Pros and cons of operating state-owned hotels

1. The rights and responsibilities of state-owned hotels are unclear. The hotel legal person operates state-owned assets on behalf of state-owned hotels and is responsible for state-owned hotels. In actual operation, the operation of state-owned hotels is often appointed by higher-level government departments. The quality of state-owned hotels is not directly related to the operators, and the evaluation system is not complete and specific enough. When operators of state-owned hotels make decisions, such as appointing managers, renovating state-owned hotels, etc., they need to report to the superior leadership department for approval. Operators of state-owned hotels only enjoy a certain degree of control over the company's residual claims, but do not enjoy the right to claim residuals from state-owned hotels. The effective operating incentives for state-owned hotels are not enough, and it is easy to form a vicious cycle, which is also the reason for the low efficiency of state-owned hotels. main reason. Each department of the state-owned hotel has predetermined task indicators, and the communication between departments is poor. As long as their own department can complete the task, it does not care about other departments. Overall development of the hotel.

2. An important problem in the development of state-owned hotels is the serious rule of man. The selection of corporate talents is mainly made by managers, leaving employees with less development space and promotion opportunities. The promotion method based on seniority has resulted in some outstanding talents not seeing promotion opportunities and development space, and having to choose to change jobs to seek better development. This has caused state-owned hotels to lose many outstanding talents and seriously affected the development of state-owned hotels. In addition, the property management of state-owned hotels is relatively flexible, and there are many loopholes in their daily inventory. Some managers take this opportunity and use their positions to seek personal interests, which increases the operating costs of state-owned hotels and affects state-owned enterprises. healthy development.

3. The incentives given to employees by state-owned hotels in my country are mainly based on material and political incentives such as salary increases and commissions. Some outstanding employees are only given bonuses, without truly considering the employees and management of state-owned hotels. The demand motivation of personnel is not effective. Employees and managers of state-owned hotels choose state-owned hotels more for the purpose of realizing their career goals of life value. The existing incentive system of my country's state-owned hotels is overly focused on form, has a single drastic approach, and does not take into account the pursuit of social and moral values ??by state-owned hotel managers.

4. State-owned hotels pay too much attention to room revenue, and their catering and entertainment projects are relatively weak and have a low market share. This also directly reduces the market competitiveness of state-owned hotels. Secondly, the hotel industry is a service industry with high work intensity and heavy workload. Employees work a lot of overtime. However, regular employees of state-owned hotels have better welfare benefits after retirement, which increases the burden on state-owned hotels. Thirdly, the professional skills of state-owned hotel employees are low. Most of the early employees were assigned and have low academic qualifications. Some employees came in through the back door through connections. Nepotism is more serious and the business level is lower, which to a certain extent lowers the level of business. improve the overall level of state-owned hotel employees.