GRO UP ASSESSMENT BRIEF
Subject Code and Name HGE401: Hotels and the Guest Experience
Assessment Group Project (Written Business Repot)
Individual/Group Group
Length 5000 + Infographics
Learning Outcomes
This assessment addresses the following subject learning outcomes:
a) Understand the concept and development of professionalism within the broader tourism, hospitality and events industry;
c) Explore the correlation between culture, customer experience and business experience;
d) Analyse the impact of poor customer experiences;
e) Assess a range of strategies that hotels can take to improve their customers’ experience.
f) Develop innovative and creative approaches to engage and meet the needs of the ever-changing customer market
Submission By 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Sunday (week 10)
Weighting 40%
Total Marks 100 marks
Context:
This assessment task requires you to explore the concept of guest experience in a hospitality service setting, integrating both the perspectives of customers and operators. It aims to enable you to recognise the importance of co-creating positive experiences for an ever-changing customer market, in order to engage and meet the needs of both consumers and providers. The task also aims at developing your capacity to identify strategies and opportunities for improvement, and subsequently propose practical recommendations for the enhancement hospitality firm’s experiences.
This assessment task gives you the opportunity to work with a group of your peers and investigate a topic that is important to the hotel sector. The purpose of this assessment is threefold. First, as a group project it is designed to be a practicum for learning leadership skills including group decision making, conflict resolution, interpersonal communication, and critical analysis. Second, communication (oral, written and visual), is an important skill in any profession and this is an opportunity for you to work with a variety of communication skills. Finally, the assessment provides you an opportunity to investigate what service firms in hospitality are doing to provide distinctive customer service.
Instructions:
This assessment task requires you, as a group (of 5), to write a 5,000-word report based on the case study “A day in the life of experience stagers: The case study of Saffire Freycinet” (Case study provided separately). The case describes the hotel experience of Charles and Karen through the eyes of the staff operating the luxury lodge.
As a group you are to write a business report, complemented with two (2) infographics, that provides:
1. An analysis of the elements of the Saffire Freycinet experience Charles and Karen had.
2. An evaluation of the importance of co-creation in creating a memorable experience and the role the staff have in managing this experience.
3. A critical reflection on the strategies utilised by the luxury lodge to manage the quality of their guest experience and the impacts that quality experiences have to the hospitality business success.
Written report structure guidelines:
The written part of your group project should follow the structure of a business report and should be written in third person.
In your report you will have to provide the analysis of the case study, the evaluation of Charles and Karen’s service experience and a reflection of the strategies used by the luxury lodge to co-create and manage positive experiences. To do so you must frame your analysis around research from academic literature and industry publications. You should read widely and incorporate this reading into your discussion. As a place to start you should include in your report the readings provided throughout the unit, however additional research is expected for this assessment.
To help you better understand how to integrate research and your case analysis please follow the below report structure:
Structure Guideline:
• Group Assignment Cover Sheet
• Executive Summary* (approx. 500 words)
? Report aim
? Main problem
? Method of research used and sources used for the report (e.g. academic articles, blogs, online magazines)
? Key findings and recommendations summarised
• Table of Contents
• Introduction (approx. 500 words – structural elements only)
? Background information on the topic
? Aim of report/Thesis statement
? Structure of report
1. Evaluation of the Saffire Freycinet Experience (approx. 1500 words)
? In this section you are required to analyse the Saffire Freycinet experience of Charles and Karen. Your analysis should focus on breaking down the experience Charles and Karen had at Saffire Freycinet, identifying all the elements that contribute to determine their experience. This section should contain the following elements and answer the following questions:
i. One (1) Infographic visualising Charles and Karen’s Saffire Freycinet total experience (a customer journey map or a service blueprint are some of the best tools you can use to do this).
ii. Utilising the case study as a reference point, reflect of the theatrical metaphor Hemmington (2007) provides to define the hospitality experience. Who is the audience? Who are the front stage actors? Who are the backstage technicians? What are the supporting activities? What constitutes the theatrical stage? How do these combined elements create the Saffire Freycinet experience?
iii. Applying Walls et al. (2011) model of luxury hotel experience, identify and analyse all the elements that, in the case study, have contributed to create Charles’s experience at Saffire Freycinet Lodge? How do these elements make Charles’ experience a luxury experience?
2. Co-creating and managing the Saffire Freycinet experience (approx. 1500 words)
? In this section you will present your evaluation of the role that co-creation, and particularly the staff, has in co-creating and managing Charles and Karen’s experience. To help you frame your report this section should address the following points:
i. Reflect on the role that co-creation has in creating positive guest experience. Provide examples from the case study to support your analysis.
ii. What is the fundamental role that staff has in delivering memorable experiences? What competencies do they require? How can they acquire them? Utilise the Hospitality intelligence framework proposed by Bharwani and Juanhari (2013) to frame your evaluation. Use examples from the case study to support.
iii. Based on the case study, evaluate what are the most impactful challenges the staff at Saffire Freycinet Lodge experience on a daily basis in co-creating, staging and managing their guests’ experiences. How do they overcome them?
3. Managing the quality of Saffire Freycinet experience (approx. 1000 words)
• In this section, you are to identify strategies used by Saffire Freycinet to manage the quality of each guest experience. Tactics and strategies proposed to manage and enhance the quality of Saffire Freycinet experience should be, in fact, explained under the lens of the theories and models studied in class on total customer experience management and experience quality (see Alnawas & Hemsley-Brown, 2019). This section should contain the following elements:
i. One (1) infographic that presents the identified strategies and how they work to manage and enhance the quality of the Saffire Freycinet experience.
ii. Reflect on Charles and Karen’s Saffire Freycinet experiences over the years, and discuss how their emotional and psychological needs have been identified and fulfilled by the “experience stagers”. How does this contribute to their evaluation of the quality of their experiences?
iii. Critically reflect on the strategies used by the lodge staff to manage the quality of the experience. Are there other strategies that can be utilised in this context? Can these strategies be utilised in other hotel contexts?
iv. What are the impacts to the business of creating quality experiences rather than unsatisfactory experiences? Use examples from the case study to support your reflection.
• Conclusion (approx. 500 words – Structural element only)
• Recommendations (OPTIONAL)
• Reference List*
• Appendix or Appendices*
Please note that a discretional + or – 10% marks could be awarded or deducted for individual performance based on peer evaluation.
Suggested readings:
Aggett, M. (2007). What has influenced growth in the UK's boutique hotel sector?. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 19(2), 169-177.
Ariffin, A. A. M., Maghzi, A., Soon, J. L. M., & Alam, S. S. (2018). Exploring the influence of hospitality on guest satisfaction in luxury hotel services. e-Review of Tourism Research, 15(1).
Bitner, M. J., Ostrom, A. L., & Morgan, F. N. (2008). Service blueprinting: a practical technique for service innovation. California management review, 50(3), 66-94.
Carù, A., & Cova, B. (2003). Revisiting consumption experience: a more humble but complete view of the concept. Marketing theory, 3(2), 267-286.
Gilmore, J. H., & Pine, B. J. (2002). Differentiating hospitality operations via experiences: Why selling services is not enough. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 43(3), 87-96.
Harkison, T. (2018). The use of co-creation within the luxury accommodation experience–myth or reality?. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 71, 11-18.
Harkison, T., Hemmington, N., & Hyde, K. F. (2018). Creating the luxury accommodation experience:
case studies from New Zealand. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 30(3), 1724-1740.
Hemmington, N. (2007). From service to experience: Understanding and defining the hospitality business. The Service Industries Journal, 27(6), 747-755.
Kandampully, J., Zhang, T., & Jaakkola, E. (2018). Customer experience management in hospitality: A literature synthesis, new understanding and research agenda. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 30(1), 21-56.
Mcintosh, A. J., & Siggs, A. (2005). An exploration of the experiential nature of boutique accommodation. Journal of travel research, 44(1), 74-81.
Meyer, C., & Schwager, A. (2007). Understanding customer experience. Harvard business review, 85(2), 116.
Pine, B. J., & Gilmore, J. H. (1998). Welcome to the experience economy. Harvard business review, 76, 97-105.
Walls, A., Okumus, F., Wang, Y., & Kwun, D. J. W. (2011). Understanding the consumer experience: An exploratory study of luxury hotels. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 20(2), 166-197.
Submission Instructions:
1. Typed and formatted following the Assessment Structure Style Guide and uploaded to BlackBoard on time on the due date. Recommendations are OPTIONAL.
2. The total word count, excluding executive summary and references, must be within 10% (+ or -) of the assessment word count. Penalties will apply when word count restrictions are not met.
3. To be submitted in electronic form as a word-processed file to BlackBoard
4. You are expected to refer, in text, to a minimum of twelve (12) academic sources, plus others as required in order to show competency in the assessment. Up to four of these can be academic textbooks, with a minimum of eight academic journal articles. Blogs and other unverifiable sources will not count as references
5. All referencing must be in accordance with the Academic Writing Guide: APA 6th Edition on SharePoint.
6. A TUA cover sheet to be attached to your paper (Group assessment cover sheet) 7. See marking rubric below, you do not need to attach this rubric to your submissions.
NOTE: For the group assessment, only one copy of the report is to be submitted to Turnitin with all group members name of the cover sheet, and a BMIHMS Peer Evaluation form MUST BE completed and submitted to the lecturer by the assessment due date.

Assessment Criteria Fail
(Unacceptable)
0-49% Pass
(Functional)
50-64% Credit
(Proficient) 65-74% Distinction
(Advanced)
75 -84% High Distinction
(Exceptional)
85-100%
Knowledge and understanding (technical and theoretical knowledge)
20%
Limited understanding of required concepts and
knowledge
Key components of the assignment are not addressed.
Knowledge or understanding of the field or discipline.
Resembles a recall or summary of key ideas.
Often confuses assertion of personal opinion with information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials.
Thorough knowledge or understanding of the field or discipline/s. Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials.
Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts.
Highly developed understanding of the field or discipline/s.
Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.
Well demonstrated capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts.
A sophisticated understanding of the field or discipline/s.
Systematically and critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.
Mastery of concepts and application to new situations/further learning.
Content, Audience and Purpose (broad and
specific content)
20%
Demonstrates no awareness of context and/or purpose of the assignment.
Demonstrates limited awareness of context and/or
purpose of the assignment
Demonstrates consistent awareness of context and/or purpose of the assignment.
Demonstrates an advanced and integrated understanding of context and/or purpose of the assignment.
Consistently demonstrates a systematic and critical understanding of context and purpose of the assignment.
Analysis and application with synthesis of new
knowledge
20%
Limited synthesis and analysis.
Limited application/ recommendations based upon analysis.
Demonstrated analysis and synthesis of new knowledge with application.
Shows the ability to interpret relevant information and literature. Well-developed analysis and synthesis with application of recommendations linked to analysis/synthesis.
Thoroughly developed and creative analysis and synthesis with application of pretested models and / or independently developed models and justified recommendations linked to analysis/synthesis.
Highly sophisticated and creative analysis, synthesis of new with existing knowledge.
Strong application by way of pretested models and / or independently developed models. Recommendations are clearly justified based on the analysis/synthesis. Applying
knowledge to new situations/other cases.
HGE401 Group Project Brief Page 6 of 7
Effective Communication
10%
Difficult to understand for audience, no logical/clear structure, poor flow of ideas, argument lacks supporting evidence.
Audience cannot follow the line of reasoning.
Did not meet the word count requirements Information, arguments and evidence are presented in a way that is not always clear and logical.
Line of reasoning is often difficult to follow.
Information, arguments and evidence are well presented, mostly clear flow of ideas and arguments.
Line of reasoning is easy to follow.
Information, arguments and evidence are very well presented; the presentation is logical, clear and well supported by evidence.
Demonstrates cultural sensitivity.
Expertly presented; the presentation is logical, persuasive, and well supported by evidence, demonstrating a clear flow of ideas and arguments.
Engages and sustains audience’s
interest in the topic, demonstrates high levels of
cultural sensitivity
Effective use of diverse presentation aids, including graphics and multi-media.
Quality of research- Correct citation of key resources and evidence
20%
Demonstrates inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas. Demonstrates use of credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed. Demonstrates use of high quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas.
Demonstrates use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and statements. Shows evidence of wide scope within the organisation for sourcing evidence Demonstrates use of high-quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Shows evidence of wide scope within and without the organisation for sourcing evidence
Quality of infographics
10%
Graphics do not relate to the topic.
Several required elements were missing.
The infographic is distractingly messy or very poorly designed. It is not attractive Some graphics relate to the topic
All but 1 of the required elements are included on the infographic.
The infographic is acceptably attractive though it may be a bit messy All graphics relate to the topic
All required elements are
included on the infographic
The infographic is reasonably attractive in terms of design, layout and neatness
All graphics are related to the topic and most make it easier to
understand
The infographic includes all required elements as well as additional information.
The infographic is attractive in terms of design, layout and neatness.
All graphics are related to the topic and are well developed and
make it easier to understand
The infographic includes all required elements as well as additional information and are well presented.
The infographic is exceptionally attractive in terms of design, layout, and neatness.
HGE401 Group Project Brief Page 7 of 7