An Examination of Stock Performance: The Three Top-Performing Lodging Firms August 1987 - January 1990

A study published in the Fall 1988 issue of the FIU Hospitality Review revealed that the top three lodging stock performers during the period July 1982 to January 1988 were Prime Motor Inns, Inc., Marriott Corporation, and Hilton Hotels Corporation. The author has completed a follow-up study in an attempt to determine how selected lodging firms have fared since the summer rally of 1987 (which preceded the stock crash of October 19, 1987) until more recent times.

Best Management Practices in Green Lodging Defined and Explained

Best management practices in green lodging are sustainable or “green” business strategies designed to enhance the lodging product from the perspective of owners, operators and guests. For guests, these practices should enhance their experience while for owners and operators, generate positive returns on investments. Best management practices in green lodging typically starts with a clear understanding of each lodging firm’s role in society, its impact on the environment and strategies developed to mitigate negative environmental externalities generated from the production of lodging goods and services. Negative externalities of hotel operations manifest themselves in energy and water usage, waste generation and air pollution. Hence, best management practices in green lodging are dynamic, cost effective, innovative, stakeholder driven and environmentally sound technical and behavioral solutions that attempt to ameliorate or eliminate the negative environmental externalities associated with lodging operations, while simultaneously generate positive returns on green investments. Thus, best management practices in green lodging should reduce lodging firms’ operating costs, increase guest satisfaction, reduce or eliminate the negative environmental impacts associated with hotel operations while simultaneously enhance business operations.

An Analysis of Stock Market Performance:The Dow Jones Industrial Average and the Three Top Performing Lodging Firma: 1982-1988

In their dialogue - An Analysis of Stock Market Performance: The Dow Jones Industrial Average and the Three Top Performing Lodging Firms 1982 – 1988 - by N. H. Ringstrom, Professor and Elisa S. Moncarz, Associate Professor, School of Hospitality Management at Florida International University, Professors Ringstrom and Moncarz state at the outset: “An interesting comparison can be made between the Dow Jones lndustrial Average and the three top performing, publicly held lodging firms which had $100 million or more in annual lodging revenues. The authors provide that analytical comparison with Prime Motor Inns Inc., the Marriott Corporation, and Hilton Hotels Corporation.” “Based on a criterion of size, only those with $100 million in annual lodging revenues or more resulted in the inclusion of the following six major hotel firms: Prime Motor Inns, Inc., Marriott Corporation, Hilton Hotels Corporation, Ramada Inc., Holiday Corporation and La Quinta Motor Inns, Inc.,” say Professors Ringstrom and Moncarz in framing this discussion with its underpinnings in the years 1982 to 1988. The article looks at each company’s fiscal and Dow Jones performance for the years in question, and presents a detailed analysis of said performance. Graphic analysis is included. It helps to have a fairly vigorous knowledge of stock market and fiscal examination criteria to digest this material. The Ringstrom and Moncarz analysis of Prime Motor Inns Incorporated occupies the first 7 pages of this article in and of itself. Marriot Corporation also occupies a prominent position in this discussion. “Marriott, a giant in the hospitality industry, is huge and continuing to grow. Its 1987 sales were more than $6.5 billion, and its employees numbered over 200,000 individuals, which place Marriott among the 10 largest private employers in the country,” Ringstrom and Moncarz parse Marriott’s influence as a significant financial player. “The firm has a fantastic history of growth over the past 60 years, starting in May 1927 with a nine-seat A & W Root Beer stand in Washington, D.C.,” offer the authors in initialing Marriot’s portion of the discussion with a brief history lesson. The Marriot firm was officially incorporated as Hot Shoppes Inc. in 1929. As the thesis statement for the discussion suggests the performance of these huge, hospitality giants is compared and contrasted directly to the Dow Jones Industrial Average performance. Reasons and empirical data are offered by the authors to explain the distinctions. It would be difficult to explain those distinctions without delving deeply into corporate financial history and the authors willingly do so in an effort to help you understand the growth, as well as some of the setbacks of these hospitality based juggernauts. Ringstrom and Moncarz conclude the article with an extensive overview and analysis of the Hilton Hotels Corporation performance for the period outlined. It may well be the most fiscally dynamic of the firms presented for your perusal. “It is interesting to note that Hilton Hotels Corporation maintained a very strong financial position with relatively little debt during the years 1982-1988…the highest among all companies in the study,” the authors paint.

Best Management Practices in Green Lodging Defined and Explained

Best management practices in green lodging are sustainable or “green” business strategies designed to enhance the lodging product from the perspective of owners, operators and guests. For guests, these practices should enhance their experience while for owners and operators, generate positive returns on investments. Best management practices in green lodging typically starts with a clear understanding of each lodging firm’s role in society, its impact on the environment and strategies developed to mitigate negative environmental externalities generated from the production of lodging goods and services. Negative externalities of hotel operations manifest themselves in energy and water usage, waste generation and air pollution. Hence, best management practices in green lodging are dynamic, cost effective, innovative, stakeholder driven and environmentally sound technical and behavioral solutions that attempt to ameliorate or eliminate the negative environmental externalities associated with lodging operations, while simultaneously generate positive returns on green investments. Thus, best management practices in green lodging should reduce lodging firms’ operating costs, increase guest satisfaction, reduce or eliminate the negative environmental impacts associated with hotel operations while simultaneously enhance business operations.

Towards an Understanding of Lodging Asset Management and its Components

Lodging asset management has emerged as one of the most important areas of strategic hotel management. Increasingly, lodging companies are soliciting the services of asset management firms or developing internal asset management competencies. This article synthesizes and discusses the essential components of dynamic lodging asset management. The article provides a detail background on asset management and its importance and explains the role of lodging asset managers and their working relationships with ownership and operators. The article also discusses the competencies and skills of asset managers.

The relationship between Internet use and perceived performance in retail and professional service firms

lnformation technology (IT) and, in particular, the Internet is dramatically impacting on the services sector. This paper specifically investigates the relative impact of several forms of internet use on perceived performance for two groups of service organisations - retail service firms and professlonal health service firms. Using a mailed out self-administered questionnaire, 625 completed questionnaires were obtained and 43 per cent of respondents reported that they used the lternet. Thus the final usable sample in the study comprised 262 respondents. Results showed that the Internet does significantly influence perceived performance in both types of service firms. However,there are differences in the forms of lntemet use between the two service groups and their relative effect on performance. For retail firms, use of transactional function, such as ordering, selling and payment was found to be positively related to increases in perceived performance. In contrast, for professional health service firms, the ability to search for information on products and/or services was found to be positively associated with perceived performance. Finally, theoretical and managerial implications of the findings of this study are discussed.

Operationalizing the resource based view for nascent and young firms : developing scales for resource advantages and disadvantages

Principal Topic: It is well known that most new ventures suffer from a significant lack of resources, which increases the risk of failure (Shepherd, Douglas and Shanley, 2000) and makes it difficult to attract stakeholders and financing for the venture (Bhide & Stevenson, 1999). The Resource-Based View (RBV) (Barney, 1991; Wernerfelt, 1984) is a dominant theoretical base increasingly drawn on within Strategic Management. While theoretical contributions applying RBV in the domain of entrepreneurship can arguably be traced back to Penrose (1959), there has been renewed attention recently (e.g. Alvarez & Busenitz, 2001; Alvarez & Barney, 2004). This said, empirical work is in its infancy. In part, this may be due to a lack of well developed measuring instruments for testing ideas derived from RBV. The purpose of this study is to develop a measurement scales that can serve to assist such empirical investigations. In so doing we will try to overcome three deficiencies in current empirical measures used for the application of RBV to the entrepreneurship arena. First, measures for resource characteristics and configurations associated with typical competitive advantages found in entrepreneurial firms need to be developed. These include such things as alertness and industry knowledge (Kirzner, 1973), flexibility (Ebben & Johnson, 2005), strong networks (Lee et al., 2001) and within knowledge intensive contexts, unique technical expertise (Wiklund and Shepard, 2003). Second, the RBV has the important limitations of being relatively static and modelled on large, established firms. In that context, traditional RBV focuses on competitive advantages. However, newly established firms often face disadvantages, especially those associated with the liabilities of newness (Aldrich & Auster, 1986). It is therefore important in entrepreneurial contexts to expand to an investigation of responses to competitive disadvantage through an RBV lens. Conversely, recent research has suggested that resource constraints actually have a positive effect on firm growth and performance under some circumstances (e.g., George, 2005; Katila & Shane, 2005; Mishina et al., 2004; Mosakowski, 2002; cf. also Baker & Nelson, 2005). Third, current empirical applications of RBV measured levels or amounts of particular resources available to a firm. They infer that these resources deliver firms competitive advantage by establishing a relationship between these resource levels and performance (e.g. via regression on profitability). However, there is the opportunity to directly measure the characteristics of resource configurations that deliver competitive advantage, such as Barney´s well known VRIO (Valuable, Rare, Inimitable and Organized) framework (Barney, 1997). Key Propositions and Methods: The aim of our study is to develop and test scales for measuring resource advantages (and disadvantages) and inimitability for entrepreneurial firms. The study proceeds in three stages. The first stage developed our initial scales based on earlier literature. Where possible, we adapt scales based on previous work. The first block of the scales related to the level of resource advantages and disadvantages. Respondents were asked the degree to which each resource category represented an advantage or disadvantage relative to other businesses in their industry on a 5 point response scale: Major Disadvantage, Slight Disadvantage, No Advantage or Disadvantage, Slight Advantage and Major Advantage. Items were developed as follows. Network capabilities (3 items) were adapted from (Madsen, Alsos, Borch, Ljunggren & Brastad, 2006). Knowledge resources marketing expertise / customer service (3 items) and technical expertise (3 items) were adapted from Wiklund and Shepard (2003). flexibility (2 items), costs (4 items) were adapted from JIBS B97. New scales were developed for industry knowledge / alertness (3 items) and product / service advantages. The second block asked the respondent to nominate the most important resource advantage (and disadvantage) of the firm. For the advantage, they were then asked four questions to determine how easy it would be for other firms to imitate and/or substitute this resource on a 5 point likert scale. For the disadvantage, they were asked corresponding questions related to overcoming this disadvantage. The second stage involved two pre-tests of the instrument to refine the scales. The first was an on-line convenience sample of 38 respondents. The second pre-test was a telephone interview with a random sample of 31 Nascent firms and 47 Young firms (< 3 years in operation) generated using a PSED method of randomly calling households (Gartner et al. 2004). Several items were dropped or reworded based on the pre-tests. The third stage (currently in progress) is part of Wave 1 of CAUSEE (Nascent Firms) and FEDP (Young Firms), a PSED type study being conducted in Australia. The scales will be tested and analysed with a random sample of approximately 700 Nascent and Young firms respectively. In addition, a judgement sample of approximately 100 high potential businesses in each category will be included. Findings and Implications: The paper will report the results of the main study (stage 3 – currently data collection is in progress) will allow comparison of the level of resource advantage / disadvantage across various sub-groups of the population. Of particular interest will be a comparison of the high potential firms with the random sample. Based on the smaller pre-tests (N=38 and N=78) the factor structure of the items confirmed the distinctiveness of the constructs. The reliabilities are within an acceptable range: Cronbach alpha ranged from 0.701 to 0.927. The study will provide an opportunity for researchers to better operationalize RBV theory in studies within the domain of entrepreneurship. This is a fundamental requirement for the ability to test hypotheses derived from RBV in systematic, large scale research studies.