Retention is improving. Commitment is not. The industry is celebrating the wrong number.

I've long been a believer in the model - Happy Staff-Happy Guest- Profitable Business.

My personal view is that this is where the real solution lies.

As an industry we are reasonably good at measuring things. Although I don't believe we are as good as measuring the right things together. It's a substrate of the structural aspects of our industry. Naturally, we need the functions to focus on areas of capability. But the truth is the sum of the parts is the whole.

While it may seem elementary today, guest satisfaction is directly impacted by staff satisfaction. Therefore, it is crucial to our business to ensure that we create a satisfactory environment for staff to work and grow in. The result is better service and engagement, meaning happier guests.

These two measurements need to be viewed in direct association and relation to each other at the top of the business.

In reality our industry has two guests. Those that stay with us and those that work with us. Equal focus and respect of the impact of each on the other is key.

In the latter area we need more intent and focus, as in our industry we tend to sacrifice the latter for the former.

Improving retention is certainly good news, but retention alone does not tell us whether employees are committed to their organizations. During economic uncertainty, some employees may practice “job-hugging,” staying primarily because changing jobs feels risky. Higher retention, therefore, does not necessarily indicate higher engagement.

I would not replace retention with commitment as the single KPI either. Hospitality organizations need a more holistic assessment that considers retention, engagement, intent to stay, performance, absenteeism, internal mobility, development participation, and guest feedback. More importantly, leaders should understand why employees stay and how they contribute while staying.

This distinction is particularly important in hospitality. An understaffed operation creates obvious challenges, but disengaged frontline employees can sometimes damage service quality even more. Hospitality service settings are intense and unpredictable. Employees must frequently exercise judgment, empathy, initiative, and immediate problem-solving. Someone who is physically present but psychologically disengaged may be unwilling to provide that discretionary effort and can negatively affect both guests and coworkers.

The goal, therefore, should not simply be retaining more employees. It should be retaining and developing employees who want to contribute. Leaders should ask not only, “Who stayed?” but also, “Why did they stay, and how much do they still care?”

Building a hospitality business team means to create community not just jobs. Business and employee performance needs to focus on the delivery of great service and support the    establishment of sustainable hospitality environments (good for the environment, good for the community and good for business). Employees that are engaged in an environment that allows them to connect with a business, its guests, and its mission are beneficial to overall employee wellbeing and can benefit a business and its reputation as an employer of choice.

Businesses can create human resources and morale building activities to engage employees and support a visibly positive hospitality environment. Optimal recruiting, selection, and retaining standards (RSR standards) supported by performance indicators and metrics are vital. This premise infers the need for sustainable human resource practices and metrics inclusive of hiring standards, workforce data, compensation data, career pathways opportunities and connected with productivity standards and training support opportunities for employees.

Guests require a welcoming environment and a sense of well-being from employees that contributes to their service satisfaction. Work communities that are supported by well-being and sustainability efforts via employees create positive environments appreciated by employees, and visible to guests and business leaders.

Low employee engagement, often called "quiet quitting," is a challenge across many industries. However, it is particularly problematic in hospitality because guest-facing employees interact directly with customers, making disengagement visible and negatively affecting the guest experience.

Economist Mark Boldger first used the term quiet quitting in 2009 to describe employees who do only the minimum required at work and show little engagement. Employees may become disengaged for several reasons, including irregular working hours, lack of meaningful goals, poor compensation, being overlooked for promotion opportunities, limited career development prospects, and lack of recognition.

When employees feel that management does not respect or value them, they may choose to "work to rule," meaning they perform only their required duties and avoid going above and beyond for guests, colleagues, or supervisors.

What can leaders do to address this issue? Managers should schedule regular meetings with employees to discuss goals and career aspirations. Incorporate employee engagement and commitment into performance appraisals conducted quarterly. Leaders should seek to understand the causes of disengagement and take action to address employee concerns.

When management consistently demonstrates that employees are valued and respected, engagement is more likely to improve, benefiting both employees and the guest experience while reducing turnover.

The claim that retention is improving while commitment is declining is provocative, but it risks presenting a complex and uneven situation as an industry-wide reality. Hospitality is not a homogeneous sector, and aggregated figures can conceal substantial differences across workforce groups, subsectors and business types.

Employees’ decisions to stay are shaped by age, career stage, family responsibilities, migration status and available employment alternatives. Working realities also differ considerably between luxury hotels, independent restaurants, quick-service businesses, contract catering and seasonal operations. Business size, ownership, location and management practices further influence both retention and engagement.

Staying should not automatically be interpreted as commitment, just as leaving does not necessarily indicate disengagement. Employees may remain because they value their colleagues, enjoy guest interaction, appreciate flexibility or see development opportunities. Others may leave despite being highly engaged because of seasonality, education, mobility or career progression.

The industry may not be celebrating the wrong number; it may be relying on numbers that are too aggregated and disconnected from context. Retention should be assessed alongside engagement, wellbeing, job satisfaction, intention to leave and management support, with findings segmented by workforce group, subsector and business type. Otherwise, replacing retention with commitment simply substitutes one blunt KPI for another.