This case study was done to measure changes from 1994 to 1996 in the decision making environment of a local, 210 room hotel in Rochester, NY. This study is considered to be a developmental research project using a longitudinal approach. The data collected in this case study were compared to the results of Koo who conducted the same study in 1994. This case study also compared differences between two Rochester, NY hotels, Hotel A and Hotel B, in 1996 that are owned and operated by the same corporation. The instrument used in this case study was the psychometric, critical incident questionnaire, "Organizational Team Survey," developed by Boone and Kilmann in 1988. It was later adapted by Barnard in 1992, in a research study on "Decision Environments of Small Firms." The Organizational Team Survey is composed four parts. Part 1 of the survey asked the employee of a work related decision that they were involved in recently. These were then classified as operational and strategic. Operational being short term decisions and strategic being long term. Part 2 of the questionnaire displayed thirty two randomly placed questions that could be clustered into the following categories that make up the structures and the processes of effective decision making. 1 . Multiple Inputs and Alternatives 2. Problem Identification and Organization 3. Rewards for Good Decisions 4. Use of Group Efforts 5. Bureaucratic Blocks and Politics 6. Resource Adequacy Part 3 of the questionnaire asks for ranking the top five problem areas in the hotel. Part 4 of the survey includes the demographic information about the employees. The survey was conducted in the two hotels in early spring. All currently working employees were asked to complete a survey when they received their paychecks. Participation was strictly voluntary and individual confidentiality was maintained. The data was analyzed using X-SPSS. Significant differences between 1994 and 1996 survey samples, as well as the two hotels for 1996, were determined using group t-Tests. There were significant differences in Factor 4-Use of Group Efforts and Group 5- Bureaucratic Blocks and Politics. There was an increase in the mean of Factor 5 resulting in the increase of Bureacratic Blocks and Politics which signifies increased hierarchy in 1996. The decrease in the means of Group efforts also signifies the decrease in team work among the employees. Hotel B had a greater Factor 5 than Hotel A showing the higher level of hierarchy in Hotel B. 1. Type of position 2. Sex of employee 3. Type of employment 4. Age of employee 5. Number of years working in hotel industry 6. Number of years working in the surveyed hotel 7. Number of years in the current position 8. Department of employment The ranking of this year changed considerably from that of 1994 in certain factors and their categories due to the lack of quality training in the hotel which was discontinued in 1994. The factors are more significant in the new recruits due to large turnover and improper training. The hotel should run more tests to find the impact that the absence of training has on the work environment of the hotel. These would then convince the mangement to reinstate the quality training program.
Library of Congress Subject Headings
Hotels--Decision making--New York (State)--Rochester; Hotel management--New York (State)--Rochester; Decision making
Department, Program, or Center
School of Food, Hotel and Tourism Management (CAST)
Sridhar, Nikhila, "Assessment of changes in the decision making environment in a 210 room, Rochester, NY hotel: A 1996 Case study" (1996). Thesis. Rochester Institute of Technology. Accessed from
RIT – Main Campus