ASSIGNMENT OUTLINE
Assignment title:
Advanced Hospitality Operations FINAL PROJECT
Weighting:
40%
Faculty responsible:
Mr. Jesus Ruiz /Mr. González
Programme:
MEIHM
Course name:
Advance Hospitality Operations
Course number:
M9111
Hand-out date:
: 13th Oct 2026
Hand-in date for Moodle: 15th Nov 2025 (23:59 CET)
Assignment Overview: The students will develop aspects of the Rooms Division
Operations based the given hotel property and will develop a successful concept for the
Food & Beverage operations.
Overall aim: To enable the students to demonstrate their understanding of the rooms
division and food and beverage operations.
Learning outcomes:
Evaluate the structure of different departments, recognize challenges, and provide solutions
to improve the daily hotel operations.
Optimize processes and budget by selecting the necessary tools.
Maximize revenue and improve staff development by implementing optimal strategies.
Recognize and discuss the core components of a basic feasibility study for the food and
beverage department of a free-standing restaurant operation.
Be able to identify, through this research and analysis, the most appropriate concept for
a given area.
Organization and methodology:
The students will answer all the questions of the case study based on the scenario provided.
Word count:
The maximum word count should not exceed 5000 words, excluding references if any.
Assessment tasks & weighting:
The project accounts for 40% of the Advance Hospitality Operations. The rubric for the evaluation of the
project is as follows:
Page 1 of 3
INTERNAL – RESTRICTED
Page
Criteria
Very Good-100
Good-75
Acceptable-60
Below average-40
Weight
Clearly structured,
well-labeled, and
logically designed. All
key roles, tasks, and
positions are
appropriately included,
with a focus on
operational efficiency.
Mostly well-
structured with
minor inconsistencies
or missing roles.
Some aspects of
operational
efficiency could be
improved.
Basic structure is
provided but lacks
clarity or some key
roles. Some
reporting lines may
be unclear.
Poorly structured or
incomplete; missing key
roles and
responsibilities. Lacks
logical organization.
Organizational
Chart
15%
Detailed, well-
balanced schedule
adhering to labor
regulations while
optimizing staffing.
Consideration for
operational flexibility
and backup support.
Mostly compliant
with labor
regulations; minor
inefficiencies in
scheduling. Some
operational
flexibility included.
Basic schedule
provided but lacks
efficiency or
flexibility. May not
fully adhere to labor
regulations.
Schedule is incomplete,
inefficient, or does not
comply with labor
regulations.
Front Office (FO)
Roster & Staffing
Plan
10%
Accurately calculated
GRA requirements
within budget. Well-
justified approach to
efficiency and
workload distribution.
Calculations are
mostly correct, but
minor errors or
inefficiencies exist.
Some justification
provided.
Basic calculations
but lacks
justification or
exceeds budget
slightly.
Incorrect calculations or
failure to meet budget
constraints. Poor
workload distribution.
Housekeeping
Labor Cost &
Staffing Plan
10%
Well-defined inventory
levels based on
accurate calculations,
lead time, and safety
stock. Logical
purchasing strategy.
Mostly accurate
calculations with
minor errors. Logical
purchasing strategy
with some areas for
improvement.
Inventory
Management &
Purchasing
System
Some inaccuracies in
calculations;
purchasing strategy
is somewhat unclear.
Incorrect inventory
calculations; lacks clear
purchasing strategy.
10%
Innovative and well-
justified concept,
aligned with the
resort’s brand and
target market.
Good concept with
reasonable
justification, though
lacking in uniqueness
or alignment.
Basic concept with
limited justification;
lacks connection to
brand identity.
Restaurant
Concept
Development
Weak or unclear concept
with little to no
justification.
20%
Creative, original, and
well-aligned with the
restaurant concept.
Professionally
designed.
Mostly original and
relevant, but with
minor design flaws or
conceptual
misalignment.
Basic creativity, but
lacks originality or
strong alignment
with the concept.
Unoriginal, poorly
designed, or misaligned
with the concept.
Name, Logo &
Slogan
10%
Clearly defined,
compelling, and well-
justified USP that
differentiates the
outlet from
competitors.
Well-explained USP
with minor gaps in
justification or
differentiation.
Basic USP provided
but lacks strong
justification or
differentiation.
Unique Selling
Proposition (USP)
Weak or unclear USP
with little justification.
20%
Well-structured, logical
flow with clear
headings, professional
tone, and academic
rigor. Free of
grammatical errors.
Adequate structure
but lacks clarity or
coherence. Some
grammar and
formatting issues.
Mostly well-
structured, minor
formatting issues, or
occasional
grammatical errors.
Poorly structured,
difficult to follow,
numerous grammar and
formatting errors.
Writing,
Formatting, &
Structure
5%
Language &
Professional
Demeanor
Language is
somewhat
professional but
includes informal or
unclear phrasing.
Mostly professional,
with minor
informalities or
imprecise wording.
Lacks professionalism;
informal or unclear
writing.
Highly professional,
precise language;
adheres to academic
and industry standards.
Page 2 of 3
INTERNAL – RESTRICTED