Inheriting the Future
Observations on the evolving role of middle management within the Australian gaming industry; a paper co-authored by Michael Ferris and Andrew MacDonald.
By Andrew MacDonald, Senior Executive Casino Operations
and Michael Ferris
Adelaide Casino, 1995
Introduction and Terminology | Pit Boss – Caretaker or Policeman | Mental Models | “If It Isn’t Broken – Don’t Fix It” | Pioneers Versus Settlers | The Challenge of Change | Bridging the Gulf between the Theoretical and the Practical | From Personal Realm to Professional Sphere | Means of Selection for Promotion | The Formation of Particular Management Structures | The Impact of Promotion upon Candidates Themselves | The Criteria for Selection | Unified Professional Ethic | Pit Boss Job Description | Code Of Ethics (Noblesse Oblige) | The Company Mission Statement | Empowerment of Staff | Implementing Change | The Human Consequences of Change | Walking Backwards into the Future | Bibliography |
Turning now to the area of staff empowerment, we shall examine the current level of empowerment and then outline the next projected stage of this process, which features significant restructuring.
The present Service Empowerment Code has been in place in the Adelaide Casino for approximately eighteen months as at the time of writing, and has proven extremely effective. With regards to staff empowerment, every gaming employee has a prescribed cash ceiling which refers to the total pay out amount of the wager concerned:
| Inspector | a sum not exceeding | $200 |
| Pit Boss | a sum not exceeding | $1,000 |
| GSM | a sum not exceeding | $5,000 |
| GSM + Surveillance Manager | a sum not exceeding | $10,000 |
| Senior Executive Cas. Ops | a sum not exceeding | $20,000 |
| Chief Executive | a sum in excess of | $20,000 |
Clear guidelines exist concerning the three key criteria which might warrant the situation being passed on to a superior – the monetary value involved, the nature of the incident and the patron involved. To ensure accountability, the gaming staff involved must complete an incident report sheet describing their decisions, they must notify their superior, and finally Surveillance is notified in every such instance.
The task of freeing the Pit Boss from the confines of a single pit is the next projected step in empowering middle management. The present levels of tedium and untapped spare capacity are primarily a function of being restricted to such a small area of endeavour. By allowing a middle manager to rove the gaming area and supervise a number of pits, many of the problems associated with working in short bursts are alleviated.
In conjunction with its middle management, the Casino has embarked upon reinventing the entire role of a pit boss. The proposed name given to this new position will be Floor Manager. By redefining the boundaries of the job, it is proposed that a single Floor Manager will be directly responsible for all gaming activities on that level of the Casino. Their duties will include several of the functions currently performed by the GSM’s.
Inspectors in turn will become known as Table Managers, and will absorb many of the clerical duties previously performed by the Pit Boss from within the pit (such as table updates and requesting fills). These Table Managers will receive a commensurate pay increase in line with their newly acquired responsibilities, and they will become more actively involved in the operation of the pit. The provision of total table coverage by Surveillance will ensure that game security is in no way compromised.
Through these changes, a casino operator may significantly reduce their senior and middle management salary commitments, and at the same time provide both the Floor and the Table Manager a far more interesting and stimulating role. Thus, the process of employee restructuring and rationalisation promises a win/win scenario on all counts.
