Abstract
Management trainee programs (MTPs) are leadership and management development initiatives used by hotels to develop talent, reduce turnover rates, and manage the succession of managerial positions. The effectiveness of these programs is paramount as the benefits of MTPs can greatly impact the success of a hotel. Therefore, evaluating the effectiveness of MTPs is an integral part of human resource practices. An ineffective program may lead to hotel objectives not being met, notably, negative financial consequences for the hotel. Four current MTPs in the hotel industry were assessed to identify common factors of these programs. The programs are targeted to potential hotel employees who recently graduated with an undergraduate degree in hospitality or tourism-related programs. Finally, the possible consequences of an ineffective MTP are explored through the examination of a dilemma at The Pegassoo Hotel in Rhodes, Greece.
Introduction
Management trainee programs (MTPs) are leadership and management development initiatives used by hotels to develop talent, reduce turnover rates and to manage the succession of managerial positions. Hotel corporations adopted MTPs to provide their existing and newly hired employees with internally designed and administered programs. Effectively training future managers through these programs is essential for the prosperity of hotel businesses considering the increased complexity and competitiveness of the fast-growing hospitality industry (Nestoroska & Petrovska, 2014). Although MTPs can be as inclusive as possible in terms of gaining desired managerial skills (such as interpersonal relationships, leadership, communication, empowerment, staff motivation, technology, and finance), they would be more successful if hotels could recruit future managers who positively contribute to the objectives of the hotel.
These programs spearheaded by hotel corporations through their corporate universities or agreements with academic institutions are usually tailored to train employees to become quality managerial candidates that meet the requirements of the hotel. However, what factors make these programs effective? What are the possible consequences for hotels when these programs are not effective? We assess four current MTPs to identify common factors and we look at training effectiveness here through the examination of a dilemma at The Pegassoo Hotel in Rhodes, Greece. This case study is expected to inform readers on the benefits of effective MTPs to organizations and their employees and to identify common factors of MTPs that may cause the failure of these programs. It also discusses the role and importance of the MTPs and their relations with human resources departments in hotels.
Background
Management Trainee Programs
Many hotel companies today have their own corporate universities, which offer training, development workshops, and hospitality certifications to their employees. Hotel companies such as Marriott International (n.d.), Accor Hotels, Four Seasons Hotels and Resorts, Sandals Resorts International, and InterContinental Hotels Group (2019) are known to offer these programs. These initiatives prepare employees for future positions in the company and may even contribute towards completing a master’s or doctoral degree with an affiliated academic institution. MTPs are important because employees usually have higher job satisfaction if the opportunity for career advancement exists (Bhatia, 2017). Other advantages of MTPs include boosting organizational performance, building and maintaining employee morale, and promoting active listening which increases mutual understanding, better conflict resolutions, finding new ideas and reducing miscommunication (Bhatia, 2017). Senior managers are also utilized as mentors and coaches which creates a cycle of sharing best practices, networking, and communicating with all levels of management and learning new skills (McCarthy & Milner, 2013).
A major benefit of MTPs is its ability to improve interdepartmental communication. Training programs such as MTPs were found to improve communication and knowledge about other departments (Nestoroska & Petrovska, 2014). Such improved communication may result in employee’s communication within a department and between departments being more effective (Bardi, 2006). With improved and effective interdepartmental communication, an organization’s performance improves along with the achievement of its goals (Gondal & Shahbaz, 2012). Employees build trust, improve coordination within and between departments, provide timely and reliable information and overall drive motivation in times of stress when they communicate effectively (Dolphin, 2005). In contrast, ineffective interdepartmental communication leads to negative outcomes (Malmelin, 2007), which in turn negatively affects employee efficacy (Zhang & Agarwal, 2009). It should be noted that even an organization with impeccable interdepartmental communication may experience times in which communication is not carried out effectively due to urgent or sudden events (Musadad et al., 2021). Therefore, it is important that hotels have HRM policies and initiatives that create an environment for effective interdepartmental communication to occur. This is because HRM policies and initiatives have been found to mediate the relationship between interdepartmental communication and organizational performance (Gondal & Shahbaz, 2012).
In addition, effective MTPs allow the hotel to respond quickly to changes in the external environment as participants learn to manage change and become adaptable and flexible. The high turnover rates and the need for high quality staff are even more intensified in times of disruptions, as some of the recent crises (recession, natural disasters, climate change, COVID-19) have shown (Zaske, 2021). As a result, hotels are left with a small pool of qualified management candidates despite the continued growth of the industry. That is, there is a shortage of qualified candidates to fill the growing vacancies for essential management positions. This places even more emphasis on the benefits of these initiatives. Effective MTPs have been found to decrease employee turnover in both managers and their subordinates (Malek et al., 2018). It has been reported that as managers engaged in quality training programs, employees’ perceptions of their manager were positive. As the employees’ perception of management becomes more positive their intentions to leave also decrease. Training programs are seen as investments and require the hotel to commit financially. It is estimated that replacing a manager incurs a cost of almost 50% of the manager’s annual salary (Choi et al., 2009). If a return on investment is not achieved, the company may experience additional financial challenges, all of which exacerbates these problems faced by the hotel industry.
What Is an Effective Management Trainee Program?
To ensure that hotels are receiving a return on their investment, evaluating the effectiveness of MTPs is essential (Choi et al., 2009). To evaluate MTPs, program developers should take into consideration training effectiveness and how the factors of the program are managed. Training effectiveness determines how training impacts the trainee’s knowledge, skills and behaviors. It measures the extent to which training enhances trainees’ performance, such as an increase in customer safety and security satisfaction in the services received from the front office department of a hotel. The effectiveness of MTPs is increased when the goals of the training program are aligned with the objectives of the hotel. The planners of MTPs need to be clear on what the current objectives of the hotel are and create a training program with these objectives in mind. Recruiting the right employees, whether existing or new, who possess the abilities, skills, and knowledge that with training could contribute to the success of the hotel is beneficial to the organization. The participants of these programs should be trained to acquire the competencies needed while on the program. Competencies are defined as “the activities, related knowledge, attitudes, and skills that directly affect performance and can be measured against specific standards” (Sisson & Adams, 2013). The leadership competencies based on the perspective of current hotel managers are soft skill competencies, leadership competencies, interpersonal competencies, organizational competencies, relational competencies, and self-management competencies (Dolasinski & Reynolds, 2019; Millar et al., 2010). Hotel managers believe these are important competencies for future managers to acquire (Talawanich & Wattanacharoensil, 2021). To keep track of how trainees are progressing and if the training received directly improved their behaviors and abilities, a pre-training assessment and post-training assessment should be done. Knowing a trainee’s starting point and how much improvement they have made can give clear indications to how effective the program is and what parts of the program should be adjusted. Kirk-Patrick’s 4 level approach is one way that hotels can evaluate the effectiveness of the programs during the post training assessment (Smidt et al., 2009).
Another integral part of ensuring training effectiveness is how MTPs are carried out. The factors that make up these programs include the length of the program, the scope, coaching or mentorship support, training structure, training course delivery, opportunities for networking, participation in work projects and continuous feedback throughout training. These are common factors that were identified when four current MTPs were assessed for this case study (Table 1). These factors, if not managed appropriately, may lead to the failure of MTPs. In some MTPs, participants are rotated through different departments before selecting a specialized area. The total program length is 12 to 18 months. This might not give participants enough time to acquire an in-depth understanding of how each department operates before choosing their specialized area. Will the participant be able to apply what they have learned after completing the program? In the programs identified, mentoring or coaching is provided. The employees mentoring or coaching participants may not be qualified to do so. This may cause undesired practices being passed on to the trainees. If a particular training course’s delivery method is not adequate, this could cause participants not being able to fully participate in the training. For example, a participant is watching a pre-recorded video of how the buffet restaurant at the hotel operates. They are unable to immediately ask questions or to physically take part in the setting up of the buffet. Most importantly, participants should receive adequate feedback throughout the program. Without this, the participants and their instructors will not be able to examine areas for improvement or make adjustments to their training plans. It is therefore paramount that human resources pay close attention to these factors to minimize any negative effects and ensure effectiveness.
Comparing Common Factors of Four Hospitality MTPs.
Examples of MTP’S in Hospitality
Marriott International—Marriott Voyage Program
The Marriott Voyage Program is a 12 to 18-month leadership development program that offers resources and support for future leaders of the company. It is offered in more than 50 countries for recent university graduates, with over 500 to 800 Voyagers per year. Voyagers receive hands-on and virtual training in areas such as accounting and finance, culinary, engineering, human resources, rooms operations, and food and beverage. Voyagers are rotated through different departments, and they network with global colleagues through social collaboration tools. They also get the chance to engage with Marriott senior leaders and are assigned a coach who assists in finding the right position for the participant. This program is tailored to recent graduates only. Similar programs are available for current employees in the company.
Accor Hotels—INSPIRE
INSPIRE is an MTP for graduates with at least 1 year of hospitality work experience. A participant needs to be strong with ability, engagement and motivation, agile, and works well in a fast-paced environment and is willing to learn (Accor, 2018). Participants must be able to speak English. The program runs for 12 to 18 months, and participants can choose a cross-exposure structure or a specialization. In the cross-exposure structure, they are rotated in different departments to gain experience before choosing an area of interest. In the specialization structure, they develop their expertise in a department with a specific focus. They are assigned a personal mentor and are paired with a peer ambassador. Participants complete property projects and take part in networking opportunities.
Four Seasons Resorts and Hotels—Manager in Training (MIT) Program
The Four Seasons MIT Program is a 12-month program that is designed to accelerate the careers of employees as future leaders. Participants are exposed to management experiences, project work, a buddy and mentor, and feedback is given during the program while getting operational exposure. Participants are rotated through two operational leadership experiences based on their division of choice. Geared toward university graduates, the program allows participants to also learn management skills while working as a supervisor or an acting assistant manager.
InterContinental Hotel Group—Future Leader Aspire Program
This program runs between 12 and 18 months. Participants receive on-the-job training both in leadership and hotel operations. Participants are eligible based on their level of education and experience working in a hotel. The participants are led by inspirational leaders who are experts in their fields. Participants are rotated through each hotel department and a focused hotel operations pathway is selected as an area of specialization. Participants follow a leadership pathway development competency in leadership and hotel performance. Regular feedback is given on the readiness to take on a managerial position. Departmental heads serve as coaches while the General Manager serves as the career mentor. Participants will need to complete a project and take part in local initiatives. Upon completion, participants are eligible to apply for a full-time manager level position.
The Dilemma: Pegassoo Hotel—Rhodes, Greece
Pegassoo Hotel is a resort hotel with 426 rooms and has a management trainee program called “Future Core.” Future Core is a leadership skills development initiative in partnership with a local university. The program aims to train entry level managers for Pegassoo Hotel and usually lasts 18 months. Trainees who have at least 5 years’ experience at any hotel or at least 3 years’ experience at Pegassoo are eligible to apply for the program. However, if the trainee has a college degree in hospitality with 3 years of hotel experience, the program can be completed within 12 months. The curriculum has different contents for 12- and 18-months tracks. Guest safety, security and privacy content is in the 18 months training program. The trainees complete courses in a classroom located on the hotel property facilitated by university lecturers. During the program, a personal mentor will be assigned. A trainee who gets training for 12 months must achieve at least 80% on the comprehensive exam to be able to graduate from the program. While the program does not offer on-the-job training while completing courses, a personal on-the-job coach is assigned to each trainee for 6 months after completing the exam.
A front office staff member receives a phone call from Ace. Ace is an international travel agency that provides local incoming tourism services such as hotel transfers, hotel bookings and daily tours on behalf of international booking agencies. During peak tourist season, approximately 90% of Pegassoo Hotel rooms are booked for Ace customers. The caller wishes to speak with the guest named Alisya Bergammon. The receptionist escalates the call to a newly appointed front desk manager, Jake. Jake, a graduate of the hotel’s Future Core program, allows Alex to relay the room number and connects the Ace representative to Mrs. Bergammon’s room. The phone rings without an answer. Jake’s first mistake is made when he allowed Alex to share the room number with the caller.
The operations director of Ace shows up at the hotel reception requesting to speak to Jake, the front office manager. The director of Ace says Mrs. Bergammon did not attend any of the daily tours she had booked prior, and her family had not heard from her during her 14-day stay at Pegassoo. When the Ace director checked with his airport operation team, he learned she arrived at the hotel by herself without using the hotel-to-airport transport service. The director continues to explain that her family has raised concerns about her failing to contact them.
The director is an expatriate manager in the country and has close relations with the front office staff, but new to Jake. The director visits the hotel almost daily since they have approximately 4,000 room bookings in a tourist season at the hotel. The director tells the guest’s name and says he wants to check whether the guest is in the room. Jake goes to the room with the director and opens the door with the master key without knocking, to find Mrs. Bergammon to be in the room. At this point, Jake has continuously failed to protect the privacy of Mrs. Bergammon and other guests by sharing the room assignment with the director. Besides that, he fails to protect the guest’s safety and privacy by going to Mrs. Bergammon’s room with someone else who is not a hotel employee. Another failure is that Jake did not inform the security (loss prevention) department about the case. He neither communicated with the housekeeping nor food and beverage departments if they received any requests from the guest during the 14 days.
Later, when Jake checked the room reservation, it showed that the room was booked for one guest, but the housekeeping room discrepancy report showed two guests staying in the room. By failing to coordinate with the housekeeping department, Jake did not notice this difference. If Jake had utilized the property management system (PMS) and the guest experience program (GXP) before going to the room, he would have been able to see the room history which included the guest’s visits to the restaurant, towel requests and privacy sign usage. On top of that, Jake did not recreate a special guest report or case that would have been dispatched to the security (loss prevention) department to be resolved as per hotel policy.
Mrs. Bergammon, upset that her privacy had been breached, filed a formal complaint with the general manager of the hotel. Jake was called into a meeting where his performance in the recently completed MTP was re-evaluated. When his records were checked, it was seen that he completed the 12 months program since he had 3 years of experience at another hotel and a college degree. There was no coordination-across-units training in the 12 months of his program since it was assumed that the participant would have learned fundamental hotel operations from his industry experience and during his college education. In addition, he scored 70% on the comprehensive exam, lower than the expected score required for his program. As he graduated from the 12 months program, he did not complete training and examination on all content areas including guest safety, security, and privacy. After completing the investigations, the general manager and the chief executive officer of ACE discussed the actions of the front desk manager which breached the hotel’s guest safety, security, and privacy policies. The general manager then requested that all ACE employees who handle the hotel’s accounts be briefed on the policies to ensure that this breach does not recur, and that the operations director be retrained.
Discussion Questions
How can The Pegassoo Hotel maintain the same level of standards between curriculums within its MTP?
How can operators of MTPs determine which program a candidate should take?
What are the competency gaps found in the case and what can the managers of MTPs do to lessen these gaps?
How often should managers receive refreshment courses?
What other implications could Jake’s actions have for the hotel?
Are Jake’s actions his failure, or reflective of issues that may be beyond an MTP participant? Discuss.
Identify the factors that make up the MTP at The Pegassoo Hotel that detract from the effectiveness of the program.
Evaluate the MTP at The Pegassoo Hotel and provide recommendations to management to improve the program.
If you are an ICHRIE member, you can access the Teaching Notes for this case study here: https://ichrie.memberclicks.net/jhtc. If you are not an ICHRIE member, the Teaching Notes will be published in a future Sage Business Cases (SBC) annual collection: https://sk.sagepub.com/cases. For more information, please contact
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.