Eran Harash: Who actually has the key to your hotel?

Many hotel owners believe they are minimising their risk by outsourcing the running of their business through a long-term lease or management arrangement. A fixed monthly sum, no operational headaches and a reputable party at the helm. All sorted, isn’t it? I would argue the opposite: it is precisely that false sense of security that can leave an owner extremely vulnerable.

Traditional management contracts are often lengthy, complicated and, above all, difficult to terminate. The operator decides which suppliers to work with, which systems to use and where the margins end up. Sometimes even the accounts with booking platforms are in the name of the management company. Anyone wishing to part ways with their operator then discovers that it is not just the manager who is leaving, but also the systems, contracts, data, reviews and the digital reputation they have built up.

You own the building, but do you still have the key to your own business?
I worked in hotels for many years, from dishwasher to hotel manager, and later in development, refurbishment and pre-opening management. The longer I was in the business, the more I found myself wondering why we’ve actually come to regard this model as normal. Why do owners accept that essential information remains beyond their sight? Why is a management company allowed to profit from agreements with suppliers, whilst the bill ultimately ends up with the owner? And why does a partnership have to be held together primarily by a heavy-handed contract?

If a governing party performs well, it has no need for a prison door.
At Weave projects We therefore operate on a principle that is almost too simple to be true: everything remains the property of the owner. Suppliers enter into their contracts directly with the owner. The full profit and loss account is transparent. There are no margins or agreements that are hidden from the owner’s view. The digital resources also remain with the hotel. If an owner concludes that we are not performing well enough, they must be able to bring in another party within a reasonable timeframe and without causing operational disruption.

That might sound as though we’re making things unnecessarily difficult for ourselves. I see it differently. Freedom demands performance. A customer who can easily walk away has to be persuaded to stay, day in, day out.

Technology helps us to keep the organisation small and the service high-quality. AI now handles the vast majority of our guests’ routine enquiries. Not to automate away hospitality, but to free our staff from having to answer the same questions over and over again. How do I open the door? Where can I find an extra towel? How does the dishwasher work? A chatbot can answer such questions straight away, even in the middle of the night. If the technology gets stuck, a human takes over.

This allows staff on site to focus on what really matters: a spotlessly clean room, a comfortable bed, properly functioning ventilation and personalised attention when needed. Technology does not make hospitality any less human. It is poorly implemented technology that does. Well-implemented technology, on the other hand, actually gives people time to be human.

Of course, a transparent management model is not appealing to every owner. Anyone who wishes to receive only a fixed monthly sum may well find the prospect of sharing in the profits too risky. But how secure is that monthly sum if, over time, the operator is no longer able to pay it? In recent years, there have been plenty of examples showing that a long-term contract does not necessarily guarantee a viable hotel business.

Perhaps that is why we should stop asking which management company promises the most certainty. A better question is: which firm dares to be completely transparent and prove its worth anew every month?

Because a true partner doesn’t hold a hotel owner captive. They ensure that he is free to leave at any time; and then give him every reason not to.