JOB SATISFACTION, ENGAGEMENT AND EMPLOYEE BEHAVIOURAL LOYALTY IN THE HOTEL SECTOR IN WESTERN UGANDA

Background of the study

Employees are a vital resource for any organization (Shweta et al., 2016) and can be a source of competitive advantage (Abugre, 2011). Moreover, for a labour intensive hospitality industry, service delivery depends on people so much (Khuong and Tien, 2013). Indeed, positive employee behavior, attitude such as commitment can result into improved productivity (Kembabazi, 2010), greater efficiency (Geeta and Pandey, 2011), and a high-quality service (Vijit, 2011). Unfortunately, employee behavior remains a big challenge in the hotel sector, for example, the sector experiences higher employee turnover rates compared to other sectors (Shweta et al., 2016). A study carried out by Burn and Thompson (2013), shows that turnover rates were the highest in Mexico (41%), the Netherlands (39%) and the United States (34%). Extended literature indicates that employees with three- to five-years tenure with employers were the most susceptible to turnover (Khuong and Tien, 2013; Matip, 2015). 

In Uganda, the rate at which employees are switching jobs is not different. The average turnover rate is 30.3% in the hospitality industry for the period December 2015 to November 2016, yet high turnover rates can pose as a risk to the hospitality industry due to the human capital loss in the form of skills, training, and knowledge (Human Resource Managers Association of Uganda, HRMAU, 2016). Secondary research by Next Generation Consulting shows that today’s young talent rotates jobs every 18-36 months. Furthermore, both college degrees and employers don’t guarantee job anymore (Dailey and Kirk, 2014). In a developing country like Uganda, Labor Law does not prohibit hiring fixed term contract workers for tasks of permanent nature. There is no regulation of fixed term contracts (their maximum duration or renewals) in the Employment Act. The Employment regulations of 2011 also do not regulate the use of fixed term contracts. They do however contain provisions on specific categories of temporary employees, namely casual employee, piece work employees and task work employees (Employment Regulations, 2011).

Drawing from the above and on the existing literature, it’s evident that there are a number of factors that influence behavourial loyalty (Matip, 2015). These factors may include but not limited to job satisfaction and engagement. This study focuses on job satisfaction and engagement as the possible determinants of behavioural loyalty. This is because these two concepts have remained a gleaning gap in the sector. Most of the employees appear to work for survival not because they are committed, they seem to loose interest and they are not engaged hence high levels of exit (Akbar et al., 2011). The current study hypotheses that if employees are satisfied with their job and are fully engaged then they can stay and become loyal to the organization. Unfortunately, it appears that a few studies have attempted to investigate the relationship between job satisfaction, engagement and employee behavioural loyalty in the hotel sector in a developing country such as Uganda. The current study attempts to fill on this gap.

2.0 Statement of the problem

The benefits of employee loyalty are too numerous to be used listed in this work (see Emerson, 2013). Indeed any firm or organization would try as much as possible to retain her employees. However, employee behavioural loyalty seems to be questionable especially in the hotel sector, more so in developing countries such as Uganda (Kyeyune, 2014). This is reflected by high levels of exit, where may industry employees are now opting for other countries such as Arab Emirates, Qatar, Abudabi and other western countries and not necessary for hotel jobs. This could be attributed to low levels of job satisfaction and engagement in Uganda. This study attempts to investigate the link between job satisfaction, engagement and employee behavioural loyalty in the hotel sector in Western Uganda

3.0 Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the study is to examine the relationship between job satisfaction, engagement and employee behavioural loyalty in the hotel sector in Western Uganda.

4.0 Specific Objectives

The study will be guided by the following objectives: 

1. To examine the relationship between job satisfaction and engagement among employees in the hotel sector in Western Uganda.
2. To examine the relationship between job satisfaction and employee behavioural loyalty in the hotel sector in Western Uganda.
3. To examine the relationship between engagement and employee behavioural loyalty in the hotel sector in Western Uganda.

5.0 Research Questions

The study will be guided by the following questions;

1. Is there a relationship between job satisfaction and engagement among employees in the hotel sector in Western Uganda?
2. Is there a relationship between job satisfaction and employee behavioural loyalty in the hotel sector in Western Uganda?
3. Is there a relationship between engagement and employee behavioural loyalty in the hotel sector in Western Uganda?

6.0 Scope of Study

6.1. Content Scope

The study will focus on examining the relationship between job satisfaction, engagement and employee behavioural loyalty among employees in the hotel sector in Uganda. Major emphasis will be put on examining the relationship between job satisfaction and, job satisfaction and behavioural loyalty and engagement and behavioural loyalty in the hotel sector in Uganda.

6.2. Geographical Scope

It will be carried out in hotels registered under Uganda Hotel Owner’s Association in Western Uganda. Main focus will be put in Mbarara district and Kabale district. This is because they have many hotels that are registered under Uganda Hotel Owner’s Association.

6.3 Time Scope

The study will consider a period (2000-2017) as a body of literature to be reviewed and it will also consider a period (2012-2016) to get information from the hotels.

7.0 Significance of Study

Given changing employee demographics and attitudes, supply-demand imbalances in the workforce, as well as ever-growing demand for hospitality businesses, it is increasingly obvious that a new understanding of employee values, attitudes, and behaviors is needed if hospitality organizations are to sustain a competitive advantage through service. Examining the relationship job satisfaction, engagement and behavioural loyalty will advance the understanding of why an employee quits or maintains organizations. 

It will help hotel managers and human resource practitioners come to term with behavioural loyalty strategies. The hospitality industry is historically identified with poor employment and underdeveloped human resource practices, which largely focus on cost control, neglecting behavioural loyalty (Zheng, 2009). The study will also highlight other human resource related issues in the hospitality industry, in particular, in Uganda that need further investigation.

8.0. Conceptual Framework  

This section proposes a conceptual framework within which the concept, behavioural loyalty is treated in this work. It is arrived at basing on the System’s theory Input-Output model advanced by Ludwig Von Bertalanffy in 1956. The selection of the model is based on the belief that, the quality of input invariably affects quality of output in this case behavioural loyalty (Acato 2006).

Figure 1.1 showing the conceptual framework for this study

Independent variable Dependent variable         

The conceptual framework consists of three major variables: job satisfaction, engagement and employee behavioural loyalty. Job satisfaction and engagement are both used as independent variables. Despite the fact that engagement may mediate the relationship between job satisfaction and behavioural loyalty the study does not test for this mediation. 

Description of the variables

Job satisfaction

Job satisfaction is the feelings of the employees in relation with their jobs and the job components such as the working environment, working conditions, equitable rewards, and communication with the colleagues (Glisson and Durick, 1988). 

There are there three attitude’s facets of job satisfaction: intrinsic job satisfaction, extrinsic job satisfaction, and general job satisfaction (Gunlu, Aksarayli, & Perçin, 2010). Intrinsic job satisfaction is derived from factors such as ability utilization, activity, achievement, authority, independence, moral values, responsibility, security, creativity, social service, social status, and variety.  While the key factors for extrinsic job satisfaction are as a result of advancement, company policy, compensation, recognition, supervision-human relations, and supervision-technical. General job satisfaction facet is formed from two more factors such as working conditions and co-workers in addition to intrinsic and extrinsic factors (Feinstein & Vondrasek, 2001). In this study job satisfaction is a pleasurable emotional state that results from the evaluation of one’s job.

Engagement

Kahn (1990) defines personal engagement as “the harnessing of organization members’ selves to their work roles; in engagement, people employ and express themselves physically, cognitively, and emotionally during role performances.” Thus, according to Kahn (1990, 1992), engagement means to be psychologically present when occupying and performing an organizational role.

Rothbard (2001) also defines engagement as psychological presence but goes further to state that it involves two critical components: attention and absorption.

According to Maslach et al. (2001), engagement is characterized by energy, involvement, and efficacy, the direct opposite of the three burnout dimensions of exhaustion, cynicism, and inefficacy. Research on burnout and engagement has found that the core dimensions of burnout (exhaustion and cynicism) and engagement (vigor and dedication) are opposites of each other (Gonzalez-Roma et al., 2006).

Schaufeli et al. (2002) define engagement “as a positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption.” They further state that engagement is not a momentary and specific state, but rather, it is “a more persistent and pervasive affective-cognitive state that is not focused on any particular object, event, individual, or behavior”.

Behavioural loyalty

Bloemer and Odekerken-Schroder (2006) operationalized employee behavioural loyalty using customer behavoural loyalty such as word of mouth, intention to stay, benefit insensitivity. They related positive word of mouth to an employee’s willingness to say positive things about the employer and the readiness to recommend the employer to other potential employees, purchase intentions in a customer to an employee’s willingness to remain in an organization (i.e. stay intentions) and price insensitivity to an employee’s tendency to be indifferent with respect to the remuneration offered by alternative employers.

LITERATURE REVIEW

9.0 Introduction

The chapter will present previously conducted research and scholarly work under the same area of investigation. The literature is cited from journals, books, newspapers, websites and reports.

9.1. Theoretical review 

The theory adapted for this study is derived from the System’s theory input-output model developed by Ludwig Von Bertalanffy in 1956. The theory, according to Koontz and Weihrich (1988), postulates that an organized enterprise does not exist in a vacuum; it is dependent on its environment in which it is established. They add that the inputs from the environment are received by the organization, which then transforms them into outputs. 

Robbins (1980), argued that organizations were increasingly described as absorbers, processors and generators and that the organizational system could be envisioned as made up of several interdependent factors. System advocates, according to Robbins (1980) have recognized that a change in any factor such as job satisfaction has an impact on all other organizational or subsystem components. Thus the inputs, the processors and the generators should function well in order to achieve the desired outcome. Saleemi (1997), in agreement with Robbins (1980) argued that all systems must work in harmony in order to achieve the overall goals. Input-output model (system theory) thus, it is assumed that satisfied employees will perform well if their engagement and behavioural loyalty are all good which may not always be the case and this is the shortcoming of this theory. According to Oso and Onen (2005), the interrelationships among parts of a system have to be understood by all parties involved. 

9.2. Job satisfaction and engagement 

Jain and Singh (2013) stated that employee attitudes reflect the values of the company. Employee satisfaction is extremely important especially in the areas of sales and services as they represent the company to employees. Khare and Pandey (2012) studied the impact of job satisfaction and organisational commitment and their impact on behavioural loyalty and found out that there was an impact of Job satisfaction and organisational commitment on behavioural loyalty. 

In addition, Hassan et al (2013) found that compensation was the most important factor for job satisfaction whereas employee empowerment was also a significant factor for behavioural loyalty. Whereas, Hooi Lai Wan (2013) in his study, revealed that there existed no correlation between behavioural loyalty and the extent of Japanese style of Human Resource Management policies used at workplace. 

Kumari and Pandey (2011) implied that job performance was comparatively high when positive beliefs and affective experiences are salient and thus predominate at a certain point in time but that their performance may be comparatively low at other times when negative beliefs and affective experiences are salient and predominate. 

Furthermore, Kabir and Parveen (2011) tested the factors affecting job satisfaction and suggested that the managers should focus on various factors that affect and enhance the employee job satisfaction for better performance of the organisation. Khuong and Tien (2013) argued that in order to achieve high behavioural loyalty, companies in banking industry should achieve high level of employee job satisfaction, enhance supervisor support and teamwork among employees, and provide good working environment.

Abugre (2011) identified that the reward system in an organisation plays a significant role in increasing the job satisfaction of employees, higher rewards and satisfied employees at work results in higher productivity of Business organizations. Adjetey and Prako (2013) revealed that there were significant linear correlations among behavioural loyalty, engagement and performance. They also found out significant positive correlations of human relation, leadership style, job content, personal development, creativity and their effect on behavioural loyalty.

Bauer (2004) showed that higher involvement of workers in high performance workplace organisations is associated with high level of job satisfaction. This positive effect is dominated by worker’s involvement in flexible work system, workers particularly associated with opportunities in the organisation regarding functional autonomy and coordination among workers. Akbar et al. (2011) identified that employee empowerment has positive and significant impact on job satisfaction they also found that there existed significant difference between male and female employees regarding job satisfaction level, male employees found to be more satisfied with their jobs.

The Loyalty of the employees mean that he is willing to work in that organization where he is already work, he try their best for the success of the organization and he think to do work in that organization it is the best option for him. He decided not to leave and nor any plan to go in some other organization (The Loyalty Research Center, 1990). It is just like a behavior of citizenship who tries to increase the value of firm, its image as well as develop interest in outsiders mind (Bentten Court, Gwinner and Meuter, 2001). 

According to Bernal et al. (2005), “The last state of psychological Process is called satisfaction”. We should be defined job satisfaction in that context which is may be accepted as: The feelings of the employees and attitude in relation with job components such as the environment where he work, work place conditions, rewards such as salary and bonuses and job itself (Glisson and Durick, 1988; Kim et al., 2005). 

In last, few years in the major organization, the employee’s satisfaction and job satisfaction apparent to be a prerequisite for spirited levels of quality and organizational success has become a major objective (Bernal et al., 2005). 

In the most of researches, it is define that if the behavior of the organization and environment of the organization is fit and the environment of the person dominates it (Mottaz, 1985; Kristof, 1996), it means the employees do their work in given time, values and characteristics of a person is high, than the degree of job satisfaction is positive. 

According to the Walker (2005), relationship between job satisfaction and job loyalty would be positive if the organization provides different opportunities such as learn, grow and clear established career path. There is strong correlation between employee satisfaction and behavioural loyalty based on these variables, recognition and rewards, working conditions, relationship with supervisor teamwork (Fosam et al., 1998). 

Empirical findings (McCusker & Wolfman (1998), McGuiness (1998), Selnow & Gibert, (1997), Vardi et al., (1989) argue that there is relationship between job satisfaction and employee loyalty on the basis of these values, honesty, trust, respect for others. So on the basis of previous research there is positive relation between job satisfaction and job loyalty.

9.3. Job satisfaction and employee behavioural loyalty 

Employee engagement is today seen as a powerful source of competitive advantage in the turbulent times. A study on drivers of engagement by Mani (2011) predicted four drivers, namely employee welfare, empowerment, employee growth and interpersonal relationships. While Bedarkar & Pandita (2014) states that employees are the key assets to any organization and if they are not given the right space and time to make a perfect blend of work and fun at workplace, then the sense of dis-engagement sets in the employees. Organization and employees are both dependent on each other to fulfil their goals and objectives. Therefore, employee engagement should not be a one-time exercise but it should be integrated in the culture of the company. Employee engagement should be a continuous process of learning, improvement and action. Thus, organizations today should actively look forward to fulfil employee`s expectations and thus, create an impact on the performance of employee, which directly affects the organization’s performance.

A study by Robertson-Smith and Markwick (2009), points out that engagement provides employees with an opportunity to invest themselves in their work and also creates a sense of self efficacy. Research on the consequences of employee engagement indicates that engagement may result in positive health and positive feelings towards work and organisation. Gallup (2006) reported improved health and well-being in engaged employees.

Engagement may lead to mindfulness, intrinsic motivation, creativity, authenticity, non-defensive communication, ethical behavior. Employee engagement is the emotional commitment that the employee has to the organization and its goals. This emotional commitment means engaged employees actually care about their work and their company. They don’t work just for a salary, or just for promotion, but work for the organization’s goals. When employees care – when they are engaged – they use discretionary effort (Kevin Kruse, 2012). There are increasing claims in management literature that engagement is needed for high-level organizational performance and productivity. Saks (2006) agrees that employee engagement could be a strong factor for organizational performance and success, as it seems to have a significant potential to affect employee retention, their loyalty and productivity, and also with some link to customer satisfaction, organizational reputation and the overall stakeholder value (Andrew & Sofian, 2012).

To succeed in any goals set, organisations need motivated employees, too; motivated employees are more productive and help organizations to survive and prosper (Smith, 1994). In this context, the notion of motivation can be described as a psychological process that gives behaviour purpose and direction (Kreitner, 1995). It is actually one of the management’s key tasks to constantly motivate their employees, something difficult at times, as what motivates one person may not motivate another and certainly such what motivates one do not necessarily remain static over time. For example, it has been argued that as income increases money becomes less of a motivator, or when employees get older, interesting work becomes more of a motivator (Kovach, 1987).

Job satisfaction is a multidimensional construct the conceptualization and measurement of which has long been of interest in the industrial and organisational psychology literatures (Bodur, 2002) where according to (Bowling and Hammond, 2008), it has been the most widely studied topic. Job satisfaction defined as an attitude reflecting person’s feelings toward his or her job or job setting at particular point in time (Schermerhon et al., 2012).

9.4. Engagement and Employees Behavioural Loyalty.

The term employee engagement was first conceptualized and defined by Kahn (1990) as “The harnessing of organizational members selves to their work roles; in engagement, people employ and express themselves physically, cognitively and emotionally during role performances.” Andrew & Sofian (2012) understood the level of commitment and involvement an employee has towards his or her organization and its values. Aon Hewitt defines engagement as the state of emotional and intellectual involvement that motivates employees to do their best work (Hewitt, 2010).

Loyalty is faithfulness that comes from consciousness and arises without any forces, but is based on past experience (Claes, 1992). In the ECSI model (European Employee Satisfaction Index), employee loyalty is a result of employee Satisfaction on quality, value, expectations, and company image (Yao & Liu, 2008). Employee loyalty (attitudes and behaviour) comes from the commitment and trust / confidence of employees, which is a feeling of satisfaction with the purchase or consumption of a good (Marie et. Al., 2008).

Anderson, Kumar, & Narus (2007), believe that retaining existing employees is a much more effective strategy for the organization then attempting to attract new. Impact of satisfaction is regarded as one of the major factor affecting employee loyalty. Several studies have revealed that there exist a direct connection between satisfaction and loyalty – satisfied employees become loyal and dissatisfied employees lead to another vendors (Heskett et al., 1997). By far, the most commonly used employee perceptual metric by managers is satisfaction. Image of brand or supplier affects loyalty at least in two ways. Firstly, employee may use his preferences to present his own image.

According to the Belk’s theory of extended self, people define themselves by the possessions they have, manage or create. Secondly, according to social identity theory, people tend to classify themselves into different social categories. They prefer partners who share similar objectives and values. Oliver (1999) argues that for fully bonded loyalty the consumable must be part of the consumer’s self-identity and his or her social-identity.

Trustworthiness of the partner is a factor that has certain impact on the establishment of loyalty. Morgan and Hunt (1994) posit that trust is a major determinant of relationship commitment: brand trust leads to brand loyalty because trust creates exchange relationships that are highly valued.

Many definitions describe loyalty as a desire to retain a valuable or important relationship (Morgan et al 1994) that way the establishment of loyalty is predetermined by the importance of relevant relationship or selection.

A relationship can also be made important by personal approach. Levitt, 1983 has considered a role of salesman in making relationship more personal. Employee bonding may be seen as a process which influences employees and employee loyalty is a result of this process. In ACSI model employee satisfaction has three antecedents: perceived quality, perceived value and employee expectations (Anderson et al., 2000). Employee bonding can be developed on through and basically with the employees’ engagement with the employees for value delivery. Employees are key stakeholders in value delivery and brand/supplier success, and they frequently represent the difference between positive experiences or negative experiences and whether employees stay or go.

A link between having engaged employees and increased employee loyalty and satisfaction has been established (Haid & Sims, 2009; Harter et al., 2002; Gonring, 2008). Giving employees the drive to enhance the employees experience is as important as the reputations and bottom lines of businesses that rely on the ability to inspire employee loyalty. In their 2002 meta-analysis, Harter et al. found that business units that scored in the top 25% on engagement had employee ratings 12% higher than business units scoring in the bottom 25% of engagement. This improvement is due to the fact that engaged employees care more about meeting employee needs.

9.5. Summary

Both the existing literature and the empirical review seem to suggest that the independent variable has a positive relationship to engagement and behavioural loyalty in a hotel industry. It may seem to suggest positive relationship between job satisfaction, engagement and behavoiural loyalty to the organization. The next section presents the methods and techniques that will be used for data collection and analysis.

METHODOLOGY

10. Introduction

This chapter presents the research methodology which include; research design, study area, study population, sample size, sampling method and procedure, data collection methods and instruments, data collection procedure, validity and reliability of research instruments, data analysis, expected limitations of the study and ethical considerations.

10.1 Research design

The study will use analytical as well as cross sectional design. The study will be quantitative in approach. This will involve a systematic empirical investigation of observable phenomena via statistical, mathematical or computational techniques (Mugenda & Mugenda, 2003). According to Silverman (2001), quantification gives greater confidence in the accuracy of conclusions derived. 

10.2. Study Area

The study will be carried out among the hotels registered under Uganda Hotel Owner’s Association (UHOA) in Western Uganda. Therefore, it will cover all the hotels under this umbrella that spreads across the districts of Mbarara, Kabale, Kisoro, Ntugamo, Rukungiri and Bushenyi.

10.3 Study population

Study population is a complete set of individuals, cases or objects with some common observable characteristics (Thornhill et al., 2003). The population for the current study will consist of all full time employees including managers, Head of department, support staff and others in the member hotels in western Uganda as shown below by district (for the detailed information see appendix).

Table 1: Study population

10.4 Sample size

The sample size will consist of 207 which will be obtained by the guideline of Krejcie and Morgan (1970). The contribution of each hotel to the sample size is shown on the table 2 below using proportionate allocation.

Table 2: Sample size

10.5 Sampling method and procedures

According to Baron (2011), sampling is a definite plan determined before data collection for obtaining a sample from a given population. It involves three decisions: who to be sampled, how many people to sample, and how to obtain the sample. 

Stratified systematic sampling will be then used to select samples from the population. Stratified sampling is a method in which the population is divided into a number of divisions and a sample is drawn from division and such sample makes us the final sample (Glen, 2009). This technique will be employed since it eases the making of proportionate samples, and therefore meaningful, comparisons between homogeneous sub-groups (Zikmund, 2003). The districts will form strata from which proportionate samples will be drawn. Respondents will be systematically selected from each district but selected from the individual hotels. All employees in respective hotels will have equal opportunity to be picked popularly known as simple random sampling. Specifically, a raffle approach will be used where all employees in the payroll (full-time staff) will be written in small pieces of paper and each picked at random until the desired number is reached.

10.6. Measurement of the variables

The variables will be operationalized and measured according to literature and previous empirical studies. 

Job satisfaction will be operationalized with intrinsic, extrinsic and general satisfaction. Intrinsic job satisfaction is derived from factors such as ability utilization, activity, achievement, authority, independence, moral values, responsibility, security, creativity, social service, social status, and variety. While the key factors for extrinsic job satisfaction are as a result of advancement, company policy, compensation, recognition, supervision-human relations, and supervision-technical. General job satisfaction facet is formed from two more factors such as working conditions and co-workers in addition to intrinsic and extrinsic factors (Feinstein & Vondrasek, 2001). The responses will be anchored on a five – point likert scale-type scale ranging from (1) strongly agree to (5) strongly disagree.

Engagement will be operationalized with vigour, dedication and absorption. Vigour will be measured with four items such as I feel motivated to perform well in the work I do, I feel committed to the organisation for which I currently work, I would speak highly to people outside the organisation about my organisation as an employer and I would speak highly to people outside the organisation about my organisation’s products/service/brands. Dedication will be measured with three items; I am proud to work for my current organisation , I feel loyal towards my current organisation and I feel the organisation I work for deserves my loyalty. While absorption will be measured with I would want to be working for my current organisation in. many year’s time, I feel valued as an employee where I work and My organisation manages to attract the best talent. The responses will be anchored on a five – point likert scale-type scale ranging from (1) strongly agree to (5) strongly disagree.

Behavioural loyalty will be operationalized using intention to stay and benefit insensitivity adopted from Bloemer and Odekerken (2006). Intensions to stay is related to an employee’s willingness to remain in an organization and benefit insensitivity to an employee’s tendency to be indifferent with respect to the remuneration offered by alternative employers.

10.7 Data collection methods and instruments

Self administered questionnaires

A questionnaire will be used and it will be in form of closed ended in nature. The questionnaires are cheap and it collects responses with minimum errors and high level of confidentiality.

10.8 Data collection procedure

The study will observe all procedures followed in research. Using the letter of introduction obtained from the Research Coordinator, the researcher will be introduced to every hotel, fully explaining the purpose of research. After getting their consent, he will set a program with the respondents on when the questionnaires will be administered and date set. The researcher will build the confidence of the respondents by assuring them that their views will be confidential and will be used only for academic purposes.

10.9 Validity and reliability of research instruments

There are no scientific principles which would guarantee a valid and reliable research instrument, but there are ways in which this can be pursued. First, the items in the research instruments should be based on prior research whenever possible. In this study, most of the questions will be to be based on prior research. Secondly, the questionnaire should be pre-tested (Malhotra & Birks 2007) for reliability and validity.

Validity

Validity can be defined as the degree to which a test measures what it is supposed to measure. There are three basic approaches to the validity of tests and measures as shown by Mason and Bramble (1989). Law & Kelton (1991) suggests that if a questionnaire model is “valid”, then the decision made with the questionnaire model should be similar to those that would be made by physically experiencing with the system. In order to ensure validity the questionnaire will be made clear and understandable. The questionnaire will be first discussed with the supervisor; this will include careful choice of words, order and structure of questions. The scale items for the constructs will be subjected to a content validity test (CVI) (George & Mallery, 2006). Content validity ratio varies between 1 and -1. The higher score indicates further agreement of members of panel on the necessity of an item in an instrument.

Reliability

According to Mugenda et al. (2003), reliability is the degree to which a measure is consistent in producing the same reading or results when measuring the same thing at different times. Reliability is influenced by random error, that is, as random error increases, reliability decreases. The random error is the deviation from the true measurement due to the factors that have not effectively been addressed by the researcher. Mugenda study indicated that the questionnaire has to be well structured to achieve the purpose of the research thereby meeting the test of reliability. The reliability of the research instruments will be tested through a pre-test. The results will be subjected to the Cronbach’s Alpha reliability test to measure the internal consistency of responses. Cronbach’s Alpha is used to determine if all the items within the instrument measure the same thing. The closer the alpha is to 1.00, the greater the internal consistency of the items being measured (George & Mallery, 2006).

11. Data analysis

Manual editing of questionnaires will be done to eliminate errors. After coding, tabulation will be done to clearly present various responses and the interpretation. Frequencies and percentages will be used to portray statistics used to analyze and interpret the findings of the study. Data analysis will be done using; correlation analysis to establish the relationships that exist between the variables. For ease of analysis, procedures within Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) will be used.

12. Expected limitations of the Study

As with any research there are study limitations that should be acknowledged for the benefit of future research efforts. 

Firstly, the study is limited to the hotel sector in one region and the country thereby questioning the generalizability of our findings. In the future, various organizational and industrial settings should be explored. 

Secondly, the study over relies on employee responses, which might create the risk of common method bias. However, studies exploring similar concepts and using the identical methodological approach should conduct additional construct-related analyses. Most importantly from varied sources such as employees, employers and ex-employees.

The study will not examine sub dimensions of the research concepts. Therefore, in order to get more fine-grained results, sub dimensions of examined concepts should be investigated as well. Certain aspects or facets of job satisfaction, engagement and employee behavioral loyalty could be more or less related. By conducting additional construct-related analyses, some additional underlying mechanisms of workplace behaviour will be obtained.

13 Ethical considerations

The researcher will collect data upon seeking respondents’ consent after revealing the type of information needed and the purpose to avoid potential concealment of vital information.

The researcher will assure respondents of confidentiality and private treatment of their information; and report the true findings of the study without any bias.

REFERENCES

Abugre, J.B. (2011). Perceived Satisfaction in Sustained Outcomes of Employee Communication in Ghanaian Organizations, Journal of Management Policy and Practice vol. 12(7)

Acato, C. (2006), “Job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and flight attendants‟ turnover intentions: a note”, Journal of Air Transport Management, Vol. 12

Adjetey, B., and Prako, I. (2013). Pay satisfaction and organizational outcomes. Personnel Psychol.

Akbar, T., Nissly, J.A. and Levin, A. (2001), “Antecedents to retention and turnover among child welfare, social work, and other human service employees: what can we learn from past research? A review and meta-analysis”, Social Service Review, Vol. 75,

Anderson C. M. and Martin, M. M. (2000) ‘Why Employees Speak to Co-workers and Bosses: Motives, Gender, and Organizational Satisfaction’ Journal of Business Communication,

Anderson, Kumar, & Narus (2007). Job Satisfaction: How People Feel about Their Jobs and How It Affects Their Performance, Lexington, New York, NY.

Andrew, C, O & Sofian, S. (2012). Individual Factors and Work Outcomes of Employee Engagement. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 40

Bedarkar, S., & Pandita, A.(2014). “Does psychological empowerment mediate the relationship betweenPsychological climate and job satisfaction?” Journal of Business and Psychology, Vol. 18No. 4

Bloemer and Odekerken-Schroder (2006). Mood and emotions while working: missing pieces of job satisfaction?”, Journal of Organizational Behavior

Bodur, S. (2002), “Job satisfaction of health care staff employed at health centres in Turkey”, Occupational Medicine, Vol. 52 No 6, pp.353–355.

Bowling N. A., and Hammond, G. D (2008), “A meta-analytic examination of the construct validity of the Michigan Organizational Assessment Questionnaire Job Satisfaction subscale”, Journal of Vocational Behaviour, Vol. 73

Claes, F. (1992), A National Customer Satisfaction Barometer: The Swedish Experience. Journal of Marketing, 56 (1)

Gallup (2006). ʹGallup study: engaged employees inspire company innovation: national survey finds that passionate workers are most likely to drive organisations forwardʹ, The Gallup Management Journal.

Geeta Kumari and Dr. K.M.Pandey, Analysis of an Individual’s Behaviour in Work Environment for a Better Output, International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 156-161, 2011.

Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hayes, T. L. (2002). Business-unit level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology

Heskett, James L., Sassser, Earl Jr. and Schlesinger, Leonard A. (1997), The Service Profit Chain: How Leading Companies Link Profit and Growth to Loyalty, Satisfaction and Value.

Hewitt Associates. (2010). Employee engagement higher at double digit growth companies. Research Brief. Hewitt associates LLC.

Jain, P.A. and Singh, P. (2013), “Women in call centres”, Economic and Political Weekly, 

Kahn, W.A. (1990), “Psychological conditions of engagement and disengagement at work”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 33 No.4

Kembabazi, T.L., Cooil, B., Andreassen, T.W. and Aksoy, L. (2010), “A longitudinal examination of ‘net promoter’ on firm revenue growth”, Journal of Marketing.

Kim, W.G., Leong, J.K. and Lee, Y. (2005), “Effect of service orientation on job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and intention of leaving in a casual dining chain restaurant”,Hospitality Management, Vol. 24, pp. 171-93.

Kyeyune, C.C. (2014). “Career commitment as a complex moderator of organizational commitment and t