The Response of Hotels to Increasing Food Costs due to Food Shortages

Abstract

the hotel industry in Hong Kong had to respond to a steady price increase in general food items and in basic food commodities. As most hotels in Hong Kong predict their food cost budgets a year in advance, these sudden and unexpected increases in food commodities came at a time when there was a downturn in the global economy in the wake of the financial crisis and a worldwide influenza A (H1N1) epidemic. There have been articles published in hospitality and tourism journals that have discussed the issue of food cost and control in hotels resulting from poor storage and purchasing, portion control, and preparation and production methods. However, none of the previous studies has examined the sudden and rapid increases in the cost of foods and the impact that this has had on the hotel industry. The measures adopted by Hong Kong hotels of different tiers to control or reduce expected food costs are analyzed in this study. This study employed a cross-sectional exploratory design, encompassing indepth personal interviews with food and beverage managers and executive chefs in high-, mid-and low-tier hotels in Hong Kong. Empirical findings revealed that mid-and low-tier hotels found the increases in commodity prices challenging and thus employed innovative methods to combat rising food costs. High-tier hotels were more concerned about satisfying customers' needs by maintaining high-quality food products and services. The findings indicate that hotels and restaurants at all points of the market adopted functional strategies to increase their efficiency and profitability. Based on the operating experience of existing hotels, this study demonstrates that enhancing the quality of suppliers' commodities, good staff communication and training practices, and innovative ideas can improve a hotel's financial situation.

“Back of house” – focused study on food waste in fine dining: the case of Delish restaurants

“…Inventory control with menu changes seemed to have been a challenge at both locations. As mentioned by Gunders (2012), stock levels are challenging to manage when demand is unpredictable, particularly for new menu items; therefore, inventories were constantly in flux (Fine, 2009;Mackenzie et al, 2011;Kling, 1943;Youngs et al, 1983). The conventional approach to stock control in the two facilities was a "bottom up" process where stockholding charges are balanced against clerical purchasing costs for individual items or perhaps groups of items, given that the two restaurants were franchises and part of a purchasing group.…”

“…Weather, local events, chronic disruptions like jobsites and holidays may unexpectedly impact the demand for food (Gunders, 2012). With unexpected fluctuations in customers, prepared food may spoil before being eaten (Mackenzie et al, 2011), making inventory prediction and control difficult.…”

Sustainable Food Sourcing in Hotels

“…• Working sustainably is ethical, and it is the right thing to do. As resources become scarce and food security becomes an issue, this will be the only way to operate (Mackenzie et al, 2011).…”

The Food Waste in Five-Star Hotels: A Study on Turkish Guests Attitudes

“…After the design of the factors, an item pool is created which constitutes the content of each factor. Both in designing the factors related to the causes of food waste and in determining the items that constitute these factors, different studies in the literature (Rolls et al, 1981;Buzby and Guthrie, 2002;Wansink, 2004;Ledikwe, Ello-Martin, & Rolls, 2005;Niemeier, 2005;Rozin, 2005;Quested and Johnson, 2009;Wansink, 2009;Parfitt, Barthel and Macnaughton, 2010;Gustavsson, et al, 2011;Mackenzie et al, 2011;Gunders, 2012;Marthinsen et al, 2012;Saad, 2012;Gjerris and Gaiani, 2013;Kallbekken and Saelen, 2013;Lipinski et al, 2013;Quested, Marsh, Stunell and Parry, 2013;WRAP, 2013;Buzby, Wells and Hyman, 2014;Dölekoğlu et al, 2014;Pirani and Arafat, 2014;Omidiani and Hashemi Hezaveh, 2016;Thyberg and Tonjes, 2016) analyses of the scheme, it is concluded that the scale is most efficient with 29 items and five factors. After various analyzes to achieve the requirements such as reliability, validity and internal consistency, the final draft of FWAS scale has Cronbach's Alpha coefficient () of 0,944 (>0,70), and the total variance explained value of five factors is 63,68 (>0,50).…”