MGT1002 Hotel Operations and Systems Management Assessment Brief 2026 | UoS
MGT1002 Learning Outcomes:
By the end of this module successful students will be able to do the following:
1. Interpret the development and classification systems of the accommodation industry and their impact on operational decision-making.
2. Examine front office and housekeeping operations, including their roles, processes, and contributions to guest satisfaction and overall operational success.
3. Discuss revenue management principles, distribution strategies, and the role of sustainability practices within the hospitality industry.
Assessment 1 Hotel Operations Scenario Assessment
Value:Â Â Â 30%
Assessment Description
This assessment tests Learning Outcomes 1, 2 and 3.
As a group of hotel consultants, you are required to study guest reviews for TWO hotels in London. By studying those comments, you should try to study the good practices and areas for improvement respectively; and compare their performance accordingly. Summarize all your findings into responsible operational departments. Hotel comments are easily found online at various websites including official hotel websites, Trip Advisor, Hotels.com, Booking.com, Agoda.com, etc.
Each project team (ranging from a minimum of 4 to a maximum of 6 members) will be responsible for a hotel consultancy presentation. The presentation contents should include:
- Introduction
- Hotel background and brief information
- Summary of good practices by departments
- Summary of areas for improvement by departments
- Highlight the THREE major key areas in achieving guest experiences
- Conclusion
Each student team will have maximum 15 minutes, no less than 10 minutes to present the findings to the class.
Assessment Guidance
Data Collection & Research
- Do not rely on a single site. Compare “Official” reviews with third-party sites like TripAdvisor or Booking.com to spot discrepancies in brand promise vs. reality.
- Look for recurring themes rather than one-off complaints. If five guests mention “slow check-in,” it is an operational system issue; if one guest mentions it, it may be an isolated incident.
Operational Categorization
To organize your findings, map reviews to the following departments, try to:
- Front Office/Systems: Booking ease, check-in speed, staff greeting, and etc
- Housekeeping: Room cleanliness, amenity quality, turndown service, and etc
- Food & Beverage: Breakfast quality, room service efficiency, bar atmosphere, and etc
- Engineering/Maintenance: Wi-Fi reliability, AC/Heating functionality, elevator speed, and etc
Presentation Innovation & Delivery
- The group-based presentation will require team members’ synergy in composing the presentation in innovative and well-organized manners, for example by using well-orchestrated role play in enhancing the delivery of the presentation contents, or videos in enhancing the visual effects.
- The “Consultant” Persona: Maintain a professional tone. Avoid saying “we liked the hotel”; instead, use “The data suggests the property excels in…”
Evaluation Criteria - Synergy: Does the team transition smoothly? Does it feel like one firm, or four separate students?
- Analytical Depth: Did you just read the reviews, or did you explain why those issues exist (e.g., outdated PMS software or understaffing)?
- Time Management: Staying within the 10-15 minute window is a test of your ability to prioritize information—a key skill for any consultant
Format and instructions
Each team assignment must be presented by all students in the same group. Students must submit the presentation PowerPoint by the submission date specified. Student full names and student numbers should be printed clearly on the cover page of the PowerPoint slide.
Assessment Criteria: Assessment 1
| Criteria | Fail / Marginal Fail (<40%) | Pass (40% – 49%) | Good (50% – 59%) | Very Good (60% – 69%) | Excellent (70% – 100%) |
|
Introduction & Context 10% |
Missing or incoherent introduction. No mention of the consultancy firm or hotel background. |
Basic introduction of the team and the two London hotels. Lacks professional Consultancy branding. |
Clear introduction. Provides brief, accurate background information on both London properties. | Professional opening. Sets a clear Consultancy stage and provides a strategic overview of the properties’ market niche. | High-impact introduction. Establishes a sophisticated consultancy persona with a clear roadmap of the audit objectives. |
|
Analysis- Departmental 40% |
Fails to categorize findings. No understanding of hotel departments | Identifies departments but links them poorly to the data. Analysis is on very surface level. | Correctly maps reviews to specific departments. Identifies clear “Good Practices” vs “Areas for Improvement.” | Detailed departmental audit. Connects guest friction points to potential management or workflow failures. | Expert operational audit. Links guest feedback to specific Systems Management structural solutions. |
|
Recommendation- The “Three areas of improvement” 30% |
Missed the requirement to highlight three key areas of the guest experience. | Lists three areas, but they are generic and not directly supported by the research findings. | Three areas are identified and logically linked to the specific findings of the two hotels. | High-level synthesis. Demonstrates how these three keys drive the overall brand reputation and guest loyalty. | Visionary strategic synthesis. Prioritizes the three most impactful “leverage points” for to improve hotel performance and guest experience. |
|
Presentation & Innovation 10% |
Unprofessional. No team coordination. Slides are unreadable. No innovative elements used. | Standard PPT with heavy text. Poor transitions. Minimal attempt at visual or creative engagement. | Clear speaking and good coordination. Uses charts/images to support data. Stays within time limit of presentation. | Very good team Synergy. Professional presentation. Uses innovative tools (e.g., role-play or video) to enhance the message. | Masterful delivery. Seamless transitions. Innovative use of role-play/multimedia that significantly elevates the “Consultancy” pitch. |
|
Research & Literature 10% |
Little to no evidence of research. Relies on anecdotal or singular comments. No reference to academic literature or hospitality management theories. |
Basic research from one major site. Primarily descriptive. Limited reference to academic literature or hospitality management theories. |
Good research sources. Identifies clear patterns in guest behaviour and expectations. Uses fair academic sources or industry frameworks to support the analysis |
Strong research across multiple platforms. Compares official brand promises against real-time guest sentiment. Strong integration of literature to explain guest satisfaction trends. |
Synthesizes high volumes of data to uncover deep, systemic operational insights across both properties. Exemplary use of academic theory. Critically hospitality models apply to justify operational recommendations. |
Assessment 2 Hospitality Operations Plan
Value:Â 70%
Assessment Description
Develop a comprehensive proposal for a new hotel project in London.
As an individual consultant, your objective is to persuade a potential investor to fund a new hotel development in the London market. You must move beyond a simple “idea” to a sophisticated Operational Concept that justifies the investment through market alignment and system efficiency.
Your report must explicitly address and justify the following strategic choices:
- Theme of the Hotel: (e.g., Luxury, High-Tech Micro-Hotel, Heritage/Boutique, and etc).
- Location: Specific London borough or district (e.g., Shoreditch, South Kensington, Canary Wharf).
- Classification: Star rating or service level
- Target Market & Competitors: Who are the primary/secondary guests? Which existing London hotels are your direct rivals?
- Facility Systems: Discuss the core technologies (PMS, CRS, Smart-room controls, Energy Management Systems) adopted for your concept.
- Operational Requirements: Justify key highlights of the facilities planning and the staffing requirements to run them.
Word Count: 2,000 words (excluding references and appendices).
Report Structure
- Cover Page: Project Title/Concept Name, Team Member Names, and Student IDs.
- Introduction: Define the project scope, the Gap in the Market, and your objectives.
- Background of Study:
- Location Analysis: Why this specific area of London?
- Market Segmentation: Current guest preferences in the current London market.
- Competitive Landscape: A brief SWOT analysis of your main competitors.
   4. Main Body:
- Detailed descriptions of the property design and facilities.
- Facility Systems Architecture: How technology will enhance the guest journey
- Operational Flow: Staffing structures and service delivery standards.
  5. Conclusion
  6. List of References: Minimum of 8–10 academic/industry sources (Harvard reference style).
Assessment Criteria: Assessment 2Â Hospitality Operations Plan
| Criteria | Fail / Marginal Fail (<40%) | Pass (40% – 49%) | Good (50% – 59%) | Very Good (60% – 69%) | Excellent (70% – 100%) |
|
Introduction 5% |
Unable to define project scope or identify any market gap. Very poor introduction. |
Basic intro. Identifies the project but provides a vague or generic “Gap in the Market.” |
Clear introduction. Outlines project objectives and a logical market gap for London. |
Strong opening. Sophisticated definition of objectives and a compelling market gap analysis. |
Masterful overview. Comprehensive understanding of scope and a unique, highly viable market gap. |
|
Main Body 45% |
Very poor understanding of the competitive landscape. Very limited knowledge of segmentation. Unable to relate theory to practice. Poor judgment in the design of systems and operations. |
Descriptive analysis of location. Basic segmentation with a surface-level of rivals. Largely descriptive writing; little evidence of theoretical application. Basic list of facilities. |
Logical location choice. Identifies clear target segments and competitors. Some quality service concepts applied. Readings are incorporated into operational arguments. |
Detailed geographic analysis. Uses market data to justify classification and target segments. Accurate quality service concepts applied to facilities and systems with a clear line of thought. |
Sophisticated market audit. Deep dive into guest preferences and a strategic, high-level analysis Outstanding application of service concepts to property design, tech architecture, and operational flow. |
|
 Analysis 20% |
Unable to provide any evaluation or recommendation. Content does not address the assigned topic. |
Limited evaluation. Recommendations for brand or location are generic or irrelevant to findings. |
Able to provide some reasonable evaluation and brand recommendation based on findings. |
Able to provide a justifiable evaluation and brand recommendation based on finding of the task. |
Able to provide a logical, very comprehensive evaluation and masterfully justified recommendation for the task |
|
Organisation and format 10% |
Badly organized report. |
Poorly organized report. |
Fairly well-organized report. |
Well-organized and complete report with very good flow of presentation |
Very well-organized report with excellent flow of presentation. |
|
Use of Literature 10% |
Lacking factual information. Many errors in format and Harvard referencing. | Lacking significant factual information. Several errors in format/quotation style. | Mostly factual with some errors in format and Harvard referencing. | Mostly correct format and quotation of Harvard referencing. |
Exemplary use of academic theory and references. The format and quotation of references are accurate. |