Report for the Board of Directors of St Christopher’s Hotels

Assignment Brief

Write a 2000-word report for the Board of Directors of St Christopher’s Hotels that applies the theory from your Business Communication module to the case study in order to analyse the communication of a project team that organises special arrangements for Elderly and Disabled guests and make recommendations to the Board

Case Study

Part 1: Your Role in St. Christopher’s St.

Christopher’s Hotels are an industry leader in the field of hospitality. They believe the primary reason for their success is their policy of diverse recruitment of expert staff who come from many different cultures. The Board of Directors know from experience that managing a team with a mix of different cultures can present challenges that companies without diversity might not face. You work in the head office of St Christopher’s. Your role is to monitor the communication of different teams and report back. You have been assigned to investigate the communication of a project team that organises special arrangements for Elderly and Disabled guests. There is no question that they members of the team are highly trained experts and respect each other. Their feedback from clients has been consistently positive, and the Board of Directors is impressed with their work and results. However, like most groups made up of diverse staff, there are some issues among the group that have recently led to tensions and frustrations. These issues recently resulted in a communication breakdown that almost led to the team missing an important deadline.

Case Study

Part 2: A summary of the testimonials gathered from the project team

Carmen (Operations staff) It’s difficult because our work involves a complex situation. There is no room for mistakes with the elderly and the hotel. As a result, everyone must follow the decisions of the operations staff precisely. There can be no questioning of it. There is no opportunity to listen to guests’ special requirements. If they have needs that we can’t meet, they should go elsewhere. It`s clear that each member of staff knows how to do their job, but I’m having issues with people following operational procedure.

Elliot (guest relations) Carmen puts me in a very difficult position. I know that she has a difficult job, and I respect that she takes notes every time we have a conversation. But I feel that the needs of guests and service users have to be considered if we want to remain profitable for the next 5 to 10 years. Our guests have very individual health and mobility requirements. These should be taken into consideration when operations decisions are made.

Samuel (Duty Nurse) The hotel staff should stop and think about how hospitals work. Hotels don’t normally have lots of sick and infirm guests. But our clients have a lot of problems. I’ve worked for years in hospitals. The staff would benefit from listening to my experience. They should also listen to and respect the elderly guests more. But the hotel is more interested in making sure everything happens on time. They don’t understand that the schedule isn’t as important as prioritising the immediate needs of the service users. Sometimes, the schedule needs to change. Sometimes, I think that Su doesn’t care about the guests as all. Don’t get me wrong, Su is very skilled in some areas. Her reports, emails and handovers are all very well written. It’s always clear exactly what points she is making and there is never anything unnecessary.

Su (Career) I don’t see a problem. Carmen is very clear about the rules of the hotel, and Samuel is always very clear about the medical requirements, and John always makes sure that he understands exactly what people are saying to him. Service users need strict rules and routine, and it’s best for them if that routine doesn’t change. It’s worked well in the past, so it will continue to work well. But, I do wish that everyone would stop being so rude and arguing about it. You can put your opinions in a more subtle way. You don’t have to be in people’s faces all the time the way that Elliot and Carmen are.

John (facilities) I’m not sure, but it seems to me that people are arguing because they aren’t clear on things. If we all sat around a table and discussed decisions before they were made, then it would be okay. Carmen shouldn’t just make decisions on her own. And, like, Su never asks questions to be sure she understands instructions, so, she always makes mistakes. And Elliot has made up his mind before we even start talking. We should try to limit the number of rules that we’re forced to follow. And someone needs to tell Carmen that her reports and emails don’t make any sense. She just writes out all the information in her head, and doesn’t realise that it needs to be organised clearly and logically into paragraphs for people to understand. She has long paragraphs that describe things that everyone already knows and she never seems to make any clear points. She’s just a typical Spanish writer.

Sample Answer

Report for the Board of Directors of St Christopher’s Hotels

Introduction

Effective communication is at the heart of every successful organisation, particularly in service-oriented industries such as hospitality. For St Christopher’s Hotels, where diversity is a cornerstone of their success, clear and culturally sensitive communication is essential for sustaining excellence in service quality and teamwork. The project team responsible for special arrangements for Elderly and Disabled guests exemplifies the benefits and challenges of working in a multicultural environment. While their expertise and dedication are unquestioned, recent communication tensions have resulted in a near-missed deadline, highlighting deeper interpersonal and organisational communication issues.

This report applies theories from the Business Communication module to analyse the communication breakdowns within the team. It identifies how miscommunication, cultural differences, and conflicting communication styles contribute to the tension, and offers recommendations to enhance collaboration, mutual understanding, and information flow within the team.

Analysis of Team Communication

Cultural Diversity and Communication Styles

St Christopher’s Hotels’ commitment to diversity has created a team with members from different cultural and professional backgrounds. While this enhances creativity and problem-solving, it can also lead to misunderstandings due to varying communication norms. According to Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions Theory (Hofstede, 2011), cultures differ along dimensions such as power distance, individualism versus collectivism, and uncertainty avoidance, all of which influence how individuals communicate and make decisions.

Carmen, representing the operations staff, appears to adopt a high power distance approach, expecting her directives to be followed without question. Her statement that there is “no opportunity to listen to guests’ special requirements” demonstrates a top-down communication style and a preference for structure over flexibility. This approach may align with cultures that value hierarchy and procedural obedience but can conflict with team members from low power distance backgrounds, such as Elliot, who favours participatory decision-making and open dialogue.

Elliot’s frustration with Carmen’s rigid approach reflects a communication clash between authoritarian and consultative styles. His emphasis on “considering individual guest needs” highlights a high-context communication tendency, where empathy, nuance, and adaptability are key. This contrast in expectations causes misunderstanding and tension, which is consistent with Hall’s (1976) theory of high- and low-context cultures, where meaning may be derived from either explicit words or implicit context.

Samuel’s testimonial also reveals cultural and professional dissonance. His background in healthcare gives him a patient-centred mindset, valuing empathy and flexibility, which contrasts sharply with the hotel’s efficiency-driven environment. His complaint that “the schedule isn’t as important as prioritising the immediate needs of service users” underscores a values conflict rather than incompetence. In line with Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner’s (2012) dimension of specific versus diffuse cultures, Samuel adopts a diffuse approach, integrating professional ethics with personal empathy, while others focus narrowly on operational targets.

These differences in cultural orientation and professional priorities illustrate that St Christopher’s team lacks a shared communication framework. Without common ground, cultural diversity risks devolving into misinterpretation and conflict rather than collaboration.

Organisational Communication Channels

Effective communication in teams depends not only on interpersonal understanding but also on the clarity and reliability of communication channels. According to Shannon and Weaver’s (1949) communication model, noise, whether semantic, cultural, or procedural, can distort messages and lead to misunderstanding.

In this case, Carmen’s written communication seems to be a source of confusion. John criticises her emails and reports for being disorganised and unclear, stating that “she never seems to make any clear points.” This suggests a breakdown at the encoding stage of communication, where the sender’s message fails to align with the receiver’s interpretation. Carmen’s long, unstructured writing style and tendency to include unnecessary information make it difficult for colleagues to extract key points, introducing “semantic noise” into the communication process.

In contrast, Samuel praises Su’s written communication for being concise and well-structured, showing that clarity and coherence are recognised strengths within the team. However, Su’s lack of verbal engagement, her tendency not to ask clarifying questions, creates another form of communication barrier. Active listening, as emphasised by Rogers and Farson (1979), is essential in maintaining understanding and trust in workplace communication. Su’s silence may be interpreted as indifference or resistance, even if it stems from a desire to avoid conflict.

John’s call for “sitting around a table and discussing decisions before they are made” indicates a lack of horizontal communication and participatory discussion. Currently, communication appears hierarchical and fragmented, with limited opportunities for team input. The absence of regular collaborative meetings reduces feedback loops, increasing the likelihood of misunderstanding. According to Hackman and Morris’s (1975) group effectiveness model, such deficiencies in communication structure impede coordination, decision-making, and morale.

Continued...