Effectiveness of Handling Guest Complaints

EFFECTIVENESS OF HANDLING GUEST COMPLAINTS BY FRONT OFFICE DESK STAFF AS OBSERVED BY THE GUEST AT SELECTED HOTELS A Research Presented to the Faculty of College of Hospitality and Institutional Management Our Lady of Fatima University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Bachelor of Science in Hotel and Restaurant Management ROBIN JUDE B. ELAURIA KATRINA CARLA G. GERALDINO AILEEN JOY A. QUIDULIT CHRISTOPER S. ROSALES GENESIS D. C. SUSANA October 2011 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The researchers would like to extend their earnest gratitude for the people who made it possible for them to finish this research study. This would not be achievable without the help and supervision of the following people who are their motivation in doing this research study. To the cherished guest’s of Nice Hotel most especially to Mr. Renold Zenarosa Branch Manager of Nice Hotel Mandaluyong and Mr. Lawrence Villanueva Branch Manager of Nice Hotel Cubao Quezon City who allowed us to conduct our survey for their pilot and actual study. To Ms. Maria Paz T. Castro, our adviser, who’s not tired of answering our question and few complains, teach us on how to exert effort in every task that we should do and sharing her knowledge and expertise in doing this research guiding until the final defense. To Mr. Cledante Navalta, our statistician, for their effort and time in plateful them to accomplish the statistical analysis of the research studies. To our parents who always supported us for financial all the way through the process of our research studies. Last but not the least, the omnipresent God, for answering our prayers for giving us the strength to plod on despite our  constitution  wanting to give up and throw in the towel make us realize that there’s always a key in every lock, Thank you so much Dear Lord. ABSTRACT Title: EFFECTIVENESS OF HANDLING GUEST COMPLAINTS BY FRONT OFFICE DESK STAFF AS OBSERVED BY THE GUEST AT SELECTED HOTELS Proponents: ROBIN JUDE B. ELAURIA, KATRINA CARLA G. GERALDINO, AILEEN JOY A. QUIDULIT, CHRISTOPER S. ROSALES, GENESIS D. SUSANA Adviser: MS. MARIA PAZ CASTRO Degree: BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN HOTEL AND RESTAURANT MANAGEMENT Date Completed: OCTOBER 2011 The researchers conducted this study to determine the Effectiveness of Handling Guest Complaints by Front Office Desk Staff as Observed by the Guest at Selected Hotels. Specifically aims to answer the following questions about the profile of the respondents, how satisfied the respondents regarding their service satisfaction, recommendations that can provide solutions to the said problems and there is no significant relationship between the satisfaction of the respondents and their demographic profile of the respondents. A descriptive method of research was used together with the questionnaire as the main instrument in gathering the needed data and information. Fifty (50) Guest at Nice Hotel in Cubao Quezon City was considered for the study. In analyzing and interpreting the data gathered, the statistical treatments used were, the percentage which was used to compare the frequencies of responses to the total number of responses, and the weighted mean which was used in measuring the Effectiveness of Handling Guest Complaints by Front Office Desk Staff as Observed by the Guest at Selected Hotels. The chi-square test is used to determine whether there is no significant relationship between the expected frequencies and the observed frequencies in one or more categories. With all the gathered information, the researchers arrived at the following conclusion: (1) most of the guests are 30-39 years old, male, guests (2) most of them are satisfied regarding the effectiveness of handling guest complaints by front office desk staff at Nice Hotel in Cubao Quezon City. (3) It was recommended that the front office desk staff of the hotel should initiate talk with the guest to get feedback about their service to improve their service. 4) In terms of age and gender there is no significant relationship between the effectiveness in handling guest’s complaints by the front office desk staff in selected hotels and their demographic profile. In terms of educational attainment and status of employment there is a significant relationship between the effectiveness in handling guest’s complaints by the front office desk staff in selected hotels and their demographic profile TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TITLE PAGE†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. i APPROVAL SHEET†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦iii ABSTRACT†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦iv TABLE OF CONTENTS†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â ‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦ v LIST OF TABLES†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. ix LIST OF FIGURES†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. x CHAPTER 1. THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. 1 INTRODUCTION†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦1 Background of the Study†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. 1 Statement of the problem†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. 2 Hypothesis†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. 3 Significance of the study†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. 3 Scope and Delimitation of the study†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. Definition of terms†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. 6 2. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND RESEARCH STUDIES†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦7 Related Foreign Literature†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. 7 Related Local Literature†¦ †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦ 8 Related Foreign Studies†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. 10 Related Local Studies†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. 12 Conceptual Framework†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. 14 Research Paradigm†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. 16 3. RESEARCH METHOLOGY†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. 17 Research Design†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦ †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. 17 Research Setting†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. 17 Research Subject†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. 18 Research Instrumentation†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦ 18 Validation of Instrument†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦18 Data Gathering Procedure†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦18 Statistical Treatment†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. 19 4. PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF THE DATA†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦21 Demographic Profile of the Respondent†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦21 Common guest’s complaints handled by the front office desk staff in selected hotels in Manila†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦25 Summary & Chi-square test on the significant relationship between effectiveness in handling guest’s complaints by the front office desk staff in selected hotels in Manila and the demographic profile of the respondents†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. 28 5. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS CONCLUSION, RECOMMENDATION†¦.. 31 Summary of findings†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. 31 Conclusions†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. 33 Recommendations†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦34 REFERENCES†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦35 APPENDICES†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. 36 A. Map of Research Setting†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚ ¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦37 B. Title Approval†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦38 C. Letter of Request for Conduct of a Pilot Study†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦ 39 D. Letter of Request for Conduct of Actual Study†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. 40 E. Research Instrument†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. 41 F. Hypothesis Testing†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. 49 G. Curriculum Vitae†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. 50 List of Tables Table no. I Demographic Profile of the Respondents 1. 1 Distribution of Respondents in Terms of Age21 1. 2 Distribution of Respondents in Terms of Gender22 1. 3 Distribution of Respondents in Terms 23 of Educational Attainment 1. 4 Distribution of Respondents in Terms 23 of Status of Employment Table no. II Common guest’s complaints handled by the24 front office desk staff in selected hotels in Manila Table no. III Summary & Chi-square test on the significant 26 relationship between effectiveness in handling guest’s complaints by the front office desk staff in selected hotels in Manila and the demographic profile of the respondents List of Figures I. Conceptual Framework14 II. Figure 1 Research Paradigm16 Curriculum vitae GERALDINO, KATRINA CARLA G. Domingo de ramos street largo, Quezon city Contact no: 09461113536 Email address:[email  protected] com ————————————————- EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND 2009-Present : Bachelor of Science in Hotel and Restaurant Management Our lady of Fatima University Hilltop Subdivision, Lagro, Quezon City 2005-2008 : Secondary Roxas National High School Roxas, San Isidro, Surigao del Norte 1999-2004 : Elementary Sto Nino Elementary School Sto Nino, San Isidro, Surigao del Norte ————————————————- PERSONAL BACKGROUND Gender: Female Age : 19 years old Birth date : June 09, 1992 Height : 5’4 Civil Status : Single ___________________________________ GERALDINO, KATRINA CARLA G. ELAURIA, ROBIN JUDE B. Blk2 Lt27 Marvi Hills, Gulod Malaya San Mateo, Rizal Mobile number: 09213336967 Email address: [email  protected] com EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND| 2009-PresentBachelor of Science in Hotel and Restaurant Management Our lady of Fatima University Hilltop Subdivision, Lagro, Quezon City 2004-2008Secondary St. Mathhew College Miguel Cristi St. San Mateo, Rizal 1997-2003Elementary Gulod Malaya Elementary School Barangay Gulod Malaya, San Mateo Rizal PERSONAL BACKGROUND| Gender :Male Age:19 years old Birth date:November 12, 1991 Height:5’6 Civil Status:Single __________________ Robin Jude Elauria AILEEN JOY A. QUIDULIT # 6 Geronimo St. Brgy Sta Monica Novaliches Q. C Contact no: 4828615/09155459133/09239238439 E-mail add: [email  protected] com ____________________________________________________________ __________ EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND 2007 – Present: Bachelor of Science in Hotel and Restaurant Management Our Lady of Fatima University Lagro, Novaliches Quezon City Secondary 2003 – 2007:Holy Redeemer School of Kalookan Franville V. Subd. , Caloocan City Elementary 1996 – 2003:Rosa L. Susano Elementary School Brgy. Gulod Novaliches, Quezon City PERSONAL BACKGROUND Gender :Female Age:20 yr/old Birth date:November 10, 1990 Weight:95 lbs Height:5’2’’ Civil Status:Single _______________________ AILEEN JOY A. QUIDULIT ROSALES, CHRISTOPER S. Blk 47 Lot 18 Area B lower 4 Sapang Palay City of San Jose Del Monte Bulacan Mobile number:09106184955 Email address:[email  protected] com/[email  protected] com EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND| 2009-PresentBachelor of Science in Hotel and Restaurant Management Our lady of Fatima University Hilltop Subdivision, Lagro, Quezon City 2004-2007Associate in Hotel and Restaurant Management Academia De San Lorenzo Tialo Sto. Cristo, City of San jose Del Monte Bulacan 000-2004Secondary Sapang Palay National High School Area E Sapang Palay City of San Jose Del Monte Bulacan 1994-2000 Elementary Barangay Bagong Buhay III Elementary School Barangay Bagong Buhay III Area B SapangPalay City of SJDBMB PERSONAL BACKGROUND| Gender :Male Age:23 years old Birth date:November 05, 1987 Height:5’7 Civil Status:Single _______ _____________ Rosales, Christoper S. SUSANA GENESIS C. 83 E Maginoo St. Kalayaan Quezon,City Cell Number: 09151908382 [email  protected] com EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND| 2009-Present Bachelor of Science in Hotel and Restaurant Mngt. Our Lady of Fatima University 1 Esperanza St. Hilltop Mansion Heigths Lagro Quezon, City 2000-2004 Amadeo National High School Amadeo, Cavite 1994-2000 Amadeo Elementary School Amadeo, Cavite PERSONAL BACKGROUND| Gender: Female Age: 23 Heigth: 5’4 Civil Status: Single _____________________ GENESIS C. SUSANA Computation Table 1 Table 1: Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Respondents in Terms of Age n=50 Age| F| P=f/n*100| %| Rank| 9 below| 3| (3/50*100)| 6| 5| 20-29| 13| (13/50*100)| 26| 2| 30-39| 17| (17/50*100)| 34| 1| 40-49| 12| (12/50*100)| 24| 3| 50 above| 5| (5/50*100)| 10| 4| Total| 50| | 100| | Computation Table 1. 1 Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Respondents in Terms of Gender n=50 Gender| F| P=f/n*100| %| Rank| Male| 27| (27/ 50*100)| 54| 1| Female| 23| (23/50*100)| 46| 2| total| 50| | 100| | Computation Table 1. 2: Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Respondents in Terms of Educational Qualification n=50 Educational Qualification| f| P=f/n*100| %| Rank| Elementary Grad. | 11| (11/50*100)| 22| 3| High School Grad. 14| (14/50*100)| 28| 2| College Grad. | 17| (17/50*100)| 34| 1| Post Grad. | 8| (8/50*100)| 16| 4| Total| 50| | 100| | Computation Table 1. 3: Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Respondents in Terms of Status of Employment n=50 Status of Employment| f| P=f/n*100| %| Rank| Worker| 19| (19/50*100)| 38| 2| Employee| 21| (21/50*100)| 42| 1| Self-employed| 10| (10/50*100)| 20| 4| Total| 50| | 100| | Table 2: Common guest’s complaints handled by the front office desk staff in selected hotels in Manila Situation| WM| Interpretation| Rank| 1. Missing of personal belonging| 3. 40| Good| 10| 2. Faulty equipments and facilities| 3. 2| Very Good| 7| 3. Lack of courtesy of the front office staff in dealing with the guest| 3. 64| Very Good| 3| 4. Slow and ineffective reservation procedures| 3. 82| Very Good| 1| 5. Neigbors intolerable noises| 3. 76| Very Good| 2| 6. Unsatisfactory of concierge| 3. 58| Very Good| 5| 7. Not well attended by front office staff| 3. 42| Good| 9| 8. Wrong room assignment or type of room given to the guest| 3. 56| Very Good| 6| 9. Poor service of the staff| 3. 48| Good| 8| 10. Delayed service of the front office desk staff| 3. 62| Very Good| 4| Grand Mean| 3. 62| Very Good| | Computation in terms of Age E=RT*CT/50Observed Age| Poor| Average| Good| Very Good| Excellent| RT| 19 below| 0| 0| 0| 3| 0| 3| 20-29| 0| 0| 5| 7| 0| 12| 30-39| 0| 0| 9| 7| 1| 17| 40-49| 0| 0| 7| 6| 0| 13| 50 above| 0| 0| 2| 3| 0| 5| CT| 0| 0| 23| 26| 1| 50| Expected Age| Poor| Average| Good| Very Good| Excellent| 19 below| 0| 0| 1. 38| 1. 56| 0. 06| 20-29| 0| 0| 5. 52| 6. 24| 0. 24| 30-39| 0| 0| 7. 82| 8. 84| 0. 34| 40-49| 0| 0| 5. 98| 6. 76| 0. 26| 50 above| 0| 0| 2. 30| 2. 60| 0. 10| | | | | | | X? =(O-E)^2/E Age| Poor| Average| Good| Very Good| Excellent| 19 below| 0| 0| 1. 38| 1. 90| 0. 06| 20-29| 0| 0| 0. 05| 0. 09| 0. 24| 30-39| 0| 0| 0. 18| 0. 38| 0. 6| 40-49| 0| 0| 0. 17| 0. 09| 0. 26| 50 above| 0| 0| 0. 04| 0. 06| 0. 10| ?X? = 5. 56 Computation in terms of Gender E=RT*CT/50Observed Gender| Poor| Average| Good| Very Good| Excellent| RT| Male| 0| 0| 13| 14| 0| 27| Female| 0| 0| 22| 27| 1| 23| CT| 0| 0| 35| 41| 1| 50| Expected Gender| Poor| Average| Good| Very Good| Excellent| Male| 0| 0| 11. 88| 14. 58| 0. 54| Female| 0| 0 | 10. 12| 12. 42| 0. 46| X? =(O-E)^2/E Gender| Poor| Average| Good| Very Good| Excellent| Male| 0| 0| 0. 11| 0. 02| 0. 54| Female| 0| 0| 0. 12| 0. 03| 0. 63| ?X? = 1. 45 Computation in terms of Educational Qualification E=RT*CT/50Observed Educational Qualification| Poor| Average| Good| Very Good| Excellent| RT| Elementary Grad. | 0| 0| 4| 7| 0| 11| High School Grad. | 0| 6| 11| 1| 0| 14| College Grad. | 0| 0| 7| 9| 1| 17| Post Grad. | 0| 0| 4| 4| 0| 8| CT| | 6| 22| 21| 1| 50| Expected Educational Attainment| Poor| Average| Good| Very Good| excellent| Elementary Graduate| 0| 1. 32| 4. 84| 4. 62| 0. 22| High School graduate| 0| 1. 68| 6. 16| 5. 88| 0. 28| College Graduate| 0| 2. 04| 7. 48| 7. 14| 0. 34| Post Graduate| 0| 0. 96| 3. 52| 3. 36| 0. 16| X? =(O-E)^2/E Educational Qualification| Poor| Average| Good| Very Good| Excellent| Elementary Grad. | 0| 1. 2| 0. 15| 1. 23| 0. 22| High School Grad. | 0| 11. 11| 0. 11| 4. 05| 0. 28| College Grad. | 0| 2. 04| 0. 03| 0. 48| 1. 28| Post Grad. | 0| 0. 96| 0. 07| 0. 12| 0. 16| ?X? = 23. 61 Computation in terms of Status of Employment E=RT*CT/50 Observed Status of Employment| Poor| Average| Good| Very Good| Excellent| RT| Worker| 0| 0| 7| 12| 0| 19| Employee| 0| 0| 6| 4| 0| 10| Self-employed| 0| 0| 9| 11| 1| 21| CT| 0| 0| 22| 27| 1| 50| Expected Status of Employment| Poor| Average| Good| Very Good| Excellent| Worker| 0| 0| 8. 36| 10. 26| 0. 38| Employee| 0| 0| 4. 40| 5. 40| 0. 20| Self-employed| 0| 0| 9. 24| 11. 34| 0. 42| X? (O-E)^2/E Status of Employment| Poor| Average| Good| Very Good| Excellent| Worker| 0| 0| 0. 22| 0. 30| 0. 38| Employee| 0| 0| 0. 58| 0. 36| 0. 20| Self-employed| 0| 0| 9. 24| 0. 01| 0. 80| ?X? = 12. 09 Table 3 Summary & Chi-square test on the significant relationship between effectiveness in handling guest’s complaints by the front office desk staff in selected hotels in Manila and the demographic profile of the respondents Demographic Profile| ComputedX? | TabulatedX? | df| ? | Comparison| Decision| Conclusion| Age| 5. 56| 15. 51| 8| 0. 05| Less than| Accept Ho| There is no significant relationship| Gender| 1. 45| 5. 9| 2| 0. 05| Less than| Accept Ho| There is no significant relationship| Educational attainment| 23. 61| 16. 92 | 9| 0. 05| Greater than| Reject Ho| There is a significant relationship| Status of Employment| 12. 09| 9. 49| 4| 0. 05| Greater than| Reject Ho| There is a significant relationship| Hypothesis Testing: Ho: There is no significant relationship between the effectiveness of handling guest complaints by the front office desk staff at selected hotels in Manila. Ha: There is a significant relationship between the effectiveness of handling guest complaints by the front office desk staff at selected hotels in Manila.