Cose 27: Housekeeping Guest Satafaction Scores 81Case 27HousekeepingGuest Satisfaction ScoresCase Type:Head CaseMain Subjects: Motivation, Rewards• Shakia Andrews, Executive HousekerperWho's Who:hakia was desperate. The guest satisfaction scores for the Housekeeping department haveSbeen extremely low for the past year. Though the Housekeeping management has been inplace for several years, nearly all of the guestroom attendants have been employed by the RoyalHotel for less than two years. Shakia was ot sure what had caused the perceived level of serviceand cleanliness to suffer.1. Why are the guest servine scores for the Housekeeping department usually low?2 Housekeeping managers often valize that probably the hardest part of their job is to moti-vate their staff. Explain.3. Where should Shakia begin to raise the guest satisfactions scores?4. To maintain the comnitment of housekeepers, identify creative intrinsic' and extrinsicrewardsNotesIntrinsie rewards are received by the individual daretly through tash performae (Satiatactiors denvnt trom thejb itself, such as pride n one's work a keting of accomplishment, or beang partof a team)"Extrinsic rewarde are ntemal to the job and pnvadai by the empluyer (Benefits provided by the employet, unually monry, prsthotian, e other benefits)ReterenceFrye, W. D. (2007, haly/August) Determining why bousekeeping guest service sores ar kow.ne Bamu Chrona le, 3.Notes and Responses to Case Questions:

"Since you have posted a question with multiple sub-parts, we will solve the first three subparts…

Answered: hakia was desperate. The guest…

Management, Loose-Leaf Version

13th Edition

ISBN:9781305969308

Author:Richard L. Daft

Publisher:Richard L. Daft

Chapter19: Managing Quality And Performance

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 1SGB: Create a Group Control System Step 1. From into groups of three to five students. Each group will...

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Cousins Jeri Lynn DeBose, Tish Hoover, and Josephine (Joey) Parks looked forward to meeting up during the Christmas holidays to compare notes on the results of midyear teacher evaluations. All were public school teachers in districts scattered over the state. In the pressured search for new levels of teacher accountability demanded by legislators, the state department of education joined 16 other States in implementing a new teacher evaluation system. The goal is to hold teachers account-able for student learning progress in the classroom. Under the guidance of the National Council for Teacher Quality, criteria varies by State, but in most cases, 40 percent of each teacher's accountability score would be based on the principal's evaluation and ranking based on personal observation, 30 percent would be based on personal observation by a master teacher from outside the district, and the Other 30 percent would be based on student test score gains. The state department of education would set a performance goal each school district, and the principal would set a performance goal for each teacher. In preparation, the State conducted intensive training sessions for principals and designated master teachers who would conduct the evaluations based on four class observations per teacher. Officials used standardized achievement tests to derive value-added scores that measure student learning over the year. Teacher ratings were 1-5, with I am being the lowest and 5 representing near perfection. The publication of the first year's evaluations stirred interest and controversy, particularly among teachers who worried about the possible long-term effects on job retention and tenure. Now, with the first-year evaluations in hand, the three cousins pored over their experiences. The three represented different types of school systems within the state. Jeri Lynn worked for a metropolitan system in the state capital. The system included many low-income students whose first language was nor English, and several schools within the system were teetering on the brink of State takeover if improvement in student scores didn't materialize this school year. Tish worked in a county System dominated by upper-income residents, and Joey taught in the rural community in which all three grew up. The rural community had high unemployment, and a low percentage of graduates went on to college. As a result, the cousins came to the table with differing teaching experiences. "The numbers are all over the place," Jeri Lynn remarked as she studied the pages. "The whole system is flawed, and they need to make changes," Joey said. " It's too subjective. The principal and master teacher observations are subjective because there are personal factors that affect a true outcome." "Yeah, look at the numbers from your upper-income district," Jeri Lynn said to Tish. " How can 60 percent of the teachers score 5s?" Tish chuckled. "Yeah, lucky us. Our schools are overflowing with children from wealthy families. These are the kids who will apply to Ivy League schools. I can tell you that the principals are going to avoid confrontation on all fronts. No principal is going to give any indication that their students are receiving an education that's less than perfect, and that means cramming the rankings with 5s. They claim a higher level of motivation for students, and thus the selection of an elite team of educators. So with those pressures, I don't think we get personal feedback that IS accurate." "At the other end of the spectrum, we have my rural district," Joey said. "The big problem is that the principals know everyone and have longstanding relationships with everyone in the county, so I think scores are based on personal history. We could almost predict who would get high or low scores before the observations. For principals, it can go back as far as 'his daddy and my daddy hated each other in high school, and now I get to evaluate his daughter." "I think that in many cases, principals feel pressure to align scores with state expectations. The stare expected my district to have high scores and expected rural schools such as yours to be lower," Tish said. "But isn't that partially offset by lower goals for the rural school distracts responded Joey. "The key to the accountability system is the principal in each school," Jeri Lynn suggested. "With several of the schools in Metro teetering on the edge of state takeover by the end of the year, we had lots of strict principals who wanted to hold our feet to the fire with lower scores." "I thought the whole idea was to provide the teachers With feedback so that we would know the areas where we need improvement," Tish said. "The principals were supposed to conduct two observations in the fall and two more in the spring," Jeri Lynn said. think that's asking too much of them when they already have so much on their plates. I think a lot of them are skimping on their visits. know I only had one observation last semester, and I'm sure Mr. Talley just faked the second set of numbers. The master teachers make only two observations a year, which may be more objective but counts for less." "I'm wondering, too, how a principal measure performance in a course area outside his area of expertise, such as math," Joey said. "If the guy has a phobia about math, anything the teacher says or does is going to 100k brilliant—thus a 5." Tish and Jeri Lynn looked at each other and laughed. Maybe we picked the wrong subjects," Tish said. "My question is one of perception," Jeri Lynn said. "A large percentage of my students are ELL. That affects their scores. How do you measure a 3 in my situation against a 5 for Tish? At the end of the school year, little Carlos is thrilled that his reading in English has improved, but there's no Big Bang here. a slow steady improvement that may not actually show up in big strides for a couple of years." "So, the question is how do they create a system that is fair?" Tish asked. "And accurate," added Jeri Lynn. Is a 1-5 grading System by principals and master teachers a valuable part of a feedback control system for teachers? Why?
Cousins Jeri Lynn DeBose, Tish Hoover, and Josephine (Joey) Parks looked forward to meeting up during the Christmas holidays to compare notes on the results of midyear teacher evaluations. All were public school teachers in districts scattered over the state. In the pressured search for new levels of teacher accountability demanded by legislators, the state department of education joined 16 other States in implementing a new teacher evaluation system. The goal is to hold teachers account-able for student learning progress in the classroom. Under the guidance of the National Council for Teacher Quality, criteria varies by State, but in most cases, 40 percent of each teacher's accountability score would be based on the principal's evaluation and ranking based on personal observation, 30 percent would be based on personal observation by a master teacher from outside the district, and the Other 30 percent would be based on student test score gains. The state department of education would set a performance goal each school district, and the principal would set a performance goal for each teacher. In preparation, the State conducted intensive training sessions for principals and designated master teachers who would conduct the evaluations based on four class observations per teacher. Officials used standardized achievement tests to derive value-added scores that measure student learning over the year. Teacher ratings were I —5, with I am being the lowest and 5 representing near perfection. The publication of the first year's evaluations stirred interest and controversy, particularly among teachers who worried about the possible long-term effects on job retention and tenure. Now, with the first-year evaluations in hand, the three cousins pored over their experiences. The three represented different types of school systems within the state. Jeri Lynn worked for a metropolitan system in the state capital. The system included many low-income students whose first language was nor English, and several schools within the system were teetering on the brink of State takeover if improvement in student scores didn't materialize this school year. Tish worked in a county System dominated by upper-income residents, and Joey taught in the rural community in which all three grew up. The rural community had high unemployment, and a low percentage of graduates went on to college. As a result, the cousins came to the table with differing teaching experiences. "The numbers are all over the place," Jeri Lynn remarked as she studied the pages. "The whole system is flawed, and they need to make changes," Joey said. " It's too subjective. The principal and master teacher observations are subjective because there are personal factors that affect a true outcome." "Yeah, look at the numbers from your upper-income district," Jeri Lynn said to Tish. "How can 60 percent of the teachers score 5s?" Tish chuckled. "Yeah, lucky us. Our schools are overflowing with children from wealthy families. These are the kids who will apply to Ivy League schools. I can tell you that the principals are going to avoid confrontation on all fronts. No principal is going to give any indication that their students are receiving an education that's less than perfect, and that means cramming the rankings with 5s. They claim a higher level of motivation for students, and thus the selection of an elite team of educators. So with those pressures, I don't think we get personal feedback that IS accurate." "At the other end of the spectrum, we have my rural district," Joey said. "The big problem is that the principals know everyone and have longstanding relationships with everyone in the county, so I think scores are based on personal history. We could almost predict who would get high or low scores before the observations. For principals, it can go back as far as his daddy and my daddy hated each other in high school, and now I get to evaluate his daughter "I think that in many cases, principals feel pressure to align scores with state expectations. The stare expected my district to have high scores and expected rural schools such as yours to be lower," Tish said. "But isn't that partially offset by lower goals for the rural school distracts responded Joey. "The key to the accountability system is the principal in each school," Jeri Lynn suggested. "With several of the schools in Metro teetering on the edge of state takeover by the end of the year, we had lots of strict principals who wanted to hold our feet to the fire with lower scores." "l thought the whole idea was to provide the teachers With feedback so that we would know the areas where we need improvement," Tish said. "The principals were supposed to conduct two observations in the fall and two more in the spring," Jeri Lynn said. think that's asking too much of them when they already have so much on their plates. I think a lot of them are skimping on their visits. know I only had one observation last semester, and I'm sure Mr. Talley just faked the second set of numbers. The master teachers make only two observations a year, which may be more objective but counts for less." "I'm wondering, too, how a principal measure performance in a course area outside his area of expertise, such as math," Joey said. "If the guy has a phobia about math, anything the teacher says or does is going to 100k brilliant—thus a 5." Tish and Jeri Lynn looked at each other and laughed. Maybe we picked the wrong subjects," Tish said. "My question is one of perception," Jeri Lynn said. "A large percentage of my students are ELL. That affects their scores. How do you measure a 3 in my situation against a 5 for Tish? At the end of the school year, little Carlos is thrilled that his reading in English has improved, but there's no Big Bang here. a slow steady improvement that may not actually show up in big strides for a couple of years: "So, the question is how do they create a system that is fair?" Tish asked. "And accurate," added Jeri Lynn. What do you see as the major strengths and flaws in the feedback control system used in the schools in this scenario? What changes do you recommend to overcome the flaws?
Create a Group Control System Step 1. From into groups of three to five students. Each group will assume that another student group has been given an assignment of writing a major paper that will involve research by individual group members that will be integrated into the final paper. Each group member has to do his or part. Step 2. Your assignment is develop a list of rules and identify some statistics by which to control the behavior of members in that group. Brainstorm and discuss potential to govern member behavior and consequences for breaking those rules. Step 3. First, select the five rules that you think are most important for governing group member behavior. Consider the following situations that rules might cover; arriving late for a meeting: missing a meeting: failing to complete a work assignment; disagreements about desired quality of work; how to resolve conflicts about paper content; differences in participation , such as one person doing all the talking and someone else talking hardly at all; how to handle meetings that start late; the use of an agenda and handling deviations from the agenda; and any other situation that your group a cover. Step 4. Now consider what statistics could be developed to measure the behavior and outcome of the group pertaining to those five rules. What kinds of things could be counted to understand how group is performing and whether members are the following rules? Step 5. Discuss the following questions. Why are rules important as a means of control? What are the advantages and disadvantages of having many rules (hierarchical control) versus few rules (decentralized control) for a student group? How can statistics help a group ensure? appropriate behavior and a high-quality product? Step 6. Be prepared to present your conclusions to the Class.
Create a Group Control System Step 1 Form into groups of three to five students. Each group will assume that another student group has been given an assignment of writing a major paper that will involve research by individual group members that will be integrated into the final paper. Each group member has to do his or her part. Step 2 Your assignment is to develop a list of rules and identify some statistics by which to control the behavior of members in that group. Brainstorm and discuss potential rules to govern member behavior and consequences for breaking those rules. Step 3. first, select the five rules that you think are most important for governing group member behavior. Consider the following situations that rules might cover: arriving late for a meeting; missing a meeting; failing to complete a work assignment; disagreements about desired quality of work; how to resolve conflicts about paper content; differences in participation, such as one person doing all the talking and someone else talking hardly at all; how to handle meetings that Start late; the use of an agenda and handling deviations from the agenda; and any other situation that your group thinks a rule should cover that your group thinks a rule should cover.
2. If you will be assigned as a Student DRRM coordinator, what possible solutions to the problem can you suggest? - 10 3. What possible activities can you suggest to increase the awareness of the learners on how to lessen the vulnerability of your previous school?
14. What is a maturity model? Describe the Gartner Maturity Model for Analytics.
Describe the met-expectations model of customer satisfaction and its implications for working with customers on projects.
With a continuous monitoring plans directed to Employee Readiness what strategies address inattention, stress and anxiety, fatigue and boredom, illness and injury, drug side effects, values and attitudes, or cognitive factors (e.g., misperception, memory, or judgment)?
Subject: Qualitative research method Topic: The effect of quick feedback on employee motivation and performance Need 02 suggestion on above topic for the improvement on the research work?
Q2. Which of the scale (i.e. Nominal, Ordinal, Interval or Ratio) will be used for measuring the following details of an employee? Give justification for your choice. Gender Experience Position Income
The productivity per worker has steadily declined in recent years in a manufacturing company. Low motivation among the workers were the main reason for the declined in productivity and it was revealed through an online survey. Following the outcome of the survey and thorough study and planning by the management, they decided to apply Maslow's hierarchy of needs models to identify and satisfy the needs of workers at various levels. Question: Using a diagram, explain to the management the various levels of needs required to meet the motivational needs of workers.
Q25 "Millennials" are individuals born between ________, who prefer _______ in workplace. a. 1972 and 1996, limited learning b. 1971 and 1991, coaching c. 1981 and 1996, flexible hours d. 1997 and 2021, real-time feedback e. 1982 and 1996, non-financial rewards

SEE MORE QUESTIONS

Recommended textbooks for you

Management, Loose-Leaf Version

Management

ISBN:

9781305969308

Author:

Richard L. Daft

Publisher:

South-Western College Pub

Understanding Management (MindTap Course List)

Management

ISBN:

9781305502215

Author:

Richard L. Daft, Dorothy Marcic

Publisher:

Cengage Learning

Management, Loose-Leaf Version

Management

ISBN:

9781305969308

Author:

Richard L. Daft

Publisher:

South-Western College Pub

Understanding Management (MindTap Course List)

Management

ISBN:

9781305502215

Author:

Richard L. Daft, Dorothy Marcic

Publisher:

Cengage Learning

SEE MORE TEXTBOOKS