Employees who would be preparing for one of the evening events during the IACVB conference. Short and direct, the purpose of the briefing was to communicate to the banquet staff the specific details of the event, just prior to the set up of the event. With the Time and Event Schedule in hand, each employee was given final instructions in the areas of banquet area set up, guest seating arrangements, audio/visual requirements, and bell captain duties. The Banquet Set Up Manager, Jay Kriske, directed the pre-event banquet briefing. While Mr. Kriske formally outlined the details for the Wednesday evening gala reception dinner, banquet set up workers utilized active listening skills to confirm and clarify issues relative to their portion of the set up. At the conclusion of the short briefing, banquet set up workers sprang into action to complete their required tasks. In teams, crew members worked on the various set up arrangements, their parts also well rehearsed in this production.
With the proper written communication tools, the Time and Event Schedule, the banquet set up manager was well prepared with the details of the evening’s event. Through his direct manner of verbally communicating to his banquet set up workers, the customer’s needs and expectations were successfully relayed for implementation. Customer Feedback The Phoenician has no formal mechanism for customers to evaluate the Resort upon the conclusion of their conference. While guests are certainly free to initiate feedback to the Resort, The Phoenician does not invite the customer to complete a survey, an evaluation form, or questionnaire of any type. Thus, there is no communication received on the results of the conference from the customer’s perspective, nor is there any formal discussion generated from Resort management to staff members concerning their performance during the event.
This critical last step in the process of providing quality customer service simply does not exist at The Phoenician Resort. With no formal mechanism for customers to evaluate the Resort upon the conclusion of their conference, The Phoenician can only rely on their own perceptions of the relative success of the event. Without this critical information provided by the customer, it would be extremely difficult for the Resort to effectively resolve specific problems the customer may have encountered during their stay at the Resort which may not have been observed by the Resort staff. Certainly, it would be in The Phoenician’s best interest to incorporate this missing link into the full circle of providing guests with unparalleled luxury service. Customer Service Transaction Model Numerous models have been introduced on the service industry to help the Resort identify, in a logical and complete fashion, those variables or factors which are most important in the process of providing quality customer service. Individually, no one model may be a sufficient framework for providing quality service in every service exchange situation.
However, the Customer Service Transaction Model, developed by Barrington and Olsen (1987), is an excellent model designed to take a more microperspective approach to analyzing specific problems associated with the encounter between the Resort and the customer. The service transaction is partitioned into a three-step process, beginning with anticipation of the experience of the service and culminating in residue. Prior to the actual service experience, customers develop an anticipated expectation of the service they will purchase. The customer’s expectation is affected by a variety of factors which make up the customer’s reference bank.
Included in this reference bank are the customer’s perceptions of the value of the service, past experience with the service (utility), motives for purchasing the service (occasion), the customer’s present emotional state, the amount of risk they are willing to assume, and the anticipated financial cost of the service. The customer’s feelings about the actual service experience, the second phase of the process, are formulated by the anticipation the customer carries into the encounter, and its congruity or fit with the actual experience. This encounter is made up of four components: service product components; service product characteristics; service product dynamics; and the repertoire produced by the Resort’s employees. Service product components are the physical items that surround the customer while at the Resort, such as: lighting, decor, and cleanliness; the sensory perceptions caused by these physical items as well as the interactions with service providers; and the psychological experience produced by these components. Service product dynamics reflect the volatile nature of providing service.
Although it may be difficult for the customer to consciously ascertain these dynamics as a separate component of the service they are experiencing, they are manifested in otherwise good service being provided in a poor manner, primarily because of the inability of management to anticipate or provide contingency plans for them. The fourth component of the service experience is the service repertoire, the framework in which the Resort employees interface with the customer. The model assumes the provision of a quality service experience, and consequently, imparts consistency to the interface sta! rting with the initial contact and proceeding through to culmination of the service interaction. Upon completion of the service experience, the final stage of the transaction is complete as the customer evaluates the total service package in relation to initial anticipation.
Residue includes the use of this evaluation to formulate the customer’s actions and future plans with regard to the service provided by the Resort (Murrmann and Suttle, 1993). The Customer Service Transaction Model is a very useful tool for identifying the essential components of The Phoenician Resort’s service process. The Phoenician can use this model as a guide for directing organizational resources toward appropriate components, such as the implementation of a customer feedback program designed to promote upward communication from the customer to the Resort management, as well as downward communication from the Resort management to the Resort’s employees. The model also provides a framework for identifying weaknesses in resource development or allocation, such as the lack of empowerment of Resort employees, that can more efficiently affect positive residue.
REFERENCES
- Barrington, Melvin N., and Michael D. Olsen. 1987.
- International Journal of Hospitality Management, 6 (3) pp. 131-138. Davis, Sally Ogle. 1993. Los Angeles Magazine, (11) pp.
- 58-59. Murrmann, Suzanne K., and Cheri Becker Suttle. 1993. VNR’s Encyclopedia of Hospitality and Tourism , pp. 398-406. Reinman, T. R. 1994.
- Golf Magazine, (9) pp. 70-73. Rice, Trudy Thompson. 1994. Saturday Evening Post, (5/6), pp. 80-82.
