Assessment of changes in the decision making environment in a Rochester, NY hotel: A 1999 Case study

This is a fourth year case study on the detection of changes that have occurred in the structures and processes that support effective decision making within a hotel in Rochester, NY. The case study is considered to be a developmental research using a longitudinal approach. The data collected in this case study were compared to the results of Salaya Chermsirivattana who conducted the same study in 1996. The instrument used in this case study was the psychometric, critical incident questionnaire, Organizational Team Survey , developed by Boone and Killmann in 1988. The purpose of this case study was to look at changes that occurred in 1996 and 1999. The survey was conducted in March in 1999 at The Marriott Thruway hotel. The questionnaires were administered to employees, currently working at the hotel. The employees were asked to complete a survey when they received their paychecks. Participation was done on a volunteer basis, and individual confidentiality is still maintained. In 1999, there were 64 participants compared to 83 in 1996. The data was analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Significant differences between 1996 and 1999 survey samples were determined using group t- Tests. T-tests and P-values between 0.10 and 0.01 were used to detect any significant changes. Consequently, seventeen comparisons between 1996 and 1999 were found to have statistically significant differences. The Organizational Team Survey is composed of four parts. Part I asked the respondent to briefly describe a work related decision in which he/she was recently involved. These decisions were classified as operational short-term decision or strategic long-term decision. Part II of the questionnaire displayed thirty-two randomly placed questions. The set of thirty questions was divided in six main factors: factor 1 -Multiple Inputs and Alternatives, factor 2-Problem Identification, factor 3- Rewards for good decision, factor 4- Use of group efforts, factor 5- Politics, and factor 6- Resource Adequacy. In 1999, part-time employees were detected significant difference in factor 1- Multiple Inputs and Alternatives and factor 2- Problem Identification. Factor 3- Rewards for good decision shows significant differences changes in many categories such as full time employees, male employees and employees who are 25 and under. Factor4- Team and use of group effort shows that the positive significant differences is among top management, while a negative is among department of engineer and security. Factor 5- Bureaucratic Block and Politics shows many significant differences in such categories as associates, part-time employees, and employees who have worked in the hotel surveyed less than one year. The last factor-Resource and Adequacy- shows significant differences in part time employees, employees who are 26 to 35years old, and employees who have worked at the current position 4 to 7 years. Part III of the questionnaire asked for ranking the top five problem areas in the hotel. Adequate training to do job was considered being the most problem area in 1999. Part IV of the survey includes the demographic information about of employees. The demographics that were used to analyzing the differences are: 1. Type of position, 2. Sex of employee, 3. Type of employment, 4. Age of employment, 5. Number of years working in the hotel, 6. Number of years working at the surveyed hotel, 7. Number of years working in current position, and 8. Department in hotel. This year, the ranking of the top five-problem area changed considerably from that of 1996 in certain factors and their categories, due to the lack of quality training in the hotel. It is noticed that the lack of quality training in hotel was discontinued in 1994. The factors are significant in the topic area of training due to an inadequate training. The hotel should run more tests to find the impact that the absence of training has on, the work environment of the hotel. These will then convince the management to reinstate the quality- training program. Besides, the future study and its outcome will help gain more knowledge in this topic