1.

METHODOLOGY
As in the past, due care has been given in selecting the parameters and designing the
questionnaire by our team of experts, for the rating and ranking of hotel
management institutes. This questionnaire is reviewed and edited every year
keeping in mind the changes being witnessed after which it has been carefully
deliberated, discussed and finalized by a consultative group representing academia,
institutions, industry, as well our team of experts. Based on this, weight-ages were
assigned.
TRANSPARENCY, RELIABILITY, RESEARCH - BASED METHODOLOGY AND STRONG
EMPHASIS ON VALIDATION OF DATA remained as the key strength of the survey.
Both QUANTITATIVE AS WELL AS QUALITATIVE FACTORS WITH ABSOLUTE AND
RELATIVE VALUE ASSIGNED TO EACH DATA /UNIT have been used in the survey
methodology.
No Perception or Subjective Bias has been allowed to creep in and we have
focused strongly on actual data and its validation.
Participation of Institutions:
In terms of participation, we had a heartening response from the hotel management
institutions this year. About 200 institutes were shortlisted and detailed
questionnaires were sent out to these Hotel Management Institutes/Colleges via e-
mails and a professional fee was asked to meet the expenses of the survey.
After narrowing down to 50 institutions, we finally shortlisted duly filled in
datasheets of 34 institutes, which are amongst the best institutes in India. Some
institutes did not revert back at all due to reasons known best to them and others
did not give complete data. We also acknowledge and encourage new and potential
Hotel Management Colleges which participated in the survey.
The survey being a voluntary participation, we did not insist on those, who had not
shown interest to participate. However, the institutes which responded to our
present survey are fairly representative in terms of age, region and reputation.
This years survey too witnessed a significant percentage of the participation of the
Top Hotel Management Institutes in India including 7 IHMs and some reputed top
ranked private institutes. Each year witnesses minor changes with respect to
institutes participating in the survey.
This year too, emphasis was given to the validation of data and its process. Similar
approach, as in our previous survey, has been followed in terms of process and
validation of data. GHRDCs research/validation team visited almost 50% of
participating Hotel management institutes.
The team of GHRDC during its visit had interaction with the Directors, Deans, Head of
the departments, groups of faculty (to evaluate composition and their intellectual
competence, updated knowledge of the concerned field etc) and a group of
randomly selected students, in addition to verification of the data. In addition to the
visits, letters were sent to many institutes for certain clarification or additional
information on the datasheet duly filled in and sent by the participating institutes.
GHRDC is thankful to all the participating Institutes for their overwhelming response
and continued support for helping us in carrying out the survey successfully for the
last 5 years. We would once again like to fully acknowledge and appreciate all
participating hotel management institutes for providing detailed data and
information required for the survey.
Parameters:
In order to establish the criteria for filtering the final list of institutions, extensive
secondary research was carried out. Key factors and parameters used for evaluating
and rating were Infrastructure (both physical & academic), Faculty, Publications,
Research, Consultancy, CDP & Other Programmes, Admission, Curriculum & Delivery
Systems, Placement, USP, Social Responsibility, Networking and Industry Interface.
For a more rigorous quantitative and qualitative analysis and assessment, the
parameters were further divided into a number of sub-parameters. For example,
Infrastructure was divided into physical and academic. Physical Infrastructure was
further broken down into factors like the institutes built-up area, hostel facility,
number and capacity of food production laboratories, training kitchens, bakeries,
training restaurants, front office and housekeeping rooms etc.
The table below provides a detailed classification of the parameters and sub-
parameters used in the evaluation process, along with their respective weight-age.
PARAMETERS & WEIGHTAGE

Parameters Data / Supporting Evidence
Weightage
(In %)
INFRASTRUCTURE
Physical
Built-up area, hall/auditorium/open ait theatre, hostel, layout
plan, Availability of commercial hotel, computer lab, internet
connection, submission of class work online, number & capacity
of food production labs, basic training kitchen, advanced
training kitchen, quantity training kitchen, bakeries,
confectionary, bar, training restaurant, laundries, front office
training lab, housekeeping rooms, larder etc.
27.6%
Academic
Library records, Number of books added, National, International
& E journals, Number of hotel management related books, LCD
projectors, etc.
EDUCATION PROCESS
Faculty,
Publication,
Research,
Consultancy,
CDP & Other
Programmes
Full-time faculty, percentage of Ph. D.s, qualification, their
academic and industry experiences, introduction of new courses
and % usage of curriculum, Salary structure of the faculty,
CDP/Consultancy, FDP, Faculty research etc.
28.3%
ACADEMIC PROGRAMMES
Admission,
Curriculum,
Delivery
Systems
Total programmes offered and their details, Entrance tests,
Competency Building / Soft skill Programs Offered, live
Projects etc.
17.9%
PLACEMENT
Placement,
USP, Social
Responsibility,
Networking
and Industry
Interface
Offer letters, recruiter details, percentage of placement, average
domestic /international salary, entrepreneurs, cost of education,
events organized, corporate social responsibility, alumni meet,
networking etc.
26.2.9%
2. RESULTS
Ranking of Government & Private Hotel Management Institutions:
This year we have decided to rank both Government and Private Hotel Management
institutes separately for the benefit of our stakeholders in order to create a level-
playing field for both in their respective areas.
Out of total 34 participants we have ranked 7 Government Hotel Management
Institutes and 27 private Hotel Management Institutes separately with the aim that
this separate rankings would benefit the students also as they will be able to
compare the rankings between the two segments to make decisions for admissions.
We have continued to follow the method and process of classifying the Hotel
Management Institutes under different clusters as opposed to ranking by number
only for better understanding of the results of the survey. The differentials between
one institute and the other in terms of points obtained are sometimes so
insignificant and therefore it is important to note the cluster or class of institutes
they belong to as far merit of an institute is concerned (though mathematically we
had to use the points system obtained by the institute to differentiate one from
other).
The results of the survey should be read and interpreted on the merit of the Hotel
management institutes ranked under different clusters/groups they belong to and
not by numbers alone.
Supreme > = 75%
Super Excellence > = 65% & < 75%
Excellence > = 60% & < 65%
Emerging Excellence > = 50% & < 60%
Promising < 50%
We also analyzed and ranked the top Institutes by separate parameters i.e. by state,
by infrastructure, by placement, by faculty and publications, etc., details of which are
given in tables along with rating and ranking of Hotel Management Institutes 2014.