Home > Free Essays > Business > Employees Management > Chinese Luxury Hotels’ Employee Motivation
Cite this

Chinese Luxury Hotels’ Employee Motivation Dissertation


Executive Summary

In the sphere of management, there are many factors that have to be taken into consideration to promote a successful accomplishment of the work. Each industry has its own rules and requirements. There are three main factors of successful management that have to be identified: motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty. Each concept has its own definition and impact on the industry. This study focuses on the existing link between the concepts of employee motivation, satisfaction and loyalty within the frames of luxury hotels which are located in China. Based on the focus of the research, the study objectives include the necessity to explore on such terms as motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty, to evaluate the link between the concepts of employee motivation, satisfaction and loyalty in luxury hotels in China, and to analyse the impact of various individual elements on the chosen factors of satisfaction, motivation, and loyalty.

In keeping up with the objectives, the accompanying suppositions have to be verified. Much attention should be paid to the demographic elements and their possible impact on workers’ motivation, satisfaction and loyalty. Besides, it is necessary to investigate if job motivation and satisfaction may have an impact on employee loyalty within the frames of luxury hotels in China. The researcher chooses to conduct quantitative research to meet the objectives. The informative description of the research methods and the literature review prove the correctness of the chosen directions and possible impact on the further development of the study. A questionnaire is the main method with the help of which the information is gathered.

The survey will be described by the research to explain how the information has to be collected from the ground and evaluated with the help of the SPSS computer package. Data has to be presented by means of tables and figures. Besides, a number of quantitative narratives and various statistical tools should be used to describe the relationship between the chosen variables. The study helps to establish a positive correlation between various factors which may be associated with motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty. As soon as general observations and evaluations are offered, the conclusions should be made in regards to the luxury hotels which are located in China. Therefore, some information about the Chinese current state of affairs, including the social and economic factors, has to be mentioned.

In addition, the information given in the Appendix section of the study confirms a significantly positive correlation between biographical factors, employee motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty (except academic achievement) for luxury hotels in China. In general, the recommendations are based on the findings obtained from the questionnaires and direct communication with the participants. These recommendations help to comprehend the nature of the relations between motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty that could be developed between the representatives of different hotels in China. Still, the main task of the study is to prove a direct relationship between such crucial concepts as employee motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty and comprehend how to use this information to improve the work in the hotel sector.

Introduction

Overview

In the sphere of management, the relationship between employees’ satisfaction, motivation, and loyalty play an important role because it defines the quality of services offered by such organisations as luxury hotels. This chapter aims at exploring the background and significance of the study, as well as study objectives and the main aim.

Background of the Study and Its Importance

The hotel industry, like other sectors, demands intensive comprehension of its strengths and shortcomings to guarantee its sustainability and competitive advantage (Abdulazis, Goldman & Olsen 2007; Walls, Okumus & Wang 2011). Motivation, job satisfaction and loyalty are the three extremely noteworthy components that may influence the general performance of the workers, as well as the monetary result of hotels (Sohrabi et al. 2012). Sustainable managers are those company’s workers, who take responsibility for the promotion of different motivational elements, the support of job satisfaction, and the explanation of loyalty as the main principle of the hotel industry (Hill 2008; Zendehdel 2013).

Current Issues and Challenges

Given the fact that most hotels lack HR departments, managers have to play the roles of an HR manager to ensure employee motivation and satisfaction in addition to their regular duties. They are responsible for looking after the welfare of the employees and promoting employees’ comfort (Walls, Okumus & Wang 2011). In hotels, managers have to face much work and complete the duties that aim at improving the quality of services. Regarding the existing changes in the economic and social aspects of life in China, the hotel industry has to be thoroughly investigated and improved in case of emergency.

Research Rationale

Despite the presence of different literature on employee motivation, satisfaction and loyalty, not many studies have been conducted to examine the relationship of these concepts in the hotel industry, and in China, in particular. This study is one of the first steps to comprehend the peculiarities of the hotel industry in China. It should be thoroughly developed including the importance of the definitions and explanations of each term mentioned in the study. It helps to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the current hotel industry in China and find out if any recommendations could be given to stabilise the chosen industry regarding the results of communication with different representatives of Chinese hotels.

Study Objectives and Aims

The overall focus of the research is to explore the relationship between such notions as employees’ motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty, clarify its main strengths and limitations, and offer several recommendations on how to improve the work of managers in luxury hotels in China. The ever-expanding Chinese economy has attracted an extensive number of renowned hotel chains. Even though these hotel chains have the upper hand in the international market, steady conveyance of their service pledges is critical to their prosperity (Tian & Pu 2008). Motivation, job satisfaction, and loyalty are still viewed as the root causes of numerous organisational problems (Kozak 2014; Cetin 2013; Fisher, McPhail & Menghetti 2010).

Unlike other sectors where consumers never meet employees, the hotel industry is involved in numerous trade processes where employees engage with consumers. Employees not only deliver services but also act as a conduit between consumers and the organisation (Abbas, Premi & Jyoti 2010). Regarding the exceptional history of the chosen country and the necessity to combine motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty as a whole, this study will cover the possible HR practices in regards to the existing cultural, personal, and professional needs of employees. Therefore, in addition to the main aim of the study, there are several objectives that determine the stages of the work that should be done to meet the initial goal and clarify the duties of managers in Chinese hotels. These objectives are as follows:

  1. To evaluate the link that exists between worker motivation, satisfaction and devotion for luxury hotels in China;
  2. To analyse the impact of various individual elements on satisfaction, motivation, and loyalty among the employees in luxury hotels in China;
  3. To develop the models and choose the best option that could be recommended to the employees and their employers in Chinese luxury hotels.

Literature Review

Introduction

This chapter reviews various studies linked to the concepts of employee motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty for luxury hotels. It aims at discussing the existing models and theories that could be offered to the representatives of luxurious hotels and analysing their worth in regards to the current economic and social aspects of the chosen country.

Definitions of Employee Motivation, Satisfaction, and Loyalty

Employee Motivation, Satisfaction, and Loyalty

The concepts of job motivation, satisfaction and loyalty have many different definitions. For example, job satisfaction may be defined as “a pleasant state of mind resulting from the assessment of one’s occupation as accomplishing or expediting one’s values” (Singh & Tiwari 2011, p. 40) or as an attitude and there are three basics of employees’ aura with respect to occupation fulfilment: extraneous, natural, and general ability components. Intrinsic elements incorporate capacity exploitation, liberty, ethical values, commitment, confidence, resourcefulness, societal services, social position, and differing qualities. Extrinsic factors incorporate growth, administrative strategy, remuneration, acknowledgement, and control of human capital (Tian & Pu 2008; Singh & Tiwari 2011).

Employee satisfaction is how individuals feel about their work. They are satisfied as soon as their needs and wants are met. For this reason, employee satisfaction incorporates not only value addition but also individual prospects (Bianchi 2012). In a number of empirical studies, job satisfaction has been measured based on the incidence and extent of absenteeism.

The term “motivation” was coined by the Latin expression that symbolises transformation. Currently, motivation implies those psychosomatic approaches that generate bearing, stimulus, and tirelessness that are objectively coordinated (Muller 2011; Ramlall 2007). Inspiration can likewise be portrayed as the propensity of a person to apply a great extent of endeavours (Pride, Hughes & Kapoor 2011). Workers are skilled and arranged to apply a high extent of exertion when their capacity and the occupation match are in adjust; when a due acknowledgement is made for their accomplishments; and when the prospects of development are accessible to those workers who fancy them (Kinicki 2009; Wentland 2009; Pride, Hughes & Kapoor 2011).

Loyalty is a common term used to denote an individual’s dedication or feeling of attachment to something. It articulates itself in both mind and actions and often attempts to identify the interests of devoted individuals (Salanova & Kirmanen 2010; Tufail, Iqbal & Lodhi 2015). Employee commitment is multifaceted in nature and includes loyalty to an entity (Bratton & Gold 2007). However, employee commitment and loyalty have been used interchangeably in most instances (Feinstein & Vondrasek 2011; Holden & Overmier 2014).

Employee Motivation, Satisfaction, and Loyalty for Hotels

Today, motivation, job satisfaction, and loyalty are viewed as possible causes of problems observed in the hotel industry. Organisational changes make employees agree with the conditions they are not confident in (Abbas & Asghar 2010). Hotel prosperity depends on proper management, and proper management includes a successful and timely identification of employees’ needs and wants (Aswathappa 2005; Nickson 2009; Abu 2011). Since the wellbeing of the hotel is influenced by the employees, the overall success of the hotel industry can be enhanced through the factors that define employees’ abilities to work and improve the results including motivational, satisfaction, and loyalty factors (Lundberg, Gudmundson & Andersson 2009). The relation between motivation and satisfaction in the hotel industry cannot be neglected because it defines the level of services offered by employees and workers’ future loyalty to the work they are involved in. It is not enough to know the definitions of terms but also to comprehend their relations to create a clear image of how crucial motivation and satisfaction for loyalty are and make the improvements in case of necessity.

Employee Motivation, Satisfaction, and Loyalty for Luxury Hotels

The peculiarities of employees’ work in luxury hotels are discussed by many researchers including Walls, Okumus, and Wang (2011), Chan (2008), and Meng and Elliott (2008). Still, all these studies fail to present a single standard definition of the term “luxury” because this term is an extremely subjective concept (Tutuncu & Kucukusta 2006). As a rule, luxury hotels are defined as the hotels that have high-end clientele and modern amenities that attract the attention of different people from different regions. They are also known as deluxe inns, first-class inns, and four-star or five-star hotels (Chan 2008; Meng & Elliott 2008). Such hotels may be categorised into three groups, namely major deluxe hotels which use prestigious brands of enormously coordinated series of hotels, deluxe special which develop a prestigious brand of small- or medium-sized hotel chains, and higher fashionable hotels which are usually difficult to fund, create, and manage because of the necessity to work in different sections from coordinated chains at the same time (Walls, Okumus & Wang 2011).

In five-star inns, enhanced working conditions can upgrade work fulfilment (Aksu & Aktas 2006). The enhanced operating environment includes employment promotion, heightening the confidence of workers, monetary recompenses, peripheral supports and reparation, and sensible operational hours. The investigation in a four-star inn shows that preparations and improvements can help with upgrading work fulfilment in the service industry (Lam, Pine & Baum 2007). In the sumptuous lodgings, executives presume an imperative part in employment fulfilment and reliability because seniors or tutors can easily empower their subordinates or newcomers in this manner to impact their employment fulfilment and behavioural expectations (Aquinas 2006; Lam, Pine & Baum 2007).

Theory/Models for Employees’ Satisfaction, Motivation, and Loyalty

Motivational Theories

There are many models and theories linked to employee satisfaction. Taylor was the pioneer, who built up a novel idea of inspiring workers and named it as logical administration (Dittmer & Griffin 2010; Strizhova & Gusev 2013). According to this theory, workers were monetarily propelled and allowed to work to secure the greatest number of wages they could. A monetary benefit was the fundamental impetus that reinvigorated workers to perform well in an organisation (Coget 2011; Strizhova & Gusev 2013). Another supposition of Taylor’s hypothesis was that work was intrinsically deplorable for the vast majority of employees, and money, earned by labourers, was more important than any type of job to be undertaken.

Regardless his innovations and helpful ideas, Taylor’s model were characterised by certain weaknesses because of its focus on money-related advantages and the inability to identify other motivational angles (Griffin & Moorhead 2011; Yelkur 2011). Still, this model cannot be ignored in this study because it helps to cover the financial and personal aspects of the work developed in a certain organisation and clarify how employees’ motivation and satisfaction may be improved by means of self-governance, competitions, and the promotion of inspiration (Griffin & Moorhead 2011). The attention of the employers to the possibilities of their workers influences loyalty among employees and their readiness to work hard and devote much time to the success of their organisations. This theory could be used in the development of the recommendations and identifying financial rewards as not the only type of motivation for hotel employees.

Another model that could be offered in the hotel industry for the consideration of motivation and satisfaction among employees is based on the achievements made by Abraham Maslow. The Maslow’s order of requirements shows that people have wishes and needs that may impact their behaviour. This model proves the fact there are various necessities, and people have to categorise these needs in regards to their priorities and individual advances. The five types of needs in the hotel industry include serviceable requirements, security needs, a feeling of being loved, confidence, and self-completion needs (Hossain 2015).

Employee Fulfilment Theories/Models

One of the most common theories of employee satisfaction is the tournament theory (Avolio, Walumbwa & Weber 2009). In line with the theory, people are frequently challenged for incentives in their work environment including salary increment or the possibility to move higher up a career ladder (Lawler, Porter & Vroom 2009). The coordination of satisfaction components among workers at assorted levels of administration assumes a huge part in propelling them to put more efforts into their employment parts and duties (Lawler, Porter & Vroom 2009).

There is also the rational satisfaction theory that could be used as an additional model of motivation-related satisfaction. This model may be associated with hotel workers introducing them in contrast to their fulfilment or inspiration levels and those of their associates with the overall market rates to figure out if they are genuinely compensated (Britton et al. 2009). It clarifies why associations ought to review the inner and outside value in detailing the fulfilment-related inspiration plans (Abbas, Premi & Jyoti 2010). This conduct emerges from the way buyers have desires on fulfilment levels and occupation positions (Bakhare 2011). On the off chance that they see they are unreasonably compensated or paid, they are probably going to lessen their exertion in executing the relegated work errands (Cano & Castillo 2008). Additionally, the advancement of the impression of being poorly remunerated is probably going to add to negative work environment conduct among employees. Cases of such practices incorporate truancy, harm, and resistance among employees. This viewpoint may essentially diminish the general fulfilment of duties and meeting the expectations set by employers and customers (Avery 2006; Ashtiani et al. 2011).

Finally, there is a model that structures the reason for encouragement. It is called the proficiency satisfaction model, and it posits that increased satisfaction among the employees enhances an association’s intensity in the market, henceforth enhancing the probability of pulling in and keeping up more abilities (Pinto 2011). Moreover, it suggests that increased impetus goes about as a gratifying force in advancing worker loyalty (Jamali 2007).

Loyalty Theories/Models

A number of theories were utilised incomprehensibly as part of numerous approaches to clarify the importance of duty and devotion among representatives (Suh, West & Shin 2012). The notion of inclusivity was used to explain workers’ reliability and dedication to an association. It can be controlled to depict any empirical outcomes since they are typically used to post-justify outcomes (Anbu and Mavuso 2012). In any case, this speculation has not been proved practically. Since it is inadequately delineated, it is not apparent how it may be put into the use (Lowry, Simon & Kimberley 2008).

The mental contract model may also be utilised as an illustrative configuration for the business relationship and for the clarification of labourers’ dispositions and practices. This model helps to deal with work relationship. Yet, the basic construct of this model is business results achieved through the mental contract execution or encroachment. Psychosomatic contract accomplishment is emphatically connected to work dedication and faithfulness. It is additionally observed to be adversely associated with the employee turnover rate.

Summaries of Findings

Hotel executives are trying to set up and keep up an environment that is more positive for the performance of individual labourers. Employee occupation demeanour is defined as the standout among the most objective and unpleasant segments in human resource organisation. Besides, it is clear that the subject of worker inspiration, satisfaction and loyalty cannot be neglected because it is generally associated with work values. The devotion of workers to their association principally happens when the representatives are persuaded and fulfilled. Inspiration and fulfilment are the fundamental aspects for hotel workers to grasp an uplifting attitude towards the association. Thus, for any organisation to achieve its objectives and targets, exceedingly motivated workers are of great significance. To make workers put forth a valiant effort, every one of the elements connected with worker inspiration, fulfilment and dedication is an essential ingredient.

Each theory is a unique combination of the factors that could determine the level of work quality and the services people could ask being the customers of hotels. Hotel workers may be in need of additional motivation or inspiration to stay loyal to and satisfied with the principles of work required in their organisations.

Relationship between Employees’ Satisfaction, Motivation and Loyalty for Luxury Hotels

Employees, who are exceptionally motivated and fulfilled, are usually more steadfast to any kind of challenge or a task given by their employers. Such employees are less likely to quit their jobs but focus on communication with their leaders and co-workers to discuss the possible methods of their services’ improvement (Danish & Usman 2010; Kolomiet 2010). In other words, as soon as employees are satisfied with the working conditions, their intentions to work better lead to a number of positive results. Effective motivation is the task leaders have to deal with to satisfy their workers. The main factors of motivation are personal growth, recognition of personal values, the identification of achievements, and responsibility. Employers have to explain these factors to their employees and focus on their importance.

Hoq and Amin (2010) explored the role that particular components of work satisfaction play in predicting different types of dedication and dependability. Such satisfaction factors as a high level of a salary, promotion, training, and self-development cannot be ignored because they promote loyalty and the desire to work. Employees understand that they could gain a number of personal benefits in case they complete their functions on a high level and stay loyal to their companies. Compelling loyalty varied from individual’s fulfilment within the aspects of the work setting (Lussier 2006; Lovvorn & Chen 2011; Lee and Lee 2012). In such cases, the role of the administration cannot be neglected because they are key individuals in teamwork and other activities where employee participation matters (Stecher & Rosse 2007). Past studies on luxury hotel administrators have established the standard elements that improve the level of reliability. These elements incorporate high and impartial compensation, managers’ enthusiasm about their workers, working conditions, the abnormal state of collaboration in the association, learning, and advancement (Maxwell & Steele 2008; Yew 2008).

According to Fisher, McPhail and Menghetti (2010), reward system and acknowledgement are two extraneous employment satisfaction factors. Besides, it is offered to consider enthusiasm in terms of self-sufficiency, security, collaboration, trust, and the chances to participate in social exercises as the main characteristics of occupational fulfilment factors. Ankli and Palliam (2012) suggest that representative dedication can be defined as an autonomous variable with occupational fulfilment, as well as the dependent factor. Workers, who are extremely faithful to an association, may encounter an abnormal state of fulfilment in their job (Reynolds & Arnold 2009; Miller 2013).

Extremely steadfast workers would attempt to meet organisational objectives and personal interests at the same time. This type of demeanour will impact financial performance and strategies of the organisation. Therefore, fulfilment is proposed as a result rather than a forerunner (Narteh et al. 2013). In regards to the models defined in this section, occupational fulfilment may be introduced as a forerunner of changes where the part of employment fulfilment imperatively affects the measurement of worker steadfastness (Klidas, van nook Berg and Wilderom 2007).

Besides, the investigations of Lam, Pine, and Baum (2007) show that luxury inn workers have a differing level of devotion and satisfaction in connection to their view of work setting. Brotherton (2006) asserted that delight with work security has a diminished effect on dedication compared to delight with the individual fulfilment. It is suggested to define the level of loyalty by the presence of employees’ intentions to work in teams, to communicate and participate in different activities regardless the nature of working conditions, and to develop trustful relations with their superiors.

Methodology

Introduction

This chapter aims at presenting the study methodology as the way of dealing with the eventual outcome of the research (Kumar 2006). It is expected to explain how assorted strategies for grasping could be used. The main study technique is a conscious examination of the demands through the pursuit of new information (Singh 2007).

Primary and Secondary Research

In this study, two types of research, primary and secondary, play an important role because such work helps to explain the study opts for a sociological facet of workers dispositions and variables that impact their conduct (Armitage & Keeble-Ramsay 2009; Putra, Cho & Liu 2015). Primary research is carried out with the aim of responding to the prevailing research questions (Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill 2007; Ballantyne, Packer & Axelsen 2009; Noble & Smith 2015). It is important for arranging the observable elements, looking at the working elements, and producing measurable representations to dissect the observations. Numbers or measurable configurations are the main parts of primary research (Wagner 2009).

Secondary research aims at identifying the sources that could be used as the support and explanation of the value of the information mentioned. It could be introduced in a printed form or found online (Malhotra & Birks 2012).

Advantages and Disadvantages of Primary Research: Quantitative Questionnaires

The peculiar feature of primary research is the necessity to introduce new information and make sure it could be tested and supported. The depiction of information plays a crucial role in primary research. The accumulated data can be examined and deciphered by clients depending on their requirements rather than relying on the explanation made by means of discretionary data (Denzin 2012). The main advantage of the chosen research method is the possibility to gather the required portion of information quickly and cover the most sensitive topics with the help of clear and definite answers of the participants. Visual materials and findings strengthen the chosen approach.

Cost, assets, and efforts should be considered in primary research. For example, human assets and materials are additionally required in significant reviews and information gathering (Al-Zawahreh and Al-Madi 2012). In light of the sweeping nature of the operation, the time expected to carry out the study is particularly long when contrasted with the secondary review, which can be carried out in a much shorter period time. On the off chance that the study involves taking feedback, there are risks that data given might not be right. There is a limited ability to probe the answers offered by certain groups of people. Besides, there is a high probability that applicable subtle elements of the key variables or observations might be neglected (Blanchard & Cathy 2012).

Questionnaire Design

A questionnaire is chosen as the main method to gather information for the study. An aggregate of 200 polls is filled by the participants. The examples of the questions are introduced in the appendices. This study technique corroborates the need to minimise the cost of the examination (Saunders, Thornhill & Lewis 2009). Before designing a questionnaire, three factors are considered: a wording principle (the content and purpose behind the solicitation), measurement principle (the age, income levels, or nationalities of the participants), and the overall set-up of the study (the models to ensure that the data assembled is fitting to test theories) (Saunders, Thornhill & Lewis 2009). Questionnaires are usually based on close-ended or open-ended questions. Besides, many researchers use forced choices in the questions to created certain boundaries and use these frames in findings. In this study, there are several questions and statements that have to be approved by the participants and create a solid basis for the investigation on the chosen topic.

Data Collection

This study primarily relies on information from the ground. The facts are taken from the questionnaires offered to the participants. Primary data is favoured because it is dependable, helpful, and agreeable. The information is also gathered with the help of a pre-trial of the survey. The survey is issued to a sample of 250 hotel employees; still, 200 polls only were completed. The employees of Kempinski Shanghai, a five-star luxury inn situated in Shanghai, China, are chosen as the participants of the study. The workers are chosen in light of the fact that their profiles fit the setting of this research. The participants’ answers are treated with extreme confidentiality and anonymity because the goal of the study is not to identify people and their problems but to cover the topic and discuss the concepts of motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty in the hotel industry using the example of a certain organisation.

Ethical Considerations

The study adheres to the conventional morals of the research. All the information gathered is utilised entirely for academic purpose and treated with utmost secrecy. The participants are informed about the goals of the study and their direct impact on the results that should be used in the discussion section. Informed consent has to be obtained from each participant at the time of a questionnaire.

Study Limitations

Carrying out this study is a relatively expensive procedure. There are also cases when respondents may give incorrect and erroneous answers. Therefore, the correctness of the answers is under a question. In addition, the procedure of information gathering may be defined as tedious and monotonous. Some participants were not willing to provide the information on their personal attributes and the level of income. Such a point is defined as an exceptional challenge in this study. Finally, the allocation of time to determine the respondents, who were prepared to give sufficient data, was required.

Main Findings

Introduction

This chapter introduces the explanation of the main characteristics of the study sample, the development of several types of analyses, including reliability, frequency, and regression analyses, and the description of the statistics. In general, analytical data and descriptive information are given in this part of the work.

Characteristics of the Sample

Kempinski Shanghai is the hotel under analysis that is purposefully situated in the business area of Shanghai and has over 30 storeys overlooking this staggering metropolis. The building outline of this inn is remarkable and exceptionally satisfying to the eyes of passers-by. It has around 1300 visitor rooms and more than four sustenance and beverages outlets. The hotel’s workers are more than 300 people working in various divisions (Kempinski Shanghai 2016). Personal attributes of the participants, the distribution of sex, age, academic level, pay, and the number of years working in the hotel are the main segments.

Gender

Table 1: Gender distribution.

 

gender N=200
woman 93 (46.5 %)
men 107(53.5 %)
Overall 200 (100%)
Gender percentages.
Figure 1: Gender percentages.

As indicated by the outcomes, there are 93 women and 107 men, comprising 46% and 54% out of the sample in that order.

Age

Table 2: Age distribution.

 

Age N=200 (%)
18-25 11(5.5%)
26-35 38(19%)
36-45 101(50.5%)
46-55 31(15.5%)
above 55 19(9.5%)
Overall 200(100%)
Age percentages.
Figure 2: Age percentages.

The distribution of age is outlined in the table and figure above. As per the outcomes, there are 50.5% of respondents aged somewhere between 36 and 45, which is the biggest, trailed by respondents aged somewhere between 26 and 35, making more than half of the total participants, and respondents aged somewhere between 46 and 55, accounted for 15.5% of the total number of participants. At long last, respondents aged over 55 or somewhere between 18 and 25 comprise 19% and 5.5% out of the total number of participants in that order.

Education Level

Table 3: Education distribution.

 

Education N=200(%)
High school or below 10(5%)
Diploma 80(40%)
Bachelor degree 60(30%)
Postgraduate degree or above 50(25%)
Total 200(100%)
 Education percentages.
Figure 3: Education percentages.

55 % of the respondents have a degree or advanced degree, trailed by the respondents, who have a diploma certificate, comprising 40% the total number of respondents. There are just 5% of the respondents who have secondary school or tertiary certificates.

Income

Table 4: Income distribution.

 

Income N=200 (%)
<2000 20(10%)
2000-5000 4(2%)
5000-10000 36(18%)
1000-15000 80(40%)
>15000 60(30%)
Total 200(100%)
 Income percentages.
Figure 4: Income percentages.

40% of the members have a salary between 10000 and 15000, which is the leading amount of the sample. They are followed by the members, who have a salary of over 15000, which comprises 30% of the total number of participants. The respondents with a salary between 5000 and 10000 comprise 36% of the total. Around 10% of the respondents have a salary beneath 2000, and the minority has an income somewhere between 2000 and 5000.

The Number Years of Employment

Table 5: Number of years employed in the hotel.

 

Times N=200 (%)
less than 4 years 42(21%)
4-8 years 44(22%)
8-12 years 48(24%)
more than 12 years 66(33%)
Total 200(100%)
Number of years employed in the hotel.
Figure 5: Number of years employed in the hotel.

The table and figure above outline the number of the years that the respondents work in the hotel. 33% of the respondents have been working or continue working in the hotel for over 12 years, which is the leading tendency in the sample, followed by respondents, who have worked or work there for around 8 and 12 years, comprising 24% of the total number of participants, and the members, who have worked or still work there between 4 and 8 years, comprising 22% of the group. Also, there are 42 participants, who have been employed at the hotel for less than 4 years, comprising 21% of the total sample.

Reliability Analyses

The reliability analysis is often utilised to gauge the consistency of items to be analysed. The study comprises of three fundamental elements which are employee motivation, satisfaction and loyalty. Each element is measured using the particular factors, which are assigned to a standardised alpha item (Saunders, Thornhill & Lewis 2009). A Likert-type scale is used. The scales are ranged from “Highly Concur” to “Highly Differ”.

In the Statistical Package for the Social Science, the Cronbach’s Alpha value is often utilised to gauge the internal consistency of items. The basic requisite for the Alpha value is 0.7 to ensure that the items are internally consistent and unwavering (Wagner 2009). In an exploratory study, the Cronbach’s Alpha value of 0.6 can likewise be acknowledged. In the current study, the different estimation items are borrowed from the existing research; thus, the base value is fixed at 0.7. The corrected item-total correlation (CITC) is also included to evaluate the reliability of specific items. If the corrected item-total correlation is beneath 0.5, then it cannot constantly measure the ensuing variable and ought to be overlooked from a different investigation.

The Cronbach’s Alpha for variables is précised in the table below.

Variables Items CITC The Alpha Value if Item Scrapped Cronbach’s Alpha Value
Employee Loyalty
Factors
α1 0.646 0.831 0.784
α 2 0.731 0.758
α 3 0.687 0.765
Employee Motivation
Factors
α 4 0.634 0.781 0.777
α 5 0.762 0.779
α 6 0.785 0.737
α 7 0.762 0.753
α 8 0.483 0.836
Employee Satisfaction
Factors
α 9 0.773 0.837 0.837
α 10 0.747 0.835
α 12 0.658 0.834
α 13 0.767 0.820
α 14 0.852 0.859

The Cronbach’s alpha value for employee loyalty factors, employee motivation factors and employee satisfaction factors are 0.784, 0.777 and 0.837, which are all above the minimum requirement of 0.7. Moreover, the corrected item-total correlations for particular variables are all surpassing the base value of 0.5, and the Cronbach’s Alpha on the off chances that it is scrapped for particular items are all underneath the Cronbach’s Alpha value. These findings prove the necessity to develop additional investigations and gathering information on the chosen factors to prove the possibility to change working conditions, training details, and teamwork to improve employee satisfaction and motivation.

Frequency Analysis

Employee Loyalty Frequency Analysis

Question Response N=200(%) Mean score
I would be exceptionally upbeat to spend whatever remains of my vocation in this association because of the reward system 1. Highly Differ 4 (2%) 110.5
2. Differ 8 (4%)
3. Not Sure 30 (15%)
4. Concur 120 (60%)
5. Strongly Concur 38 (19%)
I consider the hotel’s matters as my own 1.Highly Differ 4 (2%) 114.2
2.Differ 10 (5%)
3.Not Sure 36 (18%)
4.Concur 102 (51%)
5.Strongly Concur 48 (24%)
I consider myself “a member of the family” of the hotel because of the relationship between members of staff, including the senior staff 1.Highly Differ 6 (3%) 114.66
2.Differ 14 (7.1%)
3.Not Sure 20 (10%)
4.Concur 122 (61%)
5.Strongly Concur 38 (19%)
Total 200 (100%) 113.12

More than the half of the respondents is acquainted with the employee loyalty factors. From the total score of the 3 items measuring employee loyalty, a large group of respondents has scored more than 111. The aggregate mean score was classified into three levels: low (below 50), medium (50-100), and high (100 and above). The aggregated mean value was 113.12, suggesting that respondents have high-level knowledge of factors associated with employee loyalty.

Employee Motivation Frequency Analysis

Question Response N=200(%) Mean score
The company applies a merit-based system to determine the top performers 1.Highly Differ 4 (2%) 98.51
2.Differ 12 (6%)
3.Not Sure 28 (14%)
4.Concur 128 (64%)
5.Strongly Concur 56 (28%)
The relationship between managers and employees is excellent 1.Highly Differ 6(3%) 97.32
2.Differ 16 (8%)
3.Not Sure 42 (21%)
4.Concur 118 (59%)
5.Strongly Concur 18 (9%)
The company’s remuneration and compensation framework meets both local and international standards. 1.Highly Differ 4 (2%) 101.44
2.Differ 8 (4%)
3.Not Sure 34 (17%)
4.Concur 140 (70%)
5.Strongly Concur 22 (11%)
The hotel’s work environment and conditions are favourable 1.Highly Differ 2 (1%) 111.13
2.Differ 6 (3%)
3.Not Sure 40 (20%)
4.Concur 128 (64%)
5.Strongly Concur 24 (12%)
Total 200 (100%) 102.10

The table demonstrates the general reaction on motivation among the participants. The mean value for all estimated items was between 97.32 and 111.2. The participants’ demeanour was at an elevated level. By examining the regularity, it could be observed that the majority of the participants are concerned about the motivational elements. The cumulative mean score is 102, showing an elevated level of shrewdness among the participants. The total scores for the items gauging the motivational factors were compressed, and it was established that the region between the limits was 15, with scores running from 97.32 and 111.2. Most of the participants have an aggregate score ranging between 97 and 111.2.

Employee Satisfaction Frequency Analysis

Question Response N=200(%) Mean score
I feel contented with my work 1.Highly Differ 4 (2%) 112.42
2.Differ 10 (5%)
3.Not Sure 45 (22.5%)
4.Concur 128 (64%)
5.Strongly Concur 13 (6.5%)
I feel contented with my relationship with the superiors 1.Highly Differ 4 (2%) 112.56
2.Differ 12 (6%)
3.Not Sure 34 (17%)
4.Concur 130 (65%)
5.Strongly Concur 20 (10%)
I feel very much appreciated at my place of work 1.Highly Differ 3 (1.5%) 111.85
2.Differ 7(3.5%)
3.Not Sure 23 (11.5%)
4.Concur 135 (67.5%)
5.Strongly Concur 32 (16%)
I feel very secure and at ease in my place of work 1.Highly Differ 2 (1%) 113.47
2.Differ 10 (5%)
3.Not Sure 22 (11%)
4.Concur 112 (56%)
5.Strongly Concur 27 (16%)
I am satisfied with the hotel’s remuneration and compensation framework 1.Highly Differ 5 (2.5%) 121.4
2.Differ 10 (5%)
3.Not Sure 30 (15%)
4.Concur 115 (57.5%)
5.Strongly Concur 40 (20%)
Total 200 (100%) 114.34

The table overhead provides a summary of the frequency breakdown for items gauging employee satisfaction. As per the outcome, over 50 percent of the participants confirmed or strongly confirmed that they “feel very much appreciated in the workplace”, they “feel very secure and at ease in their place of work”, and they “are satisfied with the hotel’s remuneration and compensation framework”. The aggregated mean value of the employee satisfaction score is 114.34, suggesting that employee satisfaction is at a high level. As it can be observed from the outcome, most of the scores ranged between 112.42 and 113, which similarly points to an elevated understanding of employee satisfaction factors.

Summary of Descriptive Statistics

Descriptive statistics utilising the measurements of central tendencies were calculated from the outcomes congregated from the surveys. The inquiry forms focused on the elements linked to employee devotion, motivation and satisfaction in Kempinski Shanghai to determine their relationship. The results prove the connection between employee motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty and explain that people could influence all these factors neglecting the necessity to follow the requirements established by their organisations.

The outcomes demonstrate that from the sample of 200 participants, the mean for satisfaction elements is 113.12 with a standard deviation of 14.9212. From this computation, it can be deduced that satisfaction factors have the greatest impact on the other factors. The computed arithmetic mean for motivation factors is lower than the computed arithmetic mean for loyalty factors. It is evident that loyalty factors have an impact on motivational factors. The Skewness and Kurtosis for the employee motivation and loyalty are both positive, demonstrating that the data are skewed towards the right and leptokurtic. However, the departure from the normal distribution is not extreme. The data for employee satisfaction are positive and negative. The departure from the normal distribution is not extreme.

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Kurtosis
Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error
Employee Loyalty Factors 200 4.00 120.00 113.12 14.3648 5.499 .969
Employee Motivation Factors 200 4.00 128.00 102.10 11.3729 3.552 .969
Employee Satisfaction Factors 200 2.00 135.00 114.34 14.9212 -.869 .969

Correlational Analysis

Relationship between Employee Motivation and Satisfaction

To scrutinise the correlation between worker motivation, satisfaction and devotion for luxury hotels in China, a scatter plot was initially made with a specific end goal. It helps to prove that there was no infringement on the presumptions of typicality, linearity and homoscedasticity among the data. As it can be observed from the table below, there is a solid, positive correlation between the elements of worker motivation, satisfaction and devotion, and the data is virtually distributed normally.

Relationship between Employee Motivation and Satisfaction

In the wake of getting a positive connection between worker motivation and satisfaction, a Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient was computed to break down the association between the two factors. The results are highlighted in the table underneath. The association value beneath 0.5 demonstrates low relationship; the relationship value somewhere around 0.4 and 0.6 shows an average level of relationship, while the value past 0.6 demonstrates an elevated relationship. There was a great positive connection between worker motivation and satisfaction with a relationship estimation of 0.752, which is noteworthy at 0.01 levels, demonstrating that more elevated amounts of representative motivation are associated with more elevated amounts of worker satisfaction.

Employee Motivation Employee Satisfaction
Employee
Motivation
Pearson Correlation 1 .752
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 200 200
Employee
Satisfaction
Pearson Correlation .752 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .
N 200 200

The results in Appendix 5 show that are significant correlations between employee satisfaction factors. General satisfaction (r = 0.662, p < 0.01), satisfaction with the relationship with the superiors (r = 0.598, p < 0.01), satisfaction with job security and working environment (r = 0.702, p < 0.01), satisfaction with other employees (r = 0.684, p < 0.01), and satisfaction with the hotels remuneration and compensation framework (r = 0.715, p < 0.01). Appendix 6 confirms that the most significant relationship subsists between gender and employee satisfaction (r = 0.68, p < 0.01). Moreover, there was a solid connection between the age of the participants and the satisfaction elements (r = 0.52, p < 0.01). There was likewise a noteworthy relationship between wage level and occupation fulfilment (r = 0.58, p < 0.01). Nonetheless, the link between academic achievement and work satisfaction was relatively low (r = 0.39, p < 0.01).

Relationship between Employee Motivation and Loyalty

To establish the link association between employee motivation and devotion, a scatter plot is used. The plot proves a solid association between such elements as motivation and loyalty.

Relationship between Employee Motivation and Loyalty

In the wake of getting a positive connection between motivation and satisfaction, a Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient was computed to break down the association between the two factors. The results are highlighted in the table underneath. There is a great positive connection between worker motivation and loyalty with a relationship estimation of 0.653, which is noteworthy at 0.01 levels, demonstrating that more elevated amounts of representative motivation are associated with more elevated amounts of worker devotion/commitment.

Employee Motivation Employee Loyalty
Employee
Motivation
Pearson Correlation 1 .653
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 200 200
Employee
Loyalty
Pearson Correlation .653 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .
N 200 200

The results in Appendix 7 show that are significant correlations between employee motivation and loyalty. Remuneration and compensation framework (r = 0.64, p < 0.01), the rapport with the bosses (r = 0.65, p < 0.01), professional stability and operating conditions (r = 0.65, p < 0.01), and remunerate framework (r = 0.65, p < 0.01. Appendix 8, demonstrates that the most critical connection exists between gender and worker inspiration (r = 0.72 p < 0.01). Additionally, there was a strong association between participants’ age and worker motivation (r = 0.56, p < 0.01). There was similarly a remarkable association between a salary and worker motivation (r = 0.55, p < 0.01). Regardless, the link between academic level and job satisfaction was instructive level, and occupation fulfilment was extremely feeble (r = 0.13, p < 0.01).

Relationship between Employee Satisfaction and Loyalty

To look at the relationship between satisfaction and devotion, a scatter plot develops a specific end goal to guarantee that there is no infringement of the presumptions of normality, linearity and homoscedasticity. There is a solid, positive relationship between the elements of worker satisfaction and devotion. The information is normally dispersed.

Relationship between Employee Motivation and Loyalty.

In the wake of getting a positive connection between employee motivation and satisfaction, a Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient is computed to break down the association between the two factors. The results are highlighted in the table below. There is a great positive connection between worker satisfaction and devotion, with a relationship estimation of 0.681, which is noteworthy at 0.01 level, demonstrating that more elevated amounts of representative satisfaction are associated with more elevated amounts of worker devotion/commitment.

Employee Motivation Employee Loyalty
Employee
Motivation
Pearson Correlation 1 .681
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 200 200
Employee
Loyalty
Pearson Correlation .681 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .
N 200 200

Regression Analysis

A regression analysis is a procedure for assessing the connections between various items in the study (Wagner 2009). This analysis is utilised to see how the transformation of an autonomous variable can influence the variation of an explanatory variable (Wagner 2009). There is a solid relationship between motivation, satisfaction and unwaveringness. With a specific end goal to establish how these factors impact each other and which one has the greatest effect, regression analysis is very useful.

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate Durbin-Watson
dimension0 1 0.76a 0.536 0.534 0.19211 1.947
a. Forecasters: (Constant), employee motivation and satisfaction
b. Explained Variable: employee loyalty

The Adjusted R Square is 0.534, which means that the autonomous variables of employee motivation and satisfaction can explain 53.4% of the variance of loyalty. The relation and mutual impact are proved in the study.

In the ANOVA model offered below, the components prove the necessity to focus on several components at the same time:

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 90.282 6 15.048 411.962 0.000a
Residual 5.916 163 0.038
Total 96.198 169
a Forecasters: (Constant), employee motivation and satisfaction
b. Response Variable: employee loyalty

By outlining the ANOVA chart, one might say that the independent variable of worker motivation and satisfaction can figure out the controlled variable of devotion at 0.01 level of significance by bearing in mind F=411.962. Appendix 11 pinpoints the after-effects of a regression analysis between the personal elements and the devotion aspects. As per the outcomes, the R value is 0.603. The R-Square value is 0.362 which demonstrates that 36.2 percent of the elements describe the explained variable (devotion). The F-measurement (5.296) is noteworthy at 0.01 level that proves the populace factors on a very basic level depict the 36.2 percent of the variance in loyalty.

A salary is the principal forecaster of loyalty as well as it has a beta coefficient estimation of – 0.3685 and is measurably critical at the 0.01 level of significance. Besides, gender, age, and scholarly accomplishment are quantifiably critical at 0.05. The negative estimation of the coefficient demonstrates that workers with higher wage are more devoted to the association. Likewise, the beta coefficient shows a high level of commitment among workers who have worked in the hotel for a considerable period of time.

Un-Standardised Coefficients Standardised Coefficients T Sig. Collinearity Stat
B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF
(Constant) -0.288 0.101
.853
0.005
Employee Motivation 0.3365 0.037 0.335 3.491 0.000 0.327 2.043
Employee Satisfaction 0.313 0.042 0.306 2.807 0.006 0.281 3.562
a. Response Variable: Loyalty

The table provides a summary of the regression outcomes. In line with the outcomes, there is no concern for collinearity among the independent variables as the VIF values for all the explained variables are underneath the value of 10, and the tolerance estimates are surpassing 0.1. It was also established that worker motivation and satisfaction could expressively influence devotion with noteworthy values less than 0.05. To be specific, employee motivation has a huge influence on devotion with a uniform coefficient value of 0.335.

In general, the findings prove the required portion of a relationship between employee motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty. Still, not much attention is paid to the fact how these factors could be changed and improved in order to promote a successful completion of work. Therefore, certain recommendations and suggestions have to be offered on the basis of the findings discussed in this chapter.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Introduction

This chapter displays the synopsis of the results, conclusions, and recommendations that could be offered regarding the achievements and discoveries made.

Synopsis of the Results

The principal purpose of this research was to explore the link between motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty among the employees of luxury hotels in China. It was fulfilled by assembling and examining the information obtained from several statistical tools and methods. In keeping up with the objectives, the accompanying suppositions were verified. The study established that personal elements have a significant effect on employee motivation, satisfaction and devotion. Moreover, it established a strong relationship between employee motivation, satisfaction and loyalty for a luxury hotel in China. Therefore, it is possible to say that if an employer or any other leader of a hotel wants to improve the level of employee satisfaction or loyalty, it is enough to promote certain improvements in motivation. The relation between these factors is in direct ratio to each other. In other words, if employees are motivated by such factors as the possibility of personal growth or financially beneficial achievements, they stay loyal and succeed in teamwork, communication, and participation in different activities of hotels.

Conclusion

Taking into consideration the achievements made, the following conclusions could be offered. The value esteemed by most employees can be presented by luxury hotels such Kempinski Shanghai. The research has found that luxury inns are highly likely to create a sentiment of devotion in comparison to small organisations in the hotel business. In the study, most employees have communicated a great level of dependability and duty in hotels. This sentiment of steadfastness was supported by the societal and discrete setting in which the employees saw their places of work. The majority of the participants felt like the members of the inn’s family. This feeling is stirred by the hotels’ human asset administrative technique.

This technique is fundamentally common in organisations that have embraced satisfaction-related inspiration frameworks. Representative inspiration can be clarified as the extent of commitment, life, and creativity that employees identify with their own occupations. In fact, an assortment of differing recommendations and methods for worker inspiration has appeared, reaching out from the expanded inclusion of fiscal motivating forces and employee empowerment. For luxury hotels, worker motivation can be tested. However, entrepreneurs ought to know about such downsides. The issues associated with unmotivated representatives incorporate crumbling confidence, less satisfaction, and far-reaching discouragement.

Employee motivation and job satisfaction are the basics of loyalty in the hotel industry. The study established that the individual facets of the employees in terms of age, sexual orientation, and a salary have a positive relationship with employee motivation, satisfaction and devotion. The correlation between employee commitment and sexual orientation, age, education level and income are 0.720, 0.560, 0.132, and 0.552. The correlation between employee satisfaction and sexual orientation, age, education level and income are 0.68, 0.52, 0.39 and 0.58. The study also found out that in numerous instances, workers that have been employed in a luxury hotel for a considerably long time tend to have a low opinion of their organisations. As a result, their level of loyalty and commitment to their organisations is relatively low. In addition, employees, who have been in the same position for a long period of time, have a negative attitude towards the organisation regarding the fact that they have never been promoted.

This research has also disclosed that incentives are fundamental to employee satisfaction in the work environment. The more incentives an employee gets, the more satisfied with an organisation they become. Motivation is essential in sustaining sound employee demeanour. An organisation that does not inspire its workers is destined to perform poorly on the market. Existing and prospective workers are always lured by incentives and satisfaction elements. Furthermore, motivation assists in minimising the level of staff turnover.

Recommendations

Regarding the conclusions of the study, the need to spur representatives to enhance their occupation fulfilment and work duty/reliability can be underlined. For a luxury hotel to be effective, it is essential that the necessities of both the hotel and the workers are fulfilled. The administration ought to build up a cordial relationship with the workers and propel the hotel forward. Workers should follow a set of rules, standards, and directives of the hotel. However, workers envision positive work environment with reference to admirable compensation, good relations, professional stability and adequate consideration from directors. Employees and employers have to respect each other notwithstanding the highly contrasting occupation pact.

The necessities and expectations of both parties in businesses may vary from one organisation to another. Therefore, it is very important for deluxe hotel owners to consider the insight of workers, develop a superior approach to motivating them, and consider the contributions that could be offered to a hotel and the hotel industry as a whole. Employee motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty in luxury hotels are essential than in any other service sectors due to their close relation and possible impact on each other. Even though employees are highly trained and experienced professionals, employee loyalty is directly linked to such factors as motivation and satisfaction due to the connection of workers’ moods with the quality of services and their delivery to customers.

Appendices

Appendix 1: Questionnaire

This is an academic study and your participation is voluntary. Information provided will be confidential and individual data will be reported. THANK

YOU! ————————————————————————————————————

Part 1 Demographic Characteristics of Respondents

Characteristics
1. Gender
  1. Male
  2. Female

2. What is your age Group?

  1. 18-25
  2. 26-35
  3. 36-45
  4. 46-55
  5. Above 55

3. What is your highest level of education?

  1. High school or below
  2. Diploma
  3. Bachelor degree
  4. Postgraduate degree or above

4. How many years have you been employed?

  1. Less than 4 years
  2. 4-8 years
  3. 8-12 years
  4. More than 12 years

5. What is your average monthly income?

  1. <2000
  2. 2000-5000
  3. 5000-10000
  4. 10000-15000
  5. >15000

Part 1 Employee Motivation Factors

Please respond by indicating the degree to which you agree with the following statements.
6. The company applies a merit-based system to determine the top performers
Highly Concur [ ] Concur [ ] Not Sure [ ] Differ [ ] Highly Differ [ ]
7. The company’s remuneration and compensation system meets both local and international
standards.
Highly Concur [ ] Concur [ ] Not Sure [ ] Differ [ ] Highly Differ [ ]
1 2 3 4 5

8. The relationship between managers and employees is excellent

Highly Concur [ ] Concur [ ] Not Sure [ ] Differ [ ] Highly Differ [ ]

9. The hotel’s working environment and conditions are favourable

Highly Concur [ ] Concur [ ] Not Sure [ ] Differ [ ] Highly Differ [ ]

Part 1 Employee Satisfaction Factors

Please respond by indicating the degree to which you agree with the following statements.
10. I am satisfied with my work
Highly Concur [ ] Concur [ ] Not Sure [ ] Differ [ ] Highly Differ [ ]
11. I am satisfied with my relationship with the superiors
Highly Concur [ ] Concur [ ] Not Sure [ ] Differ [ ] Highly Differ [ ]
12. I feel very much appreciated at my place of work
Highly Concur [ ] Concur [ ] Not Sure [ ] Differ [ ] Highly Differ [ ]
13. I feel very secure and at ease in my place of work
Highly Concur [ ] Concur [ ] Not Sure [ ] Differ [ ] Highly Differ [ ]
1.4 I am satisfied with the salary/wages offered by the hotel
15. I am satisfied with the hotels remuneration and compensation system
Highly Concur [ ] Concur [ ] Not Sure [ ] Differ [ ] Highly Differ [ ]

Part 1 Employee Loyalty Factors

Please respond by indicating the degree to which you agree with the following statements.
15. I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career in the organisation because of its reward system
Highly Concur [ ] Concur [ ] Not Sure [ ] Differ [ ] Highly Differ [ ]
16. I really feel as if this Hotel’s problems are my own
Highly Concur [ ] Concur [ ] Not Sure [ ] Differ [ ] Highly Differ [ ]
17. I do feel like “a member of the family” at this hotel because of the relationship between members of staff, including senior staff
Highly Concur [ ] Concur [ ] Not Sure [ ] Differ [ ] Highly Differ [ ]

Appendix 2: Descriptive Statistics for Employee Satisfaction Factors

N Mean Std. Deviation Kurtosis
Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error
I am satisfied with my work 200 112.4243 14.3048 5.499 .969
I am satisfied with my relationship with the superiors
I feel very much appreciated
I feel very secure and at ease in my place of work
I am satisfied with the hotel’s remuneration and compensation framework
200

200
200

200

112.4720

111.8539
113.4785

121.4812

14.9229

14.4519
13.9801

14.0633

3.552

4.288
5.228

4.221

.969

.969
.969

.969

Valid N (listwise) 200

Appendix 3: Descriptive Statistics for Employee Motivation Factors

N Mean Std. Deviation Kurtosis
Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error
The company applies a merit-based system to determine the top performance 200 112.4243 11.1481 5.499 .969
The relationship between managers and employees is excellent
The hotel’s working conditions are favourable
200

200

101.4401

111.1384

9.8391

10.4592

5.213

4.913

.969

.969

Valid N (listwise) 200

Appendix 4: Descriptive Statistics for Employee Loyalty Factors

N Mean Std. Deviation Kurtosis
Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error
I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career in the organisation because of its reward system 200 110.5321 14.2427 5.114 .969
I really feel as if the hotel’s problem are my own
I don’t feel like a member of the hotel’s family because of the relationship between members of the staff, including senior members
200
200
114.0142
114.6601
13.9355
14.0212
5.399
5.010
.969
.969
Valid N (listwise) 200

Appendix 5: Pearson Correlation Matrix for Employee Satisfaction Factors and Loyalty

Employee satisfaction
Pearson correlation Sig (2-tailed)
I am satisfied with my work 0.662 0.395
I am satisfied with my relationship with the superiors 0.598 0.000**
I feel very much appreciated at my place of work 0.684 0.043*
I feel very secure and at ease in my place of work 0.702 0.000**
I am satisfied with the hotel’s remuneration and compensation framework 0.715 0.003**

NOTE:

  1. * = p<0.05
  2. ** = p<0.01

Appendix 6: Pearson Correlation between Employee Satisfaction and Biographical Variables

Employee satisfaction
Sex 0.68**
Age 0.52**
Education level 0.39*
Income 0.58**

NOTE:

  1. * = p<0.05
  2. ** = p<0.01

Appendix 7: Pearson Correlation Matrix for Employee Motivation Factors and Loyalty

Employee motivation
Pearson Correlation Sig (2-tailed)
The company applies a merit-based system to determine the top performers 0.649 0.022*
The relationship between managers and employees is excellent 0.651 0.002**
The company has a fair remuneration and compensation framework 0.655 0.000**
The hotel’s working environment and conditions are favourable 0.653 0.000**

NOTE:

  1. * = p<0.05
  2. ** = p<0.01

Appendix 8: Pearson Correlation between Employee Motivation and Biographical Variables

Employee commitment
Pearson correlation Sig (2-tailed)
Sex 0.720 0.00**
Age 0.560 0.00**
Education level 0.132 0.05
Income 0.552 0.00**

NOTE:

  1. * = p<0.05
  2. ** = p<0.01

Appendix 9: Pearson Correlation Matrix for Employee Loyalty Factors

Employee loyalty
Pearson correlation Sig (2-tailed)
I really feel as if this Hotel’s problems are my own 0.679 0.000**
I do feel like “a member of the family” at this hotel because of the relationship between members of staff, including senior staff 0.681 0.043*
I feel very secure and at ease in my place of work 0.684 0.000**

NOTE:

  1. * = p<0.05
  2. ** = p<0.01

Appendix 10: Multiple Regression Results: Loyalty and Biographical Factors

Multiple R 0.603
R Square 0.362
Adjusted R Square 0.332
Standard Error 12.962
F 5.294
Sig F 0.00**
Variable Beta T Sig T
Age -0.2163 -0.2671 0.03968*
Sex -0.1807 -1.1093 0.0107*
Education level -0.1536 -1.2952 0.0702
Income -0.3685 -3.4021 0.0228*

NOTE:

  1. * = p<0.05
  2. ** = p<0.01

Appendix 11: ANOVA Analysis Results: Loyalty and Biographical Factors

ANOVA-Analysis of Variance
Alpha0.05 F-table3.874
ANOVA Table
Sources SS df MS F-stat P-value
Between 137 4 68.6 5.296 0.04273
Error 192.6 13 18.2
Total Error 330.4 17

Reference List

Abbas, S, Premi, V & Jyoti, A 2010, ‘Job satisfaction in management faculties of a Metropolitan and proximate area: a study on private colleges’, International Journal of Research in Commerce and Management, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 11-22.

Abbas, W & Asghar, I 2010, ‘The role of leadership in organizational change: relating the successful organizational change to visionary and innovative leadership’, Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 1-49.

Abdulazis, H, Goldman, M & Olsen, N 2007, ‘Facets of type a personality and pay increase among the employees of fast food restaurant’, Hospitality Management, vol. 26, pp. 754-758.

Abu, R 2011, ‘Factors affecting job satisfaction of the employees in travel and tourism companies in Amman’, International Bulletin of Business Administration, vol. 12, pp. 78-102.

Aksu, A & Aktas, A 2006, ‘Job satisfaction of managers in tourism: cases in the Antalya region of Turkey’, Managerial Auditing Journal, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 479-488.

Al-Zawahreh, A & Al-Madi, F 2012, ‘The utility of equity theory in enhancing organizational effectiveness’, European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Sciences, vol. 46, pp. 158-170.

Anbu, J & Mavuso, M 2012, ‘Old wine in new wine skin: marketing library services through SMS-based alert services’, Library Hi Tech, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 310-320.

Ankli, R & Palliam, R 2012, ‘Enabling a motivated workforce: exploring the sources of motivation. Development and Learning in Organizations, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 7-10.

Armitage, A & Keeble-Ramsay, D 2009, ‘The Rapid Structured Literature Review As a Research Strategy,’ US-China Education Review, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 1-36.

Aquinas, P 2006, Organizational behaviour: concepts realities applications and challenges, Excel Books, New Delhi.

Ashtiani, C, Cullen, G, Davis, P, Greenwald, J, Hardigan, P, Eladio, K & Zimmerman, D 2011, Plug in electric vehicles: a practical plan for progress, School of Public and Environmental Affairs at Indiana University, Indiana.

Aswathappa K 2005, Human resource and personnel management, Tata McGraw-Hill Education, New Delhi.

Avery, C 2006, Understanding leadership, Sage Publications, London.

Avolio, B, Walumbwa, F & Weber, J 2009, ‘Leadership: current theories, research, and future directions’, Annual Review of Psychology, vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 421-449.

Bakhare, S 2011, ‘The impact of employee satisfaction on customer delight, service quality and profitability of the firm’, International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 178-179.

Ballantyne, R, Packer, J & Axelsen, M 2009, ‘Trends in tourism research’, Annals of Tourism Research, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 149-152.

Bianchi, M 2012, ‘Financial development, entrepreneurship, and job satisfaction’, Review of Economics and Statistics, vol. 94, no. 1, pp. 273-286.

Blanchard, K & Cathy, T 2012, The generosity factor: discover the joy of giving your time, talent, and treasure, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Bratton, J & Gold, J 2007, Human resource management: theory and practice, 4th edn, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.

Britton, B, Samantha, J, Chadwick, T & Terry, W 2009, ‘Rewards of work’, Ivey Business Journal, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 27-28.

Brotherton, B 2006, International hospitality industry: structure, characteristics and issues, Butterworth-Heinemann, New York.

Cano, J & Castillo, J 2008, ‘Factors explaining job satisfaction among faculty’, Journal of Agricultural Education, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 65-74.

Cetin, I 2013, ‘Motivation and its impact on labour productivity at hotel business: a conceptual study’, International Journal of New Trends in Arts, Sports & Science Education, vol. 2, no. 1, p. 78.

Chan, Y 2008, ‘Choice process of luxury hotels in China’, Journal of Hospitality & Leisure Marketing, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 5-21.

Coget, J 2011, ‘Does managerial motivation spill over to subordinates?’, Academy of Management Perspectives, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 84-85.

Danish, R & Usman, A 2010, ‘Impact of reward and recognition on job satisfaction and motivation: an empirical study from Pakistan’, International Journal of Business and Management, vol. 5, no. 2, p. 159-167.

Denzin, N 2012, ‘Triangulation 2.0’, Journal of Mixed Methods Research, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 80-88.

Dittmer, P & Griffin, G 2010, Dimensions of the hospitality industry – an introduction, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.

Feinstein, AH & Vondrasek, D 2011, ‘A study of relationships between job satisfaction and organizational commitment among restaurant employees’, Journal of Hospitality, Tourism, and Leisure Science, vol. 1, pp. 1-20.

Fisher, R, McPhail, R & Menghetti, G 2010, ‘Linking employee attitudes and behaviours with business performance: a comparative analysis of hotels in Mexico and

China’, International Journal of Hospitality Management, vol. 29, pp. 397-404.

Griffin, R & Moorhead, G 2011, Organizational behavior, Cengage Learning, New York.

Hill, J 2008, Principles of Management, McGraw Hill, New York.

Holden, J & Overmier, J 2014, ‘Performance under differential outcomes: contributions of reward-specific expectancies’, Learning and Motivation, vol. 45, pp. 1-14.

Hossain, K 2015, ‘Essential tips and tactics of motivation’, Journal of Management, Social Science and Humanities, vol. 1, pp. 1-7.

Hoq, Z & Amin, M 2010, ‘The role of customer satisfaction to enhance customer loyalty’, African Journal of Business Management, vol. 4, no. 12, pp. 2385-2392.

Jamali, D 2007, ‘A study of customer satisfaction in the context of a public private partnership’, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 370-385.

Klidas, A, van den Berg, P & Wilderom, C 2007, ‘Managing employee empowerment in luxury hotels in Europe’, International Journal of Service Industry Management, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 70-88.

Kinicki, R 2009, Organizational behavior, Tata McGraw-Hill Education, Guragaon.

Kolomiet, A 2010, Seasonality in hotel employment: case: Grecotel Kos Imperial Thalasso, BA thesis, Saimaa University of Applied Sciences.

Kozak, A 2014, ‘Relationship between job satisfaction and perception of manager’s Behaviour’, Journal for Perspectives of Economic Political and Social Integration, vol. 20, no. 1-2, pp. 37-52.

Kumar, R 2006, Research methodology-a step-by-step guide for beginners, Pearson Education, Singapore.

Lam, T, Pine, R & Baum, T 2007, ‘Subjective norms: effectives on job satisfaction’, Annals of Tourism Research, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 160-177.

Lawler, E, Porter, L & Vroom, V 2009, Motivation and management Vroom’s expectancy theory, Cengage Learning, New York.

Lee, C & Lee, WJ 2012, ‘Analysis of the relationship between the hospitality workforces and job satisfaction factors according to age, gender, native language and racial ethnicity’, Journal of Hospitality, vol. 2, pp. 1-6.

Lowry, D, Simon, A & Kimberley, N 2008, ‘Toward improved employment relations practices of casual employees in the New South Wales registered clubs industry’, Human Resource Development Quarterly, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 53-70.

Lovvorn, A & Chen, J 2011, ‘Developing a global mind-set: the relationship between an international assignment and cultural intelligence’, International Journal of Business and Social Science, vol. 2, no. 9, pp. 275-282.

Lundberg, C, Gudmundson, A & Andersson, T 2009, ‘Herzberg’s two-factor theory of work motivation tested empirically on seasonal workers in hospitality and tourism’, Tourism Management, vol. 30, pp. 890–899.

Lussier, R 2006, Human relations in organization, McGraw- Hill Irwin, New York.

Malhotra, K & Birks, D 2012, Marketing research: an applied approach, Prentice Hall, New York.

Maxwell, G & Steele, G 2008, ‘Organizational commitment: a study of managers in hotels’, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, vol. 15, no. 7, pp. 362-369.

Meng, J & Elliott, K 2008, ‘Predictors of relationship quality for luxury restaurants’, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 509-515.

Miller, W 2013, Expectancy theory overview, Pearson, Harlow.

Muller, C 2011 Employee motivation and incentives at Apple Inc: incentives really help to motivate employees? GRIN, New York.

Narteh, B, Agbemabiese, G, Kodua, P & Braimah, M 2013, ‘Relationship marketing and customer loyalty: Evidence from the Ghanaian luxury hotel industry’, Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 407-436.

Nickson, D 2009, Human resource management for the hospitality and tourism industries, Elsevier, Oxford.

Noble, H & Smith, J 2015, ‘Issues of validity and reliability in qualitative research’, Evidence Based Nursing, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 34-35.

Pinto, E 2011, ‘The influence of wage on motivation and satisfaction’, The International Business & Economics Research Journal, vol. 10, no. 9, pp. 81-91.

Pride, W, Hughes, J & Kapoor, J 2011, Business, Cengage Learning, New York.

Putra, E, Cho, S & Liu, J 2015, ‘Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation on work engagement in the hospitality industry: test of motivation crowding theory’, Tourism and Hospitality Research, vol. 0, no. 0, pp.1-14.

Ramlall, S 2007, ‘A review of employee motivation theories and their implications for employee retention within organizations’, Journal of American Academy of Business, vol. 5, no. 1/2, pp. 52-63.

Reynolds, K & Arnold, M 2009, ‘Customer loyalty to the salesperson and the store: examining relationship customers in an upscale retail context’, Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 89-98.

Salanova, A & Kirmanen, S 2010, Employee satisfaction and work motivation, Mikkeli University of Applied Sciences, Southern Savonia, Finland.

Saunders, M, Lewis, P & Thornhill, A 2007, Research methods for business students, 4 edn, Prentice Hall, London.

Kempinski Shanghai 2016, China’s leading travel company, Web.

Singh, K 2007, Quantitative social research methods, SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks.

Singh, S K & Tiwari, V 2011, ‘Relationship between motivation and job satisfaction of the white collar employees’, Management Insight, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 31- 33.

Sohrabi, B, RaeesiVanani, I, Tahmasebipurb, K &Fazli, S 2012, ‘An exploratory analysis of hotel selection factors: a comprehensive survey of Tehran hotels’, International Journal of Hospitality Management, vol. 31, pp. 96–106.

Stecher, M & Rosse, J 2007, ‘Understanding reactions to workplace injustice through process theories of motivation: a teaching module and simulation’, Journal of Management Education, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 781-781.

Strizhova, E & Gusev, A 2013, ‘Motivational task: methodology and method of work motivation diagnostics’, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 86, pp. 551-556.

Suh, E, West, J & Shin, J 2012, ‘Important competency requirements for managers in the hospitality industry’, Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 101-112.

Yew, LT 2008, ‘Job satisfaction and affective commitment: a study of employees in the tourism industry in Sarawak, Malaysia’, Sunway Academic Journal, vol. 4, pp.27-54.

Tian, X & Pu, Y 2008, ‘An artificial neural network approach to hotel employee satisfaction: the case of China’, Social Behaviour and Personality, vol. 36, pp. 467-482.

Tufail, M, Iqbal, A & Lodhi, R 2015, ‘Employee loyalty and organizational commitment in Pakistani organization’, Global Journal of Human Resource Management, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1-11.

Tutuncu, O & Kucukusta, D 2006, ‘Relationship between job satisfaction and business excellence: empirical evidence from hospital nursing departments’, Journal of Comparative International Management, vol. 9, no. 2. p. 2-12.

Wagner, E 2009, Using SPSS for social statistics and research methods, SAGE Publications Ltd, London.

Walls, A, Okumus, F & Wang YC 2011, ‘Understanding the consumer experience: an exploratory study of luxury hotels’, Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 166-197.

Wentland, DM 2009, Organizational performance in a Nutshell, IAP, New York.

Yelkur, R 2011, ‘Customer satisfaction and service marketing mix’, Journal of professional services marketing, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 105-115.

Zendehdel, HM 2013, ‘Contemporary situation and problems in tourism industry of Islamic Republic of Iran’, International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, vol. 3, no. 8, pp. 299-302.

This dissertation on Chinese Luxury Hotels’ Employee Motivation was written and submitted by your fellow student. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly.

Need a custom Dissertation sample written from scratch by
professional specifically for you?

Writer online avatar
Writer online avatar
Writer online avatar
Writer online avatar
Writer online avatar
Writer online avatar
Writer online avatar
Writer online avatar
Writer online avatar
Writer online avatar
Writer online avatar
Writer online avatar

301 certified writers online

GET WRITING HELP
Cite This paper

Select a referencing style:

Reference

IvyPanda. (2020, August 14). Chinese Luxury Hotels' Employee Motivation. Retrieved from https://ivypanda.com/essays/chinese-luxury-hotels-employee-motivation/

Work Cited

"Chinese Luxury Hotels' Employee Motivation." IvyPanda, 14 Aug. 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/chinese-luxury-hotels-employee-motivation/.

1. IvyPanda. "Chinese Luxury Hotels' Employee Motivation." August 14, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/chinese-luxury-hotels-employee-motivation/.


Bibliography


IvyPanda. "Chinese Luxury Hotels' Employee Motivation." August 14, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/chinese-luxury-hotels-employee-motivation/.

References

IvyPanda. 2020. "Chinese Luxury Hotels' Employee Motivation." August 14, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/chinese-luxury-hotels-employee-motivation/.

References

IvyPanda. (2020) 'Chinese Luxury Hotels' Employee Motivation'. 14 August.

More related papers