MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC: Labor Productivity Benchmarks and International Gap AnalysisIcon Group International, Inc.
Are the combined human resources at MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC productive? There is no absolute answer to this question. This report considers the extent to which the company's labor deployment indicators differ from global benchmarks. In this report we consider forecasts of differences between labor ratios and the resulting return on this human investment compared to global benchmarks; the estimation of such differences is commonly called a "gap analysis." What is the ratio of short-term and long-term assets to employee? What are typical capital-labor ratios? How different are these ratios to companies serving the same link in the value chain? What are the average sales and net profits per employee compared to global benchmarks? These and over 50 other indicators of labor productivity are considered in this report. The report does so by going beyond traditional analyses by considering companies competing in the same or similar industrial classification at a global level. The goal of this report, therefore, is to assist consultants, human resource managers, strategic planners, and corporate officers in gauging estimates of a company's human resource indicators compared to firms competing or participating in the same economic sector, at the global level. This report is not about whether a particular company or industry has performed well or poorly in the past or will do so in the future. With the globalization of markets, greater foreign competition, and the reduction of entry barriers, it becomes all the more important to benchmark a company's human resource indicators against other firms on a worldwide basis. Doing so, however, is not an obvious task. First, one needs to find firms competing in the same sector, but not necessarily competing directly with the company in local markets. These firms should not be perceived, therefore, to be direct competitors to the company in question, but simply those that have been classified by various sources (e.g. EDGAR or similar foreign filings), as competing to serve customers in the same link of the value chain, or broad industrial classification, as identified by SIC, NAICS or similar codes. Second, given the international nature of the task, one needs to control for exchange rate volatility. Finally, one needs use comparable financial standards. This report overcomes these issues and gives full human resources benchmarks vis-a-vis worldwide competitors who are present in the same narrow industrial classification. Benchmarks cover labor-asset ratios, labor-liability ratios, and labor-income ratios. Since our reports are printed on demand, the statistics reported are for the latest quarter and are the most up to date available (4 updates are produced each year). Each report provides over 100 statistics and 40 graphs to the reader. This report is on MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC, USA.
Excerpt: Though we heavily rely on historical performance, the figures reported are not historical but are forecasts and projections for the coming fiscal year based on various data which may not reflect the current or future situation of the firm. The forecasts are updated quarterly. This particular report was updated in the last quarter. In order to maintain comparability over time and across companies and countries, we use a common currency (the US dollar) and relate each measure to a "per employee basis". Ratios are projected using raw financial statistics and, as ratios, are therefore comparable. The source(s) for the various raw statistics include public filings, corporate releases, and various other data sources (e.g. EDGAR, or similar filings). The calculation of the company's labor ratios is meant to yield roughly approximate forecasts, or "useful indicators". The forecasts are frequently based on the assumption of relative stability. These are derived from the last or previous fiscal year's full annual financial statements and estimates of labor force. These statements themselves may be only roughly accurate or indicative of current or future ratios, and subject to future change. While these figures can substantially change from one quarter or year to the next, we are interested in looking at the structural difference between these ratios and those of companies competing in the same or similar sector of the global economy; we call this difference, as is common in business school texts, a "gap". It is this forecasted structural difference that should be the focus, not any particular ratio or group of ratios estimated which are not claimed to be accurate. In fact, given the approximate nature of the exercise, one should consider the dynamics of the forecasted gaps, as opposed to those reported in a given quarter, or in this particular report. Although Icon Group often updates its forecasted benchmarks and gaps on a quarterly basis, the underlying ratios may not change for a particular company whose figures are updated on an annual basis. Rather, the companies used to calculate global benchmarks frequently change or the data from these are more volatile given that fiscal years are not aligned across countries. Again, a number of factors might make these forward-looking forecasts inaccurate (like all such forecasts). Given a company's human resource ratios, the resulting figures are evaluated against "Global Benchmarks". In choosing the global benchmarks, Icon Group attempts to choose only those firms with sound financial situations or those not undergoing radical restructuring, or where random volatility, mergers, or bankruptcy affects labor performance. Often we consider, for benchmarks, only those firms over a given size (e.g. having more than 500 employees). In many countries, firms are organized into holding groups. These groups nominally have very few employees (e.g. 4 to 25 employees), but have extremely large assets, liabilities, or revenues. As such, the inclusion or exclusion of firms having this form of management can affect the ratios and benchmarks reported, so due caution is required. Since the calculation of benchmarks proceeds in a similar fashion to the company, and are averages across all selected companies, one can directly conduct a gap analysis. Here, Icon Group graphically reports, for each part of the financial statement, the larger human resources gaps that the firm has compared to the global benchmarks. A gap need not be a bad sign. Rather, it is simply a substantial difference that might merit further attention or perhaps signal a firm's relative strength or weakness for the coming fiscal year.
Table of Contents:
1 INTRODUCTION & METHODOLOGY 1.1 What does this report cover? 1.2 Methodology 1.3 Limitations 1.4 Extensions 2 ASSET-LABOR RATIOS & BENCHMARKS 2.1 Overview 2.2 Asset Definitions 2.3 Human Resources to Assets: 2002 2.4 Competitive Gaps: Labor-Asset Ratios 2.5 Key Percentiles and Rankings 3 LIABILITY-LABOR RATIOS & BENCHMARKS 3.1 Overview 3.2 Liabilities and Equity Definitions 3.3 Human Resources to Liabilities: 2002 3.4 Competitive Gaps: Labor-Liability Ratios 3.5 Key Percentiles and Rankings 4 INCOME-LABOR RATIOS & BENCHMARKS 4.1 Overview 4.2 Income Statement Definitions 4.3 Human Resources to Income: 2002 4.4 Competitive Gaps: Labor-Income Ratios 4.5 Key Percentiles and Rankings 5 DISCLAIMERS, WARRANTEES, AND USER AGREEMENT PROVISIONS 5.1 Disclaimers & Safe Harbor 5.2 ICON Group User Agreement Provisions 5.3 Financial Glossaries: Bibliography