There were a number of issues the case talks about, starting with insufficent training to the overall social subsystem problem. The GM was in a hurry to solve the problem rather than understand the new process that would help solve the problem. He was sold on the fact that he had to solve the problem but not on the Rapid Response system. There was insufficent training imparted on the employees on how to use the system. The social aspect of the 4 components was not addressed properly. The analyst who created the entire solution was removed before he could effect change – which leads to the question, how good was the consulting firm? There was a massive breakdown of communication between the two analysts. The transfer of the documentation was not proper and all the facts of the case were not transferred over to Jack from Blake. The system was tested properly; therefore there was no user acceptance. The staff was not properly trained to use the system and was comfortable using the old manual system. The hotel staff could not determine the effectivness of the reporting system, the value of quality improvement and the effect it would have on improving customer satisfaction.

The consulting firm went wrong at a number of steps during the entire process. Blake had already spoken to the GM and explained the solution. Blake understood that the GM was extremely anxious to get the process in place and solve the problem. He was in the process of acquiring the machine and negotiating with vendors when he was transferred to another project. This was the first point where the consulting firm went wrong. Blake was already involved with the intracies of the project, and to recall him at this point was a bad decision. Blake’s old classmate Jack had been given the project; Blake was not confident about Jack and even though he convinced himself that Jack could handle it, he did not