How Will Service Robots Redefine Leadership in Hotel Management?

A Delphi Approach

Abstract

Purpose – Using the Delphi technique, this paper aims to investigate how human resource

experts perceive service robots will impact leadership and human resource management in

the hospitality industry.

Design/methodology/approach – A three-stage Delphi study with hotel industry human

resource experts was conducted to identify the key trends and major challenges that will

emerge in the next ten years and how leaders should deal with the challenges brought about

by service robot technologies.

Findings – Results show that while service robots are anticipated to increase efficiency and

productivity of hotel activities, they may also pose challenges such as high costs, skill

deficits, and significant changes to the organizational structure and culture of hotels.

Therefore, the anticipated applications and integration of robotic technology will require

leaders of the future to carefully consider the balance between the roles of service robots and

human employees in the guest experience, and to nurture a work environment that embraces

open-mindedness and change.

Originality/value – This is the first type of study to examine hospitality leadership and

human resource management in the context of robotized hotels. This study has taken an

important step to understand the leadership role in robotized hotels from a human resource

perspective, and brings clarity as to how robotic technology can influence leadership in the

future workplace.

Keywords: Leadership, human resource management, hotel management, service robots.

How Will Service Robots Redefine Leadership in Hotel Management?

A Delphi Approach

Introduction

Robots have been utilized in industrial applications since the early 1960s when

specialized machines began appearing on factory assembly lines to reduce personnel costs

and increase reliability. Since then, robotic technologies have developed beyond industrial

automation applications and are now increasingly found performing service tasks for humans

outside of the controlled environments of a factory. Service robots, therefore, are designed to

operate in human environments. Companies now expect significantly higher returns and

business value from investments in robotic technologies (Finch et al., 2018). In addition,

employing service robots may help combat the issue of labor shortages (Ahmed, 2017).

As technological advancements continue and robots with the required autonomy,

flexibility, and efficiency become commercially available (Frey and Osborne, 2017), there is

growing interest in developing innovative ways of deploying service robots across all

economic sectors, including hospitality (Ivanov et al., 2017). Today, robots can be found in

an increasing number of “back-of-house” roles such as cooking hamburgers and cleaning

floors, as well as “front-of-house” roles such as serving cocktails, checking in hotel guests,

and delivering items to hotel rooms (Murphy et al., 2016). For example, “Flippy” has been

deployed at the CaliBurger restaurant chain to prepare food alongside human employees

(Kolodny, 2017); “Connie,” a service robot, acting as a concierge in a Hilton hotel, can assist

customers with directions, travel recommendations, etc. (IBM, 2016). Hoteliers around the

globe are now actively exploring ways in which service robots can be used to create

advantage for their organizations in increasingly competitive environments (Pinillos et al.,

2016). According to the resource advantage theory of competition, an organization can obtain

sustainable competitive advantage if it manages its internal resources to gain superior

financial performance in dynamic industry competition, and innovation plays a key role in

creating competitive advantage (Hunt and Morgan, 1996).

To uncover the true potential of robotic innovation to empower the business,

corporate leaders need to rethink the relationships between guests, employees, and service

robots. Robotic technology is not simply replacing human workers with automated machines.

Instead, new perspectives suggest that leaders must foster a culture of creativity and

collaboration with technology, the team, and data competency (Cesta et al., 2018). This is

aligned with organizational change theory (Armenakis and Bedeian, 1999), which suggests

that organizations are in a continual state of change, and in order to survive, organizations

must develop the capability to transform themselves in a fundamental manner (Choi and

Ruona, 2011).

Customer experiences will change quickly as the hospitality industry deploys robotic

technology in the future (Tung and Au, 2018). For example, service robots could provide

hedonic experiences to service transactions, and customers may receive more predictable

services from the robots. However, society could oppose employing service robots for

delivering human services. The reasons may include a lack of human touch with robots, as

well as ethical concerns with the possible growth of unemployment (Lu et al., 2019). As a

substitute for human staff, service robots could pose a psychological challenge to the

conventional view of service, and leaders will have to accept and tackle these challenges.

As with any new technological innovation, organizations must weigh and balance the

opportunities afforded with the pressures that are placed on existing organizational process

and strategy (Armenakis and Bedeian, 1999; Choi and Ruona, 2011). Indeed, it is not only

the economic and technical perspectives that must been considered when determining the

appropriate use and implementation of a new technology such as service robots, but also the

user and organizational perspectives, including the potential effects on the structure and

culture of the organisation, the decision-making processes, and the user environment

(Bouwman et al., 2005). Service robots are an emerging topic in hospitality and tourism

literature (Ivanov et al., 2019) and there is little research on how service robots impact

hospitality leadership behaviors, particularly from a human resource (hereafter referred to as

HR) perspective. Thus, the purpose of this study is to utilize the Delphi technique to

understand hotel HR experts’ expectations regarding the following issues: (1) ways service

robots will impact HR management in hotels, (2) skills or practices successful hotel managers

will need to master in order to work with service robots, (3) major challenges hotel managers

will have in capturing any potential benefits of service robot technologies, (4) strategies hotel

managers will use to deal with any potential challenges brought about by service robot

technologies, and (5) ways hotel managers will establish a culture that empowers employees

to thrive alongside service robots. Organizational change theory (Armenakis and Bedeian,

1999) provides a useful framework for addressing these research questions. According to the

theory, leaders need to define challenges, prepare skills, and build change-embracing culture

to modify organizational functioning and achieve more favorable outcomes (Battilana et al.,

2010). This study builds upon these principles of organizational change and provides insight

for leadership practices as well as suggestions for those hospitality organizations looking to

introduce robotic technologies.

Background and Literature Review

Service Robots

Nowadays, robots can handle intellectually demanding tasks and replace humans in a

way that is comparable to how steam power replaced muscle power during the industrial

revolution (McAfee et al., 2014). Service robots perform meaningful tasks for humans; they

require a degree of autonomy, or the ability to perform the intended tasks depending on

current state and sensing, without human interventions (International Organization for

Standardization, 2012). The use of service robots in the hospitality industry is on the rise

(Murphy et al., 2016). When service robots act as the frontline employees, they are

responsible for delivering human-like services and interactions and enhancing customer

experiences in real-time (Kuo et al., 2017). Service robots are able to initiate interactions

with customers and provide added-value services while conforming to safety standards for

human robot interaction (Pinillos et al., 2016). Although the functional tasks carried out by

service robots may also be accomplished through other technologies such as kiosks, mobile

payment and touch screens, service robots are able to provide frontline services where

interactional value is an essential element of the customers’ experiences (Lu et al., 2019), and

customers feel a sense of fun, as well as enjoyment (Kuo et al., 2017).

Several hospitality studies have investigated the role of service robots from the

customer’s perspective (e.g., Ivanov and Webster, 2019; Lu et al., 2019). For example, Lu et

al. (2019) developed a service robot integration willingness scale that conveys the important

dimensions characterizing consumers’ long-term willingness to incorporate service robots

into regular service transactions. Tung and Au (2018) explored consumer reviews with

robotics to evaluate user experiences (including embodiment, emotion, human-oriented

perception, feelings of security and human-robot co-experience) from research in human-

robot interactions. Choi et al. (2019) found that consumers responded favorably to service

robots that used literal (vs. figurative) language due to the notion of anthropomorphism, while

language style effects were not observed among service kiosks because they lacked human-

related features. In addition, perceived credibility was found to be the underlying mechanism

explaining the language style effect on service encounter evaluation. Tussyadiah et al. (2019)

investigated travellers’ trust in intelligent autonomous technologies based on two studies

involving on-demand self-driving vehicles and robot bartenders, and they found that trust led

to adoption intention in both studies.

However, the study of robotics in hospitality from the HR perspective is rare (Lu et

al., 2019). While most of the hospitality research about service robots has addressed

customers’ aspects, research on leaders’ and HR experts’ perceptions of outcomes derived

from service robots is much needed. With every new technology, controversy is fought over

how it would influence jobs and wages. On the one hand, it is anticipated that most low-skill

and low-wage jobs could be automated in the near future (Wirtz et al., 2018), and Huang and

Rust (2018) predicted that to remain employable, service employees need to upgrade their

“soft” people skills such as empathy and intuition. Even in situations where human wages are

low, hotels may soon opt for the more consistent guest experience delivered by service robots

over the costs of (re)training in markets with high seasonality and employee turnover (Kuo et

al., 2017). On the other hand, pairing robots and humans to complement each other may

make jobs more efficient and interesting, and could offer improved service experiences to

customers at a lower cost (Maurtua et al., 2017). Generalized statements cannot be made

from a work science point of view (Wirtz et al., 2018), but Huang and Rust’s (2018)

argument rings true in that considerable employment threats exist in the near future if the

industry integrates service robots.

Service Robots and Leadership

As robotic technologies are going to play a compelling role for organizations in the

near future, it will not leave the field of leadership intact (Johansson and Björkman, 2018).

The responsibilities of future leaders are moving towards the social perspectives of the

workplace, where the leadership role is mainly inspiring and encouraging their employees,

and leaders are facilitators of collaboration and creativity instead of imposing command and

discipline (Plastino and Purdy, 2018). This reflects the importance of focusing on “soft”

values including communication skills and creative thinking while robots replace technical

skills (Parry et al., 2016). Therefore, leaders need to search for skills and abilities in

communication, creativity, and critical thinking when resourcing employees. As Tapscott

(2014) suggests, when technological competencies increase in organizations leaders need to

place emphasis on initiating and cultivating working relationships, and on collaborating with

and creating a work learning environment for their employees. One of leadership’s roles

should be to create and monitor a pathway for new technology (Parry et al., 2016), and to

promote social cohesion in the work environment (Tapscott, 2014).

Robotic technologies will play an important role in hospitality leaders’ future daily

lives, because robots are able to facilitate decision-making processes and perform a variety of

tasks superiorly to humans (Hannola et al., 2018). Nevertheless, in the hospitality workplace,

the need for human interaction is expected to continue (Larivière et al., 2017). Although

technology may be getting better at recognizing emotional states, Schier (2018) argues that

humans are the ones to influence and change others’ mental states. The mind-sets and

emotions of humans are difficult for machines to read and duplicate because humans are

social in their nature. Leaders need to create positive emotions, motivation, persuasion, and

cohesion among their followers. Brynjolfsson and McAfee (2016) further claimed that

leaders will have to be the ones to support and encourage their employees.

As Tapscott (2014) argues, when the work environment becomes more and more

reliant on technology, then collaboration, partnership, teamwork and social skills become

more and more valued as well. Future leaders are expected to designate responsibilities and

provide more support for their staff (Noe et al., 2017) to reflect the face of an inclusive

workforce. Therefore, it is anticipated that collective and relational approaches to leadership,

including transformational leadership, will be continually emphasized in the future work

environment.

In addition, hoteliers are increasingly looking to monitor and bring down costs (Solnet

et al., 2016). One of the strategies leaders have within their control is technology substitution

of routine tasks, which can lower costs by negating the competition for the services of low

skill workers. New technologies can enable higher customization and streamlining of product

offerings, which in turn, can further reduce the need for front-line employees (Kuo et al.,

2017). According to organizational change theory (Armenakis and Bedeian, 1999),

organizations should transform themselves in a changing environment (Choi and Ruona,

2011). Thus, at the leadership level, in response to the changing environment of technology,

expert competencies such as crisis and yield management would be increasingly emphasized

to actively manage for and minimize external uncertainties. This will allow leaders to instill a

culture and practice of environmental stewardship throughout their workforce (Solnet et al.,

2016). These sought-after skills and competencies could help to combat the hospitality

industry’s current low status as a career choice, and help form future active policy and

planning (Solnet et al., 2014).

Thus, given the impending, but still uncertain changes that robotic technology will

bring to the workforce and leadership of the hospitality industry, this paper aims to

investigate how HR experts perceive service robots will impact leadership and human

resources in the hospitality industry.

Method

This study utilized a Delphi methodology to find consensus opinion about hospitality

leadership in the context of robotized hotels and to bring clarity as to how robotic technology

can influence leadership and human resources in the future workplace. The Delphi method is

considered a qualitative analysis by which a group of experts anonymously share their

opinions on a complex issue over several rounds of questionnaires, and is particularly useful

for forecasting emerging issues (Linstone and Turoff, 1975). During the first round of a

Delphi study experts are presented with open-ended questions soliciting their opinions about

the issue(s) of interest. The experts’ responses are then summarized into a series of

statements. In the second round of the Delphi survey, experts indicate their level of

agreement with each statement (typically using Likert scales) and to provide comments

supporting their decisions. In the subsequent rounds of a Delphi survey, the experts’

aggregated opinions are presented and individual respondents are given the opportunity to re-

evaluate and revise their agreement with each statement and provide additional comments

(Linstone and Turoff, 1975).

Expert Selection and Brainstorming

Because the aim of this study was to explore the leadership issues of service robot use

and implementation from organizational and workforce perspectives, rather than economic or

technical perspectives, HR experts were deemed the most appropriate informants. HR

managers and executives were selected for participation in the study on the basis that they

occupy senior management positions within hotel organizations. An online questionnaire was

developed with convenience and snowball sampling used whereby the research team’s

personal contacts of 65 senior level HR professionals working in the hotel industry were

initially emailed invitations to take part in the Delphi survey. Survey invitations were also

posted on the LinkedIn profiles of the research team (representing a network of 2,680

individuals of which 150 were qualified to participate). All individuals who received the

Delphi invitation were encouraged to share the invitation with other senior level HR

professionals working in the hotel industry. The online questionnaire included a screening

question to ensure that participants made HR-related decisions in the hotel industry. Data

pertaining to age, gender, position (executive-level, management-level, or owner), property

size, and current service robot implementation were also collected to ensure participants were

qualified experts.

The Delphi survey was conducted in three stages over an eight-week period. The first

round of the survey resulted in 19 valid completions. The respondent profiles and their

participation in each round of the Delphi study are presented in Table 1.

---------------------------------------------------Insert Table 1 about here

---------------------------------------------------

During the first-round survey respondents were provided with the following definition

of service robots according to the International Organization for Standardization (ISO 8373):

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) defines a “service robot” as a robot “that performs useful tasks for humans or equipment excluding industrial automation applications” (ISO 8373). According to ISO 8373 robots require “a degree of autonomy”, which is the “ability to perform intended tasks based on current state and sensing, without human intervention”. For service robots this ranges from partial autonomy - including human robot interaction - to full autonomy - without active human robot intervention. Service robots are categorized according to personal or professional use. They have many forms and structures as well as application areas.

To assist respondents with the conceptualization of service robots, several pictures of

service robots in both front and back of house hotel settings, and with varying degrees of

autonomy, were presented alongside the ISO definition.

Respondents were asked their opinions regarding five general themes related to

hospitality leadership and human resources in the context of robotized hotels: (1) ways

service robots will impact HR management in hotels, (2) skills or practices successful hotel

managers will need to master in order to work with service robots, (3) major challenges hotel

managers will have in capturing any potential benefits of service robot technologies, (4)

strategies hotel managers will use to deal with any potential challenges brought about by

service robot technologies, and (5) ways hotel managers will establish a culture that

empowers employees to thrive alongside service robots. Participants were asked to provide

up to five responses for each of these five themes and to explain briefly the reasons for their

views. This effort yielded 285 unique responses which were then analyzed and summarized

by the research team. A total of 54 items across the five themes (see Tables 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6)

were developed and included in the second round of the Delphi Survey.

First Ranking

All participants from the first round were emailed invitations to complete the second-

round questionnaire, and 16 valid survey completions were received. For the second round of

the survey, experts were asked to indicate their level of agreement with each of the 54 items

developed from the first round of the survey using a five-point Likert scale. To gain

additional insight, each expert respondent was also given the opportunity to explain the

reasoning behind their opinions.

Second Ranking

The third and final round of the Delphi survey had 13 experts providing valid

responses. The aggregated response to each item (along with related expert comments) from

round two were presented and respondents were asked to re-evaluate each of their previous

responses using the same five-point Likert scale.

As recommended by Dajani et al. (1979) stability (consistency of responses between

successive rounds) and agreement were used as the criteria for evaluating the Delphi survey

results. The Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed ranks test was used to evaluate the stability of

responses for each item (von der Gracht, 2012). The results of the stability tests are presented

in Tables 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, where non-significant z-scores indicate consistency in expert

opinion between rounds two and three. Agreement was then evaluated following Barnes and

Mattson (2016) where consensus is defined as agreement among 100% of respondents and

majority agreement is defined as agreement among at least 70% of respondents. Response

stability was achieved for all but three items. However, for each of these three items a strong

majority agreement was still present among the experts and the Delphi survey was concluded

after round three.

Results

This section presents quotations and the experts’ opinion with the 54 expert-identified

items related to leadership and HR in the context of robotized hotels. Tables 2-6 present the

stability and the agreement ratings for each item after the final round of the Delphi survey (n

= 13).

---------------------------------------------------Insert Tables 2-6 about here

---------------------------------------------------

Service Robots’ Impact on HR Management in Hotels

The first question asked HR experts to “Please describe up to five ways you think

service robots will impact HR management activities in hotels over the next ten years.”

Eleven items were developed based upon 75 responses (see Table 2). Experts’ opinions of

each of the 11 statements were stable between rounds two and three. Majority agreement was

only achieved for one item – that service robots in hotels would disenfranchise employees

due to perceived threat to jobs. However, if strongly agree/somewhat agree responses are

combined, then there is consensus that hotel service robots will increase the efficiency and

productivity of HR administration and a majority agreement that service robots would

diminish the quality of service delivery. Majority agreement was not achieved for two

predictions - that hotel service robots would reduce recruitment costs, and that service robots

would cause an increase in staff grievances.

Interestingly, there was also bipolarity in agreement for several items. In particular,

agreement/disagreement was nearly evenly split for the prediction that service robots would

advise management on employment law. The ambiguity of this issue was further illustrated

by two contradicting comments made by experts: “employment law advice is very personal

to each case and a ‘one size fits all’ approach should be avoided” and “those admin jobs

will be replaced by robots.” Additional chi-square analysis was conducted for all bipolar

items to investigate if group substructure (i.e., respondent age, gender, job position, and hotel

size) could explain the lack of consensus for the items. Results found that only the bipolarity

of “increase staff grievances” (chi-square = 16.714, df = 6, p = .010) and “threaten the

security of HR functions” (chi-square = 20.080, df = 9, p = .017) could in part be explained

by hotel size, with larger properties being more likely to disagree with these statements

regarding grievances and security threats. These findings may imply that larger hotel

organizations are more prepared to be the early adopters of service robots, while small and

medium organisations may avoid risks and take a “wait and see” approach.

Additional comments were made by experts to explain their opinions regarding ways

that service robots will impact HR management activities in hotels:

“Whilst I believe that it is imperative that HR does not lose its personal human touch and interactions, I believe that there are certain things that could be delegated to robotized technology. This would almost definitely decrease payroll costs because the more the robot is able to deliver and provide, the less human activity is needed. This is specific to certain procedures only.”

“Providing the service robots are reliable and used to take out repetitive tasks I believe they will add to the efficiency of the business.”

“Carrying out routine and repetitive task. However, humans will be required to programme and look after the robots so there will be a requirement for more technically skilled employees.”

“I think that this is not an ‘if’ but a ‘when’ and the focus of HR should already be on how best to include robots into the framework and start working on how to implement and how the team will react to the new reality.”

While it is clear that hotel HR experts anticipate improvements in workforce

efficiency afforded by various service robot applications, examination of these results also

reveals that experts forecast new and emerging leadership challenges as a consequence.

Significant changes to the culture and structure of hotel organizations are anticipated, with a

potential negative impact on employee morale and service quality predicted. While service

robots may be welcomed by hotel leadership to reduce costs and to gain competitive

advantage, there is evidence that current employees will not readily accept this new

technology. These finding are consistent with the principles of organizational change theory

(Armenakis and Bedeian, 1999) in that while service robots are being adapted for use in a

hotel, the hotel’s structures and processes will simultaneously be redefined. This suggests that

leaders must carefully consider not only the appropriate uses of service robots within hotels,

but also the intended and unintended HR adaptions that new robot-related processes will

require, including any future updates to employment law relating to service robots becoming

part of the workforce. Importantly, the new, redefined roles of the human workforce must be

clarified to avoid employee disenfranchisement and diminished quality of service delivery.

Skills or Practices of Successful Hotel Managers

The second question presented to HR experts was “Please describe up to five skills or

practices you think successful hotel managers will need to master in order to work with

service robots over the next ten years.” Fifty-eight responses were summarized into ten items

(see Table 3). All opinions were stable between rounds two and three. Majority agreement

was achieved for five items, with “flexibility/open mindedness about new technology” and

“understanding of service robots’ impact on guests” being rated the most important skills for

hotel managers to have when working with service robots. Other key skills experts agreed

upon were “soft skills for managing human employees”, “decision making skills with logic

and judgement”, and “crisis control management skills and planning for service

interruption/failure of robots”. When strongly agree/somewhat agree responses are combined

then nine out of the ten items found in Table 3 achieve consensus or majority agreement. The

lone exception was the skill of “theft/loss prevention management” with only 61.5% of HR

experts indicating that they somewhat agreed and 30.8% neither agreed nor disagreed. This

suggests that there is uncertainty of theft and loss prevention management of service robots;

thus, further research is needed.

Several HR experts also provided insightful comments explaining their reasoning:

“Once the robot is programmed to suit the need of the business, the robot should be self-sufficient really, it is important though that change is communicated effectively to the teams.”

“To get the best results it is important that all hotel managers are trained to the highest level.”

“I would not expect the hotel manager to execute the operational functions however they will need to understand what is required, what can and cannot be done with robots. I don't believe that they will replace humans.”

“They have to understand and able to manage the working harmony between employees and robot.”

“There is need to be a change in how hotel managers manage and embrace change. It will have a big impact on how they manage a property.”

Aligning with organizational change theory (Armenakis and Bedeian, 1999), these

additional comments provided by HR experts make it clear that many see change as

inevitable and that training and acquisition of new skills will be essential for success.

Services management will remain an essential skill for all hotel leaders to design guest

experiences that utilize service robots at appropriate touch points, add value, and create

competitive advantage. Additionally, hotels will need to acquire new technical expertise in

programming and robot maintenance. While the technicians required to operate service robots

in a hotel could either be hired directly or outsourced, survey results suggest that managers

will need to possess at least some knowledge and technical training themselves to be

successful. Equally important is the clear emphasis on “soft” skills including communication,

critical thinking, and creativity that are expected to be essential as leaders will be tasked with

integrating service robots into hotels. These findings are consistent with Tapscott (2014) who

emphasized the importance of creating a collaborative culture while new technological

processes are introduced. Interestingly, comments regarding “harmony” and managing the

relationship between humans and robots suggests that robots may have their own social status

within hotel organizations and that lines between employee and equipment may blur.

Major Challenges Facing Hotel Managers

The next question presented to HR experts was “Please describe up to five major

challenges you think hotel managers will have in capturing any potential benefits of service

robot technologies over the next ten years.” Sixty-two responses were summarized into 14

items (see Table 4). Experts’ opinions were stable between round 2 and round 3 for all but

one item. “Inability of service robots to handle guest complaints” (z = -2.000, p = .046) saw a

significant change in response structure, though a majority agreement was still achieved. This

challenge, along with “keeping up with changes in technology” were the most highly rated

among the experts.

Other challenges achieving majority agreement were “technical issues: maintenance,

repair, breakdowns, power issues”, “understanding where/how to deploy service robots”, and

“understanding how humans can best work alongside service robots”. There was also a

majority of experts that somewhat agreed that “re-deployment of people” would be a major

challenge. Similar to experts’ opinions on necessary skills, when strongly agree/somewhat

agree responses are combined then all 14 items found in Table 4 achieve consensus or

majority agreement. The item with the least overall agreement is “negative effect on brand

because of human redundancies” with 84.6% of experts either somewhat or strongly

agreeing.

Experts’ comments reiterate that the challenges identified can be addressed through

strategic planning and preparation.

“I imagine that robots will carry a hefty cost and there will naturally be resistance to change however robots play a big part of our future and we need to somewhat embrace them.”

“With change comes challenges. Positive benefits will only be obtained if planning, training and positive thinking is used to get the best results.”

“I believe that certain brands are more likely to explore and implement robots than others.”

“There will be no negative effect on brand since all preparation must be done before launching the project.”

“The impact of the change will affect staff and guests. Depending on the level of hotel guests will always want personal people service.”

“Not all managers resist change; it is all about the implementation.”

Consistent with Bouwman et al. (2005), experts have identified technical, economic,

organizational, and user issues that will influence hotels’ adoption of service robots. As

suggested by organizational change theory, the identification of these anticipated challenges

is valuable to leaders as they provide the opportunity to proactively develop solutions and

contingencies when creating an adoption strategy for the eventual routinization of service

robots in hotels. Finally, responses also indicate that leadership would need to consider in

which roles service robots could be trusted, and which roles would be best designated to

remain for human employees.

Strategies for Hotel Managers

HR experts were next asked “Please describe up to five strategies you think hotel

managers will use to deal with any potential challenges brought about by service robot

technologies over the next ten years.” Forty-two responses were analyzed and ten items were

developed for expert evaluation. The levels of stability and agreement for each strategy item

are presented in Table 5. While there was overall consensus for all strategies identified, the

items “developing customer feedback polices” (z = -2.000, p = .046) and “developing robot

servicing and maintenance strategies” (z = -2.236, p = .025) saw a significant change in

response structure between the second and third rounds of the Delphi survey. However, with

92.3% of experts strongly agreeing, these strategies were also among the most highly rated.

Other top-rated strategies were “avoiding gimmicky, low value experiences with service

robots”, “ensuring technology is user friendly”, “engaging with tech professionals before,

during, and after implementation”, and “providing clear guidelines to all staff”. The

additional comment that “planning and training is key” suggests that leaders optimistically

believe that the strategies outlined above will be effective in addressing future challenges

brought upon by service robots.

Understanding how service robots match with the hotel brand should be a strategic

priority for hotel leaders. According to organizational change theory (Armenakis and

Bedeian, 1999), leaders must identify key activities for implementing organizational change.

Thus, in the context of service robots, leaders must devote considerable resources to

understand how their guests will respond to service robots and how to meet their guests’

needs. When implemented properly, service robots will afford hotel brands new points of

differentiation through the varying levels of social interaction they provide and how “human”

their robots appear.

Empowering Employees

Finally, HR experts were asked to “Please describe up to five ways you think hotel

managers will establish a culture that empowers employees to thrive alongside service

robots.” Forty-eight responses were analyzed and summarized into nine items. As shown in

Table 6, experts’ opinions for each item were stable between rounds two and three.

Consensus was achieved for the idea that “eliminating menial/boring tasks” can empower

hotel employees to thrive alongside service robots. Other top empowerment strategies were

“creating a culture that embraces change and is excited about new technologies”,

“emphasizing employees’ role in face to face interactions and guest satisfaction”, “ensuring

proper employee training for use of technology and its role in the guest experience”, “giving

staff the opportunity to suggest new ideas/solutions” and “emphasizing the value of human

employees and the importance of human interaction with guests”. However, several ideas did

not achieve a majority agreement: “involving staff in the planning of service robot

implementation” and “creating initiatives for improving IT skills of employees”.

Additionally, one expert noted to “ensure employees are engaged prior to implementation

not as an afterthought.”

Overcoming a culture of resistance to change is a challenge that many organizations

face (Karp and Helgo, 2008). These results suggest that leaders will have an important role in

creating an organizational culture that emphasizes the importance of humans in the guest

experience. This may seem counterintuitive to employees as robots are tasked with replacing

humans in many roles, but it is clear that experts envision that service robots will

complement, rather than eliminate, the human workforce. The value of HR will increase by

freeing employees from menial tasks so that they can focus on addressing complex problems

related to service delivery and guest satisfaction. Indeed, experts suggest that face-to-face

human interactions will become increasingly important. What remains uncertain, however, is

if the introduction of service robots and the reduction of menial tasks for human employees

will have a positive or negative effect on the desirability of careers in the hotel industry

(Solnet et al., 2014).

Discussion

Business and management research has rarely examined the role of robots, although

this increasing adoption of technology in organizations requires greater understanding (Phan

et al., 2017). This study is one of the first to examine hospitality leadership and HR issues in

the context of robotized hotels and brings clarity as to how robotic technology will influence

the leadership role in the future workplace. As hotels invest more heavily in robotic technology,

they will also need to invest in leaders who understand it. By embracing the notion that service

robots will complement employees and endow them with new capabilities, hospitality

organizations can start to secure impressive benefits (Papathanasis, 2017).

Theoretical and Practical Implications

This research points toward the significant role of strategic HR for implementing

service robots. The technology of service robots implies an essential shift of thinking and

acting, hence entails a variety of challenges such as re-deployment of human employees and

understanding guests’ desired service level as suggested by our experts. Therefore, strategic

HR will play an important role in adjusting organizational mind-set towards embracing

change and emphasizing the need for employees to develop their “soft” skills. This is

consistent with organizational change theory, which suggests that leaders’ readiness toward

organizational change will have real influence on change implementations and is vital for

change initiatives to be successful (Battilana et al., 2010; Choi and Ruona, 2011). Future

studies need to identify the relevant strategic HR practices (e.g., compensation structures and

job rotations) in the context of robotized hotels.

This study contributes to hotel management by highlighting current expert opinions

on the likely considerations and adaptations needed to ensure effective leadership in

robotized hotels of the future. This will help educate practitioners facilitate the introduction

of service robots. From a practical standpoint these implications are considered by the three

major stakeholder groups: employees, guests and the business itself.

From the employee perspective, as with all change processes, effective leadership is

required with clear communication that fosters a culture that is open-minded about the

opportunities of new technologies and excites employees to embrace the change.

Consequently, the need for training and acquisition of new skills at all levels, including

leadership, will be of critical importance. Clear guidelines will need to be developed for staff

to understand how they will work alongside these robots and how the new combined roles of

employees and robots are configured to deliver consistent guest service. The benefits to

employees should also be emphasized with the likely elimination of some of their most

boring and repetitive tasks, allowing them greater role enrichment with additional guest

contact time. However, the potential redeployment of personnel and their possible

disenfranchisement due to perceived job threats will equally require careful management.

It is paramount that hotel leaders understand the likely impact on their guests’

attitudes and willingness to be served by robots. This is key to allay the industry

professionals’ concerns over service robots diminishing the quality of service delivery and

their inability to deal with guest complaints. Indeed, developing a clear policy on how to

collect guest feedback to evaluate guests’ satisfaction level on the service experience

provided by service robots should be proactively considered.

Finally, the business must weigh the likely benefits of service robots such as increased

efficiency, productivity and reduced costs against the perceived downsides. Hotels must pay

great attention to where to deploy service robots and how they may complement human

employees in these settings, without being too gimmicky. Businesses must also consider the

downsides on the brand, such as any negative effect of human redundancies and the

implementation of the robots more generally. In addition, planning for the costs and resources

required to proactively service and maintain the robots and strategies to mitigate any service

interruption/failure of the robots must be undertaken. Ultimately, however, forward-looking

business should be fully and proactively prepared for the introduction of these exciting new

technologies.

Limitations

This study examined service robots and leadership from the perspective of hospitality

industry experts. As is the case with any other Delphi studies, the results are largely

dependent on the experts. The study sample was dominated by experts from the UK and

lacked respondents from other countries from the world, thus the generalizability to other

countries could be limited. Future studies on this topic may want to examine whether the

consultations of experts from various geographical areas result in different predictions of

trends. This study also had a small sample of experts, which might also affect the

generalizability. Yet, this concern does not compromise the validity of the findings, because

the Delphi technique is based on the selection of suitable experts but not on statistical power

(von Briel, 2018). In addition, in designing a Delphi study, sample sizes comparable to ours

are commonly suggested (e.g., von Briel, 2018; Okoli and Pawlowski, 2004).

Future Research Directions

As noted previously, the relationship between robotic technology and leadership

behavior has been the focus of little research, meaning there are fruitful avenues for future

studies. For example, investigating the perceptions of the important stakeholders of service

robots such as customers, managers, recruiters, and front-line employees could yield

additional important insights. While technology acceptance theory (e.g., Venkatesh et al.,

2003) suggests that ease of use and usability are critical to hospitality employees’ perceptions

of service robots, this study also raises new questions of how organizations’ facilitating

conditions, employees’ perceived behavioral control, and the perceived social status of

service robots may influence employees willingness to work with service robots. A

longitudinal study can be performed to assess the leaders’ perceptions of the value of service

robots over time. For example, we can evaluate pre- and post-implementation of service

robots and investigate whether they create a difference in leaders’ perceptions of robot usage.

Future research can also investigate the role of the classification (e.g., star rating) and size of

the hotels in leaders’ perceptions of using service robots. Furthermore, case studies of

pioneering organizations that have implemented robotic technology could be used to gain

qualitative insights into the subsequence of utilizing service robots. Future research may also

take a well-being perspective and explore how robots reduce employee stress associated with

performing repetitive tasks. These topics imply a rich source of empirical research

opportunities.

Concluding Remarks

Application of service robots in the hospitality industry is on the rise. This study is

among the first to investigate HR experts’ perceptions of service robots impacting leadership

and strategies to deal with potential challenges brought about by introducing service robot

technologies. The results and implications in this research should be seen as a stimulation for

future studies in the increasingly popular area of service robots. Ultimately, we hope that this

paper can trigger a spate of contributions that continue these discussions, lead to new and

radical directions of inquiry, and open a new realm to contributions from the social sciences.

Reference

Ahmed, K. (2017), “Hotels, restaurants and tourism may face staff shortages”, BBC.com,

available at https://www.bbc.com/news/business-39448424

Armenakis, A.A. and Bedeian, A.G. (1999), “Organizational change: A review of theory and

research in the 1990s”, Journal of Management, Vol. 25, pp. 293-315.

Barnes, S.J. and Mattsson, J. (2016), “Understanding current and future issues in

collaborative consumption: A four stage Delphi study”, Technological Forecasting

and Social Change, Vol. 104, pp. 200-211.

Battilana, J., Gilmartin, M., Sengul, M., Pache, A.C. and Alexander, J.A. (2010),

“Leadership competencies for implementing planned organizational change”,

Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 21, pp. 422-438.

Brynjolfsson, A. and McAfee J. (2016), “The Second Machine Age”, New York: Norton &

Company.

Bouwman, H., Van Den Hooff, B., Van De Wijngaert, L., & Van Dijk, J. (2005),

“Information and Communication Technology in Organizations”. Sage.

Cesta, A., Orlandini, A., & Umbrico, A. (2018). Fostering robust human-robot collaboration

through AI task planning. Procedia 51st CIRP Conference on Manufacturing

Systems, 72, 1045-1050.

Choi, S., Liu, S.Q. and Mattila, A.S. (2019), “How may I help you? Says a robot: Examining

language styles in the service encounter”, International Journal of Hospitality

Management, Vol. 82, pp. 32-38.

Choi, M. and Ruona, W.E. (2011), “Individual readiness for organizational change and its

implications for HR and organization development”, Human Resource Development

Review, Vol. 10, pp. 46-73.

Dajani, J.S., Sincoff, M.Z. and Talley, W.K. (1979), “Stability and agreement criteria for the

termination of Delphi studies”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol.

13, pp. 83-90.

Finch, G., Goehring, B. and Marshall, A. (2018), “Cognitive innovation: Top performers

share their best practices”, Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 46, pp.30-35.

Frey, C.B. and Osborne, M.A. (2017), “The future of employment: how susceptible are jobs

to computerisation?” Technological Forecasting & Social Change, Vol. 114, pp.

254-280.

Hannola, L., Richter, A., Richter, S. and Stocker, A., (2018), “Empowering production

workers with digitally facilitated knowledge processes”, International Journal of

Production Research, Vol. 56, pp. 4729-4743.

Huang, M.H. and Rust, R.T. (2018), “Artificial intelligence in service”, Journal of Service

Research, Vo. 21, pp. 155-172.

Hunt, S.D. and Morgan, R.M. (1996), “The resource-advantage theory of competition:

dynamics, path dependencies, and evolutionary dimensions”, Journal of Marketing,

Vol. 60, pp.107-114.

IBM (2016), Hilton and IBM pilot “Connie,” the world’s first Watson-enabled hotel

concierge robot. https://www.ibm.com/blogs/watson/2016/03/watson-connie/

International Organization for Standardization. (2012). Robots and robotic devices.

https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:8373:ed-2:v1:en.

Ivanov, S., Gretzel, U., Berezina, K., Sigala, M. and Webster, C. (2019), “Progress on

robotics in hospitality and tourism: A review of the literature”, Journal of

Hospitality and Tourism Technology. Advance online publication.

Ivanov, S. and Webster, C. (2019), “Perceived appropriateness and intention to use service

robots in tourism”, in Pesonen, J. & Neidhardt, J. (Eds.) Information and

Communication Technologies in Tourism 2019, Proceedings of the International

Conference in Nicosia, Cyprus, pp. 237-248.

Ivanov, S., Webster, C. and Berezina, K. (2017), “Adoption of robots and service automation

by tourism and hospitality companies”, Revista Turismo & Desenvolvimento, Vol.

27/28, pp. 1501-1517.

Johansson, S. and Björkman, I., (2018). What impact will Artificial Intelligence have on the

future leadership role? Master’s thesis, Lund University.

Karp, T. and Helgo, T.I., (2008), “From change management to change leadership:

Embracing chaotic change in public service organizations”, Journal of Change

Management, Vol. 8, pp.85-96.

Kolodny, L. (2017) Meet Flippy, a burger-grilling robot from Miso Robotics and CaliBurger.

Available at: https://techcrunch.com/2017/03/07/meet-flippy-a-burger-grilling-robot-

from-miso-robotics-and-caliburger/ (Accessed 28 August 2019).

Kuo, C. M., Chen, L. C. and Tseng, C. Y. (2017), “Investigating an innovative service with

hospitality robots”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,

Vol. 29, pp. 1305-1321.

Larivière, B., Bowen, D., Andreassen, T.W., Kunz, W., Sirianni, N.J., Voss, C., Wünderlich,

N.V. and DeKeyser, A. (2017), “ ‘Service Encounter 2.0’: An investigation into the

roles of technology, employees and customers”, Journal of Business Research, Vol

79, pp. 238-246.

Linstone, H.A. and Turoff, M. (Eds.). (1975). The delphi method (pp. 3-12). Reading, MA:

Addison-Wesley.

Lu, L., Cai, R. and Gursoy, D., (2019), “Developing and validating a service robot

integration willingness scale”, International Journal of Hospitality Management,

Vol. 80, pp. 36-51.

Maurtua, I., Ibarguren, A., Kildal, J., Susperregi, L. and Sierra, B. (2017), “Human–robot

collaboration in industrial applications”, International Journal of Advanced Robotic

Systems, Vol. 14, pp.17-29.

McAfee, A., Goldbloom, A., Brynjolfsson, E. and Howard, J. (2014), “Artificial intelligence

meets the C-suite”, McKinsey Quarterly, Vol. 3, pp. 66-75.

Murphy, J., Hofacker, C. and Gretzel, U. (2016), “Dawning of the age of robots in

hospitality and tourism”, European Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 15, pp. 104-

111.

Noe, R.A., Hollenbeck, J.R., Gerhart, B. and Wright, P.M. (2017), “Human resource

management: Gaining a competitive advantage”, New York, NY: McGraw-Hill

Education.

Okoli, C. and Pawlowski, S.D., (2004), “The Delphi method as a research tool: an example,

design considerations and applications”, Information & Management, Vol. 42, pp.

15-29.

Papathanasis, P. (2017), “R-Tourism: Introducing the potential impact of robotics and

service automation in tourism”, “Ovidius” University Annals, Economic Sciences

Series, Vol. XVII, pp. 211-216.

Parry, K., Cohen, M. and Bhattacharya, S. (2016), “Rise of the machines: A critical

consideration of automated leadership decision making in organizations”, Group &

Organization Management, Vol. 41, pp. 571-594.

Phan, P., Wright, M., & Lee, S.H. (2017). Of robots, artificial intelligence, and work.

Academy of Management Perspective, Vol. 31, pp. 253–255.

Pinillos, R., Marcos, S., Feliz, R., Zalama, E. and Gómez-García-Bermejo, J. (2016), “Long-

term assessment of a service robot in a hotel environment”, Robotics and

Autonomous Systems, Vol. 79, pp. 40-57.

Plastino, E. and Purdy, M. (2018), “Game changing value from Artificial Intelligence: eight

strategies”, Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 46, pp. 16-22.

Schier, R. (2018), “Artificial intelligence and the practice of radiology: An alternative view”,

Journal of the American College of Radiology, Vol. 15, pp. 1004-1007.

Solnet, D., Baum, T., Robinson, R.N. and Lockstone-Binney, L. (2016), “What about the

workers? Roles and skills for employees in hotels of the future”, Journal of Vacation

Marketing, Vol. 22, pp. 212-226.

Solnet, D., Nickson, D., Robinson, R., Kralj, A. and Baum, T. (2014), “Workforce

development in tourism: an analysis of public policy, planning and implementation

in Australia and Scotland”, Tourism Analysis, Vol. 19, pp. 609–624.

Tapscott, D. (2014), “The Digital Economy Anniversary Edition: Rethinking Promise and

Peril in the Age of Networked Intelligence”, 2nd edn, New York: McGraw-Hill

Education.

Tung, V.W.S. and Au, N. (2018), “Exploring customer experiences with robotics in

hospitality”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol.

30, pp. 2680-2697.

Tussyadiah, I.P., Zach, F.J., Wang, J. (2019). Do travelers trust intelligent service robots?

Annals of Tourism Research. Online first publication.

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., & Davis, F.D. (2003), “User acceptance of

information technology: Toward a unified view”, Vol. 27, MIS Quarterly, pp. 425-

478.

von Briel, F. (2018), “The future of omnichannel retail: A four-stage Delphi study”,

Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 132, pp. 217-229.

von der Gracht, H.A. (2012), “Consensus measurement in Delphi studies: review and

implications for future quality assurance”, Technological Forecasting and Social

Change, Vol. 79, pp. 1525-1536.

Wirtz, J., Patterson, P.G., Kunz, W.H., Gruber, T., Lu, V.N., Paluch, S. and Martins, A.

(2018), “Brave new world: service robots in the frontline”, Journal of Service

Management, Vol. 29, 907-931.

Table 1. Participant description

Position Age Gender Employees Round 1

Round 2

Round 3

Management-level

45-54 Female 100-199 X X

Executive-level

35-44 Male 200+ X X X

Owner 55-64 Male Less than 50 X XExecutive-level

45-54 Male 200+ X X X

Executive-level

35-44 Male 200+ X X X

Executive-level

55-64 Female Less than 50 X X X

Executive-level

35-44 Female 100-199 X X X

Executive-level

65+ Female 200+ X X X

Management-level

35-44 Female 200+ X X

Executive-level

25-34 Female 200+ X X X

Executive-level

35-44 Female 200+ X X X

Management-level

34-44 Male Less than 50 X X X

Management-level

35-44 Female 200+ X X X

Executive-level

25-34 Male 50-99 X X X

Management-level

25-34 Female 100-199 X X X

Retired 45-54 Female 100-199 X X XExecutive-level

35-44 Female 100-199 X

Executive-level

45-54 Male 200+ X

Executive-level

35-44 Female 200+ X

Table 2. Ways service robots will impact HR management in hotels, Round 3, n=13

Statement Stability Agreementz p Strongly

DisagreeSomewhat Disagree

Neither Agree nor Disagree

Somewhat Agree

Strongly Agree

Ease the pressure of staff shortages -.378 0.705 38.5% 61.5%

Effectively conduct hiring processes (applicant screening, interviewing, filing, etc.) -.108 0.914 23.1% 23.1% 23.1% 30.8%

Increase the efficiency and productivity of HR administration -1.000 0.317 61.5% 38.5%

Advise management on employment law -1.265 0.206 30.8% 15.4% 30.8% 23.1%

Reduce recruitment costs -.491 0.623 7.7% 23.1% 69.2%

Reduce payroll costs -1.508 0.132 46.2% 53.8%

Change the way employees are rewarded and recognized -.632 0.527 23.1% 46.2% 15.4% 15.4%

Diminish the quality of service delivery (i.e., impersonal guest experiences) -1.078 0.281 15.4% 53.8% 30.8%

Disenfranchise employees due to perceived threat to jobs -1.414 0.157 15.4% 84.6%

Increase staff grievances -.816 0.414 23.1% 69.2% 7.7%

Threaten the security of HR functions (i.e., vulnerability of personnel data and processes) -1.265 0.206 15.4% 30.8% 46.2% 7.7%

Table 3. Skills or practices successful hotel managers will need to master to work with service robots, Round 3, n=13

Statement Stability Agreementz p Strongly

DisagreeSomewhat Disagree

Neither Agree nor Disagree

Somewhat Agree

Strongly Agree

Flexibility/open mindedness about new technology -1.000 0.317 7.7% 92.3%

IT/programming skills -1.000 0.317 7.7% 7.7% 15.4% 69.2%

Decision making skills with logic and judgement -1.000 0.317 15.4% 84.6%

Organization skills -.816 0.414 7.7% 61.5% 30.8%

“Soft” skills for managing human employees .000 1.000 15.4% 84.6%

Understanding of service robots’ impact on guests -1.000 0.317 7.7% 92.3%

Understanding of how to add value to a guest using service robots -.577 0.564 30.8% 69.2%

To teach guests how to use/interact with new service robot technologies -.378 0.705 7.7% 30.8% 61.5%

Crisis control management skills and planning for service interruption/failure of robots .000 1.000 7.7% 15.4% 76.9%

Theft/loss prevention management -1.265 0.206 30.8% 61.5% 7.7%

Table 4. Major challenges hotel managers will have in capturing any potential benefits of service robot technologies, Round 3, n=13

Statement Stability Agreementz p Strongly

DisagreeSomewhat Disagree

Neither Agree nor Disagree

Somewhat Agree

Strongly Agree

Technical issues: maintenance, repair, breakdowns, power issues -1.414 0.157 23.1% 76.9%

Financial investment/costs -.816 0.414 46.2% 53.8%

Re-deployment of people -.707 0.480 84.6% 15.4%

Keeping up with changes in technology -1.732 0.083 15.4% 84.6%

Understanding where/how to deploy service robots -1.134 0.257 7.7% 15.4% 76.9%

Understanding guests desired service level -1.508 0.132 7.7% 23.1% 69.2%

Understanding how humans can best work alongside service robots -1.414 0.157 23.1% 76.9%

Resistance from line employees -.447 0.655 7.7% 61.5% 30.8%

Resistance from management -.447 0.655 53.8% 46.2%

Guests desire/need for “human touch” and social interaction -.577 0.564 30.8% 69.2%

Guests fear/distrust of service robots .000 1.000 61.5% 38.5%

Inability of service robots to handle guest complaints -2.000 0.046* 15.4% 84.6%

Accurately analysing historical data -.447 0.655 7.7% 61.5% 30.8%

Negative effect on brand because of human redundancies -.333 0.739 7.7% 7.7% 69.2% 15.4%

* p < .05 indicates a statistically significant change in response structure between Delphi Rounds 2 and 3

Table 5. Strategies hotel managers will use to deal with any potential challenges brought about by service robot technologies, Round 3, n=13

Statement Stability Agreementz p Strongly

DisagreeSomewhat Disagree

Neither Agree nor Disagree

Somewhat Agree

Strongly Agree

Developing customer feedback polices -2.000 0.046* 7.7% 92.3%

Conducting comprehensive market research -1.732 0.083 15.4% 84.6%

Ensuring personalisation for guests using service robots -1.342 0.180 15.4% 84.6%

Avoiding gimmicky, low value experiences with service robots -1.732 0.083 7.7% 92.3%

Ensuring technology is user friendly -1.414 0.157 7.7% 92.3%

Establishing standards and consistency -1.633 0.102 23.1% 76.9%

Engaging with tech professionals before, during, and after implementation -1.732 0.083 7.7% 92.3%

Developing robot servicing and maintenance strategies -2.236 0.025* 7.7% 92.3%

Understanding when/where guests prefer an emotional connection -1.000 0.317 15.4% 84.6%

Providing clear guidelines to all staff -1.732 0.083 7.7% 92.3%

* p < .05 indicates a statistically significant change in response structure between Delphi Rounds 2 and 3

Table 6. Ways hotel managers will establish a culture that empowers employees to thrive alongside service robots, Round 3, n=13

Statement Stability Agreementz p Strongly

DisagreeSomewhat Disagree

Neither Agree nor Disagree

Somewhat Agree

Strongly Agree

Communicating service robots as an added benefit for employees, something to assist them and improve human interactions

-.577 0.564 23.1% 76.9%

Creating a culture that embraces change and is excited about new technologies .000 1.000 7.7% 92.3%

Eliminating menial/boring tasks -1.000 0.317 100%

Emphasizing employees’ role in face to face interactions and guest satisfaction -1.000 0.317 7.7% 92.3%

Ensuring proper employee training for use of technology and its role in the guest experience -1.414 0.157 15.4% 84.6%

Involving staff in the planning of service robot implementation .000 1.000 38.5% 61.5%

Giving staff the opportunity to suggest new ideas/solutions -1.414 0.157 15.4% 84.6%

Emphasizing the value of human employees and the importance of human interaction with guests -1.000 0.317 15.4% 84.6%

Creating initiatives for improving IT skills of employees .000 1.000 38.5% 61.5%

36