HR PROPOSAL

HR Proposal



Abstract

In their quest for advanced service value, hospitality associations face a paradox. Unit HR and cluster HR are generally perceived as essential to maintaining high service standards. These bureaucratic means, although, are supposed to have a negative influence on spontaneous “organizational citizenship” behaviors, which are equally essential for flawless service delivery. Empirical results from the Swiss hotel industry suggest that Unit HR behavior is more widespread than cluster HR behavior among hotel employees. The results also provide support for the hypothesis that Unit HR and cluster HR behaviors are negatively affected by a centralized organization structure. Theoretical and practical implications of these outcomes are discussed.

1. Introduction

Research on the service-profit chain (Heskett et al., 1994) has firmly anchored the notion that employees — in particular, those at the front line of service operations — occupy a central position in the service delivery process. From the customer's perspective, perception of service value is largely determined by the interaction with employees throughout the “service encounter” (Czepiel et al., 1985; Surprenant and Solomon, 1987). When customers observe gaps between the organization's general service standards and the exact presentation of a service worker, the result will be clientele disappointment. Conversely, the customer-employee interaction during the service encounter can also be an opportunity to demonstrate “behavioral differentiation” (Bacon and Pugh, 2004, p. 65) which may lead to advanced customer approval and loyalty.

Asubstantial allowance of study on service value has yielded conceptual forms (Parasuraman et al., 1985) as well as exact measures of service value (e.g. SERVQUAL, [Parasuraman et al., 1988] and [Parasuraman et al., 1991]). Unfortunately, research on the components that enable better service delivery is much less common and its outcomes are more ambiguous. As Bitner et al. (1990, p. 72) put it, “the human interaction constituent of service delivery is essential to the conclusion of satisfaction/dissatisfaction”. But what precisely can hospitality companies do to facilitate human interaction during the service encounter?

Avery common approach comprises of establishing diverse forms of bureaucratic control. This can be accomplished, for instance, by setting up and enforcing specific service measures as a means for advancing service quality. Employees may be instructed to use or bypass exact vocabulary, to choose up the phone before the third ring or to consign room-service instructions inside a specified time.

While service measures are a helpful tool for advancing service value, they furthermore face certain limitations. Service procedures are usually distinuished by a considerable allowance of uncertainty. Fluctuations in demand are considerable and clientele desires may be both highly varied and subject to fast change (Sasser et al., 1978; Wright, 1999). Hence, there are elements during a service encounter that cannot be anticipated nor Unit HR. From time to time, service workers should inescapably conclude for themselves how to hit an appropriate balance between clientele expectations and organizational constraints.

When bureaucratic command is unrealistic or insufficient, associations should find alternate ways of encouraging the delivery of high value service. One likelihood for accomplishing this goal is to boost employees to brandish “organizational citizenship ...