Quality Control in a
Service Business
Qality control in a service business is not the
same as in the manufacturing business
HBR 1975
His file was clean of
those pesky, lukewarm evaluations that can cool the enthusiasm of superiors as
they leaf through personnel records seeking indications of exceptional
management talent. There were no “Good, but needs improvement in handling
people” comments or “Promising, but not achieving full potential.” Simpson had
consistently been rated “Excellent,” “Superior,” or “Promotable.”
No company likes to lose
good, young talent, certainly not service companies, which typically are labor
intensive. For a service organization, quality control of employee attitude and
performance is pretty much the equivalent of product quality control for a
manufacturer. Computer manufacturers, for example, point to a roomful of
hardware that has been quality controlled down to the last core and spool. The
service company has nothing so tangible. It counts instead on favorable
impressions made on customers as a result of services properly rendered.
Everything depends on “quality control” of personnel. As J. Willard Marriott,
the founder of our company, has said many times, in the service business you
can’t make happy guests with unhappy employees.
After good people have
been recruited and trained, it is essential to keep them. Accordingly, Simpson
was interviewed several times by senior executives when he announced his
resignation. He was asked to reconsider, told that he was thought to have
exceptional talent and promise, and assured that he could look forward to a
well-paid career with increasing responsibilities.
Six months later we
wrote Simpson asking that he send us a constructive critique of our company. We
asked him to tell us about complaints that he, or others he knew, had about us,
and also to tell us what he felt to be good about Marriott. He sent us a fine
letter of criticism, and we acted on some of his suggestions.
10% of the managers who leave us voluntarily return as he
did. We try not to feel insulted when they leave, and we always feel complimented
when they return. One reason for the departure of our managers is the unusual amount
of entrepreneurial ambition among people in the food and lodging business.
Sometimes it seems as if, deep down, everyone in the industry wants to open his
own restaurant. This speaks well of the level of individual ambition, but it’s
a troublesome thing for the company, and it’s a problem not fully shared by any
other industry I can think of.
Another reason for good
people leaving us—and thereby hurting our quality control program—is dislike
for the physical requirements of our business—the long hours of physically
demanding work, the weekend and holiday duty, and so on. After all, how many
management careers can you think of where the heaviest work load comes on family
holidays like Thanksgiving and Easter? Still another reason for losing good
people like Simpson is the seeming attractiveness of a higher position with a
competitor. This is a reflection of the intense competition for good personnel
in our industry; the problem is most acute for industry leaders.
Because of pressures like these we pursue an elaborate “rescue”
operation for our good management people. But,
needless to say, maintenance of a high level of performance cannot be
accomplished just by retrieving good people who have left. When able employees are hired, the objective must be to retain them by
keeping them challenged and satisfied and growing in their jobs. It takes a
number of personnel programs to keep good people, partly because employee needs
vary so widely and partly because a variety of subjects, settings, and instructors
often serves to “reinforce” a person’s knowledge and understanding.
Let us
turn now to eight of the most effective programs that Marriott has developed
over the years.
1)
Individual Development : This program is designed to teach new management employees
necessary skills and technical knowledge during their two- or three-month
formal training period so they can assume responsible management roles quickly. It leans heavily on programmed instruction
manuals written specifically for the assistant manager positions that the
trainees are preparing for. It involves numerous, highly detailed task sheets
that break required job knowledge down into dozens of major and minor
components, and it establishes performance times for the degree of mastery
required in each instance. Also, this program allows the individual to set his
or her own pace in acquiring the skills, mixing a series of structured
on-the-job experiences with classroom seminars where the learning process is
shared with other trainees.
2)
Management Training Our company policy calls for every member of
management up through the middle levels to attend one management development
session each year. Sessions are
conducted by the corporate training department and include a variety of two-
and three-day seminars, for groups of 10 to 20, on a wide variety of
professional management topics. Courses are aimed at the first three levels of
management, and an individual usually attends with members of his peer group
from various operating divisions. As a
company with a progressive profit sharing plan that allows managers to retire
at any age after 20 years of service, Marriott’s management organization tends
to be youthful. Restaurant managers average between 24 and 29 years of age, and
district managers are in the 28- to 35-year range, very close in age and
outlook to the managers they supervise. As a result of this youthfulness, there
is little in the way of a generation gap between top management and the “firing
line.” Yet the company still emphasizes communication skills, offering such
seminars as “Managing the ‘Now’ Generation” in which 30-and 35-year-old middle
managers learn to deal with their even more youthful subordinates.
3)
Manpower Planning : How many and what kinds
of people will be needed in three or four years to fill key company positions?
Properly managed, the manpower planning process can create an inventory of good
prospects who are trained and ready to be shifted upward to fill newly created
managerial opportunities. The employee who knows how he or she is performing on
the job, and what his or her chances are for more pay and responsibility, is
more likely to be a happy employee. Thus a key element of good manpower
planning is the periodic performance review of all management personnel. Our
people know that these reviews of their work, attitudes, and potential are
prerequisites to promotion, and it follows naturally that our better people
look forward to them. Our policy is to schedule these reviews annually (or more
frequently), for if spaced too far apart they lose effectiveness. They should
be formalized. We try to use them to focus on strengths rather than weaknesses.
While they are time-consuming and, for some managers, difficult, they are the only
consistently effective way we know of to identify good back-up personnel long
before the actual need for them arises. Manpower planning is carried out by successive layers of
management, with the process starting from the bottom and moving upward. Each
manager personally reviews two layers of employees below his own rank. This
allows an overlap in the evaluation procedure, because everyone is evaluated by
his immediate superior as well as by the person two ranks ahead. Each line division or staff department plots three-to five-year
expansion curves and the management talent needed to accomplish the growth. For
example, if in two years we will be needing five additional district managers
in a given division, we should be able to identify five to ten people nowwho
can reasonably be expected to grow to fill those positions. If such individuals
need further training and experience, top management should know who they are
and should insure that they get the needed attention. Managers tend to be unwilling to admit that some subordinates are
truly non-promotable; rather they will say that a particular individual “isn’t
ready yet” or “just needs more experience.” In manpower planning, therefore, we
try to focus most of our attention on those individuals who are identified as
promotable “immediately” or, at most, “within one year.” We have found it extremely important to keep the process personal,
and not let it become statistical. Therefore, an executive doesn’t try to
evaluate employees who are more than two levels below him. Beyond that point he
(or she) cannot be directly knowledgeable about the performance of the people
involved. When I participate in manpower planning, I ask such questions as
these of my team:
i)
How many new units are you going to open in each of the next two
years?
ii)
What will your organization structure look like two years from
now?
iii)
How long will it take you to develop the talent you will need for
each position?
iv) Do you have enough
identified reserve talent now to meet your needs two years out and, if not, can
you recruit the talent you need from other divisions within the company?
v)
As a last resort, when must you recruit the necessary “fast track”
candidates from outside to fill the vacancies that remain?
Manpower planning often makes it necessary for a manager to “bite
the bullet” in order to cope with a shortcoming. For example: Some time ago we had a
man in a middle management position who was considered a prime future candidate
for two or three different higher-level jobs. But most of them would require
considerable travel—and he was deathly afraid of flying. We told him where he
stood and asked him to grapple with the problem, with our help if he wished, before it
could affect his career. As a result of this candid approach, he decided to
seek medical assistance. He brought his fear under control and was subsequently
promoted into a position that he could not have filled successfully before. Such high store is set by manpower planning
appraisals that our corporate president examines reports on management down
through several ranks and often compares them with reports from previous years.
He also reports personally to our board of directors on manpower planning and
appraisal for the two layers of management below him.
5)
Standards of Performance : We find it helpful to
have written, highly detailed statements of expected productivity for each
member of management. They are negotiated personally between subordinate and
superior every year. They enable a person to answer the all-important question,
“Exactly what is expected of me in my job in order for me to be rated at
least a satisfactory performer?” They allow managers the much needed
freedom to determine for themselves how a task is to be
performed, while being held strictly accountable for the end result.
a)
Standards of performance are also applied to improving the
performance of lower-ranked employees. They help the holders of even unskilled
jobs understand the importance of their function to the organization and the
company’s expectations of them. For example: A series of booklets tells
employees in our hotels what their attitudes toward guests should be, how they
should conduct themselves when dealing with customers, what courtesies to show,
and, in many cases, how to speak.
b)
“The Marriott Bellman” booklet is designed to convince our
uniformed doormen that they represent an all-important first and last
impression for many of our guests, that they must stand with dignity and good
posture, and that they must not lean against the wall or put their feet up when
sitting. Important standards of personal hygiene are outlined in the booklet as
well. Bellmen are often looked at subconsciously by guests as being “Mr.
Marriott himself,” because many times a guest will speak to and deal with the
bellmen more often during a visit than with any other employees of the hotel.
The bellman is the person the guest talks with on the way up to his room. It is
the bellman who points out the air conditioning dial and where the extra towels
are. And while making the guest comfortable, the bellman is expected to explain
about the restaurants on the property, what great food they serve, and which
ones the guest might enjoy most during his stay.
c)
Our bellmen, bell-ladies (we call them “doorbelles”), and the
young people who drive our airport limousines are some of our best sales
persons. They are coached to smile often and do all they can to make the guest feel welcome and special.
It’s a regular practice for a bellman to check the guest’s luggage tag and find
out where he comes from. This is a fine basis for conversation as the guest is
escorted to his room; there is power in suggesting to, let us say, an
Atlanta-based guest that “you really should visit our great hotel in
Atlanta—it’s got some terrific restaurants and meeting facilities!”
d)
I have even known bellmen to strike up a conversation about
Marriott stock on the way to the room, one reason for this being that a large
number of our employees own company stock. Ask a Marriott bellman what the
current price of hisstock is, and you’re very likely to get a right
answer! We encourage employee interest in our stock through our profit sharing
plan, stock purchase plan, and various management equity programs. We believe
that stock ownership helps build pride, identification, and a sense of profit
responsibility at all levels.
6)
Another booklet, “The Switchboard Operator,” tells in detail how
to speak with the guest, and it offers guidelines in handling a variety of
specific situations that might face a hotel switchboard operator. Still another
booklet, “The Housekeeper,” tells precisely how a room is to be tidied and is
accompanied by a 12-minute audiovisual film to help insure that the job is done
right. Standards are established for every part of the job—even such details as
requiring wrapped bars of soap to be placed on the same side of each wash
basin, with labels upright so they can be read by the guest.
7)
The ‘flying squad’
8)
By themselves, standards are not enough. To see that they are
followed, a “flying squad” of inspectors goes periodically from one hotel
property to another to observe operations. Typically, the squad consists of a
representative of each of the key job skills in a hotel—experts on food and
beverage, sales and marketing, accounting and finance, personnel, front desk
operation, banquets, restaurants, housekeeping, and so on.
9)
Soon after its arrival, the squad assembles all the employees,
gives a pep talk on the purpose of its visit, and often counsels individual
employees on their work, attitudes, and opinions about how the property is
being operated. Each employee is rated as to technical proficiency, attitude, cleanliness,
and how well he or she communicates with guests and other employees. A lengthy
evaluation is prepared on each facet of the hotel’s operation, comparisons are
made with prior reports, and objectives are negotiated for improved future
performance. Arrangements are made with the resident managers to follow up on
the appraisal after the squad departs.
10) Flying squad reports are
often used by those who assign employees to the next new hotel “opening team.”
These teams consist of one or more outstanding performers in every area of
operation—dishwashing, cooking, housekeeping, waitressing, and so on. The
employees are selected from Marriott hotels all over the country. Recently, for
example, our new 1,000-room Marriott in Los Angeles opened with very few hitches,
thanks to the opening team that moved into the hotel a few weeks before
operations began and spent from one to three months training the new Los
Angeles employees.
11) Career Progression
12) This is a job
advancement program designed to provide hourly employees with a ladder of
advancement up through positions of increasing skill, responsibility, and
pay—even up into management—if they have the ability and the industry to go
with their ambition. It was designed originally for the underprivileged, minority-group
employee. In many hundreds of instances it has enabled employees to pull
themselves and their families out of the poverty cycle.
13) Employees must request
consideration for career progression, and only those with positive attitudes,
aptitudes, and a Marriott work history are accepted. (See Exhibit II.) The
employee must say, in effect, “I want to grow with the company. I want to get
ahead. I’m ready and willing to work harder, do more, study, and prepare myself
for promotion.” Adult education courses at local schools are sometimes used to
improve reading skills, sharpen writing abilities, and learn mathematics.
Individual step-by-step programs are devised by our personnel people for
employees in the program. Times are allotted for the completion of each
progression step; and if an employee lags too far behind for lack of effort, he
is dropped from the program.
15) An average of 800
employees are usually enrolled in career progression at any one time. It has
enabled many people to get two or three extra promotions beyond what they might
otherwise have earned. As an example:
16) I recall one restaurant
employee who was ambitious and appeared to have real growth potential. She
talked with her boss, the manager in one of our good service operations, and,
after being accepted in the program, started learning various new job skills.
She spent 40 hours in training for promotion at the rate of one hour per day
beyond her regular employment time. When a vacancy in a higher-paid job turned up,
she was promoted for a trial period to prove her proficiency. She obtained
progressively higher-rated jobs this way and today is manager of one of our
food service operations in a retirement home near Washington. Without the
career progression program, it is hard to imagine that she would have been able
to advance as she did from kitchen worker to unit manager.
17) Employees understandably
feel good about the career progression program. Whether or not an employee has
the desire to seek enrollment, the knowledge that the opportunity exists is a
strong ingredient in maintaining a positive attitude toward the company.
18) Opinion Surveys
19) We conduct annual
surveys of rank-and-file opinion. These surveys are our first line of defense
against the buildup of unfavorable attitudes—our “early warning system.” Also,
like the fair treatment policy to be discussed, they are one of our most
important quality control devices.
20) Specially trained
personnel representatives go to each one of our units and conduct a meeting of
all employees. They explain about the opinion survey and urge frank, open
participation by everyone. (See Exhibit III for a sample of Marriott’s employee
survey questionnaire.)
22) Employees do not have to
sign the questionnaires; in addition, they may add anonymous comments about
each statement in subsequent interviews with the personnel representatives. The
survey responses are analyzed by computer, and two weeks later an employee
meeting is held to discuss the results of the survey and to solicit additional
comments. Four weeks after that, another meeting is held to announce the action
that will be taken in response to the survey. Results of surveys made in
previous years are often brought out for comparison with new surveys.
23) Many times the surveys
bring to light small but potentially serious situations that can get out of hand
if ignored. One recent survey, for example, revealed that employees resented
not being provided with a safe place to store their valuables while they
worked; they were troubled by occasional petty theft from their lockers. When
this sentiment was brought to light, a safe storage place was made available
for employee use, and a cause of ill will was eliminated.
24) Fair Treatment
25) Our fair treatment
program predates and goes beyond the Federal Government’s Equal Opportunity
legislation of the 1960s. We give new employees a handbook that outlines the
kind of conduct the company expects and what, in turn, the company considers
its obligations to the employee. The handbook outlines, among other things, job
security, promotion possibilities, disciplinary measures, safety, and a
step-by-step procedure for bringing any personal grievance to a just
conclusion.
26) The grievance procedure,
part of our fair treatment policy, is a bulwark of our quality control program.
It tries to guarantee that no one supervisor has the last word about an
employee’s job in the event of a dispute. If an employee doesn’t think he or she
has been treated fairly, he or she can appeal without fear of retribution by
the supervisor. An ombudsman is provided for many of our employees. He is John
Randolph, a 61-year old man who has been with the company since its early days.
He is the honored friend of all, from dishwashers to senior executives, and he
holds the absolute right to take any disagreement, any charge of unfair
treatment, all the way up the chain of command—to the president’s office if
necessary. A recent example of his work is illustrated by the following story:
27)
Quality Control in a Service Business
28)
by G.M. Hostage
|
45)
RELATED
46)
ALSO AVAILABLE
47)
Buy PDF
48) A restaurant employee
who was transferred from one unit to another resented the move. Although she
complained, her supervisor decided that the transfer stood as ordered; his
superior, when brought into the case at her request, also agreed with the
decision. She then called John Randolph. He listened to her story and then
traveled the 100 miles from Washington to her unit, interviewed her supervisor,
and finally agreed with her that she had been unfairly treated in being forced
to transfer to another department.
49) Failing in his attempts
to have the decision reversed at the unit level, Randolph took the case through
channels to the division vice president and conducted a meeting attended by the
employee, the district manager, and the unit manager in question. After
reviewing the facts, the vice president upheld lower management. But Randolph
still disagreed.
50) He took the case to the
next higher level, a group vice president, where a complete review of the case
brought out additional information that favored the employee’s point of view.
The group vice president reviewed the case in its new light with the managers
involved and then, with their concurrence, put the woman back to work at her
old job, with no loss in pay.
51) This case, like many
others pursued by John Randolph, consumed several weeks and many hours of
executive time—all in the interest of justice for a single employee. We think
our known willingness to go “all the way” in this manner, when necessary, is an
important ingredient in our employee quality control program.
52) In all parts of our
operation we maintain personnel representatives who can function as ombudsmen
when the need arises. Sometimes, in divisions where large numbers of high
school or college youths are employed, the role is assumed by a “house mother”
who is expected to guide the youngsters and alert management to troublesome
situations that may develop.
53) Profit Sharing
54) This program originated
in the belief of Mr. and Mrs. J. Willard Marriott, who started our company with
a root beer stand in Washington nearly 50 years ago, that their employees were
responsible for much of their company’s success and deserved more than a
paycheck and a few fringe benefits in return for their efforts. Their son, Bill
Marriott, Jr., agreed wholeheartedly with this approach, and our profit sharing
plan has been improved upon several times since he became president.
55) All employees and
managers are eligible to join our plan after three years of service, and 80% of
those who are eligible do join. They contribute at least 5% of their
earnings to the plan, and the company makes a distribution from profits that
has, in the past, more than equaled the amount of employee contributions. These
proceeds are invested by a board of trustees that includes both company
management and outside advisers. Since the plan is only 15 years old, none of
our retirees has yet actually received the maximum benefit from it, but a
projection of the return for one of our recent new hires will serve to indicate
the magnitude of the program:
56) Last year Bill Jones
brought his wife and child to the Philadelphia area to start a management
career in our Roy Rogers Family Restaurant division. Bill, who was 25 years
old, had completed two years of junior college and his military service and had
had a year of unpromising job experience behind him. We started him at a
trainee salary of $9,000 per year.
57) If Bill stays with us
until age 55 and makes reasonable progress in his 30 years of service,
advancing three or four positions to the level of district manager, his
profit-sharing fund expectations are impressive. Even at age 45, his retirement
fund will be worth almost $150,000; after 30 years, his fund should exceed $600,000.
(These projections assume average annual salary increases of 8% and fund
performance equivalent to that achieved during the past 15 years.) His total
salary deduction in the 30 years, on the other hand, will be less than $50,000.
58) Continuing Evolution
59) The programs and efforts
described here are far from being the last word in quality control. They have
taken much time and brought many good results, but they must be regarded only
as steps along the way. The programs that kept our employees happy yesterday
are not necessarily the ones that will work tomorrow. Consider just two
examples of the need for continued change:
1.
Our profit sharing and career progression plans were developed to
meet the needs of an era when most of our employees were adult, career-service,
full-time, mostly black, relatively uneducated, and only marginally skilled
workers. But today much of our work force is made up of part-time workers,
youthful employees who are completing their education, and educated workers for
whom there are an ample number of alternative jobs. Also, the federal
government now takes considerably more interest in the subject than it did when
our plans were started. In short, we cannot take for granted that the programs
are up to date.
2.
Our approach to management training and development evolved before
the post-World War II baby crop, the “Now Generation,” began to enter the
management work force. It was a time when “traditional” values were accepted
without question. It was generally believed that the advancement of a man’s
career was his most important life goal, that the gratification of wants should
be deferred until earned, and that a woman’s primary interest should be her
family and her husband’s career. Of course, we now have a generation of
management trainees who are often indifferent to these values. Therefore our
approach to career development programs must keep evolving, and we must look at
these programs with open minds.
60) In one important
respect, however, we feel that our quality control approach is as sound as it
ever was. Half a century ago, J. Willard Marriott reasoned that it takes happy
employees to make happy customers. We find that this simple conviction
continues to make good sense.
No comments:
Post a Comment