Raman	
  Dhiman	
  
INDIAN	
  INSTITUTE	
  OF	
  MANAGEMENT(IIM),	
  SHILLONG	
  
Some of the Rosewood properties across the world
Introduction

• 

A	
   private	
   5	
   star	
   hotel	
   management	
   company	
   with	
   luxury	
   iconic	
   hotels	
  
headquartered	
  in	
  Dallas,	
  Texas	
  

• 

It	
  has	
  12	
  hotel	
  world	
  wide	
  with	
  capacity	
  of	
  1513	
  rooms	
  

• 

Room	
  Tariffs	
  Rate	
  ranging	
  from	
  $120	
  to	
  $9000.	
  

• 

John	
  ScoU	
  is	
  a	
  new	
  President	
  &	
  CEO	
  and	
  	
  

• 

Robert	
  Boulogne	
  is	
  VP	
  of	
  sales	
  &marke]ng	
  
John

• 

Robert

Competed	
  with	
  hotels	
  with	
  Corporate	
  branding	
  and	
  individually	
  branded	
  unique	
  
hotels.	
  
Introduction Contd…

•  Rosewood’s	
  “Sense	
  of	
  Place”	
  Philosophy	
  –	
  Architectural	
  details,	
  interiors	
  
reflected	
  the	
  local	
  character	
  and	
  culture.	
  
•  Two	
  strategies	
  u]lized	
  by	
  Rosewood	
  in	
  opera]ng	
  its	
  proper]es:	
  
I.  Reposi]oning	
  Exis]ng	
  hotels	
  with	
  strong	
  brand	
  equity	
  with	
  the	
  professional	
  
management.	
  

Hotel Bel Air, Los Angeles

Hotel Caroline

	
  
	
  
II.  Create	
  new	
  genera]on	
  hotels	
  having	
  strong	
  brand	
  equity	
  in	
  the	
  property	
  itself.	
  
Introduction Contd…

•  1990	
  adver]sing	
  was	
  property	
  specific	
  and	
  by	
  early	
  
2000	
  Rosewood	
  adver]sing	
  began	
  to	
  feature	
  in	
  all	
  
Rosewood	
  proper]es,	
  but	
  secondary	
  to	
  hotel	
  logo.	
  
•  Issue	
  came	
  in	
  2003	
  when	
  it	
  realized	
  that	
  Rosewood	
  
had	
  low	
  recogni]on	
  	
  and	
  brand	
  wide	
  usage	
  among	
  
guest	
  was	
  an	
  untapped	
  asset.	
  
Important Factors to taken into account…

Corporate	
  	
  
Branding	
  

Employees	
  

Guests	
  

Agents	
  

Compe]]on	
  
External Competition…

•  Compe]ng	
   with	
   known	
   chains	
   and	
   individually	
   branded	
  
proper]es,	
  to	
  name	
  few:	
  
•  Four	
  Seasons	
  with	
  58	
  proper]es	
  
•  Ritz-­‐Carlton	
  –	
  52	
  proper]es	
  
•  Fairmont	
  –	
  46	
  proper]es	
  
•  Orient	
  express	
  
•  Rocco	
  Forte	
  etc.	
  	
  
	
  
Agents Perception

o  I	
  book	
  the	
  hotel	
  and	
  not	
  the	
  Rosewood	
  
o  Brand	
  is	
  not	
  as	
  important	
  as	
  the	
  hotels	
  &	
  resorts	
  
o  The	
  brand	
  is	
  not	
  as	
  strong	
  as	
  it	
  was	
  in	
  its	
  past	
  
o  Known	
  only	
  by	
  individual	
  hotels	
  &	
  resorts	
  	
  
o  Clients	
  don’t	
  come	
  asking	
  for	
  Rosewood	
  as	
  a	
  Brand	
  
o  Clients	
  know	
  Rosewood	
  only	
  because	
  I	
  educate	
  them	
  on	
  it	
  
o  We	
   have	
   to	
   drive	
   understanding	
   of	
   Rosewood.	
   Once	
   they	
  
understand	
  what	
  Rosewood	
  is,	
  it	
  does	
  mean	
  something	
  

—  	
  	
  
Employees’ Perception

•  It’s	
   a	
   brand	
   of	
   dilemma	
   –	
   don’t	
   see	
   great	
   opportunity,	
   few	
  
business	
  opportunity	
  
•  Secret	
  club	
  –	
  known	
  by	
  some	
  guests	
  who	
  go	
  and	
  the	
  industry	
  
•  Very	
  low	
  awareness.	
  Those	
  who	
  know	
  are	
  past	
  guests	
  
Guest’s Perception

•  Brand	
  Rosewood	
  means	
  nothing.	
  
•  Guests	
   have	
   used	
   various	
   proper]es	
   but	
   couldn’t	
   realize	
   that	
  
all	
  were	
  a	
  part	
  of	
  same	
  group	
  
•  Even	
  aier	
  staying	
  at	
  the	
  property,	
  guests	
  don’t	
  tend	
  to	
  know	
  
the	
  name	
  Rosewood	
  
•  Rosewood	
   as	
   a	
   brand	
   doesn’t	
   encourages	
   me	
   to	
   try	
   different	
  
proper]es	
  
•  I	
  dint	
  know	
  un]l	
  my	
  travel	
  agent	
  men]oned	
  it	
  
Current Issues

Aier	
  switching	
  to	
  automated	
  data	
  gathering	
  through	
  CRS,	
  
consolidated	
  guest	
  data	
  	
  revealed	
  that	
  -­‐	
  	
  
•  5%	
  mul]	
  property	
  return	
  visit	
  while	
  corporate	
  branded	
  hotels	
  
enjoyed	
  10%	
  -­‐15%	
  	
  cross	
  property	
  usage	
  rate.	
  
•  Rosewood	
  was	
  at	
  the	
  low	
  end	
  of	
  the	
  scale	
  and	
  there	
  were	
  an	
  
opportunity	
  for	
  increasing	
  cross-­‐property	
  usage.	
  
Probable Solutions

•  Through	
  frequent-­‐stay	
  program	
  

•  Corporate	
  branding	
  approach	
  
Issues observed with Frequent Stay Programme

•  This	
  type	
  of	
  program	
  had	
  been	
  successful	
  only	
  for	
  large	
  mul]	
  
segment	
  operators	
  with	
  broad	
  geographic	
  distribu]on.	
  
•  Loyalty	
  through	
  these	
  type	
  of	
  program	
  was	
  fostered	
  by	
  
offerings	
  such	
  as—flexible	
  check	
  in,	
  check	
  out	
  ]me,	
  
personalized	
  services,	
  freedom	
  to	
  request	
  a	
  specific	
  room,	
  
capacity	
  of	
  employees	
  to	
  solve	
  most	
  unusual	
  problem	
  etc…	
  
Advantages of Corporate Branding:
Better Customer Life Time Value
CLV	
  
3000	
  
2500	
  
2000	
  
1500	
  
1000	
  
500	
  
0	
  

2003	
  

2004	
  

2005	
  

2006	
  

2007	
  

2008	
  

2009	
  

CLV	
  without	
  branding	
  

317	
  

640	
  

966	
  

1296	
  

1628	
  

1963	
  

2299	
  

CLV	
  with	
  branding	
  

364	
  

731	
  

1102	
  

1475	
  

1850	
  

2226	
  

2603	
  
Advantages of Corporate Branding (Contd…)

•  Collec]ve	
  experience	
  	
  
•  Consistent	
  service	
  –	
  in	
  all	
  aspects	
  
•  Encourage	
  guests	
  to	
  use	
  more	
  than	
  one	
  property	
  
•  BeUer	
  brand	
  recogni]on	
  	
  
•  High	
  customer	
  loyalty	
  
•  As	
  per	
  the	
  survey,	
  Individual	
  brand	
  or	
  collec]on	
  hotels	
  had	
  5%	
  to	
  
10%	
   cross	
   selling	
   rates	
   while	
   corporate	
   branded	
   hotels	
   enjoyed	
  
10%	
  to	
  15%	
  cross	
  property	
  usage	
  rates	
  
Issues in Corporate Branding

•  Internal	
  resistance	
  :	
  Few	
  Hotel	
  Managers	
  were	
  inclined	
  to	
  
promote	
  their	
  own	
  Hotel	
  Rather	
  than	
  promo]ng	
  the	
  Rosewood	
  

•  Some	
  corporate	
  guests	
  didn’t	
  want	
  to	
  be	
  a	
  part	
  of	
  bigger	
  
Organiza]on	
  due	
  to	
  their	
  emo]onal	
  aUachment	
  to	
  a	
  par]cular	
  
hotel.	
  
Scenario with an Introduction of Corporate Branding
Without Rosewood
brand Name(2003)

With Rosewood corporate
brand name

115000

115000

750

750

No. of days av guest stays

2

2

Av gross margin per room

32%

32%

Av no. of visits per year per guest

1.2

1.3

Av. Mktg. expense per guest (system wide)

130

139

Av new guest acquisition expense (system wide)

150

150

19169

46000

5750

11500

16.67%

40

386

407

138689580

146314155

Total Guest

115000

115000

New Guest

95831

69000

183070246

193134685

Parameters
Total no of unique guests
Av daily spend

Total no of repeat guests
(Of which: total no. of multi property stay guest)
Average Guest retention rate
Average gross profit per guest
Total Expenses

Total Revenue Generated

Corporate Branding proves out to be profitable vis-à-vis Frequest Stay programme
Suggestion based of Corporate Branding as a go ahead

•  Don’t	
  dilute	
  individual	
  brand	
  persona	
  
•  Subtly	
  add	
  Rosewood	
  to	
  it	
  
•  Get	
  internal	
  teams	
  confidence	
  	
  
•  Show	
  them	
  a	
  bigger	
  picture	
  
•  Incen]vize	
  trade	
  and	
  ask	
  them	
  to	
  push	
  a	
  brand	
  
•  PR	
  can	
  do	
  wonders	
  
•  Build	
  a	
  Rosewood	
  membership	
  plan	
  
•  Tie	
  up	
  with	
  travel	
  agencies/tour	
  operators	
  etc	
  
Thanks

Rosewood hotels & resorts HBS case study

  • 1.
    Raman  Dhiman   INDIAN  INSTITUTE  OF  MANAGEMENT(IIM),  SHILLONG  
  • 2.
    Some of theRosewood properties across the world
  • 3.
    Introduction •  A   private   5   star   hotel   management   company   with   luxury   iconic   hotels   headquartered  in  Dallas,  Texas   •  It  has  12  hotel  world  wide  with  capacity  of  1513  rooms   •  Room  Tariffs  Rate  ranging  from  $120  to  $9000.   •  John  ScoU  is  a  new  President  &  CEO  and     •  Robert  Boulogne  is  VP  of  sales  &marke]ng   John •  Robert Competed  with  hotels  with  Corporate  branding  and  individually  branded  unique   hotels.  
  • 4.
    Introduction Contd… •  Rosewood’s  “Sense  of  Place”  Philosophy  –  Architectural  details,  interiors   reflected  the  local  character  and  culture.   •  Two  strategies  u]lized  by  Rosewood  in  opera]ng  its  proper]es:   I.  Reposi]oning  Exis]ng  hotels  with  strong  brand  equity  with  the  professional   management.   Hotel Bel Air, Los Angeles Hotel Caroline     II.  Create  new  genera]on  hotels  having  strong  brand  equity  in  the  property  itself.  
  • 5.
    Introduction Contd… •  1990  adver]sing  was  property  specific  and  by  early   2000  Rosewood  adver]sing  began  to  feature  in  all   Rosewood  proper]es,  but  secondary  to  hotel  logo.   •  Issue  came  in  2003  when  it  realized  that  Rosewood   had  low  recogni]on    and  brand  wide  usage  among   guest  was  an  untapped  asset.  
  • 6.
    Important Factors totaken into account… Corporate     Branding   Employees   Guests   Agents   Compe]]on  
  • 7.
    External Competition… •  Compe]ng   with   known   chains   and   individually   branded   proper]es,  to  name  few:   •  Four  Seasons  with  58  proper]es   •  Ritz-­‐Carlton  –  52  proper]es   •  Fairmont  –  46  proper]es   •  Orient  express   •  Rocco  Forte  etc.      
  • 8.
    Agents Perception o  I  book  the  hotel  and  not  the  Rosewood   o  Brand  is  not  as  important  as  the  hotels  &  resorts   o  The  brand  is  not  as  strong  as  it  was  in  its  past   o  Known  only  by  individual  hotels  &  resorts     o  Clients  don’t  come  asking  for  Rosewood  as  a  Brand   o  Clients  know  Rosewood  only  because  I  educate  them  on  it   o  We   have   to   drive   understanding   of   Rosewood.   Once   they   understand  what  Rosewood  is,  it  does  mean  something   —     
  • 9.
    Employees’ Perception •  It’s   a   brand   of   dilemma   –   don’t   see   great   opportunity,   few   business  opportunity   •  Secret  club  –  known  by  some  guests  who  go  and  the  industry   •  Very  low  awareness.  Those  who  know  are  past  guests  
  • 10.
    Guest’s Perception •  Brand  Rosewood  means  nothing.   •  Guests   have   used   various   proper]es   but   couldn’t   realize   that   all  were  a  part  of  same  group   •  Even  aier  staying  at  the  property,  guests  don’t  tend  to  know   the  name  Rosewood   •  Rosewood   as   a   brand   doesn’t   encourages   me   to   try   different   proper]es   •  I  dint  know  un]l  my  travel  agent  men]oned  it  
  • 11.
    Current Issues Aier  switching  to  automated  data  gathering  through  CRS,   consolidated  guest  data    revealed  that  -­‐     •  5%  mul]  property  return  visit  while  corporate  branded  hotels   enjoyed  10%  -­‐15%    cross  property  usage  rate.   •  Rosewood  was  at  the  low  end  of  the  scale  and  there  were  an   opportunity  for  increasing  cross-­‐property  usage.  
  • 12.
    Probable Solutions •  Through  frequent-­‐stay  program   •  Corporate  branding  approach  
  • 13.
    Issues observed withFrequent Stay Programme •  This  type  of  program  had  been  successful  only  for  large  mul]   segment  operators  with  broad  geographic  distribu]on.   •  Loyalty  through  these  type  of  program  was  fostered  by   offerings  such  as—flexible  check  in,  check  out  ]me,   personalized  services,  freedom  to  request  a  specific  room,   capacity  of  employees  to  solve  most  unusual  problem  etc…  
  • 14.
    Advantages of CorporateBranding: Better Customer Life Time Value CLV   3000   2500   2000   1500   1000   500   0   2003   2004   2005   2006   2007   2008   2009   CLV  without  branding   317   640   966   1296   1628   1963   2299   CLV  with  branding   364   731   1102   1475   1850   2226   2603  
  • 15.
    Advantages of CorporateBranding (Contd…) •  Collec]ve  experience     •  Consistent  service  –  in  all  aspects   •  Encourage  guests  to  use  more  than  one  property   •  BeUer  brand  recogni]on     •  High  customer  loyalty   •  As  per  the  survey,  Individual  brand  or  collec]on  hotels  had  5%  to   10%   cross   selling   rates   while   corporate   branded   hotels   enjoyed   10%  to  15%  cross  property  usage  rates  
  • 16.
    Issues in CorporateBranding •  Internal  resistance  :  Few  Hotel  Managers  were  inclined  to   promote  their  own  Hotel  Rather  than  promo]ng  the  Rosewood   •  Some  corporate  guests  didn’t  want  to  be  a  part  of  bigger   Organiza]on  due  to  their  emo]onal  aUachment  to  a  par]cular   hotel.  
  • 17.
    Scenario with anIntroduction of Corporate Branding Without Rosewood brand Name(2003) With Rosewood corporate brand name 115000 115000 750 750 No. of days av guest stays 2 2 Av gross margin per room 32% 32% Av no. of visits per year per guest 1.2 1.3 Av. Mktg. expense per guest (system wide) 130 139 Av new guest acquisition expense (system wide) 150 150 19169 46000 5750 11500 16.67% 40 386 407 138689580 146314155 Total Guest 115000 115000 New Guest 95831 69000 183070246 193134685 Parameters Total no of unique guests Av daily spend Total no of repeat guests (Of which: total no. of multi property stay guest) Average Guest retention rate Average gross profit per guest Total Expenses Total Revenue Generated Corporate Branding proves out to be profitable vis-à-vis Frequest Stay programme
  • 18.
    Suggestion based ofCorporate Branding as a go ahead •  Don’t  dilute  individual  brand  persona   •  Subtly  add  Rosewood  to  it   •  Get  internal  teams  confidence     •  Show  them  a  bigger  picture   •  Incen]vize  trade  and  ask  them  to  push  a  brand   •  PR  can  do  wonders   •  Build  a  Rosewood  membership  plan   •  Tie  up  with  travel  agencies/tour  operators  etc  
  • 19.