Hilton Hotel Change Management
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Like this? Share it with your network

Share
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
7,959
On Slideshare
7,957
From Embeds
2
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
208
Comments
0
Likes
1

Embeds 2

https://twitter.com 2

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide
  • Before I begin I would like to thank Hilton for the opportunity to present this case.
  • Agenda-First off: issue identification (opportunities to see some areas for improvement)Industry and financial analysis to compare and contrast Hilton to their counterpartsPossible Alternatives will outline viable options that Hilton may considerImplementation plan sums up our opinion of how Hilton should proceed Should that plan go awry, a contingency plan is in place which we will share with youFinally I will wrap up with a summary of the case followed by a brief question and answer period.
  • - 4 key issues that Hilton has an opportunity to take advantage ofBrand differentiation: although hilton has a proprietary system, other hotels have similar IT systems that perform similar servicesMonitoring performance: SALT surveys are the only predictor of performance/poor completion rate, not properly reflecting opinions, measuring performance in a more effective manner is high priority – Customer Personalization: this is an opportunity to further enhance personal experience – facilitate that competitive advantage – which will ultimately breed brand differentiationAlignment and Execution: strategy may be in place, but execution is often a struggle – it is essential to provide consistency in brands. A customer can expect the same experience from a Hilton in San Fran to a Hilton in NYC.
  • - Brand Differentiation – Will be the outcome of customer personalization, essentially you are killing 2 birds with one stone here as implementing a customer personalization element will enhance brand differentiation, therefore low urgency low differentiation
  • Current SALT surveys are in place, additional performance metrics are not extremely urgent, but measuring performance is an important indicator (high importance/low urgency)
  • Creates foundation for your competitve advantageHigh urgency to stay ahead of the competition, but low importance as the main factor to consider is the actual execution through the front desk staff
  • High urgency/high importance – this includes making sure there is consistency across all brands, front staff execution is the most difficult task, front desk staff is the facet of the organization that the guest deals with most often, therefore it is most crucial.With the identification of these issues, I would like to hand it over to our industry analyst, Adam.
  • Principal-Agent: Franchise & Brands. CRM: Customer retention,
  • System integration-customer feedback component-coaching/encourage with rewards-monthly performance reports(run parallel system)Continue with current system-customer feedback component-coaching-monthly performance reports
  • System integration-customer feedback component-coaching/encourage with rewards-monthly performance reports(run parallel system)Continue with current system-customer feedback component-coaching-monthly performance reports
  • A RevPAR (Yield) Index measures a hotel’s fair market share of their segment’s (competitive set, market, submarket, etc.) revenue per available room. If a hotel is capturing its fair market share, the index will be 100; if capturing less than its fair market share, a hotel’s index will be less than 100; and if capturing more than its fair market share, a hotel’s index will be greater than 100.
  • Thank you Paul, taking the financial and qualitative analysis explained by Adam and Paul into account , we propose three alternatives. The first alternative begins by discarding the current proprietary system which took 6 years to build and opting for an off the shelf ERP software like SAP and customizing it to the business needs. The cost estimate for doing this is 125 Million/5 years. The advantages of doing this are low maintenance which is covered in the purchase of software, IT support from the vendor and cost cutting of staff as a result of outsourcing.
  • The major disadvantages associated are losing the competitive edge against your major competitor Marriott as a result of less personalization of software. Also since we are deploying an entirely new system, there is a training cost associated for front desk as well as booking sources. The time lines associated with this option are anywhere from 1 to 2 years.
  • Going forth the second alternative we propose is integrating the current OnQ CRM, Reservations and property management systems into one consolidated OnQ system and add a Customer relationship marketing component to it. This system will be capable of delivering monthly performance reports from each franchise and track front desk performance as well. We estimate the cost of executing this alternative at 392.5 M/5 Years. The advantages of implementing this plan is lower maintenance cost associated with single system, cost saving on staff and front desk personalization from CRM component and brand alignment.
  • The only disadvantages of system integration are high front end costs from hardware and system reengineering. Although there is a possibility of data loss, we recommend running the current system parallely during the implementation. There are also costs associated with maintaining two systems in the initial phases.
  • The third alternative we propose is Customer relationship marketing. This alternative uses the guest data from existing SALT surveys to target market segments and further launch a marketing campaign centered around customer interactivity. We estimate the cost of implementing this alternative at 100M/5 years. The positive side of implementing this is quicker time lines, lower cost and this system is sustainable over long-term since it concentrated on gaining new customers and build a loyal customer base.
  • Although this plan is promising in terms of marketing the brand, it does not alter anything in the current OnQ system, so there is ultimately no personalization component to address front desk staff issues. Another factor of implementing this system involves tailoring it to the diverse client base since you are expanding into different continents in the future.
  • Looking at the decision matrix with criterion addressing evident areas of we find System Integration and consolidation to score major points over other alternatives. opportunity and weights assigned in order of available resources like your IT budget being 240 M/yr.
  • Current SystemAs you know, With the current system, all Bookings go through to the Reservation systemCommunicates with both CRM system, which maintains customer profiles and preferencesAnd PMS – which manages guest accounts and guest historyFront desk staff accessed PMS and CRM systems separately, and staff don’t have the ability to make any changes to customer information
  • New Consolidated SystemHere, the three current systems (OnQ Reservations, OnQ CRM, and OnQ Property Management System) are being consolidated into one OnQ system. The Result will be a more seamless interface that allows for greater customer flexibilitycustomers can now choose to alter their preferences during the booking process through Hilton branded websites, Hilton reservation and call center, and third party distribution centresthis will help address the room pre-assignment issue for loyal customers (ex. Preference for first floor room, except in New York) by allowing customers to specify preferences pre-arrivalIn addition, Hilton employees at the front desk now have the ability to go right into the system and make any changes that customers may request on-site
  • TimelineThis timeline addresses the estimated completion time of each of the phases of our implementation plan, which I will go into more detail about in a second.For the consolidation process, we estimate the design and implementation time will take 6 months.Testing and finalization will take a month eachAs a whole, 8 monthsOnce the new system has gone through design and testing, we estimate it will take 2 years to convert the existing 3000 hotels under the Hilton brand, which works out to roughly 30 hotels a week.In addition, In order to accommodate your aggressive expansion plans, we aim to keep you on track to expand by 1000 local hotels in the next 5 years, with the understanding that the expansion will be delayed by 8 months initially to ensure the new system is ready for implementation
  • DesignOur plan involves creating a design team of 50 IT staff who will be responsible for the design and testing process, and hiring 50 new staff on contract to take fill the now vacant positionsThis team will be responsible for the purchasing, coding, and documentation necessary to consolidate the OnQ systems, as well as determining hardware requirementsThey will also ensure that the new system is end-user friendly, to ensure that both customers and front desk staff can make changes easilyIn addition, they will ensure that there is no loss of current CRM data due to the transition Testing and FinalizationOnce design is complete, this team will spend 2 months testing and revising the new consolidated system, and finalizing before implementation
  • ImplementationPhase 2 begins with the actual implementation of the new system, which will be introduced through phased conversionNew system able to be installed remotely30 existing hotels per week will be convertedSo At this rate your 3000 current hotels will be completely converted in 2 yearsWith reference to the expansion hotels, we are recommending that you be fairly conservative in the first 2 years while the conversion is ongoingWhich is why we propose that the expansion goes forward at 100 hotels per year for the first two yearsAs these hotels are launched, the system will be installed and ready to go upon openingFor the third and fourth year you will be expanding at a faster rate, and we project that you will be able to meet your goal of 1000 expansion hotels in 5 years TrainingQuality assurance staff with knowledge of system/ITWill be responsible for training front desk staff on how to navigate and utilize new systemThis will be an ongoing process, as this team will also be responsible for training front desk staff at the expansion hotels
  • Performance MetricsThe final aspect of our implementation plan involves improving the performance metrics in order to increase customer feedback and improve CRM over the long termNow that customers have the ability to change their personal preferences in the new system, we will introduce QR codes to every room key that links to their account so that they can make changesFrom there they will also be able to navigate to Satisfaction and Loyalty Tracking (SALT) surveys where they can give feedbackIn addition, the current SALT surveys will now include questions regarding the overall booking experience with the new system, and rating the hotel on their ability to meet their personal preferences
  • 50*$130K for 8 months(prorated)-replacement staff for design team. Transfer staff from existing staff to design.(40 million for 5 years/ 8 million a year that’s 4 million for 6 months)$55 Million for hardwareBack up slide on training costs
  • Utilize existing systemInteractivity/Two Way communicationPersonalizing campaign to international marketStudies show companies can boost profits by almost 100 percent by retaining 5 percent more of their customersCustomer Relationship Marketing focuses on increasing loyalty of customersInvolves solicit customer feedback to increase interactivity, two-way discussionEx. Ford Mustang ClubStudy: higher advertising budget increased loyalty in customers more than generating new customers70% of sales increase attributable to increased advertising came from existing customersMore loyal customers are, higher the average price they will pay for your brand, less influenced by relative price
  • Utilize existing systemInteractivity/Two Way communicationPersonalizing campaign to international marketStudies show companies can boost profits by almost 100 percent by retaining 5 percent more of their customersCustomer Relationship Marketing focuses on increasing loyalty of customersInvolves solicit customer feedback to increase interactivity, two-way discussionEx. Ford Mustang ClubStudy: higher advertising budget increased loyalty in customers more than generating new customers70% of sales increase attributable to increased advertising came from existing customersMore loyal customers are, higher the average price they will pay for your brand, less influenced by relative price
  • Lets recall the key issues:Recall proposed recommendation (consolidation of existing systems, add customer personalization and feedback component, training programs to coach front desk staff to properly explot the benefits of the newly implemented IT system.Monthly performance reports, enhanced SALT surveys, QR codes…tracking performance is now available through new convenient avenuesAll recommendations directly address key issuesEssentially, you have a good proprietary system in place, but this recommendation allows hilton to properly execute across all brands, and sustain a competitive advantage throughout the new expansionAs SMRT consulting, we thank you yet again for the opportunity to present our recommendations and we look forward to working with you in the future.
  • 50*$130K for 8 months(prorated)-replacement staff for design team. Transfer staff from existing staff to design.(40 million for 5 years/ 8 million a year that’s 4 million for 6 months)$55 Million for hardwareBack up slide on training costs
  • 50*$130K for 8 months(prorated)-replacement staff for design team. Transfer staff from existing staff to design.(40 million for 5 years/ 8 million a year that’s 4 million for 6 months)$55 Million for hardwareBack up slide on training costs
  • 50*$130K for 8 months(prorated)-replacement staff for design team. Transfer staff from existing staff to design.(40 million for 5 years/ 8 million a year that’s 4 million for 6 months)$55 Million for hardwareBack up slide on training costs
  • 50*$130K for 8 months(prorated)-replacement staff for design team. Transfer staff from existing staff to design.(40 million for 5 years/ 8 million a year that’s 4 million for 6 months)$55 Million for hardwareBack up slide on training costs

Transcript

  • 1. AGENDA • Key Issues/Opportunity Areas • Industry Analysis • Financial Analysis • Possible Alternatives • Implementation of selected alternatives • Contingency Plan • Summary • Q&AOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 2. KEY ISSUE/OPPORTUNITY • Brand differentiation • Monitoring Performance • Customer Personalization • Alignment and ExecutionOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 3. KEY ISSUE/OPPORTUNITY IMPORTANCE LOW HIGH Brand Differentiation Monitoring Performance LOW URGENCY Customer Personalization Alignment & Execution HIGHOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 4. KEY ISSUE/OPPORTUNITY IMPORTANCE LOW HIGH Brand Differentiation Monitoring Performance LOW URGENCY Customer Personalization Alignment & Execution HIGHOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 5. KEY ISSUE/OPPORTUNITY IMPORTANCE LOW HIGH Brand Differentiation Monitoring Performance LOW URGENCY Customer Personalization Alignment & Execution HIGHOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 6. KEY ISSUE/OPPORTUNITY IMPORTANCE LOW HIGH Brand Differentiation Monitoring Performance LOW URGENCY Customer Personalization Alignment & Execution HIGHOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 7. SWOT STRENGTHS WEAKNESS • Strong global brand • Principal-Agent recognition • Pre-assignment • Diversified Portfolio • Multiple ERP systems • Owner Appreciation • Proprietary IT System OPPORTUNITY THREATS • Brand Consistency • Intense Competition • Customer Relation • Exposure to cyclical downturns Management • Rising cost of air fare • Increasing World Travel & TourismOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 8. SWOT STRENGTHS WEAKNESS • Strong global brand • Principal-Agent recognition • Pre-assignment • Diversified Portfolio • Multiple ERP systems • Owner Appreciation • Proprietary IT System OPPORTUNITY THREATS • Brand Consistency • Intense Competition • Customer Relation • Exposure to cyclical downturns Management • Rising cost of air fare • Increasing World Travel & TourismOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 9. SWOT STRENGTHS WEAKNESS • Strong global brand • Principal-Agent recognition • Pre-assignment • Diversified Portfolio • Multiple ERP systems • Owner Appreciation • Proprietary IT System OPPORTUNITY THREATS • Brand Consistency • Intense Competition • Customer Relation • Exposure to cyclical downturns Management • Rising cost of air fare • Increasing World Travel & TourismOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 10. SWOT STRENGTHS WEAKNESS • Strong global brand • Principal-Agent recognition • Pre-assignment • Diversified Portfolio • Multiple ERP systems • Owner Appreciation • Proprietary IT System OPPORTUNITY THREATS • Brand Consistency • Intense Competition • Customer Relation • Exposure to cyclical downturns Management • Rising cost of air fare • Increasing World Travel & TourismOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 11. THREAT OF NEW ENTRY PORTERS 5 FORCES Low Capital Intensive market Industry dominated by 2 players Strong brand presence COMPETETIVE RIVALRY WITHIN SUPPLIER POWER INDUSTRY BUYER POWER Low Moderate High Large global brand High barriers to exit Access to information Commodity based product Utilizing capacity Buyers are price sensitive Cost of switching is low Buyer power is high Low switching costs Moderate level of product diff THREAT OF SUBSTITUTION Moderate Varied options Easy substituteOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 12. THREAT OF NEW ENTRY PORTERS 5 FORCES Low Capital intensive market Industry dominated by 2 players Strong brand presence COMPETETIVE RIVALRY WITHIN SUPPLIER POWER INDUSTRY BUYER POWER Low Moderate High Large global brand High barriers to exit Access to information Commodity based product Utilizing capacity Buyers are price sensitive Cost of switching is low Buyer power is high Low switching costs Moderate level of product diff THREAT OF SUBSTITUTION Moderate Varied options Easy substituteOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 13. THREAT OF NEW ENTRY PORTERS 5 FORCES Low Capital intensive market Industry dominated by 2 players Strong brand presence COMPETETIVE RIVALRY WITHIN SUPPLIER POWER INDUSTRY BUYER POWER Low Moderate High Large global brand High barriers to exit Access to information Commodity based product Utilizing capacity Buyers are price sensitive Cost of switching is low Buyer power is high Low switching costs Moderate level of product diff THREAT OF SUBSTITUTION Moderate Varied options Easy substituteOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 14. THREAT OF NEW ENTRY PORTERS 5 FORCES Low Capital intensive market Industry dominated by 2 players Strong brand presence COMPETETIVE RIVALRY WITHIN SUPPLIER POWER INDUSTRY BUYER POWER Low Moderate High Large global brand High barriers to exit Access to information Commodity based product Utilizing capacity Buyers are price sensitive Cost of switching is low Buyer power is high Low switching costs Moderate level of product diff THREAT OF SUBSTITUTION Moderate Varied options Easy substituteOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 15. THREAT OF NEW ENTRY PORTERS 5 FORCES Low Capital intensive market Industry dominated by 2 players Strong brand presence COMPETETIVE RIVALRY WITHIN SUPPLIER POWER INDUSTRY BUYER POWER Low Moderate High Large global brand High barriers to exit Access to information Commodity based product Utilizing capacity Buyers are price sensitive Cost of switching is low Buyer power is high Low switching costs Moderate level of product diff THREAT OF SUBSTITUTION Moderate Varied options Easy substituteOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 16. DEBT-EQUITY STRUCTURE 2007 Hilton Corp. Avg. Cost Capital Structure Debt = 6.8% Total Debt $32,670 86.27% DEBT EQUITY Total Equity $5,198 13.73% 14% Total Cap. $37,868 100% 2004 2005 2006 2007 86% Hilton Corp. 2.21 2.11 3.42 6.29 Marriott Int. 1.12 1.62 2.28 5.25 Hilton Corp. Capital Structure (as of 2007 year-end)OPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 17. BRAND ANALYSIS Brand 2001 2006 $3,500.00 $3,000.00 $2,500.00 Annual Revenue (in Millions) $2,000.00 $1,500.00 Waldorf Astoria $258.56 $351.12 $1,000.00 $500.00 $0.00 2001 Conrad $5.60 $34 2006 International Hilton Hotels $2,565.87 $3,334.15 Embassy Suites $1,144.36 $1,581.90 Doubletree $1,023.60 $1,256 Hilton Garden Inn $368.69 $1,045 2001 2006 % Growth Homewood Suites $284.50 $566 Avg. RevPar $88.25 $113.63 4.3% Hampton Brand $1,787 $3,208.90 Avg. REVPAR 106.23 109.51 3.28% Index Revenue Matrix Across all BrandsOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 18. CALL CENTRE PERFORMANCE Year Net Revenue/Call Hilton Corp. Call Centre Performance $110.00 $100.00 2001 $73.09 $90.00 $80.00 $70.00 2002 $77.64 $60.00 Net Revenue / Call $50.00 2003 $84.39 $40.00 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2004 $85.57 Year 2005 $90.30 Conversion Ratio 2007 2006 $99.29 Hilton Corp. 41.4% 2007 $102.55 Hospitality Industry 28.4%OPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 19. OFF THE SHELF • Opt for an off the shelf ERP software like SAP or Oracle • Customize it to the company’s needs • Cost Estimate: $125Million/5 years PROS CONS • Lower maintenance costs • Lose competitive advantage • Outside IT support and • Lose customizability consulting • Timelines • Cost saving on staff • Training costs • Reduces front desk personalizationOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 20. OFF THE SHELF • Opt for an off the shelf ERP software like SAP or Oracle • Customize it to the company’s needs • Cost Estimate: $125Million/5 years PROS CONS • Lower maintenance costs • Lose competitive advantage • Outside it support and • Lose customizability consulting • Time lines • Cost saving on Staff • Training costs • Reduces front desk personalizationOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 21. CONSOLIDATION • Integrating existing System • Add Customer Personalization and Feedback Component • Coach Front desk Staff • Monthly Performance Reports • Cost Estimate: $392.5Million/5 years PROS CONS • Lower maintenance costs • High front-end cost • Cost saving on Staff • Potential data loss • Brand alignment • Managing two systems • Front desk personalizationOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 22. CONSOLIDATION • Integrating existing System • Add Customer Personalization and Feedback Component • Coach Front desk Staff • Monthly Performance Reports • Cost Estimate: $392.5Million/5 years PROS CONS • Lower maintenance costs • High front-end cost • Cost saving on Staff • Potential data loss • Brand alignment • Managing two systems • Front desk personalizationOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 23. CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP MARKETING • Using the guest data to target market segments • Launch a Marketing Campaign • Utilize existing system • Cost Estimate: $100M/5 Years PROS CONS • Quick implementation • No increased personalization • Low cost • Does not address front-desk • Sustainable over long-term staff issues • Profitable to gain new • Tailor marketing campaign for customers diverse client base • Marketing builds loyaltyOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 24. CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP MARKETING • Using the guest data to target market segments • Launch a Marketing Campaign • Utilize existing system • Cost Estimate: $100M/5 Years PROS CONS • Quick implementation • No increased personalization • Low cost • Does not address front-desk • Sustainable over long-term staff issues • Profitable to gain new • Tailor marketing campaign for customers diverse client base • Marketing builds loyaltyOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 25. DECISION MATRIX Criteria Weight System Integration/ Standardization CRM Marketing Consolidation of IT Campaign Cost 0.05 1 2.5 4 Implementation Time 0.05 1 1 4 Brand Differentiation 0.2 3.5 0 3.5 Performance Metrics 0.1 2.5 2 2 Brand Alignment & 0.35 4.5 2.5 1 Execution Personalization 0.25 4 2 4 Total 1 3.6 1.75 2.65 System Integration/Consolidation 33% 45% Standardization of IT 22% CRM Marketing CampaignOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 26. CURRENT OnQ SYSTEMOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 27. NEW OnQ SYSTEMOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 28. IMPLEMENTATION PLANOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 29. STAGE ONE: Design • Usability • End-user friendly • Consolidate/Streamline system • Combine OnQ Reservations, OnQ Property Management System and OnQ CRM • Front-desk access to data • Purchasing, Coding & Documentation • Ensure no loss of data • Estimated Time: 6 Months Testing /Revisions & Finalization • Estimated time: 2 MonthsOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 30. STAGE TWO: Implementation • Planning & Phased conversion • Estimated Time: 2 Years Expansion Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Hotels 100 100 200 300 300 Training • Ensure Front desk properly executes CRM • Implemented by IT specialists (QA) • 1 week per hotel and 30 hotels per week • Estimated Time: OngoingOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 31. PERFORMANCE METRICS • Add QR code on room key for customer feedback • New SALT (Satisfaction and Loyalty Tracking) questions: overall booking experience with new system, Rating on ability to meet required preferencesOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 32. RevPAR PROJECTIONS: Basis: Historical 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 CAGR 4.3% $113.63 $118.52 $123.61 $128.93 $134.47 $140.25 $146.28 Conversion Ratio GOAL: MAINTAIN 42% Hilton Corp. Projected RevPAR $150.00 CAGR of $140.00 3.67% $130.00 $120.00 $110.00 $100.00 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012OPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 33. CONTINGENCY PLAN • Encourage customer interaction • Example: Ford Mustang Club • Build Loyalty base • Utilize existing systemOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 34. CONTINGENCY PLAN • Using the guest data to target market segments • Launch a Customer Relationship Marketing Campaign • Social Media Marketing • TV & Print ads • Focus of campaign will be core customers, using OnQ data and SALT surveys to collect information about and communicate with customers • Cost Estimate: $100M/5 Years • Time Estimate: 5 YearsOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 35. SUMMARY Opportunity/Key Issues: Proposed Alternative: Design & Testing • Integrating existing System • Brand differentiation (8 Months) • Add Customer Personalization and • Monitoring Performance Feedback Component • Customer Personalization • Coach Front desk Staff • Monthly Performance Reports • Alignment and Execution Implementation & Training (2 Years) Remodel CRM all units (5 Years) (Ongoing)OPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 36. OPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 37. COSTING Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Total Cost $137,000,000 $82,000,000 $57,500,000 $58,000,000 $58,000,000 $392,500,000 Annual IT Budget $240,000,000 $240,000,000 $240,000,000 $240,000,000 $240,000,000 % of Annual Budget 57.10% 34% 24% 24.16% 24.16% Yr 1 55 + (130,000 * 50) + ($50,000 * 50) + $8M + 65M = 137 000 000 Yr2 (130,000 * 50) + ($50,000 * 50) + $8M + 65M = 82 000 000 Yr3 (130,000 * 50) + 50M + 1 = 57 500 000 Yr4 (130,000 * 50) + 50M + 1.5 = 58 000 000 Yr5 (130,000 * 50) + 50M + 1.5 = 58 000 000OPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 38. COSTING Budget = $90.8M Hardware costs of new system = $55,000,000 Employee cost for design = ($130,000 * 50)(.66) = $4,333,333 (50 * $130,000) + (50 * $50,000) = $9M New IT guys (used for conversion as well) = $50,000 * 50 = $2,500,000 Risk (33% of total cost) = $29.96M Implementation and Employee Training Costs for the first 5 years locally = $5000 * 4000 hotels = $20,000,000 Year 1 to 2 = $16,000,000 or $8M per year (1,500 hotels currently plus 100 expansion * $5,000 per hotel training) Year 3 = 200 hotels * $5,000 = $1M Year 4 = 300 hotels * $5,000 = $1.5M Year 5 = 300 hotels * $5,000 = $1.5M 55 + (130,000 * 50) + ($50,000 * 50) + $8M = 72M + 60M for Maintaining the current system.OPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A
  • 39. COSTING Financials- Basis for Calculations RevPAR Index (Hotel RevPAR/ competitive set RevPAR) *100 = RevPAR Index CAGR (End Value/Beg Value) 1/n - 1 2001- (113.63/88.2 2006 5) 1/6 -1 2007- 146.28/113.6 2012 3) 1/7 - 1 Average Cost of Debt Taken from 2006 Hilton Annual ReportOPPORTUNITY SWOT PORTERS 5 FIN. ANALYSIS ALTERNATIVES IMPLEMENTATION CONTINGENCY SUMMARY Q&A