How a Hotel Management Company delivered PIPs with clearer scope, cleaner documentation, and fewer escalations

PIPs are where hospitality execution gets tested. They come with strict brand standards, documentation requirements, and timelines that often collide with live operations.

For management companies, PIPs can be successful and still feel chaotic if the workflow is not connected. This case study reflects a real deployment with a Top 20 hotel management company. The identity is anonymized, but the pattern is common across hospitality portfolios.

The challenge

PIP execution was being managed through spreadsheets and email. That created a predictable set of problems:

• Scope and decisions were not consistently traceable

• Supporting documentation lived in separate folders and inboxes

• Budget changes were hard to explain without manual reconciliation

• The team could answer brand questions, but too often through fire drills

PIPs did not fail because the team lacked expertise. They strained because scope, approvals, backup, and reporting were not tied together.

What was at risk

When PIP information is fragmented, the risk is escalation:

• Scope drift without a defensible history of decisions

• Documentation gaps that trigger brand questions and delays

• Misalignment between ownership, brand, and operators due to inconsistent reporting

• Slower response time to brand requests for approvals, backup, and status

• More rework because teams are constantly rebuilding the narrative

The workflow change

The management company implemented a connected workflow that made PIP reporting a natural output of execution:

• Budget revisions with clear variance visibility

• Pending costs tracked with lifecycle history, including why changes occurred

• Change orders tied back to the pending items they originated from

• Vendor documentation tracked and kept current

• Approvals captured inside the workflow with an audit trail

• Standardized reporting views used consistently for brand and ownership updates

Results

Metrics below are representative ranges from real deployments, with client identity anonymized.

• PIP reporting and status update prep time reduced by 40 to 70 percent

• Approval cycle time reduced by 25 to 50 percent

• Reduced missing backup issues and rework by 30 to 60 percent

• Fewer escalations because answers were available with supporting documentation attached

• Better scope confidence through change traceability and consistent variance narratives

Why it worked

PIP execution improves when information is connected:

• One source of truth for PIP scope, costs, approvals, and backup

• Clear traceability from pending exposure to approved change

• Consistent reporting structure across properties and stakeholders

• Fewer handoffs between spreadsheets, inboxes, and systems

The takeaway

Brand teams and owners do not want more reporting. They want confidence. When PIP workflows are structured, updates become predictable, documentation is attached, and escalations drop because the answers are already organized.

Metrics shown are representative ranges from real deployments. Client identity anonymized.