МОДЕЛЬ ФОРМУВАННЯ ОПТИМАЛЬНОЇ ІЄРАРХІЇ ЦІЛЕЙ ФУНКЦІОНУВАННЯ ПІДПРИЄМСТВ ГОТЕЛЬНО-РЕСТОРАННОЇ ІНДУСТРІЇ

The article presents the research findings on building an optimal goal hierarchy for businesses in the sector of hotel and restaurant industry. A mathematical rationale has been provided for setting objectives in the context of ensuring effective hospitality management by hotel and restaurant businesses based on a set of key performance indicators. It is argued that every managerial action must be focused on problem solving. According to the research results, a solution is a management decision aimed at gaining the maximum to achieve certain goals. Failure to set optimal goals makes impossible to shape a management problem which, in turn, translates into absence of the need for making management decisions. Goals contribute to shaping the criteria for evaluating the feasibility of proposed management decisions as well as mapping the criteria for assessing the ultimate predicted outcomes. However, most often, objectives sought to be achieved by top management of hospitality industry companies are perceived quite differently by the staff. In this context, the system of goals is a critical instrument for management decision making and problem solving related to organizational issues in managing businesses of hotel and restaurant industry. Thus, the flexibility of organizational structures in a management paradigm within the hospitality industry is associated with the dynamic process of designing the optimal goal hierarchy to achieve good performance in the sector of hotel and restaurant industry. The author assumes that the estimation of the relevant flexibility of organizational structure management by hospitality industry businesses can be attained through the suggested classification of management goals.

Nonconciliation in Peer Disagreement: Its Phenomenology and Its Rationality

The authors argue in favor of the “nonconciliation” (or “steadfast”) position concerning the problem of peer disagreement. Throughout the paper they place heavy emphasis on matters of phenomenology—on how things seem epistemically with respect to the net import of one’s available evidence vis-à-vis the disputed claim p, and on how such phenomenology is affected by the awareness that an interlocutor whom one initially regards as an epistemic peer disagrees with oneself about p. Central to the argument is a nested goal/sub-goal hierarchy that the authors claim is inherent to the structure of epistemically responsible belief-formation: pursuing true beliefs by pursuing beliefs that are objectively likely given one’s total available evidence; pursuing this sub-goal by pursuing beliefs that are likely true (given that evidence) relative to one’s own deep epistemic sensibility; and pursuing this sub-sub-goal by forming beliefs in accordance with one’s own all-in, ultima facie, epistemic seemings.

Selection of the Investor’s Type for the Project Utilization of a Man-Made Deposit Using Hierarchy Process Method

Factors influencing the volumes of investments in spoil banks reclamation are considered. Using goal hierarchy, all possible types of investors are analyzed, as well as their goals when obtaining licenses for the development of man-made deposits. On the example of Lvov basin spoil banks, four types of investors are systematized and different priorities of goals are assessed, the environmental criterion always being the first priority. It is made to prevent environmental catastrophe while developing man-made deposits in the region. Using the matrix of pair comparison, it is proved that the state or community is the optimal investor in developing man-made deposits. Both foreign investor and the spoil-bank owner can be on the second place after the state depending on the priority of profitability or social problems of the area.