EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEMS IN THE SERVICE SECTOR

Transcription

1 EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEMS IN THE SERVICE SECTOR Zarkali Open University of Cyprus A. Mihiotis (Corresponding Author) Associate Professor HOU, Tutor OUC, Mrs Zarkali Anastasia has studied Public Administrative at Panteion University of Athens and recently she successfully completed her postgraduate studies at the Department of Business Administrative (MBA) from the Open University of Cyprus. She has 10 years professional experience mainly as an account assistant in several companies in various fields of action. Dr. Athanassios Mihiotis is an Associate Professor at the Hellenic Open University, School of Social Science, and MBA Course. He graduated from the Department of Mechanical Engineering of the National Technical University of Athens, Greece, and he holds a PhD degree from the NTUA. Dr. Mihiotis has more than 15 years teaching experience in several universities in Greece at undergraduate and postgraduate level. He has in the past worked as Planning and Logistics Director for multinational and domestic companies and has served as Member of Project Teams in the Greek Public Sector. His interests lie in operations management and crisis management. He is the Editor-in-chief of the International Journal of Decision Sciences, Risk and Management. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES 17

2 ABSTRACT T he aim of this paper was to evaluate the human resources performance within the hotel businesses operating in the Attica region, Greece. The necessity of this research derives from the influence of evaluation systems on employee productivity and motivation. An appraisal system does not only delineate the human potential in a given period, but it also reflects the principles, philosophy and general mindset behind the management techniques of a business and by extension the real state of employment relations, with all that this entails. Considering its versatility, we tried to make inferences through primary research, about the prevailing trends and the policies implemented by hotel businesses in order to assess their employees. The research findings are encouraging, as they demonstrated that there has been some progress regarding appraisal systems. It is becoming increasingly clear to hotel business administrators that a key element to the success of a company and the achievement of the company objectives, among others, is the degree of individual performance and employee productivity, for the development of which employee appraisal is an important tool. Key words: human resources, appraisal system, performance, employee, effectiveness, efficiency, firm, hotel. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES 18

3 Introduction Nowadays, in a rapidly changing business, economic, social and technological environment, firms go through a struggle for survival in order to operate in an extremely competitive and complex world. In order to survive, they need to adapt to the continuously new information and to respond to the constantly new circumstances; namely globalization and market expansion across borders; new technologies and continuously innovation; customers and other stakeholders interests, high expectations and demands. As a result, the modern business environment can be characterized as highly demanding and the challenge for every enterprise is in the field of competitiveness, productivity, quality and efficiency. The achievement of a firm s goals depends largely on its ability to assess the performance of its employees and also to monitor the extent to which those employees contributes to the achievement of the firm s objectives. In order to assess staff performance and determine in to what extent a firm s personnel respond successfully to the duties of an assigned position is employee evaluation. In this perspective, the existence of a performance appraisal system is an essential procedure and should be included in the company s operations. The purpose of the present study is to investigate the prevailing trends and policies implemented by companies in the hotel industry for employee performance appraisal system, and specifically hotel business operating in the region of Attica. The remainder of the study is organized as follows: The second section presents the particular characteristics of the hotel industry, while reference to previous researches is taking place on the performance appraisal systems both in Greece and abroad. The third section describes the research methodology that was followed for the collection of data, while in the fourth section the results of the research are being presented. Finally, the fifth section summarizes the conclusions of the research and recommendations are being presented for further research. Basic characteristics of the hotel industry In order to understand better the general aspects of hotel accommodation and the categories thereof, it is useful to proceed to a short description of the criteria used for classifying them. Hotels are divided into various categories, which are related to the level of services and goods on offer, the type of property or the geographical area of installation. Following Presidential Decree 43/ (Journal of the Greek Government, 2002) Classification of main hotels in categories using a star system and technical specifications thereof, a new system for classifying hotels into star categories has been established, similar to the system followed by other European tourism destinations. In accordance with the above Presidential Decree, hotels are classified by the number of stars (in up to five classes), depending on the operating form thereof. The superior class is 5 stars (luxury) while the lowest class refers to one-star hotels (fourth and fifth class). The criteria for classifying the hotels into various categories basically refer to the variety of services on offer, while it does not refer to quality criteria such as the quality of construction, the quality of materials, etc. In order to understand the importance of the human factor in the production of the tourist product, it is important to comprehend the peculiarities of the hotel industry. The hotel industry is a sector with particular features and peculiarities in comparison with other sectors, fact that prompts the hotel industry to move in EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES 19

4 an environment of uncertainty. This complexity derives (Laloumis, 2002): From the very nature of the hotel product. The hotel offers a multiform product, which in order to be produced, is essential and necessary the collaboration of a number of specialties with varied features and extensive range of positions. From the seasonality of the hotel industry and the high frequency of personnel change that is been demonstrated. The mainly seasonal hotels, unlike to permanent operation ones, do not present a constant administrative structure, but rather an increased instability, which is a result of the increased mobility of personnel and department managers, the changes in the production processes and the modifications to organization chart of hotel units. from the interdependence and the degree of cooperation with other branch and sectors of economy, as well as From the correlation with exogenous factors, related with economic and social situationscircumstances. The complexity of the hospitality industry requires the implementation of new methods, tools and methodologies to ensure the long-term effectiveness. The contribution and role of the human factor, for the proper and smooth operation of the tourism business, is the key and an important tool for efficient business operation. Since tourism enterprises have an anthropocentric character, it is deemed appropriate and necessary for businesses to develop efficient performance appraisal systems. The evaluation of employee performance is a field of human resource management, which seems to have different criteria and characteristics, accordingly to the cultural environment and the country that is to be applied. For example, according to Mondy et al. (2009), staff evaluation in the western world is determined in relation to measurable outcome aiming to achieve individual and organizational goals. On the other hand, firms in China have focused on different criteria giving particular emphasis on ethical characteristics such as loyalty and obedience. In general, studies have shown that the evaluation of employee performance in the most developed countries is a process that becomes systematically, something that is not the case with the less developed countries. For the hotel industry, a research carried out by Davies et al. (2001) in 483 hotel companies in Western Australia, with regard to the appraisal systems, the remuneration and the professional training as well as the overall role of the human resources department in the hotel industry, showed that practices such as the implementation of appraisal systems leads in providing higher quality services, which will increase customer satisfaction and loyalty and therefore the profitability of the firm. The results of the research on the implementation of appraisal systems showed that approximately 55.5% of companies do not use any system of evaluation. A more detailed analysis of the same survey showed that from the 44.5% of the companies that evaluate their employees, the 37.3% of them evaluate all of them, while 7.2% only evaluate their supervisors and senior management. Research conducted by Woods et al. (1998) in 389 hotels in America, to determine the use of appraisal systems in the tourist industry and compared them with other industries, showed that 87% of the sample applies systems of assessments. Regarding the frequency of assessment, 67.1% of hotel businesses showed that they evaluate their employees once a year, 18.2% every six months, while 5,6% every 3 months. The research showed as the prevailing method of appraisal the management by objectives (49%), while followed by the behaviorally anchored rating scales (or BARS) with 41%. It is also worth noting EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES 20

5 that most of the hotel units management applies more than one method of appraisal for more than one purpose. Finally, 15% of businesses do not inform their employees for the results of their evaluation. In Greece, from a study that was conducted in luxury, A and B class hotels in Corfu (Liberis, 2008), in order to identify and analyze issues related to the overall picture of personnel administration, resulted in a not so much encouraging outcome. With regard to the systems of performance measurement there are poorly implemented, while when there are rudimentary applied, there aren t linked to specific measurable targets, and neither with specific remunerations and rewards such as promotions. As it was expected, the situation is better in the luxury hotels over the A and B class. According to the results of another survey that was conducted in the region of Attica and included private companies from all sectors (Aspridis, 2007), it showed that only a small percentage applies a short of a formal appraisal system, while a rate of 12% does not evaluate their personnel. The majority of businesses assess their employees in an annual base, while some only assess the executive and upper management. As far as the purpose of evaluation, the overwhelming majority answered that they apply it as a tool to carry out promotions and personnel training. As regards the criteria for the employee evaluation, the survey showed that companies give particular attention to the job knowledge, the behavior and the qualitative and quantitative performance. Finally, when asked if they announced the results of the evaluation, 91% of companies responded that employees are informed for the reports of evaluations. Research that was conducted in a large Greek hotel (Aspridis, 2009) member of a larger group of 147 hotels around the world showed that it applies a completed appraisal system which takes place on an annual or semi-annual basis. The evaluation is implemented on all personnel including managers. The criteria for assessing employees have to do among other things mainly with job knowledge, and the quality and quantity of work. The criteria for assessing managers have to do with professional training, quality of work, communication ability as well as reliability. Finally, the evaluation is carried out by the direct supervisor while there is also the possibility of self-assessment Research Methodology The research field for the present paper involved businesses providing services, and specifically the hotel branch at the periphery of Attica. The selection of the district of Attica occurred for the following reasons: o Attica is one of the four largest destinations, along with Crete, the South Aegean Islands and the Ionian Islands (Pavlopoulos, 2007). These four regions, as per the results of a study made by the Foundation for Economic and Industrial Research (FEIR) gather the highest average potential for the entire country, a fact that is connected with the gathering at these areas of a large number of hotels belonging in the top categories, and specifically of four and five stars (Pavlopoulos, 2007). Based on the same study, the periphery of Attica gathers the largest average employment, a fact that is related to the wider range of services and activities offered by high-class hotels, which must be manned by more employees. o An additional reason for selecting hotels in Attica is the fact that in their majority (save from the area of Argosaronikos) they are active on a twelve-month basis, contrary to the island Greece, where the period of operation is mainly the main tourism season, i.e. from April to October, when tourism is peaked. Due to this observation, in combination with the fact that the research for the present paper was conducted in March, most of the hotels outside of Attica for this period would probably be closed. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES 21

6 Based on the hotel registry kept by the Hellenic Chamber of Hotels (HCH, 2012), it is resulted that for 2012, the hotels in Attica are as follows (Table 3.1): Table 3.1: Hotels in Attica for 2012 Hotels in Attica for ***** 4**** 3*** 2** 1* TOTAL ATTICA ATTICA- ATHENS ISLANDS ARGOSARO NIKO ISLANDS LAKONION UNITS ROOMS BEDS UNITS ROOMS BEDS UNITS ROOMS BEDS UNITS ROOMS BEDS REST OF ATTICA PIRAEUS UNITS ROOMS BEDS UNITS ROOMS BEDS Source of information: Hellenic Chamber of Hotels, A decision was made for the present research to focus on hotels falling into the high classes, and specifically hotels of five and four stars and not of smaller categories, due to the fact that the smaller categories employ far less personnel, and it is possible that they do not apply any evaluation systems. The initial population - objective of the research was 125 hotels active in the region of Attica. However, due to the fact that the size of a firm is a crucial factor for having an integrated personnel evaluation procedure, the present research is trying to cover mainly the firms that are regarded as small-medium and large sized firms, as per the Official Journal of the European Union (no. L107/8, ). According to the above, a medium-sized firm refers to a firm employing more than 50 employees and less than 250, and has a turnover that does not exceed 40 million Euros, or a total annual balance sheet of less than 27 million Euros. A large firm applies more than 250 employees and its turnover is more than 40 million Euros. The requirement for identifying a firm as small-medium is to be within the limits with regard to the number of personnel, and the limits for the turnover or of the balance sheet. Nevertheless, for reasons of simplicity, this paper used a single criterion, i.e. the number of employees. Based on a recent research conducted by the Research Institute for Tourism (RIT, 2011), which is the scientific body of the Hellenic Chamber of Hotels, with regard to the developments in the main figures of the hotel market in , the end conclusion was that the factor affecting employment the most is the number of rooms in each hotel. In other words: the size of the hotel. For the purpose of expressing the total amount of employment positions for each hotel room, and also to select from this total those hotels with more than 50 persons in their workforce, we used the results of the above study conducted by RIT among a total of 125 five and four-star hotels. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES 22

7 Based on the results of said study, the five-star hotels employ, on average, 0.8 persons per room, while for four-star hotels this figure is This rate seems to decrease further down the hotel classes. In consequence, in three-star hotels the average employment per room is estimated at 0.31 while in the hotels of the two lowest categories this rate is 0.21 employees per room. Considering the above approach, the final population - objective of the research included 40 hotels (Figure 3.1), of five and four stars respectively, with an average workforce of more than 50 persons. Figure 3.1: Sample selection five-star hotels Initial sam ple selection 23 five-star hotels sam ple selection 97 four-star hotels Initial sam ple selection 17 four-star hotels sam ple selection The collection of the data required by the firms selected was made using a structured, closed-ended, questionnaire. Its content was mainly based on previous research, whose questions had been used and verified with regard to the validity thereof, and on the information discovered during the secondary investigation of the literature review. 4. Research results The research population sample refers to 31 5 and 4-star hotels, operating in the region of Attica. Considering the size of the hotels, as specified in the previous chapter, 9.68% of the sample hotels are considered small, 70.97% small-medium, while 19.35% are considered large (Table 4.1). These data resulted during the research. It is a fact that the seasonal operation of hotels has a significant impact on the number of employees - especially in times of increased tourism, where needs for extra personnel are greater. Table 4.1: Firm size Firm size Firm size Frequency Rate % Small (< 50) Small-medium (50 249) Large (> = 250) Total EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES 23

8 From the analysis of the research data, it is resulted that 54.84% of hotels employ both permanent and seasonal personnel, while 45.16% of hotels employ only permanent personnel. These employment rates for seasonal and permanent personnel derived during the research. However, due to the nature of the hotel product and its seasonal aspects, these data constantly change, especially in peak seasons, when most hotel businesses tend to hire a large number of seasonal personnel in addition to their permanent personnel. It should be noted that 74.19% of the persons completing the questionnaire are in charge of the human resources department, a fact that increases the reliability and validity of their replies. With regard to the remaining persons completing the questionnaire, 6.45% are from the accounting department, and 19.36% includes managers and executives from other departments. Based on the research data, out of 31 hotel units, 30 (96.77%) replied that they evaluate their employees, while only 1 (3.23%) replied that they do not have an evaluation system in place % of hotels replied that they evaluate the performance of all employees, including extra personnel, while 46.67% of the firms under consideration evaluate only permanent personnel. With regard to the frequency of evaluation, i.e. the time on which the standard evaluation takes place, 53.33% of the hotels replied that the evaluate their employees at a fixed frequency, and specifically once per year, while 13.33% set this frequency to every 6 months, while 6.67% to every 3 months. A rate of 26.67% of the hotels asked replied that they perform the evaluation whenever it is considered necessary. From the verification of the degree of correlation performed, in order to find whether the size of the firm plays a role on the frequency of evaluation, it was resulted that, indeed, there was a significant level of correlation (0.88) between the medium-sized and large hotels. Figure 4.1 presents analytically the frequency of evaluation in relation with the size of the firm. Figure 4.1: Frequency of evaluation in relation with the size of the firm At 60% of the hotels, the evaluations are conducted by the direct heads of the department, while at 40% they are made by numerous sources at the same time. In 13.33% of the hotel units, there is an option for selfevaluation, although this is not used as the sole source of information concerning performance, but in combination with the evaluation by the direct supervisor of the employee. The traits evaluated are various. Nevertheless, the most significant for the firms under examination is behaviour to customers (100.00%). Obviously, this property is a main priority due to the specific nature of EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES 24

9 the services provided by hotels, especially when the personnel comes in direct contract with and provides services to customers. This property is followed by collaboration with colleagues (96.67%), while the personal traits of an employee, such as enthusiasm (66.67%), are not considered as matters of priority (Table 4.2). Table 4.3 presents more thoroughly the traits evaluated for employees, with regard to the correlation between them. At this point it is useful to mention the use of correlation and how mathematically is expressed. We use the correlation coefficient of the array1 and array2 cell ranges to determine the relationship between two properties. Where array1 is a cell range of values and array2 is a second cell range of values. The equation for the correlation coefficient is: where x and y are the sample means AVERAGE(array1) and AVERAGE(array2). It is observed, from that table 4.3, that the greatest level of correlation is found in the quality of work with appearance and personal hygiene (0.85), as well as the quality of work with collaboration with colleagues (0.80). Table 4.2: Employee evaluation traits Employee evaluation traits Traits Frequency Rate % Knowledge of the subject 28 93,33 Willingness to learn 28 93,33 Quality of work 28 93,33 Level of productivity 25 83,33 Ability to handle emergencies 22 73,33 Taking the initiative 26 86,67 Enthusiasm 20 66,67 Collaboration with colleagues 29 96,67 Behavior to customers ,00 Reliability punctuality 25 83,33 Straightforwardness - honesty 28 93,33 Appearance and personal hygiene 27 90,00 Total 316 EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES 25

10 Table 4.3: Degree of correlation between the employees evaluation traits. The evaluation traits for executives that hold priority is personnel management (96.67%), quality of work (96.67%), problem solving (96.67%) and the development of interpersonal relations (96.67%). These are followed by taking the initiative (83.33%) and promoting new ideas (80.00%) (Table 4.4). Table 4.4: Evaluation traits for executives Evaluation traits for executives Traits Frequency Rate % Personnel management 29 96,67 Quality of work 29 96,67 Development of interpersonal relations 29 96,67 Professional & Technical expertise 28 93,33 Problem solving 29 96,67 Promoting innovative ideas 24 80,00 Initiatives 25 83,33 Total 190 EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES 26

11 Table 4.5 presents more thoroughly the traits evaluated for executives, with regard to the correlation between them. We observe that the largest degree of correlation is shown by the quality of work with professional and technical expertise (0,80) as well as personnel management with professional and technical expertise (0,80). Table 4.5: Degree of correlation between the executives evaluation traits. Personnel management Quality of work Development of interpersonal relations Professional & Technical expertise Problem solving Promoting innovative ideas Personnel management Quality of work Development of interpersonal relations Professional & Technical expertise Problem solving Promoting innovative ideas Initiatives 0,47 0,47 0,80 0,47 0,49 0,20 0,47 0,47 0,80 0,47 0,49 0,20 0,47 0,47 0,36 0,47 0,17 0,20 0,80 0,80 0,36 0,36 0,61 0,12 0,47 0,47 0,47 0,36 0,49 0,54 0,49 0,49 0,17 0,61 0,49 0,32 Initiatives 0,20 0,20 0,20 0,12 0,54 0,32 According to Table 4.6, with regard to the evaluation methods, 43.33% of the hotels apply the graphic rating scale method % of the hotels perform their evaluation using the management by objectives method, while 26.67% uses the 360 ο feedback method. Fewer hotels apply the behaviorally anchored rating scales method (10.00%), the checklist method (6.67%) and evaluation by specialist (3.33%). Among the above evaluation methods, 4 hotels apply a combination of various methods for evaluating employee performance. Table 4.6: Evaluation methods Method Frequency Rate % Management by objectives 10 33,33 Evaluation by a specialist 1 3,33 Graphic rating scale method 13 43,33 Checklist method 2 6,67 Behaviorally anchored rating scales 3 10, ο feedback method 8 26,67 Total 37 EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES 27

12 The feedback with regard to the results of the evaluation of the hotels is provided through a personal meeting between the evaluator and the evaluated person, in order to communicate / discuss the evaluation results % of the firms opt for written reports, while an equal rate of firms choose not to inform the evaluated person, while 13.3% prefers group discussions % of the management believe that the evaluation plays a significant to very significant role for the improvement of personal performance and for increasing productivity (93.33%) % consider that the evaluation is significant to very significant for defining the personal and company needs with regard to training and promotions % believe that it is significant for setting the wages, 60.00% for upgrading duties and, finally, 33.33% for proceeding to layoffs. It becomes clear from the above that there is a trend for allocating significance to and connecting the evaluation system with the other systems related with development, productivity, training, and the promotion system (Tables 4.7 and 4.8). Table 4.7: Evaluation significance for achieving objectives Evaluation significance for achieving objectives (1=Insignificant, 2=Low significance, 3=Average significance, 4=Significant, 5=Very significant) Firm objectives Significance % Improvement of personal performance 0,00% 3,33% 3,33% 46,67% 46,67% Increase of productivity 0,00% 0,00% 6,67% 43,33% 50,00% Upgrade of duties 10,00% 0,00% 30,00% 33,33% 26,67% Specification of personal and company needs for training 16,67% 6,67% 3,33% 26,67% 46,67% Promotions 0,00% 10,00% 16,67% 53,33% 20,00% Layoffs 6,67% 13,33% 46,67% 26,67% 6,67% Formation of wages 3,33% 10,00% 20,00% 50,00% 16,67% Table 4.8: Evaluation significance for achieving objectives Firm objectives Frequency Average Median Deviation Improvement of personal performance Increase of productivity Upgrade of duties Specification of personal and company needs for training Promotions Layoffs Formation of wages ,37 4,00 0, ,43 4,00 0, ,67 4,00 1, ,80 4,00 1, ,83 4,00 0, ,13 3,00 0, ,67 4,00 0,99 EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES 28

13 Table 4.9 presents the degree of correlation between the significance of the evaluation objectives. It is observed that the largest rate of correlation is presented by promotions with the upgrading of duties (0.81), as well as the determination of the personal & company needs for training with the upgrading of duties (0.71). Table 4.9: Degree of correlation between the significance of the evaluation objectives. Improvement of personal performance Increase of productivit y Upgrade of duties Specification of personal & company needs for training Promotions Layoff s Formatio n of wages Improvement of personal performance Increase of productivity Upgrade of duties Specification of personal & company needs for training 0,25 0,43 0,67 0,38-0,27 0,18 0,25-0,03 0,13-0,24-0,04 0,52 0,43-0,03 0,71 0,81-0,20 0,17 0,67 0,13 0,71 0,62-0,38 0,18 Promotions 0,38-0,24 0,81 0,62-0,22 0,21 Layoffs -0,27-0,04-0,20-0,38-0,22 0,23 Formation of wages 0,18 0,52 0,17 0,18 0,21 0,23 In 56.67% of the firms, the evaluation is implemented as a formal procedure, while for 43.33% of the firms it is implemented as an informal procedure. A significant element for choosing a suitable evaluation system is the size of the hotel, since a small hotel with a handful of employees usually uses an informal evaluation system - the reason being that it is not easy to implement a formal evaluation system like in large hotels. This conclusion is drawn after analysing in detail the relation between the size of the firm and the informal or formal procedure applied for an evaluation system. In all 6 large hotels of the sample, the evaluation is implemented as a formal procedure, contrary to the 3 smaller hotels, where the evaluation is implemented as an informal procedure. In the event that the outcomes of the evaluation are not satisfactory, all firms replied that they are trying to find the sources of the problem (100.00%), while 70.00% proceeds to taking action against employees with unsatisfactory performance, as opposed to the remaining 30.00% which do not take such action. The results of the evaluation are satisfactory, 80.00% of the firms issues awards to the employees, as opposed to 20.00% were not awards are issued. Finally, after the thorough investigation performed in order to ascertain the degree of correlation between consequences if the results of the evaluation are not satisfactory and awards when the results of evaluation are satisfactory, the degree of correlation observed was low to average (0.22). EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES 29

14 5. Conclusions Proposals From the statistical analysis and processing of the results, the basic conclusions of the research are focused on the following: All hotels under examination, save from one, apply evaluation systems. The evaluation of the employees performance is a procedure conducted systematically, since 73.33% of the hotels under examination conduct such evaluations on an annually, semi-annually or even quarterly basis. The direct supervisors of the departments are the most frequently used source of information concerning the performance of employees, a fact confirmed by literature, since they possess thorough knowledge of work requirements, while also having direct relation with their subordinates; in any case, the research results show that many firms have started applying a multiple-sourced evaluation method. Among the qualities of the employees evaluated, the one considered most important is personnel behaviour to clients, a quality that was due to be very important because of the specific nature of the services provided in hotels, especially when the personnel's position requires direct contact with clients and servicing of them. Committing to new values, such as behaviour to clients, means that the managers of the hotel must pay greater attention to evaluation sources located outside the firm, i.e. the clients. With regard to the evaluation qualities of the executives, the most important position is held by personnel management, quality of work, problem solving, and development of interpersonal relations. With regard to the evaluation methods employed, the most prevalent is the method of graphic rating scale, which according to Chytiris (2001) is considered as the most frequently applied method in the category based on qualities and according to Mouza-Lazaridi (2006) is the most objective, stable and simple one. This is followed by the method using the management by objectives, and by the 360 o feedback method, which allows the evaluated person to receive feedback by a rather large amount of persons (Newbold, 2008). The gravity of feedback for results seems to be confirmed by research results, since only 16.67% of the hotels do not inform the person under evaluation. The majority of the persons responsible who provide replies to the research consider, among other, that the evaluation contributes significantly up to very significantly to the improvement of personal performance and to the increase of productivity. From the research conducted, we may observe a change and a trend towards the adoption of a standard evaluation method, which is noticed however more in small-medium and large hotels than in small ones. These results are confirmed by the relevant literature, where depending on the size and the level of organisation for a company, the evaluation may vary between having a structured and well-designed form, to an informal and quick opinion. Usually, large hotels, due to the large number of persons that must be managed, require more systemised procedures and methodologies of evaluation, which operate within specific organisational frameworks, contrary to small hotel units that have much less personnel. Finally, the majority of hotels studied seem to understand the incentive factor and its benefits, hence they award with various ways any employee with satisfactory results. The results of the research are encouraging, since the findings of the research concerning modern tendencies and policies applied by these firms show that there has been progress concerning evaluation systems, since it becomes clearer by hotel managements that the realisation of corporate objectives is closely tied to personnel performance. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES 30

15 The present research tried to study and map the methods and systems employed by hotels in Attica, in order to draw conclusions regarding the prevailing trends and the policies applied by these firms within the context of evaluating their personnel. The size of the sample was considered satisfactory for performing a statistical analysis of such form. However, it must be taken into consideration that larger samples, as well as a geographical generalisation of the research could lead to different results or verify with increased safety the results already shown. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES 31

16 References 1. Aspridis, G., (2007), Study for human resources performance evaluation in the private sector, Review of Administrative Science Journal, Issue 13, pages , Athens - Thessaloniki: Sakkoulas editions (in Greek) 2. Aspridis, G., (2009), Human Resource evaluation in hotel units, Review of Administrative Science Journal, Issue 15, pages , Athens - Thessaloniki: Sakkoulas editions (in Greek). 3. Chytiris, L., (2001), Human Resource Management, Athens: Interbooks editions (in Greek). 4. Davies, D., Taylor, R. & L. Savery, (2001), The role of appraisal, remuneration and training in improving staff relations in the Western Australian accommodation industry: A comparative study, Journal of European Industrial Training, Vol. 25, p Laloumis, D. (2002), Hotel Management, Athens: Stamoulis editions (in Greek). 6. Liveris P., (2008), Personnel Management in the Hotel Industry, Athens: Ellin editions (in Greek). 7. Mondy, W., Sphr, J.B. Mondy, (2009), Human Resource Management, Prentice Hall, Human Resource Management, Thessaloniki: Tziola. 8. Mouza-Lazaridi Α.Μ., (2006), Human Resource Management,Athens: Kritiki editions (in Greek). 9. Newbold, C., (2008), 360-Degree Appraisals are now a Classic, Human Resource Management International Digest, Vol. 16, No 2, p Pavlopoulos, P., (2007), Small and medium sized tourist firms. Role, Perspectives, Measures, Athens: Research Institute for Tourism (in Greek). 11. Research Institute for Tourism (2011), Developments in the main figures of the hotel market in , Athens: Hellenic Chamber of Hotels (in Greek). 12. Woods, R.H., Sciarini, M. & D. Breiter, (1998), Performance Appraisal in Hotels. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Vol.2, p Websites 14. Hellenic Chamber of Hotels, (2012), [retrieved ] 15. Hellenic Chamber of Hotels, (2012), Hotels in Central Greece for [retrieved ] 17. Official Journal of the European Union (1996), (No. L107/8, ), Commission Recommendation of 3 April 1996 concerning the definition of small and medium-sized enterprises, [retrieved ] 19. Journal of the Greek Government (2002), Presidential Decree 43/ , Classification of main hotels in categories using a star system and technical specifications thereof, [retrieved ] EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES 32