Introduction An excessive supply of rooms resulting, in part, from a 15-year building binge, and a weaker economy that leads to a decline in business and leisure travel signal that the nation’s hotels and motels will face unparalleled competitive challenges in the years to come. In these trying times, only those hoteliers with a clear vision of their front and back-stage operations will be able to lower costs, attain efficiency and deliver consistent levels of service quality. This above all will necessitate an integration of technological and humanistic approaches to service quality within the framework of a quality assurance programme. Recognizing the lodging industry’s preoccupation with cost containment and short-term operational efficiency, as opposed to long-term strategic effectiveness, in 1982 the American Hotel and Motel Association launched an industry-wide quality awareness campaign (Alexander, 1982). Despite the Association’s intensive efforts, hotels and motels having successful quality assurance programmes are still in the minority (Walker and Salameh, 1990). It appears that focus on short-term gimmicks and quick fixes still predominate (Nassikas, 1991) and the prevalent organizational culture in the hospitality industry, just as in the 1980s, continues to view efficiency, quality and long-term effectiveness as mutually exclusive rather than complementary strategies (Goffe, 1983). A well conceptualized and carefully implemented quality assurance programme offers several benefits to organizations in the hospitality industry. First, at a time when the industry is witnessing increasing competitive pressures (Geller, 1990; Sharpe, 1990) and facing an increasingly discerning clientele, it allows an organization to differentiate itself strategically from its competitors (Pickworth, 1987). Second, contrary to common misconception, investment in quality assurance programmes do not result in increased costs but rather in monetary savings. It is, for instance, estimated that every US$1 invested in a quality assurance programme results in a saving of US$10 in internal failure and a saving of US$100 in external failure costs (Bohan and Horney, 1991). Third, successful quality assurance programmes result in not only improved customer satisfaction but also employee satisfaction (Walker and Salameh, 1990). Fourth, considering that close to 30 per cent of total revenues in a typical hotel is spent on rectifying quality- related problems, a quality assurance programme can help reduce this drastically by ensuring that the service delivered to the guests is of high quality in the first place. Indeed, in addition to real costs incurred because of poor service, the hidden costs associated with lost business due to bad quality can reach exorbitant figures (Alexander, 1982; Lodging Hospitality, 1987). On the other hand, a successful quality assurance programme facilitates consistent delivery of high quality service to customers. Having a well-executed quality assurance programme in place, for instance, the Holiday Inn chain’s promotional theme is “Stay with someone you know”. This theme stresses the consistency dimension of service quality and reminds customers that at Holiday Inn there will be no surprises with regard to service quality. As can be inferred from the above discussion, quality assurance does pay off in terms of the bottom line. Therefore, the question is no longer whether to have quality assurance programmes or not, but rather how to make these programmes work for organizations in the hospitality industry. With this in mind, this article first presents a conceptual framework outlining the 22 MARKETING INTELLIGENCE & PLANNING 13,11 Front and back-stage strategies in service delivery in the hospitality industry: a conceptual framework Ugur Yavas, Mahmoud M. Yasin and Marwan Wafa Service quality and operational efficiencies should work together rather than against each other Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 13 No. 11, 1995, pp. 22-26 © MCB University Press Limited, 0263-4503