Next Practice by a French Hotel Company
Creating a dialogue space to allow for change has already been discovered by two smart Frenchmen who founded a European hotel chain at the end of the 1960s of last century.
Their service idea was built on the idea of “new work”2 I take this example deliberately to illustrate that the new features do not depend on a technical innovation, but rather on the idea behind it.
I agree with the thesis which has been developed at the DGFP Lab 2014: Sharing responsibility and having trust. Tomorrow’s successful employee thinks “We”. He or she actively demands other opinions, uses them and faces others respectfully, expecting the same fundamental understanding from others. How did the founders of the hotel chain solve this thesis? Rather than copying existing hotel concepts, they wanted to bring the industrial revolution into the hotel business.They realized during the development phase that they could not be part of the existing hospitality business in 1969 which justified itself by means of its own norms and rules. Forty years ago, a bathroom as a part of the hotel room, good traffic links or a swimming pool, was still a privilege seen only in 5 star hotels. At the time, in hospitality, it was unthinkable to offer these services for a large number of travelers. The two founders of a hotel chain covered the existing concepts and quickly realized that the standardization of processes and the flexibility of service provided the key to a profitable hotel brand. They exchanged the planks of the ship, without compromising its functionality in the process. Their credo: “Faire la course en tete”—lead the field from the front[92] [93] could only be realized if they were more innovative and faster than their competitors. In their view, they were able to be faster and more innovative if they were questioning themselves and, above all, if they gave employees a chance to discuss and question their system. These values were considered the entry ticket into a protected dialogue space. Anyone could retire into this space who was able to explain their actions and behavior conclusively with a value. In that case, there wasn’t going to be a sanction. One of the founders is said to have uttered: “Values make sense only if they are useless”,[94] alluding to the sword of political games in organizations. This danger exists if from values undefined rules originate. Singles or parts of the organization can abuse values thus for own interests. Five of the values that had been introduced didn’t carry explanations of what the value canon meant, but consciously explained what wasn’t intended. Long word loops were omitted, in order to avoid taking away employees’ orientation. This construction was tested during a discussion of company goals, which showed conflicts just like the magic square of business studies. The transparency and openness in which value conflicts are addressed in the hospitality business is unique, up to today. Since then, the company has not formulated many rules regarding service delivery to the guest. These five values underpin the spirit and behavior towards guests. Not every employee or manager may understand this, but the ability for innovation has been imprinted in the company's DNA. A pattern which can be described retrospectively as culture. The Latin stem for “colere” means “to build, to order or to care for/nurture”. This term became the center of discourse of culture in society and economy during the last 200 years. It now describes a certain moral behavior in comparison to an uncontrolled and random approach. The farmer tending his fields was considered uncultured since he didn't take the time to reflect his moral ideals and to cultivate them. This is at the center of the task which is presented to the legal function in the organization. Both, thinking about how the world might perceive the company's actions, and determining what is economically feasible touches moral boundaries. 1.4