To complete the given task, I first of all had to choose a place for my research. I decided that it would be a restaurant called ‘Palladium’, which is situated not far from the business center. It means that a lot of people visit it during their lunch break. According to it, I chose the time for my observations. It is from one up to two o’clock in the afternoon. The place is good for our aim because it is often overcrowded, and the number of tables is big (about thirty), so the staff is numerous and I can observe the working process of different employees. In order to get more reliable facts, I visited this spot three times - twice during the working week (from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m.) and once at weekend (from 8 p.m. to 9 p.m.).
First-Class Online Research Paper Writing Service
- Your research paper is written by a PhD professor
- Your requirements and targets are always met
- You are able to control the progress of your writing assignment
- You get a chance to become an excellent student!
Let us observe the working cycle employees of the restaurant do.
- When clients come to the restaurant, they first of all see a receptionist, who greets them and asks a waiter to show people to their table.
- When visitors are at the table, they get menus and then give orders. I can say that in order to improve their service I would change the process of meeting clients.
- Waiters are busy enough with their direct responsibilities and they do not have time to show clients to their places. So, this problem can be solved in two ways: either by hiring one more receptionist and they will take turns, or simply by giving numbers to the tables and visitors will be able to find them on their own. As for the atmosphere in a working team, I would say that it is neutral and sometimes positive. I mean that they did not show some strong emotions to each other, sometimes smiled at each other. The staff did not look relaxed, they were rather stressed, but I think it is because of the amount of work they had to do. They were always in a hurry, trying to serve their clients. Once I became a witness of a so-called conflict.
- A waiter, who was a trainee, brought a cocktail to the client and accidently poured half of it on the table. In a minute a manager came, apologized and offered free drinks. She said nothing to the waiter, but I could see that they had strained relations. The manager was angry and irritated, and the trainee was upset. I stayed there for another half an hour, but I did not see that they tried to resolve their conflict. The manager is in charge of this restaurant. Hence, I have noticed that the restaurant workers have problems with solving conflicts. In response, they should provide compensation to the clients because establishing good relationships with clients should be prioritized in hospitality industry.
- When the manager gave some orders, all the waiters were ready to complete them. I can connect my observations of the working process in a restaurant with theory Y, written by Douglas McGregor (2006). All the employees were not only ready to take their responsibilities (bring orders, answer questions, help their clients) but were eager for them, perhaps, due to the quality of preparation the waiters had before they started working and the fact that in the end of the day they get a reward (tips). Furthermore, in a restaurant I saw a bureaucratic theory, found by Max Weber (2013).
- The organization of work was divided into levels. The top level has a manager, who organized the process and gave tasks. The lower level took waiters, who completed orders they got from the manager without any protests or dissatisfaction.
After my observations, I tried to compare my notes with the key points of management history and this is what I noticed. During the working process of the restaurant, I did not see any sign of ‘Hawthorne effect’. The reason is that this effect is connected with the interest to the experiment. This fact brings the research to positive results, which are usually wrong and do not show the real situation. According to ‘Hawthorne effect’, the participants of the experiment are too excited with their part in it; they try to work better then they usually do (Draper 15). I did not tell the employees about my observations. I acted secretly and without being noticed and I think I managed to avoid the effect. The results of the experiment should be reliable enough. If to analyze my observations from Frederick Taylor’s (1911) point of view, first of all, I should mention that the basis of his system is in the fact that for effective work organization there should be a special system of management, the system, which can provide high level of work productivity. At the same time, it does not have to cost much (Taylor 4). In other words, according to Frederick Taylor, the management should make the staff perform their work as good as possible (Taylor 3). That was what I could see in the restaurant. The manager organized the work of all the waiters by giving orders. What Mr. Taylor would not like in work organization is the way how responsibilities of meeting new clients are divided between the staff. According to his theory, this part of the work has to be given to a certain person or people. A receptionist and waiters should not share these responsibilities. I think that Taylor would like that the staff of this restaurant is organized as one team, where all workers support each other, as it was seen in the situation with a poured cocktail. If I consider the work of the manager according to Chester Barnard’s theory, I can say that he suited it partially. According to his ideas, a manager has to create an environment in the communicative system or a system of long-termed relations properly established (Williamson 22). I think that the manager organized this system in ‘Palladium’ for the workers but not for trainees. Apparently, it is some kind of checking whether they suit the team or not.