Pearson New International Edition International pcl tp indd 1

Evaluating Work Processes
Processes used today to deliver service to guests may need revision tomorrow.
Soliciting feedback from guests and from the staff members who interact with them
can be an effective tactic of obtaining input about the need for change. One method
to quantify guest perceptions about service is to measure defects. However, even with
a goal of zero defects, there will be times when service standards are not met.
FRONT OFFICE SEMANTICS
Zero defects:
Goal of no guest-related complaints that is established when guest service processes are
implemented.
Guests’ needs and concerns are addressed when processes are developed. Therefore,
ongoing measurement of guest responses to processes can provide information about
how well the processes satisfy guests. Figure 4 provides an overview of how the 
measurement (count) of defects helps to evaluate a process.
Let’s look at Figure 4. Note that input from guests suggested there were approx-
imately 12 service complaints about the original registration process per 1,000 rooms.
Assume that this defect rate was judged excessive, and a new process was implemented
using the tactics noted in the previous section of this chapter. A subsequent evaluation
then determined that there were approximately 8 service defects per 1,000 rooms.
Some FOMs would likely believe that this reduction in complaints was significant
(and it is) and would look elsewhere to determine how guests could be better served.
Other FOMs might continue to evaluate the registration process because the process
has been identified on the guest comment card or other survey system that is in use.
However, they might discount concerns from these sources because they have already
addressed them. An FOM with a zero defect goal will likely pay serious attention to
other ways that the new process can be revised. (This will especially be so if analysis
of other processes indicates that the number of defects remains higher for the regis-
tration process than for other processes that are the responsibility of the FOM.) In
Figure 4 note that further revisions in the registration process reduced the defect rate
still further (to 6 service defects per 1,000 rooms).