Fontainebleau and Oxygen are two leading multinational hotel chains that have branches throughout the world. Both hotels have a strong focus on customer service; however, two of their outlets represent contrasting fortunes in terms of the customer service skills of their workforce.

Although both hotels have strong service brands, the exact nature of these differ considerably. Oxygen managers and staff describe the hotel as ‘young’, ‘fresh’ and ‘stylish’. The hotel building itself had won design awards and had a minimalist interior complemented by modern art prints. There was also an emphasis on informality when serving customers and employees were allowed a high degree of discretion over service encounters. Employees were also allowed some discretion over their appearance at work, although a designer uniform was supplied. As such there was a stated requirement for Oxygen employees to be ‘stylish’, ‘funky’ ‘friendly’ and ‘individual’. Fontainebleau has a much more formal service brand characterized by managers and employees as ‘traditional’ and ‘professional’. This was reflected in the decor of the hotel, which was grandiose and opulent, with antique style furniture and complemented by classical art prints. Employees had to adhere to rigid brand standards when they served customers, reinforced through regular training, and were expected to interact with customers in a highly formal manner. Employees were expected to be ‘polite’, ‘clean’ and ‘tidy’. Fontainebleau provided an industry standard uniform and strict guidelines existed over staff appearance.

Managers in one branch of Fontainebleau reported a number of current staff who were not fully proficient in customer service skills (known as skills gaps), with line managers reporting such problems in approximately 60 per cent of reception staff (although many were new employees) and 25 per cent of chefs, waiting staff and bar staff. The HR manager also reported that approximately 30 per cent of front-line staff lacked customer service skills. In Oxygen, however, no customer service skills gaps were reported. The Food and Beverage (F and B) Managers in the hotels (who recruited most front-line customer service staff) also reported contrasting incidence of skills shortages in potential employees during the recruitment process; Fontainebleau’s F and B manager reported few customer service skills shortages while Oxygen’s F and B manager reported that many applicants lacked the required customer service skills. The two hotels also had differing staff turnover rates, with Fontainebleau reporting a rate of 75 per cent in the previous year and Oxygen 42 per cent.

Both hotels used recruitment methods such as: internal advertising; recruitment websites; press adverts advertising in schools, colleges and universities; advertising in local job centers; accepting speculative enquiries; and accepting recommendations from current staff. Oxygen, however, relied more heavily on recruiting from university campuses and informal staff recommendations.

The rationale for using informal recruitment methods also differed between the hotels, although managers in both saw their benefits. In Fontainebleau the HR manager believed that recruiting through recommendations of current employees fostered a happy work environment and good team spirit, while in Oxygen there was more emphasis on the fit between people and the establishment.

Formal job adverts also differed between the two establishments. While Fontainebleau’s adverts tended to emphasize details about the job and benefits of working for the company, Oxygen’s recruitment advertising emphasized the company’s brand. One advertising campaign, for example, gave a picture of the inside of the hotel alongside words such as ‘distinctive’, ‘unmistakable’ and ‘unique’ before adding ‘but enough about you’ and then describing what Oxygen offered to employees. This advert mirrored a customer advertising campaign, which had almost identical wording.

Fontainebleau’s HR manager also noticed a problem that, ‘Some of the managers would recruit…based on the fact that “OK that person’s willing to do the job” and not necessarily concerned with what skills they have’, prompting a move to a standardized, competency-

based selection interview process. It became clear, however, that not all managers were using the competency-based interviews. In Oxygen the F and B manager emphasised ‘cherry picking’ applicants with the correct skills and while interviews were semi-structured, they were much less formal than in Fontainebleau. Oxygen managers also stated that interviews were viewed as a two-way process, intended to establish whether candidates’ expectations ‘…married up with reality’.

Oxygen also took applicants on an establishment tour as part of the recruitment process, with the reception manager reporting that he found this to be one of the most important features to allow candidates to assess the reality of their expectations of the hotel.

Question

1 What might the different experiences of the two hotels’ F and B departments in terms of customer service skills shortages and customer service skills gaps tell us about recruitment practices?
2 What other factors could potentially have led to Fontainebleau’s customer service skills gaps?
3 What perspectives on recruitment, discussed during the chapter, can be used to analyse Oxygen’s superior performance in terms of skills gaps and staff turnover?
4 Are there any apparent contradictions in terms of the recruitment approaches of the two hotels and their subsequent experiences with skills gaps?
5 Are there any potential drawbacks with Oxygen’s approach to recruitment?