This case illustrates the difficulties borne of adversarial union – management relations. Specifically, the issues of intergroup conflict and trust are brought to the fore. The student is encouraged to explore alternatives whereby conflict is ameliorated and the trust repair process is begun. Further, exposure to a labor strike situation is provided along with tactical choices both union and management made leading up to and during the strike.

This case is most appropriate for upper division undergraduates or graduate students in organizational behavior courses and/or labor relations courses. The topic of social identity theory is typically introduced as part a micro organizational behavior course or a cross-cultural organizational behavior course. Issues of trust and cooperation are typically part of an organizational behavior course. The entire case revolves around union – management issues and thus is appropriate for a labor relations class.

The new owner/manager of The Box Tree, a fine dining restaurant and inn, was faced with the task of revitalizing her restaurant after having survived a four-year labor strike, the longest in New York City history. Gila Baruch, the owner/manager, had to welcome back the strikers, a stipulation she agreed to as part of her settlement agreement with the union. Out of a staff of 31 full time employees, seven remained on strike the entire four years. She had replaced these employees early on in the battle, but now was committed to giving them their jobs back. Baruch was also committed to not laying off or firing any of the replacement workers she hired. They had helped her in a time of need, and she was not going to reject them now. The success of her efforts, Baruch believed, would be affected by how successful she would be in getting all the employees on the same page, working toward the same goals. A question prominent in her mind was how she could build trust between the two employee groups, and between the employees and management.

________________________________
Contact Person: David L. Corsun, Ph.D., University of Nevada, Las Vegas.
Mail: Harrah College of Hotel Administration, 4505 Maryland Parkway – Box 456021, Las Vegas, NV 89154-6021
Phone: 702-895-4967; FAX: 702-895-4872; e-mail: dcorsun@ccmail.nevada.edu
 

********************************************************************************************************
 

The case study opens with the departure of Steve Marx, the Vice President—Hotels, after six years’ successful tenure and ends with issues of strategy and leadership succession that are left unresolved. The case offers students and practitioners opportunities to: 1) learn more about the lodging industry in general, 2) illustrate the classic entrepreneurial dilemma regarding pressures to grow vs. staying small and manageable; 3) explore the necessity of updating leadership capabilities in a dynamic competitive environment; and 4) improve students’ understanding of the benefits and limits of implementing a niche strategy. The case is suitable for use in senior undergraduate and/or graduate-level hotel or strategic management or entrepreneurship courses. It should be positioned in towards the end of these courses, preferably in a module on strategy implementation. Because of the comprehensiveness of the issues in the case, it is suitable for a written final examination or final group presentation assignment. The people and events in this field-researched case are real.

On June 3, 1999, Steve Marx, Vice President, Hotels of the Kimpton Hotel and Restaurant Group, Inc., resigned to accept an "irresistible" offer to run the Loews Hotel Group in New York. Marx had directed Kimpton Group during its growth from 14 hotels and restaurants in its headquarters city, San Francisco, to 23 semi-luxury hotels and 24 upscale and popular restaurants in Chicago, Denver, Portland, Salt Lake City, and Seattle. The Group was committed to open three new properties a year "indefinitely." Kimpton Group was industry leader in the boutique hotel niche it had created and had set standards for occupancy rates and daily revenues per available room.

We listen in on the discussion as Marx meets with the Director of Operations and Director of Sales and Marketing, to explain his "bombshell" decision. Either person could be tapped to become Marx’s successor. Competitors are poised to replicate Kimpton Group’s model, perhaps cutting off avenues of future growth. Should the company change its strategy now? Are there untapped niches in the hotel industry? How much more growth could the organization sustain, where should it take place, and what changes would be needed to assure continued success? As he prepares to depart, Marx knows that important leadership decisions had to be made. He feels strongly responsible for having developed a style that attracted top management talent to Kimpton from other hotel companies. Would his successor continue Marx’s open management philosophy and participatory decision-making style? What advice should Marx give to his successor that would lead to future success?
 

__________________________________________________
Contact Person: Armand Gilinsky Jr., Sonoma State University, 1801 E. Cotati Ave., Rohnert Park, CA 94928-3609
Voice: (707) 664-2709; FAX (707) 664-4009; e-mail: Armand.Gilinsky@sonoma.edu

********************************************************************************************************

This case concerns the management of two very different rebranding efforts in the hotel industry. Learning objectives include:

• An understanding of the process of managing complex change including the challenge of maintaining employee motivation and customer service in uncertain environments, and the importance of managing employee "exit behaviour."
• An appreciation of the importance and challenges associated with the alignment of marketing, human resource, and operational strategies.
• An understanding of the nature of franchise agreements and management contracts.

In April 1998, George Monzon, General Manager of the Rockley Westbrook, had just learned that Westbrook was planning to break their mangement contract with the hotel’s owners due to "irreconcilable differences" over the extent and nature of future renovations. George is asked to maintain operations as best he can until told otherwise; potentially for as much as year. George is unsure of how much information he should share with his managers and employees, and what he should do to maintain the levels of morale and customer service that he had worked so hard to achieve.

Built and branded as a Vacation Inn in 1975, the Westbrook had once been known as the "crown jewel" of the city. By the mid 1980s, however, it had become shabby and outdated; there had been little in the way of renovation or refurbishment. Coupled with an economic downturn, hotel rates and occupancy levels declined. In 1988 the owners decided to sell. The new owners re-branded the property as a Radient although operationally little changed. In 1997, after almost 10 years of modest results, the owners re-branded the property again – this time as a Westbrook. As part of the new management contract, the owners began to invest in the long overdue renovations. Under the direction of George Monzon, the hotel soon began to achieve Westbrook’s rigorous standards along with significant increases in employee morale, customer satisfaction and sales. Ultimately, however, the owners were unwilling to continue with the planned renovations, and senior Westbrook management felt they had no choice but to walk away.
 

_____________________________________
Contact Person: Julia Christensen Hughes, University of Guelph
Mail: School of Hotel and Food Administration, University of Guelph, Guelph ON, N1G 2W1
Voice: (519) 824-4120 #6938; FAX: (519) 821-8530; e-mail: jchriste@uoguelph.ca
 

************************************************************************************************************

To introduce or expand upon the discussion of the concept highest and best use of potential revenue producing space in a hotel or other mixed use commercial setting.

To present an opportunity to identify the criteria and consequent calculations that may be used to determine operational success and improvement in hotel food and beverage facilities. The potential for evaluation of a proforma income statement is also contained in this case study.

Another objective for this case study is an exposure, for students, to an international setting. The setting may have an influence on customer segmentation and demand, operating results, the case issues and required decisions.

This case study is intended for:

• A university undergraduate business course in hospitality operations and analysis. We have also found value in its use early in a capstone course where analysis and decisions making are stressed.
• This case study also has potential application to industry management training courses for hotel managers.

In January 1997 the Food and Beverage Manager of the three year old 389 room Delta Grand Pacific Hotel in Bangkok, Thailand must evaluate the current results and future potential of their 78 seat Mediterranean restaurant, Casablanca. The Food and Beverage Manager was expected to make a recommendation to the hotel's Board of Director's meeting in two week. He was considering whether to continue with the Casablanca concept, recommend another food and beverage concept or an alternative use of this space.

The Food and Beverage Manager has assembled the historical operating information for the entire department as well as a proforma operating statement for a new Chinese restaurant in the Casablanca space. He is particularly concerned about the accuracy of this pro forma, how to construct a proforma for use of the space for catering and why any change should be initiated at all since the Casablanca is profitable.
 

_____________________________________________________
Contact person: John W. Patterson, School of Hotel and Food Administration, University of Guelph,
Guelph, Ontario Canada, N1G 2W1 Telephone (519) 824 4120 X3971, FAX (519) 823 5512. Email jpatters@uoguelph.ca
 

Many individuals have mixed conceptions based on myths and stereotypes regarding the benefits and costs associated with older workers. A manager may suggest firing an older employee who cannot perform his or her job as well as in the past or who fails to adhere to and/or embrace organizational changes. However, without a complete understanding of older employees based on empirical evidence and not on stereotypes one is likely to overlook the benefits to be gained from them. This case facilitates the open discussion of older workers, what the common stereotypes are, what the research evidence indicates, and how managers may go about attracting, training, managing, and retaining older employees.

This case and teaching note are most appropriate for undergraduate human resource (HR) management classes. The topic of older workers is typically introduced in an HR class as part of managing diversity, using alternative sources of labor, assessing demographic changes (the aging of the U.S. work force), or understanding equal employment opportunity laws.

Nick DiCarlo, General Manager, and Roger Johnson, Hotel Manager, of The Danbury Hotel, face two challenges: how to implement additional cost-cutting changes to increase the profitability and competitiveness of the hotel given the resistance they have already faced from some of the older, long-tenured employees of the hotel; and what to do about older employees who do not appear physically capable of performing their jobs to the same degree. Many of the hotel’s 650 employees have been with the hotel over twenty years, and some as long as forty-five years. Sixty-year old maids, seventy-year old waiters, and fifty and sixty-year old doormen are still the norm at The Danbury. Although incredibly loyal and committed, these employees presented challenges when change was implemented.

Surrounded by Hyatt, Marriott, The Ritz-Carlton, Sheraton, Four Seasons, and Westin, The Danbury faced formidable competition. DiCarlo and Johnson question how they will continue to move The Danbury forward and keep up with the competition when some employees can not bend down or fall asleep in back hallways. One of the biggest costs for The Danbury, like all hotels, is labor. Hotels traditionally attempted to do more with less labor. Yet DiCarlo and Johnson wonder how they can continue to implement labor saving ideas when some of the older, long-tenured employees present the most resistance to change, and attempt to sabotage DiCarlo and Johnson’s new ideas. ________________________
Contact Person: Cheri A. Young, University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Mail: Department of Hotel Management, Box 456021, Las Vegas, NV 89154-6021
Voice: (702) 895-4124; FAX (702)895-4872; e-mail: cyoung@ccmail.nevada.edu