|
by Claire Belilos
Copyright December 2000 Claire Belilos -
All Rights Reserved
On the occasion of the launching of its
Easytraining Insights Digital Newsletter, CHIC Hospitality Consulting
Services has authorized Hotel Resource to reprint its first issue on
Benchmarking Human Performance as follows:
December 4, 2000
Easytraining Insights, CHIC Hospitality
Consulting Newsletter - http://www.easytraining.com
***********************************************************
ISSN 1496-3361 Eeasytraining Insights, CHIC Hospitality Consulting, Vol. 1
***********************************************************
Benchmarks are the "standards"
(or "criteria") management sets to help achieve organizational
goals and specific departmental objectives. They are also used to measure
actual organizational and departmental performance. In these instances they
are based on quantitative and financial data, enabling "measurable
goals" and an objective assessment of performance. Such benchmarks form
the basis of forecasts, budget planning, and Profit and Loss reports.
Benchmarks are set after goals and objectives are decided upon.
Benchmarks are also set for work
performance which can be measured, such as the number of cars assembled,
number of faulty equipment, returned merchandise and the reason for the
return, number of covers served by a waiter, the number of rings before an
incoming call is answered by company employees, the duration and number of
unanswered calls, the number customers who hanged up, and so forth. Most
companies also express work performance-related benchmarks in quantitative
and financial data. This practice is a disservice to the company and to the
managers and employees whose performance is being measured. Purely
quantitative and financial benchmarks do not provide for the intangible
individual "human" aspect nor do they reflect on whether company
values have been upheld.
Company values are the essential third
integer when setting benchmarks for human performance. For example, one of
the values a company has is Customer Satisfaction. Once there is a clear
definition regarding the quality and degree of Customer Service the company
wishes to achieve, we would work backwards to identify the benchmarks
(standards) by which we can measure whether this value is reached and
maintained. We go about dissecting "Customer Satisfaction" in all
its details, basing ourselves on customer needs and expectations from this
establishment: courtesy? comfort? discretion? privacy? speed? cleanliness?
attention? assistance? problem-solving? safety? correct billing?
non-threatening environment? professional staff?
When determining benchmarks for work
performance, there are many subtleties around the job position in question
which we have to analyze, categorize and prioritize, directing our thoughts
towards the desired end-results which would lead to a successful operation.
Let us take a few examples to clarify this point:
a) Benchmarks for the performance of a
Human Resource Director:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Do we measure the efficiency of a Human
Resources Director by the number of people he (or she) interviews and hires?
Or do we stretch our mind further and measure this person's efficiency by
the number of "correct" selection of applicants and successful
hires, comparing these to manager and employee turnover (throughout the
company and in specific departments).
* Do we measure this same Director's
performance by the number of memos he (or she) writes or by this person's
ability to create effective policies and strategies and to solve problems in
a manner beneficial to both management and employees?
* Do we count the number of labor disputes
this Director (or any Manager or for that matter) deals with, or do we
measure his performance by other yardsticks such as leadership style, human
relations and negotiation skills which, when properly applied, lead to the
absence of disputes? Will out standard be "inadequate performance"
if "X" number of disputes arise and "excellent
performance" for "0" or a small number of disputes? Or,
should we play ignorant and laud the Manager whose time is consumed by a
larger number of labor disputes, slapping his back for time he can account
for? Or should his quality of leadership be gauged by the measure of his
employees' motivation? Should this be measured through observation or formal
surveys? Who will evaluate? And who will determine the benchmarks for
effective evaluation? What relativity will be used?
b) Benchmarks for the performance of a
Phone Operator:
--------------------------------------------------------------
* Do we measure the success of this
employee's performance by the number of calls he answers and processes, or
do we also measure the degree of customer satisfaction? Do we use customer
feedback as yardstick? How is this done? Through analysis or with a quick
reading? How do we measure efficient call management? Or is evaluation
subjectively carried out through the Supervisor's personal observation?
c) Benchmarks for a Waiter's (Server's)
performance: -----------------------------------------------------------
* Do we measure only the number of covers a
Waiter serves? or do we set additional criteria such as the manner in which
the Waiter communicates a feeling of "welcome" towards the guest;
behaves courteously; is attentive to guest needs and anticipates unusual
needs; "listens" effectively; assists the guest in the selection
of food and beverage items; demonstrates a caring attitude; follows up on
guest satisfaction; "sells" and "upsells" with subtlety
and discretion, and performs all other duties professionally.
* For this same Waiter, do we not need to
measure his work performance also in terms of compliance with house rules,
sanitation and safety regulations, cooperation and team work? How do we set
benchmarks for these?
As we can see, when we setting up
benchmarks for "human performance" we cannot limit ourselves to
quantitative and economic standards. We must integrate the
"intangibles", work hard to clarify company values, define the
quality and style of service (e.g. in fast food service, there would be less
stress on many of the afore-mentioned points and more stress on speed,
procedure and quantity), formulate policies and draw a road map for work
performance. Without all these aspects, efforts in benchmarking become
futile.
Even with such elaborate planning, we have
to remember the unpredictability of human nature. On the one hand, we want
supervisors and employees to be creative, use initiative, solve problems,
help increase business, offer "the extra personal touch" and cause
customers to select our product or service over all others. On the other
hand, we set formal rules and measurement criteria. It is in the planning
stage that we must make provision for "the human element",
coupling performance planning with strategies for internal communications,
training and development. In these latter activities we can iron out
differences in concepts, values, attitudes and behavior, and lead towards
the desired results. "Benchmarks" can be used as "training
(learning) objectives".
If we take the example of a Waiter dropping
cutlery or a bread roll in the dining room, picking it up with bare hands
and placing it back among items slated to be served to a guest. Besides the
sanitary connotations, we must think of the effect such action has on guests
who witness such an event. Without say, such irresponsible, unsanitary and
unprofessional behavior on the part of the Waiter affects the restaurant in
a dramatic fashion: immediate loss of customers present, a snowball effect
on the restaurant's reputation and loss of future business. Should we not
ensure that compliance with "sanitation" regulations and
procedures be one of the benchmarks for a Waiter's performance?
Consequently, does this not then obligate us to train Waiters on the what,
how, and wherefore?
When we begin setting benchmarks for work
performance by human beings we enter a maze which at first seems to blur our
vision. We risk becoming immersed in never-ending details. However, if we
keep our vision clearly fixed at the end objectives, we can chart a course,
set landmarks to guide our way, progress in a systematic fashion and reach
our goal. The seeming enormity of such an undertaking leads many companies
to take shortcuts, limiting themselves to simplified benchmarks
(quantitative and financial). Such benchmarks do not reflect corporate
vision, philosophy and values; nor do they serve as tools and guides for the
management and control of work performance and quality of service.
Quantitative and financial benchmarks are intended for Operations Analysis -
an almost forgotten term and function.
Copyright 2000 Claire Belilos - All Rights
Reserved
Canadian Copyright resource: http://insight.mcmaster.ca/org/efc/pages/law/canada/copyright.html
U.S. Copyright resource: http://lcweb.loc.gov/copyright/
** This publication is registered with the
National Library of Canada, Ottawa, ON - ISSN 1496-3361
Please send your comments, questions and
contributions to be covered in our next newsletters to
Mailto:insights_benchmarks@easytraining.com
This article cannot be copied or
distributed without written permission of the author. For permission to
distribute the original issue of the newsletter itself please e-mail Claire
Belilos at mailto:insights@easytraining.com
Read about subcription to the Easytraining
Insights Digital Newsletter at http://www.easytraining.com/insights.htm
Claire Belilos CHIC Hospitality Consulting
Services Guiding the way and offering practical solutions to people
management and customer service www.easytraining.com insights_benchmarks@easytraining.com
|
