EMPLYEE EMPOWERMENT AND CUSTOMER ORIENTATION :EFFECTS ON WORKERS’ ATTITUDES IN RESTAURANTSORGANIZATIONGabriel Gazzoli ; Murat Hancer & Yumi Park (2012)International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism AdministrationSUTINIBatch 61263620054Human ResourcesManagement in Hospitality &TourismProf. Syamsir Abduh
ContentsConclusion and ImplicationFindingMethodologyLiterature ReviewIntroduction
INTRODUCTIONEmployee Empowerment and Customer Orientation:It is widely documented that employee well-being, customersatisfaction, customer orientation, and empowerment are pivotalelements in determining the success of any organizationAs employees and customers become the centerpiece oforganization with different, needs, wants, and demands. Firmsmust establish customer-oriented strategies and developcustomer-oriented employees who are capable of and empoweredto provide excellent service to the patrons.
INTRODUCTIONAccording to previous research customer-oriented employeeinfluence the level of their customers’ satisfaction andcommitment to the firm.(Kim & Ok,2010; Hennig-Thurau,2004)Additionally, research has suggested that customer-orientedemployees have more positive attitudes towards their jobsthan service workers showing lower levels of CO ((Donavan,Brown, & Bowen, 2004)There for, CO is an imprtant element in organizationl success; andorganizations that focusnon and are able to improve employee COmay be able to outperform those that do not (Kim & Ok, 2010;Donavan et al., 2004)
INTRODUCTIONEmployee Empowerment is one of those processes andcontrols embedded in a customer-oriented strategy(Hartline et al., 2000; Kotler, Bowen, & Mackens, 2006).Empowerment is also viewed as an important aspect ofmanagerial practice leading to improved individual andorganizational performance (Fulford & Enz, 1995;Bowen & Lawler, 1992; hancer & George, 2003)
The Management literature reflects two views of Customer Oriented : The first drawn from Marketing Orientation. MO its self has beenpresented from several different perspectives including :a) Marketing Intelligence (Kohli & Jaworksi, 1990)b) Culural Behaviour (Narver & Slater, 1990)c) Customer Perspective ( Deshphande et al., 1993) The Second view of Customer Oriented focuses on the individuallevel of analysis: The service worker themselves. This researchstream is represented by the pioneering work of Saxe and Weitz (1982) who developed a two-dimensional SOCO scale (selling –orientation-customer orientation) and found avidence that selling -oriented/customer-oriented employees had a significant impact on asalespersons performance.CUSTOMER ORIENTEDLITERATURE REVIEW
…LITERATURE REVIEWLee and Koh (2001) suggested that the theory ofempowerment has been presented in two differentways:EMPOWERMENT AND ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH COThe first incorporates the “behaviour of supervisor” as a drivingforce to empower employee. The second view , the “ psychological state of a sub ordinate” isthe major force behind feelings of empowerment.This conceptualization is also known as psychological empowerment,which is defined as an experience of being empowered (Barnes, 2006)
LITERATURE REVIEWEMPOWERMENT AND ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH COFew studies have tried to identify the relationship betweenempowerment and CO. Peccei and Rosenthal (2001), hadattempted to investigate the impact of organizational initiativessuch as management behaviour, job design, and training have onemployee empowerment and the effect of empowerment oncustomer oriented behaviour (COBEH).Their study conceptualized empowerment using three variables:a. Internalization of service excellenceb. Job competencec. Job autonomyTheir results showed that COBEH was affected by empowerment,which in turn was affected by organizational initiatives.
METHODOLOGYvariable :Employee of therestaurantas the independent variable and anumber ofdependentvariables.These werefollowed byprobing open-ended questionstoanswer the "whyquestion.derive descriptivestatistics tocharacterize thedemographics ofcustomer-contactemployees
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONThe datarepresentsstatistically.There were1,308respondentsparticipated inthe studyThere are92,4% of therespondentswere line levelemployees, 5,2held entry-levelmanagerialjobs.All measurmentitems wereanalyzed forreability andvaliditypurposes.
…FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONAfter an explanatory factor analysis, the empowerment construct showed three factors:Empowerment Factor 1: Meaning (a =873); Empowrment Factor 2; Self-Efficacy (a=782);and Empowerment Factor 3: Influence (a=859). The result shows three empowermentdimensions that, while different from those in Spreitzer (1992), are consistent with thefindings of Fulford and Enz (1995). There for, they renamed their empowerment factorsafter those detailed in Fulford and Enz (1995)The CO construct consisted of 13 items and their factor analysis show four factors. COFactor 1: Need to pamper the guest (a=910); CO Factor 2: Need to read the customer’sneeds (a=849); CO Factor 3: Need to deliver (a=827) and CO Factor 4: Need for personalrelationship (a=801) These dimensions are consistent with those in the work of Donavan etal. (2004). However, one item each from CO Factor 2 and CO Factor 4 were deleted due tolow factor loadings.EmpowermentCustomer Oriented
…FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONWe use a single-item indicator for global jobsatisfaction measurement. The measurement error ofthis single item was set to 0 prior to estimating themeasurement model due to potential identificationproblems. (Yoon, Beatty, & Suh, 2001)The job involvement construct included five items. Areliability test indicated that the Cronbach’s coefficientalpha of this construct is acceptable ( a=906)Job SatisfactionJob Involvement
…FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONThe organizational commitment constract includedthree items. As a result of a reliability test. TheCronbach’s coefficient alpha of this construct is 848.The high construct Reliability (CR) of their modelprovides evidence of internal consistency:Empowerment (CR= 93); CO (CR=0,97), Job Involvement(CR=0,94); and Organizational Commitment (CR=92);Empowerment (average variance extrected (AVE)= 54);CO (AVE=81); Job involvement (AVE=66) andOrganizational commitment (AVE=71)Organization Commitment
…FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONThe empowerment constructs fits the data wellbecause indicators of model fit such as GFI,the AGFI, the NFI, the CF are, 975, ,944, ,975,,993, and , 993 respectively. The RMR was ,045and the RMSEA was ,035, respectively.EmpowermentResult of the analysis :
…FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONThe Customer Oriented construct fits the data well.The GFI, AGFI, NFI, IFI and CFI has scored of ,987, ,954,,984, ,997, and 997 respectively. And RMR and theRMSEA had a score of ,052 and ,029, respectively. TheCustomer Oriented measurement model is good.Customer OrientedResult of the analysis :
…FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONThe Job involvement construct fits the datawell. The indicators of GFI, AGFI, NFI, and CFIare .993, .963, .995, .998, and .998 respectively.Also the indicators of RMR and RMSEA are .038and .052, respectively. Therefore, themeasurement model is also good.Job InvolvementResult of the analysis :
CONCLUSIONThe purpose of this study was to test a proposedmodel suggesting the benefits that restaurantmay reap by having a customer-oriented culturethat is driven by empowerment and customeroriented worker.The role of empowerment plays inraising workers’level of CO, and the effects of heightened workerCO on three very important job related workerattitudes, including job satifaction, organizationalcommitement and job involvement.
...CONCLUSIONAnalysis of this study has shown that theempowerment exerts a positive and direct effecton employees’ CO.The result also show that workers’ CO exertspositive and direct effects on job satisfaction andorganizational commitment, and job satisfactionmediates the relationship between CO andcommitment.
...CONCLUSIONThis study has also advanced CO theory byproving that higher levels of worker CO result inhigher levels of worker job involvement.Therefore, workers who have high levels of COwill also have positive organizational attitudes.In industry in which turnover rates have reached83% for full-service operation (Ebbin, 2000) andhas typically exceeded 120% in quick-servicerestaurants (Tracey & Hinkin, 2006), a customer-oriented strategy through empowerment with theaddition of customer oriented workers may playbig role in reducing this astonishing numbers.
...CONCLUSIONThe benefits of having customer-orientedemployees may go well beyond employeeattitudes towards their job and human resourcesimplication.The CO construct ties in with the service-profit chainmodel (Heskett et al., 1997) which states that employeesatisfaction lead to delivery of superior service tocustomers which in turn affects customer satisfaction,loyalty and profitability of the firm.