Side note for those who don't know: most Marriott properties are Marriott-managed, not Marriott-owned.

It usually doesn't matter, but on policy questions there can sometimes be some friction between owner preferences & Marriott corporate preferences.

Usually this is over things like "Your food and service isn't up to Marriott quality, because you're under investing." But I imagine politics is also a sensitive point too. Regardless, Marriott corporate usually wins, as a hotel-without-the-Marriott-name prints less money.

Edit: Although in this instance, from the scarce details, it sounds like it was divergence from corporate policy by local management. Which, if you're putting management teams in ~7,900 properties, is probably a thing that happens.

Basic summary: https://marketrealist.com/2014/10/why-marriotts-hotels-have-...

Marriott Intl page for franchisees: https://hotel-development.marriott.com/