員工離職對酒店利潤的影響一個橫跨多個酒店的研究【外文翻譯】

1、<p><b>　　外文翻譯</b></p><p><b>　　原文</b></p><p>　　The Effect of Employee Turnover on Hotel Profits: A Test Across Multiple Hotels</p><p>　　Material Source:

2、Cornell Hotel &Restaurant Administration Quarterly</p><p>　　Author: Simons Tony; Hinkin Timothy</p><p>　　We know that employee turnover costs money. Here’s one way to estimate that cost.<

3、/p><p>　　By Tony Simons And Timothy Hinkin</p><p>　　Many hospitality managers are convinced that excessive turnover is a costly phenomenon, but it is difficult to develop specific turnover-cost num

4、bers. That is not to say that researchers have not attempted to nail down the cost of turnover, but the fact remains that specific cost figures can be elusive.’ Because turnover costs are hard to calculate, it is equally

5、 difficult to assess the bottom-line financial value of turnover-reduction programs.</p><p>　　The matter of determining a cost of turnover (or, more to the point, the value of preventing turnover) is also co

6、mplicated by the industry’s ambivalence toward the matter. Despite the disruption and cost of turnover, many managers still view employees as replaceable commodities-especially hourly employees. The “warm body” syndrome

7、of hiring unselectively to fill a position remains in place, even though the results of this practice can have devastating effects on both internal and external custom</p><p>　　We have seen the industry make

8、 strides in this area in recent years, especially given low unemployment and increased competition for quality employees. Some hospitality organizations have begun to focus on retaining their employees. Companies such as

9、 aramark morton’s of Chicago, and Southwest Airlines, to name just three, have developed specific programs to emphasize the importance of employee retention and development. This article provides a tool to help managers

10、objectively estimate the cost </p><p>　　Researchers have built a case for the benefits to be gained from employee retention. In a recent article Huselid examined a sample of 968 firms from a wide range of in

11、dustries and found a strong link between a decrease in employee turnover and an increase in sales, market value, and profItability. Similarly, Heskett, Sasser, and Schlesinger in their work on the service-profit chain de

12、monstrated relationships between employee retention and increased productivity in a wide range of industries. Exa</p><p>　　Turnover costs I. Hinkin and Tracey identified and examined many of the hidden costs

13、 associated with employee turnover at hotels. In that work, the authors interviewed over 40 employees and human-resources professionals connected with two hotel companies and used information to develop a computer progra

14、m to calculate the costs associated with a voluntary departure of a single employee in a variety of positions. That model considered the separation costs; the costs of recruiting, selection, hirin</p><p>　　T

15、urnover costs II. Let’s look at two primary concerns regarding the results laid out in the Hikin and Tracey article. First, many of the costs associated with employee turnover are drawn from the fixed-cost pool of salari

16、ed-employee time. For example, the human-resources manager who spends several hours each day interviewing prospective employees is salaried and would be on the premises anyway. Second, though the original work drew on ma

17、ny informants and so has reasonable validity, many of the s</p><p>　　We seek to fill that gap by offering in this article a complementary approach to estimating turnover costs. We examine operational and fin

18、ancial records across a large sample of hotels. The current work examines actual financial performance and employee-turnover information at 98 hotels during the first half of 1999. We also examine the possible difference

19、s in turnover effects for different price tiers of hotels and the relationship between hotel size and turnover.</p><p>　　A Different Estimate</p><p>　　We drew data from 105 hotels throughout the

20、 United States as part of a larger study. The hotels ranged from 72 to 652 rooms, employed between 14 and 505 employees, and ranged in ADR from $46.73 to $165.53. We secured financial performance information about all bu

21、t one of the hotels, and six of the hotels experienced increases or decreases in total personnel counts greater than 50 percent during the period studied. We excluded those seven properties from further analysis, and ana

22、lyzed full inform</p><p>　　We analyzed the data using a correlation matrix and continuous moderated linear regression techniques as described by Aiken and West.6 This combination of approaches allows for exa

23、mination of both simple, direct effects-in this case, the relationship between turnover rate and GOP-and of the extent to which the expense of turnover varies with a hotel’s price point.</p><p>　　Contingency

24、 model. </p><p>　　Moderated regression is a form of analysis that explores whether the impact of a predictor (in this case, employee turnover) on an outcome (in this case, GOP) depends on a contingency (in

25、this case, ADR). That is, is employee turnover more costly at luxury hotels than at economy hotels? Examining this contingency will allow for a more precise estimate of the cost of turnover at a given hotel. The first st

26、ep in the analysis is to adjust GOP to account for the effects of hotel size and ADR. Large </p><p>　　It would be a mistake, however, to attribute a large hotel’s high GOP strictly to lower employee turnover

27、, given that large hotels simply have more rooms to sell than do smaller ones. To correct this problem, we used statistics to hold constant the effects of a hotel’s size and ADR. Essentially ,we allow ADR and hotel size

28、to explain as much of GOP as they can, and then leave employee turnover to explain whatever changes remain in GOP? </p><p>　　The analysis in Exhibit 2 shows the effect of turnover at the sample’s average ADR

29、, and it also shows that turnover is more costly at high-price hotels than at moderate-tier properties. This point is made by the highly significant interaction term that looks at the product of employee turnover and ADR

30、. For each dollar increase in ADR, each percentage point of employee turnover costs an additional $525 in annual GOP. Thus, while a typical hotel in the sample might face a cost of $7,550 GOP per pe</p><p>　

31、　Costs and Benefits</p><p>　　As we said, many large hospitality companies are making concerted efforts to control employee turnover. Companies may enhance pay, benefits, or incentive systems. They may undert

32、ake to train managers in how better to respond to the needs expressed by line employees. Companies may systematically survey employee attitudes and reward managers for the extent to which they can foster a satisfied and

33、committed workforce. Properly administered, most of those approaches have a good potential for reducin</p><p>　　This article provides a way to calculate the cost-benefit ratio, or the return on investment, f

34、or programs designed primarily to reduce employee turnover. An additional regression analysis, using a count of employee terminations rather than a global turnover rate, provides additional insight. After controlling for

35、 ADR and total employee base, we found a per-employee dollar cost of approximately $5,000 for the typical employee at a typical hotel in our sample. That figure would be lower for econo</p><p>　　Of particula

36、r interest is the finding that although large hotels and those with high ADRs may have lower rates of turnover, the cost of each point of turnover for those hotels is considerable. This result is consistent with the find

37、ings of Hinkin and Tracey, who noted that as jobs become more complex and more difficult to master, the cost of turnover increases dramatically. High-rate hotels often invest heavily in their employees in the form of tra

38、ining and pay, they typically have complex opera</p><p>　　A Picture of a Single Company</p><p>　　This study has limitations. For one, it was conducted in a single hotel company, and it is possib

39、le that the results would be different with another sample. The magnitude of the relationships lead us to believe that strong relationships would almost certainly be found in another hotel sample, but exact dollar figure

40、s would likely vary. This issue is of special concern because our sample tended to cluster in the middle tier, and our estimates for the luxury segment are largely extrapolations from</p><p>　　All methods of

41、 study have limitations, and the wisest path is to draw conclusions based on the results of multiple studies using diverse methods. Thus, Hikin and Tracey’s detailed analysis of single-position turnover at six hotels is

42、complemented by our broader-brush study. Each analysis directs some light into the shadows left by the other. Hinkin and Tracey lay out the mechanisms by which turnover costs hotels money, and the present study finds, ac

43、ross many hotels, that employee turnover reall</p><p><b>　　譯文</b></p><p>　　員工離職對酒店利潤的影響:一個橫跨多個酒店的研究</p><p>　　資料來源:餐館的管理 作者：西蒙斯·托尼 赫堅·蒂莫西</p>

44、;<p>　　我們知道員工離職會花費成本。這里有一種估計成本的方法。</p><p>　　許多酒店管理者相信，過多的離職率是一個損失慘重的現(xiàn)象，但很難得到明確的離職成本數(shù)據(jù)。這并不是說，研究人員并沒有試圖確定下來的離職的成本，但事實仍然是，具體的成本數(shù)字可能難以捉摸。因為離職成本難以計算，同樣難以評估離職減少方案的最低經(jīng)濟價值。</p><p>　　業(yè)界對于確定員工離職的費用

45、問題（或者，更重要的是，降低離職率）也很復雜的矛盾心理。許多管理者不顧離職的干擾和成本，仍然把雇員作為更換的商品，尤其是小時工雇員。盡管這一做法的結(jié)果能對內(nèi)部和外部客戶產(chǎn)生嚴重的影響，但是暫時無選擇地雇用員工填補職位空缺的現(xiàn)象仍然存在。</p><p>　　近年來，我們已經(jīng)看到了行業(yè)在這方面做的進步，特別是考慮到低失業(yè)率和增加高標準員工的競爭。有些服務組織開始注重保留自己的員工。如芝加哥的艾瑪克莫頓和西南航空公司

46、，已制定了具體方案，強調(diào)員工保留和發(fā)展的重要性。本文提供了一個工具來幫助管理者客觀地估計員工離職成本，使他們能夠衡量雇員保留的經(jīng)濟效益和比較其成本。</p><p>　　研究人員已經(jīng)建成了一個從留住員工中獲得利益的方案。在最近，作者休斯里德對968家公司進行抽樣調(diào)查，找到一個存在在減少員工離職和增加銷售、市場價值、利潤之間的強有力的聯(lián)系。同樣，赫斯克特和施萊辛格在其服務利潤鏈上證明了廣泛的行業(yè)雇員之間和保持并提高

47、生產(chǎn)力的關(guān)系。檢查76家酒店，西蒙斯和麥克萊恩發(fā)現(xiàn)，員工離職是酒店盈利能力明顯的驅(qū)動器。</p><p>　　離職費用一 赫堅和特雷西確定和審查許多與酒店員工離職相關(guān)的隱藏的費用。為了這項工作，筆者采訪了40名員工，并與公司聯(lián)手兩個酒店人力資源專業(yè)人士，利用信息來開發(fā)一個計算機程序來計算出一個單一的員工在各種相關(guān)陣地自愿離職的成本。該模型考慮了離職費用，招聘費用，選拔，聘用，以及生產(chǎn)力損失。作為一個例子，他

48、們發(fā)現(xiàn)，前臺員工的個人離職費用約為年薪的30%。對于一個只有30名員工，一個小時工資12.00美元，而離職率百分之五十的前臺，每年總費用將超過15萬美元?；谶@些信息，他們建議，對于增加員工工資（鼓勵保留）可能大部分酒店拒絕減少工資冊費用。</p><p>　　離職費用二。讓我們來看看兩個關(guān)于赫堅和特雷西文章得出的主要問題。首先，與員工離職相關(guān)的許多費用均來自拿薪水雇員時間的固定成本。例如，人力資源經(jīng)理每天面試花

49、費幾個小時?？傊瑴蕟T工的薪水，應該是放在首位。其次，雖然原工作借鑒了許多具有合理的有效性的信息提供者等方面，生產(chǎn)力的損失還是難以估算出一些可靠的指定的成本。但是我們不能說，一個新雇員將取代整整50%和他一樣具有生產(chǎn)力的人，并不能確切知道多久才可以實現(xiàn)指定的能力水平。盡管這種模式提供了有價值的信息，赫堅和特雷西的研究主要集中在隱性成本，不直接研究員工離職與酒店整體盈利能力的關(guān)系。</p><p>　　我們尋求填補

50、這篇文章中提供具有補充性的辦法來估計員工離職成本的不足。我們研究樣本酒店的業(yè)務和財務記錄。在目前的工作期間，我們考察98家酒店的1999年上半年的實際財務業(yè)績和雇員離職信息。我們還檢查了在不同的價格層次的酒店，酒店規(guī)模與員工離職可能存在的差異。</p><p><b>　　一個不同的估計</b></p><p>　　我們得出的數(shù)據(jù)來自美國各地的105家酒店這一個更大的

51、研究群體。那些酒店有14至505間房間，有72至652個員工，并且其股價介于46.73美元至165.53美元之間。但在研究期間，我們獲得的所有的酒店的其中一家酒店，財務執(zhí)行情況以及經(jīng)驗豐富的酒店總量的增加或減少數(shù)大于百分之50。我們排除進一步分析這七個對象，并分析98家酒店的全部信息。對于每一個酒店，我們收集了以下信息：房間數(shù)目、雇員人數(shù)、雇員流失率（包括自愿和非自愿）、總經(jīng)營利潤和1999年1月1日至1999年6月30日期間的股價。&

52、lt;/p><p>　　我們分析數(shù)據(jù)使用了相關(guān)矩陣線性回歸和艾肯和與韋斯特的持續(xù)放緩線性回歸分析。結(jié)合這兩種方法的結(jié)合進行檢查既簡單，又有直接影響，在這種情況下，離職率與總營業(yè)利潤之間關(guān)系，轉(zhuǎn)交費用隨酒店價格的變化的程度而各不相同。</p><p><b>　　權(quán)變模式。</b></p><p>　　線性回歸是一種分析預報因子（在這種情況下，員工流

53、失）的沖擊對結(jié)果（在此情況下，總營業(yè)利潤）是否取決于意外情況(在這種情況下，股價)的形式。也就是說，員工離職在豪華型酒店比經(jīng)濟型酒店多？研究這一情況需要在某一特定的酒店更精確的估計離職成本。分析的第一步是調(diào)整總營業(yè)利潤占酒店的規(guī)模和股價的影響。一般大型酒店都有比較高的，而我們可以證明它。大酒店和小酒店的員工離職相比較也往往有較低的性能。</p><p>　　但是，嚴格地說來，這將是一個錯誤，大酒店高的總營業(yè)利潤可

54、以降低員工流失率，那是因為有更多的大型酒店客房銷售比小的酒店多。要糾正這個問題，我們經(jīng)常使用統(tǒng)計得出一間酒店的規(guī)模和股價的影響。從本質(zhì)上講，我們可以用股價和酒店大小來解釋，總營業(yè)利潤多是因為它們和總營業(yè)利潤一樣，解釋員工離職是否對總營業(yè)利潤有直接的影響。</p><p>　　我們分析的是離職在樣本的股價中的影響，它也表明，離職成本在高價位酒店的成本比在中等層次的酒店高。這一點是由高度顯示的是在員工離職與股價之間的

55、關(guān)系。股價每增加一個美元，員工離職每一個百分點，成本有525美元。因此，雖然在樣品中典型的酒店可能會面臨員工離職每一個百分比，7550美元總營業(yè)利潤，據(jù)估計，在一個有125元股價的酒店，可以估計能面對超過成本的四倍多的離職成本百分點。相反，結(jié)果表明，與65美元股價相比，將面臨一個相對較小的每年離職的費用。</p><p><b>　　成本和效益。</b></p><p&g

56、t;　　正如我們所說，許多大型餐飲公司正在共同努力，以控制員工離職。公司可以提高工資，福利，或獎勵制度。他們可能進行培訓，如何更好地回應一線員工提出的需求管理。公司可以系統(tǒng)地對員工的態(tài)度進行調(diào)查和獎勵管理人員，他們可以營造一個滿意，忠誠的員工。這些適當管理方法大多數(shù)是減少雇員流失率的良好潛力。由于這些計劃的成本較高，一個精明的管理者會問是否離職成本減少的收益超過了實際的營業(yè)額減少方案的費用。</p><p>　　

57、本文提供一種方法來計算成本效益比或為了減少員工離職的方案投資回報。一個額外的回歸分析，是提供額外的見解，而不是用一個全球性的周轉(zhuǎn)率計算的雇傭關(guān)系終止。在控制股價和總員工基礎(chǔ)后，我們發(fā)現(xiàn)在我們的樣本典型的酒店約5,000元，每名雇員為典型的雇員美元的成本。這個數(shù)字將會降低經(jīng)濟型酒店和高股價的酒店的成本。</p><p>　　特別有趣的是，調(diào)查結(jié)果顯示，雖然高的大酒店可能隨著憑證有不較低的離職成本，每家酒店的離職成本

58、對這些問題的觀點相當可觀。這一結(jié)果是赫堅和特雷西調(diào)查的一致結(jié)果，他們指出，由于工作變得更加復雜，更加難以掌握，成本增加的離職率顯著。高速率的酒店往往大量投資在員工的培訓形式和支付上，他們通常具有復雜的操作系統(tǒng)，他們吸引需要高水平的服務的客人。它為中到高速率的酒店投資于留住員工的良好的商業(yè)意識。根據(jù)我們的數(shù)據(jù)，在1%或2%將證明這種類型的酒店需要一個相當大的開支，離職率下降。另一方面，經(jīng)濟檔飯店需要檢查離職開支的減少的主要因素，也側(cè)重于尋

59、找有效的且廉價的方案。</p><p><b>　　一個單一公司的現(xiàn)狀</b></p><p>　　本研究有其局限性。首先，它進行了一個單一的酒店公司的調(diào)查，它可能與其他樣品的結(jié)果不同。這個量值的關(guān)系使我們相信，強有力的關(guān)系，幾乎可以在另一家旅館樣本中發(fā)現(xiàn)，但確切數(shù)字可能會有所不同指標。這個問題得到很大關(guān)注，因為我們的樣品往往集中在中間層，我們的推斷主要來自于對豪華領(lǐng)

60、域的數(shù)據(jù)趨勢。驗證的豪華酒店樣品的結(jié)果是有價值的。</p><p>　　所有的研究方法有局限性，最明智的道路，就是利用各種方法使用多個研究結(jié)果的結(jié)論。因此，赫堅和特雷西在6家酒店對單一的職位進行的詳細分析的補充。每個分析引導到由其他一些留下的影響。赫堅和特雷西奠定了機制，在許多酒店，花費的離職成本和目前的研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，得出員工離職確實出現(xiàn)在酒店的最低利潤。每個百分點約20,000與100美元的大效果表明，沒有完善的員