AbuCordoba

I came across this article below, I was wondering if people really do think Ritz Carlton is the benchmark for customer experience? I personally have found my experiences at St Regis and Park Hyatts to be much more customer focused than at Ritz properties.

The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company is an evergreen model and benchmark for companies aiming to transform their customer experience and achieve an exceptional level of customer service.

In retail, for example, the Apple Store customer experience is strongly informed by what Apple learned from the Ritz-Carlton. You can see it in how Apple Store employees greet and guide incoming customers, in how hard they strive to avoid being merely transactional, and—most visibly–in the concept and design of their Genius Bar, which is a loving knockoff of a Ritz-Carlton concierge counter.

< moderator edit to remove the entire article, to comply with FTs copyright rules. Please follow the link below >

https://www.forbes.com/sites/micahsolomon/2020/02/23/how-to-bring-ritz-carlton-caliber-customer-service-to-any-type-of-business/

arlflyer

Yeah...so the only time I've had remotely personalized, memorable service at an RC was after I got the ear of the GM due to a billing issue. After that, it was like a switch flipped. But for my normal stays as an AMB, it's pretty much nothing - nearly nonexistent recognition, and I sometimes feel like I'm an annoyance to them (e.g. when inquiring about an upgrade with many premium room types available).

Many RCs in the US are just glorified Westins / MRs with more gold/wood (if 90's vintage) or stark white decor (if 2000's vintage) and an expensive club that gives you basically the offerings you'd get at an entry-level lounge in Europe or Asia.

And look at the signal that MR corporate sends by carving out exclusions from RC for its elite program - basically straight up telling RC "You don't need to do anything for our best customers".

UA-NYC

Have always just seen RCs as "dated luxury"

No interest in even redeeming points at them due to being seen as a second class citizen

HeyUpDuck

The Ritz yes, Ritz-Carlton the brand? It's hit and miss but it's quite good, I'd say the benchmark is Four Season Georges V in Paris, by far the best experience I've ever had.

That said, I stay in a lot of Marriott properties and I rarely use anything other than the room and interaction is pretty much check-in and check-out, quite hard to screw that up from a CS POV and as I don't pay myself, I care even less for anything just give me a bed please!

MSPeconomist

It was easier when RC was a totally independent brand, although they weren't inclined to invest in a loyalty program. Now customers can have bad experiences with Marriott/Bonvoy customer service long before they arrive at the front desk.

mctaste

People who don’t pay to stay *are* second class hotel guests. Or maybe third class. People who book through OTAs are in there somewhere too, in my experience.

Beltway2A

Agreed. They strike me as a brand that my grandparents would have thought of as high-end (like Rolex or Tiffany and Co.) that stopped being worth their price tag some generations back. It doesn't help that many are still decorated like they're targeting that generation as well.

DJ_Iceman

Like it or not, SPG loyalists, yes: the Ritz-Carlton is the benchmark of superior service in the hospitality industry and they serve as such for other industries as well (as described in the OP's post). Ritz-Carlton is the only hotel company to have earned the Malcolm Baldrige award, and one of the only organizations to have won it twice. They gladly share their philosophies, knowing that they are much harder to put into practice than to read about.

The complaints listed here seem rooted in jealousy, envy, and a fundamental misunderstanding of what "guest service" really means. Here's a hint: it's not as simple as upgrading someone to a suite because they've spent a few dozen nights in a Four Points.

And luckily, the hospitality marketplace (even within the Bonvoy portfolio, for that matter) offers plenty of choices. It the Ritz-Carlton doesn't offer what you consider value for the price paid, then there are plenty of other options out there. But don't let that personal judgement block you from seeing, as this article describes, that the Ritz-Carlton is indeed widely and consistently seen as a model of how to take care of people.

UA-NYC

Second or third class companies are ones that treat their guests as a function of their form of payment that specific day

(and the people who are burning points at RCs are likely the ones doing heavy time in legacy Marriott limited service chains actually)

kaizen7

While some RC do provide superior service, unfortunately there are some RC that not worthy the brand.
Hope RC as a company could bring back these properties up to their standard.

arlflyer

How about spending 30+ nights at a single RC at $400+/night? And then having that same RC ask if this is your first time here, after you have been waiting for five minutes at an unmanned check in desk on a Monday night? Guess I must be confusing that RC memory with the Four Points I was really staying at. My bad.

You’re right - service isn’t just about upgrades. In my mind it would include recognition at the front desk as a repeat guest, remembering room preferences, housekeeping done before I return from work for the day, concierges who actually call back after they agree to by a certain time, and accurate folios reflecting all charges not being sent two days after my “final” folio has already been expensed to my employer. Unfortunately, these are all examples of areas where I have had repeat issues with RCs.

The service experience, one could argue, also could include elements of the physical guest ecosystem which contribute, such as working door locks, amenities (e.g. gyms) which are online and not malfunctioning, and clubs which are properly stocked. Again, RC seems to have trouble in this space, whereas places like FS and Conrad manage to get it right.

I also love the hotel apologists’ “have your cake and eat it too” argument - that chain loyalists are owed nothing unless it was earned there on the spot at that property. As if the hotels aren’t getting a huge amount of business pushed their way through that same network. If that is the case, then those RCs should just spin right off again - they’ll cut tons of overhead like bad MR IT and Arne’s salary, and according to your logic they don’t need the MR network and its bunch of lowlife hanger-on elites.

Nice try, though, at making this RC service sound so metaphysical and elusive that those of us who think contrary to you are clearly just too uncultured to recognize service when it hits us in the face. But what I have lived over months in RCs just doesn’t align.

Handcake

I am not someone who has a lot of experience with RC, but the few times I have stayed at one I did not feel that the service was noteworthy enough to brag about. On the other hand, I can't say enough about the Four Seasons. If I was in a higher income bracket, this would be my go to hotel. It would be a toss up for me to pick where I got the absolute best service: Four Seasons or Banyan Tree Phucket.

writerguyfl

I've always viewed the Ritz-Carlton approach as a regimented philosophy of customer service. When I worked in hospitality, the Ritz-Carlton's service was indeed deemed to be the pinnacle by many managers (general and otherwise). My first hotel job was at an upper-upscale property very much in the style of a Ritz-Carlton. At the Front Desk, everyone wore suits and guests were addressed with Mr/Ms/Mrs/Dr.

By regimented I mean the ways an employee are to respond are scripted. Certain words or responses are taught and expected to be parroted back verbatim. In my view, it is both very formal and somewhat detached. It's a style that works well in many hotels. That said, it's not a universal approach that is appropriate everywhere.

Later in my career, I worked at Disney. Like Ritz-Carlton, Disney has a reputation for excellent customer service. The Disney approach is more "folksy" and much more accessible by the general public. At Disney, everyone from the guest to the CEO were to be addressed by their first names. While I learned to operate in the formal Ritz-Carlton style, my personality works far better with the Disney approach.

In terms of outside companies looking to adopt a customer service philosophy, what is appropriate will depend upon the goals of that company. I'd guess that the author of the Fortune article probably enjoys the formal environment of a Ritz-Carlton. As such, he lauds that approach. A different person could interview a General Manager at a Disney World Resort and write a similar article with an entirely different set of principles on which to promote. Neither approach is necessarily wrong.

I think this is an important point. When you're talking about a customer service philosophy, you're talking about the forest, not the trees. No company with multiple locations is 100% perfect. There will be shining examples and places where re-training needs to occur.

The Fortune article is about outside companies adopting the Ritz-Carlton best practices when it comes to customer service. The fact that some (or even many) people here on FlyerTalk have experienced mediocre/bad service at a Ritz-Carlton doesn't invalidate the premise of the article.

However, the fact that some (or even many) people here on FlyerTalk have experienced mediocre/bad service at a Ritz-Carlton does damage the reputation of the brand. If Marriott is smart, they will proactively address the weak links in the chain. Maintaining the reputation of a brand requires work.

UA-NYC

I can't see R-C having much if any special brand equity with anyone under ~45 - it's just not that relevant

And for the next generation of Bonv*y loyals, they likely see better luxury options within the chain (either to spend money or points on) that actually adhere to the program T&Cs

DJ_Iceman

Your whole post was excellent, writerguyfl, but I found this point particularly interesting. I, too, worked for Disney and very much resonated with the corporate style and values! But you may be interested (dismayed?) to hear that even Disney has started to behave more like Ritz-Carlton. There was a realization (correct, in my view) that particularly at Disney's high-end resorts, the level of guest service simply wasn't up to the standard of other world-class hotels and resorts. Interestingly, the cruise line and Aulani did seem able to deliver, but at the other hotels and DVC properties the service just wasn't up to snuff. About three years ago Disney lured several executives away from Ritz-Carlton to rejuvenate their high-end resorts. Personally I haven't noticed any improvements.

And the other part of your post I wanted to jump off from is that Disney is another company seen as a benchmark in many areas, creativity and guest service among them. So much so, in fact, that the Disney Institute has been rather profitable in teaching many people from many diverse industries "the Disney way" of doing things. Just like you correctly pointed out, though, if the tarnish comes off the Disney brand (just like it does every time a guest has a lackluster, substandard Ritz-Carlton stay) then that reputation for excellence earned over the decades will evaporate much more quickly.