in order to allow the theory to emerge from the data. Primarily, within case analysis of each case was carried out. In the second level of analy-sis, owner-managed independent hotels and the remotely-owned independent hotels are compared in separate groups. Each of the two groups had three case hotels, where, in the next level of analysis, all the six cases were compared and contrasted.
The analysis process resulted in the development of a number of categories:
•
Business dynamics (explores the decision-making mechanism, core elements of the business, and the information flow). This category has emerged as the central category•
Overall performance aspects (explores the kind of performance measures used, the reasons for utilizing them, the way they are conducted for the hotel in general, and for the departments specifically)•
Employee measures of performance (incorporates all employee related issues with employee performance measurement)•
Customer satisfaction measures (explores the type ofperform-ance measures utilized and explains how they are incorporated to overall activities and decision-making)
•
Financial measures (reflects on the type, form and the way financial measures are utilized in relation to performance measurement practices)•
Innovation activities (explores and identifies the new activ-ities and their importance for the business’s performance measurement).Findings
When the owner-managed case hotels (three hotels) were analysed, the following key issues emerged:
•
There is a strong family involvement in all three hotels. This has several key consequences on management; one of them is family privacy concerning the use of financial information, this limits the sharing of such information. The other is the forma-tion of an accounting system that satisfies the requirements of the owners. The accounting system is primarily based on cash information, which is one of the most important concerns of general managers and founders. In addition, sales information of revenue generating points and the profit figures are other important elements of the accounting systems. Therefore, the financial information and the accounting system are designed to satisfy the requirements of the owners and this information is not shared with non-family members. In addition to limita-tions of the receipt of financial information, there are also limi-tations involving access to computerized systems – once again, the family member department managers generally have more chances of accessing the system and reaching information. The family members, together with the founder and the generalmanager, are the final decision-makers, particularly for more strategic issues like investments.
•
Family involvement has consequences in terms of manage-ment and operational control as well. The personal presence of managers and the general manager is a key type of performance measurement used for different purposes, including employee performance, guest satisfaction and operational success meas-urement. The control through personal presence is felt more in one of the hotels where the management team comprises of siblings. The efficacy of their ‘we are always present’ (food and beverage manager, River Hotel) personal control system is demonstrated by the fact that they use the least amount of fig-ures for cost control of the three case study hotels.•
Additionally, the families’ other businesses and occupations are effective in determining their management styles and con-trol. Family members are influenced by their founder and other family members in establishing their management style. It was noted in the River Hotel that ‘rent-a-car’ is a department of the hotel – this is due to the fact that the family’s original occupa-tion was car rentals and they still have a reasonable size of busi-ness operating alongside the hotel busibusi-ness. In order for the family to control and combine the two businesses, they operate the rent-a-car business under the same roof. Similarly, the Beach Hotel has established their cost system according to the other businesses of the owner. The two restaurants the family owns specialize in ‘kebabs’ which use beef and lamb, and it was rec-ognized that the cost report of the hotel is named as the ‘meat usage report’. This indicates that systems and information used from them are affected by the other occupations of the family.•
Another significant point is the extended role of front officedepartments – it is more than the front office notion of hoteliers. It acts as a guest information and relations point in order to reach the widely accepted aim of guest satisfaction in all hotels. Further to this, in the River Hotel, the housekeeping depart-ment also reports to front office, which extends the responsibil-ities of the department even more. One reason for doing this is for the better understanding of the guests requirements from the rooms and thus to provide better service in return.
As a result of an overall analysis of the remotely-owned case hotels, the following key issues are concluded:
•
All the owners of the remotely-owned case hotels live in Turkey. Owners of the Mediterranean and Chance Hotels areTurkish and have no relationship in Northern Cyprus. In con-trast, the owner of the Palm Hotel is a Turkish Cypriot. The two Turkish owners are involved in businesses in tourism, trans-portation and leisure industry and their key reason for having such investments in Northern Cyprus is to develop their already existing businesses outside the boundaries of Turkey. However, the Palm Hotel owner has a metal plant in Turkey and has no other hospitality or tourism involvement. His primary aim was to invest in his home country. As a result of this, the owner of the Palm Hotel visits the hotel more frequently, whereas the others are mostly remote to the property. This has a further impli-cation such that the owner of the Palm Hotel has more informal means of measuring the hotel performance. He receives infor-mation from the family in Northern Cyprus who visits his hotel and has personal observation of the business during his visits to Northern Cyprus.
The key people in these hotels are the general managers. Financial information is supplied and decisions made by the owners and the general managers. The financial information dissemination is limited and the monthly performance reports are supplied to the owners and the general managers only. The department managers can reach the information they need, however, this depends on the capability of the computerized system and the access they have. For instance, the access is wider in the Chance Hotel as each department is responsible for reaching its own budget targets. However, in the Palm Hotel, only the food and beverage department manager receives some financial information in the form of cost reports.
The accounting system is primarily based on the principles of generally accepted uniform systems of accounts for hotels. The key information comes from the monthly and annual finan-cial performance reports that include profit and loss statement, food and beverage cost statement, itemized sales statement and occupancy statement. The computerized information systems enable managers to reach primarily the revenue and occupancy figures.
•
One of the consequences of owners being remote to the business is the formality regarding information flow. The general manager and owner base their communication and performance measure-ment on reporting. In addition, the departmeasure-ment managers and the general manager have scheduled meetings and formal decision-making. They also have daily one-to-one communica-tion for operacommunica-tional follow up. When examining the depart-ments, it is noted that they are generally informal, having large reliance on personal observations and guest communications.The guest relations departments also play important liaison roles in order to facilitate simultaneous decision-making.
•
Other businesses of the owner are effective in determining themanagement styles and the control in the hotels. For instance, the accounting department of the Chance Hotel was one of the largest departments in the hotel, and the largest accounting department compared to the other case hotels. The reason for this is the presence of a sizable casino operation as part of rou-tine hotel operations. Further to this, some of the managers of the Mediterranean Hotel were transferred from the owner’s other hotel property in Turkey. Additionally, the hotel is used to support the operations of the airline company, therefore, it is not surprising that good pricing and selling strategies were the primary concern of the managers.
•
The guest relations department plays an important role in terms of performance measurement of the hotels. They supply guest-related information both in verbal and written forms so that employee and departmental performances can be determined. For instance, the guest comment card results are the key indica-tors of employee performances and the ‘employee of the month’ rewards are given as a result of their evaluations. However, it is important to note that the front office departments also have guest relation roles besides their front office functions.Evaluation
As a result of the comparison between all case hotels in the form of owner-managed to remotely-owned hotels, four key assertions are made. First, the management of these hotels should recognize the importance of the owner’s involvement in the management of the hotel. The four main aspects developed are:
1 the quality of life, provision of job opportunities to family mem-bers and good status aims of owner-managers as opposed to the profit maximization aim of remotely-owned businesses 2 the owner-centred structure of owner-managed hotels in
oppos-ition to the formal structure of remotely-owned ones
3 the verbal and face-to-face management style of owner-managers as opposed to the more formal, report-based, management style of remotely-owned businesses
4 owner-managers’ reliance on basic computerized systems with limited access, in contrast to generally accepted computerized systems with wider access and use in the remotely-owned ones.
Secondly, independent hotels relate their management and oper-ations to other significant external and internal factors including: 1 proximity to the seaside influences the atmosphere, formality
and kind of activities
2 high seasonal demand variations have significant influence on employee policies resulting in short-term perspectives for the independent hotels
3 the front office department is the centre of communication, coordination of functions and guest requests, where it plays a crucial role in building the desired hotel image
4 operational alternatives and investments for better operational results are commonly practiced in independent hotels; their measurement generally occurring in their results, primarily in the form of revenue generation of such activities.
Thirdly, it is suggested that the management of independent hotels should understand and recognize the importance of guest satisfac-tion and its measurement for their businesses. This would require them to identify the elements of the service industry, including primarily the simultaneity feature that consequently leads to high guest interface and high reliance on measurement through guest feedback. In addition, the organizational culture – primarily com-municated through the owner – is a powerful determinant of the extent of one-to-one guest relations at all levels of management and the resulting repeat business.
Lastly, independent hotels develop a range of performance measures in three categories:
1 ‘overall measures of performance’ – due to the totality of pro-cesses (thus service-production-facility), non-financial measures for handling day-to-day operations, primarily occupancy and occupancy related information, and on-the-spot service measure-ment are utilized
2 ‘employee measures of performance’ – due to the service fea-ture of independent hotels, service quality measures interact with employee performance measures, simultaneous measure-ment of inputs and outputs is required and dependence on qualitative measures (verbal feedback and observation) is iden-tified. In addition, the seasonal demand changes of the hotel industry in general and in Cyprus, in particular, cause difficulty in formalizing staff policies and lead to a high reliance on on-the-job training
3 ‘financial measures of performance’ – although there is more reliance and more tendency to use financial measures in hospi-tality businesses, the extent of access and communication of financial information at different levels is limited; this is mainly due to the owners’ perception of such information as being confidential to family members. Monitoring cash flow indica-tors at owner and general manager level, and measuring finan-cial success of operations by sales and occupancy information is the accepted practice.
Conclusion
The findings indicated that performance measurement in the context of independent hotels is influenced by various organiza-tional factors. For instance, the degree of owner’s involvement in the operations and management of business is determined to be an important factor affecting the way management operates and performance measurement takes place. It is identified that when owners are involved in the management of businesses they restrict the flow of information and, in so doing, limit the involve-ment of managers and employees. In the case of an owner’s direct involvement in management, the kind of information and infor-mation dissemination is limited by the owner. The extent of acceptance and usage of uniform accounting systems is largely influenced by the involvement of the owner. In addition, infor-mation to decision-makers is limited by cash flow and revenue related information. It is also apparent that owners require more flexible control systems as they establish business structures around themselves and their family members. This leads to the development of measures based on personal observation and, therefore, greater reliance on informal business processes.
The kind of business and the kind of services/products the busi-ness provides is another significant determinant of the perform-ance measurement methods. For instperform-ance, utilization of ‘overall measures of performance’ in order to acquire an overview of the hotel performance is a common practice in independent hotels. The issue of the ‘total hotel product’ has been discussed by Harris (1999) who highlighted the complex nature of operating a hotel in terms of the total experience customers receive. Therefore, although the hotel information and accounting systems rely on a number of revenue and support centre departments (see Uniform
System of Accounts for the Lodging Industry, 1996), designing the
control systems of hotels with the use of such accounting informa-tion may prove insufficient. The ‘total guest experience’ implies that the consequences of any mistake at any point during a guest
stay in the hotel can become a substantial overall issue and thus, the control and measurement of discrete parts (i.e. departments) of the business can only assist management to a limited degree. In effect, the financial information from the accounting systems of hotels requires to be supplemented by qualitative operational measures, such as on the spot (simultaneous) service and guest satisfaction measurement, in order to present a more comprehen-sive view of the hotel performance.
Department managers utilize employee measures and guest-related measures to a larger extent in their evaluation of depart-mental success. It is identified in the same research that one-to-one guest satisfaction feedback and repeat business figures are of prime importance to decision-makers. The simultaneity feature of service encounter at the hotels is the key reason for having such a reliance on one-to-one guest information. Management by per-sonal presence facilitates direct interaction of managers both with staff and guests at every level of the business. This brings informa-tion through observainforma-tion and verbal communicainforma-tion and therefore, action can be taken in real-time. In addition, having a guest rela-tions department can also support the management by passing timely guest-related information.
References
Adam, D. (1997) Management Accounting for the Hospitality Industry:
A Strategic Approach. Cassell, London.
Andrew, W.P. and Schmidgall, R.S. (1993) Financial Management for
the Hospitality Industry. Educational Institute of American Hotel
and Motel Association, East Lansing.
Bolton, J.E. (1971) Report of the Committee of Inquiry on Small Firms
(Bolton Report), Cmnd 4811. HMSO, London.
Brander Brown, J. and Harris, P. (1998) Performance management in the Hotel Industry: an Application of Eisenhardt’s ‘Roadmap’.
Paper presented at the Management Accounting Group Conference,
University of Aston, Birmingham.
Brander Brown, J. and McDonnell, B. (1995) The balanced score-card: short term guest or long term resident? International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 7 (2/3), 7–11.
Brander Brown, J., McDonnell, B. and Lang, L. (1996) Performance measurement in UK hotel organisations: towards a balanced scorecard? Paper presented at the Council on Hotel, Restaurant and
Institutional Education 50th Annual Conference, Washington, DC.
Collier, P. and Gregory, A. (1995) Management Accounting in Hotel
Groups. CIMA, London.
Emmanuel, C., Otley, D. and Merchant, K. (1990) Accounting for
Fitzgerald, L., Johnston, R., Brignall, S., Silvestro, R. and Voss, C. (1991) Performance Measurement in Service Businesses. CIMA, London.
Geller, A.N. (1985a) Tracing the critical success factors for hotel companies. The Cornell HRA Quarterly, February, 76–81. Geller, A.N. (1985b) The current state of hotel information system.
The Cornell HRA Quarterly, May, 14–17.
Haktanir, M. (2004) Performance measurement in small service businesses: an investigation of independent hotels. Unpublished
PhD Thesis, Oxford Brookes University.
Haktanir, M. and Harris, P.J. (2005) Performance measurement practice in an independent hotel context: a case study approach.
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,
17(1), 39–50.
Harris, P.J. (1999) Profit Planning, 2nd edn. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.
Jarvis, R., Curran, J., Kitching, J. and Lightfoot, G. (2000) The use of quantitative and qualitative criteria in the measurement of performance in small firms. Journal of Small Business and
Enterprise Development, 7 (2), 123–134.
Jogaratnam, G., Tse, E.C. and Olsen, M.D. (1999) Matching strategy with performance. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administrative
Quarterly, August, 91–95.
Jones, P. and Lockwood, A. (1989) The Management of Hotel
Operations: An Innovative Approach to the Study of Hotel Manage-ment. Cassell, London.
Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. (1992) The balanced scorecard: measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, January–February, 71–79.
Kotas, R. (1975) Market Orientation in Hotel and Catering Industry. Surrey University Press, London.
Lynch, R.L. and Cross, K.F. (1991) Measure Up! Yardsticks for
Continuous Improvement. Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
Main, H. (1995) Information technology and the independent hotel – failing to make the connection? International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, 7 (6), 30–32.
Marriott, N. and Marriott, P. (2000) Professional accountants and the development of a management accounting service for the small firm: barriers and possibilities. Management Accounting
Research, 11 (4), 475–492.
Maskell, B. (1989) Performance measurement for world class manufacturing: Part 1. Management Accounting, May, 32–33. Morrison, A. (1998) Small firm statistics: a hotel sector focus. The
Service Industry Journal, 18 (1), 132–142.
Neely, A., Gregory, M. and Platts, K. (1995) Performance measure-ment system design: a literature review and research agenda.
International Journal of Operations and Production Management,
15(4), 80–116.
Shaw, G. and Willams, A.M. (1994) Critical Issues in Tourism: A
Critical Perspective. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.
Stanworth, J. and Gray, C. (1991) Bolton 20 years on: the small firm
in the 1990s. Paul Chapman Publishing, London.
Uniform System of Accounts for the Lodging Industry (1996) 9th
revised edition. Educational Institute of the American Hotel and Motel Association, New York.
