文献阅读翻译

Hotel Security:The Needs of the Mature Age Market Introduction Rises in crime rates have more impact on some sections of the community than on others; older members of the community are particularly vulnerable. Individuals who have retired, or who no longer have dependent children, may have more disposable income to spend on recreation and tourism. The tourism industry has been quick to identify this market. Holiday and tour packages are now targeted specifically at the older tourist. Hotel companies offer incentives to those who have the leisure time to benefit from reduced tariffs in the low season or at other times of reduced occupancy. Hotels, however, are public places and individuals may naturally feel less secure than when they are in their home environment. It is important for hoteliers to focus on the security concerns of their guests.

Hotel Security Guest security in hotels means those measures required to maintain a state of wellbeing, to protect life and property and to minimize the risk of disasters or crime. In recent years security in the Australian hotel sector has come to mean more than the protection of life and possessions. The very nature of the operation of hotels, providing for a cross-section of the population, most unknown to management, poses a threat to the security of the property and its bona fideguests.

Modern standards of hotel security as required by law are constantly being revised in the light of court decisions that take into account the necessity to show “reasonable care” in matters of guest security. Increasingly, courts deliver decisions about preventable acts that harm a guest on hotel premises. Courts in many countries have held and continue to hold that, if a manager is able to foresee danger to any guest, then action is required to deal with that danger. The implication of this trend for the hotel sector needs to be examined. To this end a research study was carried out in Australia to examine the perceptions of hotel security of the mature hotel guest.

Previous Research There is a lack of research in the literature on the security perceptions and attitudes of mature hotel guests. Much of what has been written about is anecdotal, appearing in trade magazines. Typically, this material reviews new security products and is aimed at practising managers. To give direction to the present research, therefore, consideration was given to studies that have generally examined the security concerns of hotel guests.

Discussion The ten most important areas of concern in the present study, as indicated by the mean for each question and ranging from most to least important, were: emergency telephone number by bed; well-lit hotel corridors; door security chains; security liability insurance; bomb threat procedures; security personnel trained in unarmed defence; security officers having knowledge of civil and criminal law; closed circuit TV in hotel car parks; advising guests of criminal activity near hotel; and, control of access to guest areas. Ten least important areas were (from least important): plain clothes security officers carrying firearms; uniformed officers carrying firearms; the searching of guest’s luggage; carrying of handcuffs by security personnel; number of arrests and convictions by hotel security being an important indicator of effectiveness; electronic “sweeping”; guards controlling hotel entrances; security patrols by plain clothes security personnel; security patrols by uniformed security personnel; and, the need for female security officers. This later ranking is an interpretation placed on the data by the researchers, as respondents were merely asked to strongly agree, or otherwise, with statements about security.

When the results of both studies are compared in Table V, agreement on the non deployment of armed hotel security personnel is clear. There was no support for this concept, as it received the lowest overall rating. Other responses are less easy to classify. The statement “When it comes to hotel security, prevention is better than cure”, which was included as a check for consistency, received a mean score of 4.698 and rated a tied second place. This contrasts with the respondents’ perceptions on preventative security measures, for example uniformed security patrols. Only ten respondents agreed and twostrongly agreed with the need for security patrols.

There is considerable clustering of the data that correspond to items 5, 10, 13, 17 and 22. These relate to security patrols by uniformed personnel, security departments that have a high level of detection are effective departments; carrying of handcuffs by security personnel; electronic sweeping to prevent eavesdropping; and a statement that says “the standard of security in hotels is adequate”. This would appear to indicate that a majority of the respondents were indifferent about these aspects of security. An inspection of the means and standard deviations of these items supports this contention.