200 words each question

CASE STUDY Training at Central Hotels Central Hotels owned and managed 25 mid-range hotels in the UK, offering residential, conferencing and leisure facilities to a wide range of customers. In a competitive environment, quality of service was a factor in the company retaining its reputation as providing a reliable and professional service to its cus- tomers. With a mixture of permanent and temporary/casual workers, the training of new staff and helping those who needed to develop improved competences was an ongoing, and important, activity. The head of the company's training function realized that course-based training, with trainers instruct- ing staff in various skills, simply was not working and couldn't deliver real changes in attitudes and behaviours, particularly in the area of customer service. With the help of outside consultants, she devised a new training package, which was called 'rainbow training'. This reflected the fact that there were seven PART THREE HRM PROCESSES modules or elements, each reflecting a key set of competencies. For example, one covered supporting your colleagues', while another related to enhancing the customer experience. The interesting thing about the package was that it was only prescriptive in the objectives that were laid down for each of the modules; each hotel was responsible for devising how the objectives would be met. There were sugges- tions about using certain types of activity and, particularly, using a collaborative approach, but the staff, led by each hotel's operations manager, were left to create their own solutions, which needed to include all staft. In the Nottingham hotel, David Wilson had the challenge of meeting the objectives of the rainbow train- ing package. Most of his staff were interested in the new approach to training, and were glad they weren't being forced to sit in a classroom and be 'lectured' at. There were, however, one or two members of staff with whom he knew he would have problems. One was the hotel's head barman, Ken Barnes. Ken had worked at the hotel for over seven years and, in all that time, hadn't really changed much. He had a view of what his job involved and, basically, 'did it his way'. In a job that involved frequent interaction with cus- tomers, he wasn't what might be described as customer focused and never went out of his way to help others. He did his job and that was it. David felt sure that, unless he could overcome Ken's attitude problem, his involvement in rainbow train- ing would be limited and not particularly enthusiastic. David decided to take the risky decision of asking Ken to lead the group developing ideas for enhancing the customer experience. He explained to Ken what he wanted, and that it was Ken's responsibility to set an example to the other team members in working collaboratively and cooperatively. The training ideas with which Ken's team came up would then be used to train staff in other departments in customer care, To David's surprise and relief, Ken's team worked well together and came up with some creative and interesting proposals. These were then delivered over a six-month period throughout the hotel. The effects of this training on levels of customer satisfaction was quickly noticed through changes in the monthly customer satisfaction index, but David noticed another, quite different, outcome: Ken Barnes had changed. He became more sociable and flexible in his attitude to work, he was confident and developed a range of important social skills that he had never had before. He became a valued member of the hotel's staff and seemed to have acquired more self-esteem. Was he the same person, but a different worker - or a different person and a better worker? David now realized that training could be enjoyable and stimulating, and deliver "bottom-line' results. He also began to realize the power that the rainbow training approach possessed and the way in which it could not only generate important work-related competencies, but, in important ways, change people. 266 Questions 1. It might be argued that what was seen in this case study was an example of what is described as the Hawthorne Effect. This can be understood as an increase in worker motivation and productivity, produced by the psychological stimulus of being singled out and made to feel important. What are the origins of this phenomenon and how can it be used to support structured learning? Why are ownership and responsibility important in the design and delivery of training? lor and practices of accelerated learning cannot be