HRMG 4202 Week 11 Final Training Proposal Example

A Proposal to the Larkfield Hotels Ownership Committee: Train All 34 Guest Hosts to Clear Kiosk Errors and Reach Stalled Guests, at 230 Staff Hours, With First Floor Results Due October 30

Student Name

Walden University

HRMG 4202: Human Resource Development and Change

Instructor Name

Month Day, Year

A Proposal to the Larkfield Hotels Ownership Committee: Train All 34 Guest Hosts to Clear Kiosk Errors and Reach Stalled Guests, at 230 Staff Hours, With First Floor Results Due October 30

Summary for the Committee

Request. Approve a training program for all 34 guest hosts at the seven Larkfield Hotels properties: four 45-minute sessions at each hotel, led by two peer coaches, teaching three kiosk and mobile-key fixes and a way to reach guests who stall at a kiosk. Larkfield, a fictional set of select-service properties around Columbus, swapped its counters for phone keys and kiosks this spring.

Cost. About 230 staff hours in total: 102 coach hours, 102 host hours during the afternoon lull and about 24 general manager hours for observation, plus two hours of vendor briefing included in the kiosk contract. No overtime is required.

Expected change. One in four guests who stall at a kiosk now leaves before a host reaches them. The program aims to have hosts reach stalled guests within two minutes and clear common errors on the spot in at least two-thirds of observed opportunities.

First results. Two-week floor observations at the first hotels will be reported by October 30, with the full twelve-week answer in January.

The Need

In the three hotels that changed first, kiosk logs recorded 1,184 errors in four weeks, 61 percent of them card-read or encoding errors that a host with practice can fix in under two minutes. Over six observed evening shifts, 14 of 58 stalled guests left the kiosk before anyone reached them. Hosts had never practiced the fixes; five of eight interviewed had never re-issued a digital key. The needs analysis, using the questions of Mager and Pipe (1997), sorted each gap by cause, and only some proved to be gaps of skill. That distinction shapes everything that follows.

What the Change Asks of Each Group

The host row carries the most weight because it calls for a brand-new skill during the lobby's busiest hour.

Table 1

Who the Change Affects and the Moment That Matters

Condensed from the Week 3 impact map. Composite organization.

What Hosts Will Be Able to Do

Eight objectives define the program, each written as an act, a moment and a sign an observer can record (Mager, 1997). The core four: reach a stalled guest within two minutes, clear a card-read error without the phone line, clear an encoding error and print a working card within three minutes, and re-issue a failed digital key at the guest's door. The other four cover identity checks, a second waiting guest, stepping back when help is declined and logging errors a host could not clear.

How the Program Runs

The four sessions follow the first principles of Merrill (2002) in order: a real problem, a demonstration, practice with feedback on a spare kiosk and use on the lobby floor, ending with each host teaching a colleague. Each delivery choice was weighed against a cheaper option.

Table 2

Delivery Decisions and the Option Rejected

A five-minute tablet refresher in week five replaces a fifth live session, where the cheaper option suffices.

Resource Table

Table 3

Staff Hours by Role

Composite organization.

Resistance and the Message to Hosts

Hosts' objection combined four strands that Kotter and Schlesinger (1979) would separate: worry that the machines will justify job cuts, distrust after two abandoned rollouts, a belief that approaching guests is pushy and discomfort with losing the desk. Training addresses the third and softens the fourth. It cannot address the first. The operations director has therefore agreed to state in the message announcing the sessions that host positions will not be cut before eighteen months have passed. The message also says plainly what stays the same and that practice scores will not go to managers.

How the Committee Will Know

Managers will observe each hotel's lobby for thirty minutes at the arrival peak, two, six and twelve weeks after training, marking an eight-line checklist yes, no or no opportunity, against baseline marks taken before training at the second-phase hotels (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The committee should treat the program as unsuccessful if fewer than two-thirds of opportunities on the core four lines are marked yes at twelve weeks, or if results do not exceed the baseline.

What Training Will Not Fix

Two gaps lie outside training. Tablets sign themselves out when left idle for five minutes and are often flat by evening; the IT manager can extend the timeout and add charging docks before the floor sessions begin. Schedules still follow desk-era shift times, leaving the lobby uncovered for stretches of the evening peak; general managers should roster hosts to arrivals. Without these fixes, trained hosts will still miss stalled guests.

Alternatives Considered

The committee could choose a smaller pilot at the three first-phase hotels only, at about 100 staff hours, with a decision on the other four in January. This lowers cost but delays help at the four hotels that changed most recently, where hosts have had the least experience with the kiosks. It could also delay the program until winter, when occupancy is lower, which would ease scheduling but leave the current gap in place through the fall travel season. The full program is recommended because the cost is modest, no overtime is needed and the evaluation will show by October whether it is working.

Conclusion

The kiosks changed what guest hosts must do, but no one taught them how. A program of 230 staff hours, delivered on each hotel's own equipment by colleagues who have done the work, can close the skill part of the gap. Paired with a staffing commitment and fixes to tablets and schedules, it gives the change its best chance to deliver what it promised guests.

References

Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), 354-380. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.3.354

Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation. ATD Press.

Kotter, J. P., & Schlesinger, L. A. (1979). Choosing strategies for change. Harvard Business Review, 57(2), 106-114.

Mager, R. F. (1997). Preparing instructional objectives: A critical tool in the development of effective instruction (3rd ed.). Center for Effective Performance.

Mager, R. F., & Pipe, P. (1997). Analyzing performance problems: Or you really oughta wanna (3rd ed.). Center for Effective Performance.

Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43-59. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02505024