HOLIDAY INN HURGHADA “QS”
To recognize and measure the Guest’s perception of each Holiday Inn Hurghada’s service criteria. To determine the criteria weakness & strengths.
See pages 6 -8
The Resort’s Guest responses, and the Mystery Shoppers Assessments. (Mr. Sam Saker – Mr. Yousry Zaghow – Mr. Andrew Kaulmann – Mr. Franz Baus – Mr. & Mrs. Risch – Ms. Sylvia Bursch)
Statistical method & tools:
Based on the Eight criteria of “QS” excellence, as identified by the group at the various testing stages. Cross tabulation, analytic tools were utilized. Data qualitative, quantitative measurements were applied.
The Four Interviewed Guests’s perception of Holiday Inn Hurghada each individual “QS” criteria. The Guest Defined the service Criteria as follow:- Speed of service. / - Attentiveness.
- Friendliness. / - Efficiency.
- Smiling. / - Tactfulness.
- Hospitality (feel welcome). / - Use of name.
POSITIVE RATING OUTCOME (RANKING)
The Guest’s perception of the Holiday Inn Hurghada service quality Criteria, Based on the positive rating (strongly agree + agree).
See page 8
Out come in as follow.-0 % of the group agreed that the Use of Name meets their
-0 % of the group agreed that Feeling welcomed – FriendlinessEfficiency meets their expectations.
- 17 % of the group agreed that Attentivenessmeets their
-0 % of the group agreed that staff Smiling meets their
-0 % of the group agreed that staff Tactfulness of the staff
meets their expectation.
See pages 6 - 8
- The Attentiveness, ranked the highest positively perceived. It is also 83 % away from excellence level.
- Tactfulness and Smiling and all other criteria ranked the lowest positively perceived. They are all 100% away from excellence level.
- The overall QS criteria, positively perceived (average), are 100 % from QS excellence level.
NEGATIVE RATING OUTCOME (RANK)
The Guests’s perception of the Holiday Inn Hurghada’s Service Quality Criteria, based on the negative rating (disagree + strongly disagree).
See page 8
The outcome is as follow:- 66 % of the group disagreed that EfficiencyTactfulness meets their expectation.
- 50 % of the group disagreed that Speed of Service and Attentiveness meets their expectations.
- 66 % of the group disagreed that Friendliness, Feeling Welcome, and Smiling meets their expectation.
- 99 % of the group disagreed that Use of Name meets their expectation.
See page 7 -8
Smiling & Use of Guest Name were the highest, negatively perceived at 100%. It is consistent with the prior finding No one, in spite of the neutral (unaccountable) responses.
- Hospitable was also, the lowest negatively perceived at 83 %.
- The other Criteria are in 33 % to the 66% averages.
Score for Guest’s overall, total attitude
Based on the variance between the positive outcome (in finding # 1) less the negative outcome (in finding # 2), for each of the eight “Q of S.” criteria’s. The score of the overall attitude towards Quality Service Criteria were determined at the Holiday Inn Hurghada.
See page 8
Identifying the level of weakness for each criteria (weakest to the least weak), On a scale from 1 – 100 points, one hundred is the highest /excellent quality.
Score of total attitude:
CRITERIA POSITION/ SCORE (POINTS)
(Weakest to the least weak)
1 –Use of Name. / (16)
2 – Speed of Service- Efficiency – Smiling. / 0 (each)
3 –Tactfulness (polite, diplomatic sensitivity to guest needs sincerity).– Hospitable(FeelWelcome). / 9 (each)
4 – Friendliness. / 16
5 – Attentiveness / 34
-Smiling (polite, diplomatic, sensitive to guest needs and sincerity) is worst score of 0 points and weakest of all Criteria.
-Use of guest name scored the lowest at 1 point out of 100 points of excellence.
-The balance of the Criteria falls in between 17 to 33 points out of 100 points of excel.
The guest’s perception and over all attitude of “Quality of Service” Criteria at the Holiday Inn Hurghada is unfavorable.
The majority of the Criteria (Speed of Service – Efficiency – Smiling – Attentiveness – Hospitable “feel welcome”), stands in the lower 25% of excellence.
Tactfulness stands at extreme between at 0 (or worst). While Friendliness is at the lower 30% and Use of guest Name is at lower 5% of excellence.
It is evident, (for some reason) that the “Use of guest Name” Criteria was emphasized with the hotel staff, more than any other Criteria, specially the Tactfulness.
The study’s final hypothesis, reflect inconsistency in the Quality Service Criteria (performed by the staff). In other words some team members are delivering / satisfying the Market, “QS” expectation, but the majority are not. Consequently, the overall image is infected.
1HIH / MYSTERY GUEST / SHOPPER / QS CRITERIA ASSESSMENT