1

Making a tough personnel

decision at
Nova Waterfront Hotel

Kavita Patil PGP09193

Neha Sheenam PPGP09211
Krishnakant Maheshwari PGP09197
Risha Agarwal PGP09224
Mansi Agarwal PGP09201
Moica Syal PGP09203
Hrangbung Darthang PGP09189

PRESENTED BY: OWEN EXEC

 2

Nova Waterfront hotel

• It was situated in downtown Baltimore
• Was owned and operated by Nova International
• Accommodate meeting of up to 1200 people
• 80000 sq. feet of meeting space and grand ballroom
• Close proximity to National Aquarium ,Convention centre
Company , Maryland science centre

Overview
Nova International
Facts
• Leading hospitality company with more than 3,900
properties and 18 brands around the world
• Revenues of $13 billion
• Known for putting people first , its enduring values and
spirit to serve
 3

Situation Analysis

• There was a vacancy for the position of senior event manager

• . Laura Green, Director of Event Planning at Nova Waterfront Hotel in Baltimore,
interviewed two candidates, Shannon Smith and Matt Mayes
• Shannon Smith was working for Nova as an event manager
• Matt Mayes was an external candidate who worked as a senior event manager
for smaller Nova hotel
• The problem was to decide which candidate to be hired
• Top 3 selection criteria:- Leadership, Innovation/ creativity , and holding people
accountable.
 4

Selection Process
• Hiring manager was responsible for recruiting a selection team and managing
the
.
selection process
• Selection team composed of:
Hiring manager
Boss of the hiring manager
Peers of the position (within and outside departments)
Subordinates of the position
• Nova contracted with a firm to screen resumes, select candidates for phone
screening, conduct the phone screening interviews, refer finalists for in-person
interviews, and provide feedback to candidates who were not offered a position
 5

Selection Process
• The selection team was responsible for providing input on the selection criteria,
interviewing the candidates, evaluating the candidates, participating in the team
.

debrief, and providing input on the selection decision.

• At the end of the day, the team would meet, usually for a half an hour or an
hour, to discuss their findings and make a decision
• During the debrief they were expected to share and record their ratings,
discuss evidence from the interviews that led to their ratings, calculate average
scores for each candidate on each evaluation criterion, and reach a consensus
on a decision
• Each candidate was given feedback after the interview process via the hiring
manager or the outside recruiting/selection agency
 6

Shannon Smith

Our Strengths Our Our Our Threats

Weaknesses Opportunities
• Event Manager at • Had an easy
• Already • Leadership skills
Nova Waterfront Hotel going and
experienced with are questionable
• Current position at informal style
working Nova so
Nova for three years
she can quickly
• Consistently received
adapt
good performance
evaluations
• Gets the job done and
satisfies customers
• Excellent track record
planning events
• Open, friendly, and
easy to work with
 7

Matt Mayes

Our Strengths Our Our Our Threats

Weaknesses Opportunities

• Worked as a Senior • Worked for a • He was hungry and • Need to spend

Event Manager smaller sister had a desire to time and money
• Been in his position hotel grow on enhancing his
for two years • New ideas from skills
• Had received good Matt can be useful
performance
evaluations
• Matt had a dominant
and formal style
• Associate degree in
business
administration
 8

Critical Issues for Laura to decide

• Internal Candidate without leadership skills versus External Candidate with some
leadership skills but not all the experience the role needs?
• Should we hire the people and let them grow or do we demand all the skills that are
in need?
• If the job was not offered to Shannon smith, will she leave the organization?
• Should the recruitment process be started all over again?
• Should we lower the standards of the job?
• Should we rethink the criteria of the job?
• Should we start over and look for more qualified candidates?
• Should we rethink the job?
• Should we reward people with opportunities to grow or should they earn the
opportunities by demonstrating the required skills?
 9

Selection Process Critique

They had a vast The role was people

1 recruitment team that
was deeply involved in
2 management/ operations
intensive. There was no
the entire process process to judge the
candidates on same task to
evaluate their performance.
The job description did
not carry any Ambiguity in the final
3 prerequisites in terms of 4 decision process.
the duration & quality of
the past experience
 10

Recommendations
• The job description should be made crisp, specific and mention clear requirements.
• Just as the selection process, the job description could be defined after taking
comprehensive inputs from the selection team so as to alleviate all confusion
• Thorough analysis of the viability of the job role should be conducted before
initiating the recruitment process
• Proper behavioural tasks should be included in the selection test to measure the
candidates on all desired skill parameters for evaluation
Thank You