Tasks that can utilize Robo Claw in large tourism and hospitality companies and how to choose implementation candidates
Target tasks should be evaluated from the perspectives of workload, frequency, standardization, number of exceptions, reservation management/PMS/CRS connectivity, presence of writing tasks, and the impact on customer safety and rights. It is recommended to prioritize routine tasks that span multiple systems and have a high burden of handling reservations and inquiries.
When large tourism and hospitality companies choose target tasks for Robo Claw implementation, please prioritize tasks that meet the following conditions: ① occur frequently, ② have standardized procedures, ③ span information across multiple systems such as reservation management/PMS/CRS, ④ have a high burden in handling reservations and inquiries, ⑤ have minimal impact on customer safety and rights or can be verified by humans, and ⑥ involve limited writing or can be made subject to approval. Tasks that meet these conditions are easier to verify for effectiveness during a pilot.
Who This Is For
Who This Is For
This is intended for those considering which operations to start introducing Robo Claw to, such as reservation department managers, facility operation managers, and DX managers.
What You'll Decide
What You'll Decide in This Step
In this Discover STEP, we will identify candidate tasks for Robo Claw, prioritize them, and decide on the first task to undertake. Detailed design of requirements, permissions, and approvals will be handled in the next Refine STEP.
Fit Check
Suitable/Not Suitable Tasks
Suitable Tasks
- Tasks with high frequency and standardized procedures, such as drafting multilingual guidance texts and organizing review trends.
- Tasks like initial classification of reservation inquiries or complaints, where preliminary judgments can be easily verified and corrected by humans.
- Tasks that involve cross-checking information across multiple systems (reservation management, PMS, CRS, CRM, etc.).
- Tasks where approval can be obtained before updates, even when reservations are changed or rates are updated.
- Tasks where the format of input data is relatively stable (reservation data, facility data, etc.).
Unsuitable tasks
- Tasks that occur very infrequently and for which automation benefits are difficult to anticipate
- Tasks that inherently require human interaction, such as customer service and on-site response.
- Tasks that require immediate execution without approval for safety judgments or conclusion of travel contracts.
- Tasks that include a large amount of highly confidential customer and location information and are not yet organized in handling.
Industry Challenges
Challenges unique to large tourism and accommodation companies.
Many companies face the following challenges when selecting target tasks.
Too many candidate tasks to narrow down
There are many candidates such as reservation handling, multilingual guidance, review organization, and customer service, and it is difficult to decide where to start.
Unable to formulate hypotheses of effectiveness
The actual workload and man-hours of the facility/headquarters are not visible, making it difficult to estimate the effect of introduction in advance.
It is unclear whether connection to reservation management, PMS, and CRS is possible.
Whether the existing reservation management or PMS supports API linkage can only be determined by the information systems department.
Unsure how to handle tasks related to safety and contracts
There is no criteria for determining whether tasks related to safety decisions or travel contracts are appropriate.
Method
Implementation Steps
1. Identify candidate operations
We will take stock of tasks related to reservations, facilities, and headquarters, such as reservation inquiry classification, multilingual guide drafts, review trend organization, and FAQ searches.
2. Check workload and frequency
Confirm the occurrence frequency of each operation (constant, daily, weekly, etc.) and the labor required to handle it.
3. Evaluate standardization and frequency of exceptions
We will evaluate whether procedures are standardized and to what extent exceptional responses (complaints, individual requirements for group travel, etc.) occur.
4. Check the possibility of connecting to reservation management, PMS, CRS
Confirm with the information systems department where the data required for the target tasks is located and whether reservation management, PMS, CRS can cooperate.
5. Check the impact on customer safety and rights
Confirm whether the target tasks are related to reservation confirmation, rate confirmation, or safety decisions, and clarify the scope that should not be decided solely by AI.
6. Confirm whether writing is required and the need for human approval
Organize whether it involves reservation updates or communications to customers, and to what extent human approval needs to remain.
7. Determine priorities
We will compile the evaluation results and decide on the first task to start.
Evaluation Table
Candidate Task Evaluation Sheet
The following is an example of an evaluation table. Please replace it with your company's candidate tasks. The tasks closer to ◎ have a higher priority for Discover.
| Candidate tasks | Frequency | Formality | Impact on customer safety and rights | System connection | Post |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Organizing trends from reviews and surveys | Weekly | Expensive | None | CRM / surveys | None |
| Initial classification of reservation inquiries | Always | Moderate | Low | Reservation management | Internal only |
| Draft of multilingual guidance text | As needed | Moderate | Low | FAQ／CRM | None |
| Support for creating itinerary proposals | As needed | Moderate | High (human confirmation required) | Reservation management / CRS | Based on approval |
Data & Systems
Data and Systems Used
In the Discover STEP, the status of the following data and systems is checked to evaluate candidate tasks.
Human-in-the-loop
Where Human Approval Is Required
At the Discover STEP stage, implementation is not performed, but during the evaluation of candidate tasks, the following judgments are organized based on the assumption that they will always be made by humans.
- Final decision on whether the target task can be selected as an automation candidate
- Decision on whether to include tasks involving reservation confirmation/cancellation and fee updates as candidates
- Decision on whether to include tasks handling customer location information and itinerary information as candidates
Measurement
KPI Candidates
In the Discover STEP, the following are recorded as hypotheses for each candidate task and used as verification material in subsequent steps.
Current work effort
Estimation of the human workload currently required for the candidate task
Effect hypothesis
Hypothesis of the workload and time savings expected if automated
Implementation priority score
Priority calculated based on frequency, standardization, impact on customers, etc.
Pitfalls
Common Pitfalls
Select only tasks where the effects are easily visible
If you select only the prominent tasks without considering their frequency or the burden of handling exceptions, it becomes difficult to verify the effectiveness of the pilot.
Postpone reservation management, PMS, and CRS connection checks
If you decide on candidate tasks first and then check connectivity, rework may occur in later steps.
Disregard impacts on customer safety and rights
If you choose tasks without evaluating the magnitude of their impact, you may need to redesign the approval flow in later processes.
FAQ
Frequently Asked Questions
How many tasks are appropriate to start with first?
In most cases, it is recommended to start with one task. Handling multiple tasks simultaneously complicates permission design and pilot evaluation.
Should tasks related to reservations be excluded from candidates?
It is not necessarily required to exclude them. By automating up to the candidate organization and draft creation, and designing so that confirmation/cancellation is approved by the reservation staff, they can be treated as candidates.
What should be done if it is unclear whether reservation management, PMS, or CRS connections are possible?
Coordinate with the information systems department and check whether API or data linkage for the relevant reservation management, PMS, and CRS is possible. Individual consultations are also available.
Who should evaluate the candidate tasks?
It is recommended that the on-site reservation department manager, facility operations manager, and information systems department work together. Evaluation that considers both actual business operations and system constraints is necessary.
Continue
Next Step
Once the target operations are decided, the next step is to concretize the requirements, authorities, and approval design for those operations.
Shall we organize the selection of target operations together?
Based on current workload, frequency, and reservation management/PMS/CRS configuration, you can discuss Robo Claw application candidates and priorities in the official LP.