3. • Review of the literature
• Casual staff for busy season, high staff turnover (Johnson. 1981)
• Easy entry
• Culture of “excessive turnover” (Deery, 1997)
• Ongoing Recruitment – ‘cat chasing it’s tail’ (Paulston, 2008)
• Impact on
• Costs
• Service delivery
• Psychological impact of the remaining employees
• Training important for growth and development, which is a determining factor
of sustainability within Greek tourism industry (Zopiatis, Constanti &
Theocharous, 2014) - Induction and training to be effective and efficient
• NZ study, training was poor but employees held accountable for poor
performance (Paulston, 2008)
• Influence of solely induction on the effects on organisational commitment and
staff turnover is rarely found (Kumar & Govindarajo, 2014)
• Influences of training had more of a dominant occurrence.
• These relationships were greatly discussed in countries such as Greece,
India, USA, New Zealand but were lacking in the South African context
(Zopiatis, Constanti & Theocharous, 2014) (Dhar, 2015)
4. • Whether induction programs affect organisational commitment
and in turn the staff turnover
• Whether training programs affect the organisational commitment
and in turn the staff turnover
• Which moderating factors such as gross income, length of service
and department will influence these factors and how
• To provide guidance to understand the importance of induction
and training in
• Retaining staff
• Enhancing guest experience
• Decrease hiring costs
• Build a team and culture
5. • What effect do induction programs and training programs
have on organisational commitment of the employees
and in turn the turnover of staff within the Gauteng hotel
industry?
6. H1: Induction programs will positively affect
organizational commitment
Ha: Induction programs will not positively affect
organizational commitment
H2: Training programs will positively affect organizational
commitment
Ha: Training programs will not positively affect
organizational commitment
H3: Organizational commitment of the employees will
negatively affect staff turnover
Ha: Organizational commitment of the employees will not
negatively affect staff turnover
H4: Induction program will negatively affect staff turnover
Ha: Induction program will not negatively affect staff
turnover
H4: Training programs will negatively affect staff turnover
Ha: Training programs will not not negatively affect staff
turnover
7.
8. • Deductive positivist approach
• Past literature investigated and hypotheses being
formed
• A social study done by applying the methods of natural
science (Bryman & Bell, 2011)
• Research design
• Quantitative study, using a survey research instrument
ie: questionnaire, to be issued to 300 employees to
gather primary data showing the perceptions of the
respondents of the various relationships, which will be
statistically analysed
9. Population
• Hotel employees within
the Gauteng hospitality
industry.
• PWC website
• 71% of total accommodation
revenue in 2013
• Increase to 73% by 2018
• Increase in hotel rooms of 30
000 by 2018 due to new
hotels being built
Sample
• Employees from either 3
star, 4 star or 5 star hotels
within the Johannesburg and
Centurion area
• Eight hotels had agreed to
take part in this study, and
approximately 300 hotel
employees were to receive a
questionnaire to complete.
• Received 91 questionnaires
back and only 74 were
useable.
10. Sampling procedure
• Two hotel groups, 3* to 5*
status
• Convenient and random
sampling to approach
groups
• Changed to snowball
sampling
• Actual employees done by
means of random
sampling – designated
person
Research instrument
• Cover letter and consent letter
• Section 1 = Demographics
• Section 2 = Induction, training
and performance reviews
• Categorical data
• (Kaiser, 2006)
• Section 3 = Affective
Commitment – emotional
attachment
• 5 point Likert Scale – Continuous
data
• (Jun, Cai & Shin, 2006) (Allen &
Meyer, 1990)
11. Data Collection
• GM and designated
person
• Hand delivered and
collected over a 2 week
period
• 74 useable responses
Data Analysis
• Microsoft Excel
• SAS Enterprise Guide 7.1
• Descriptive stats on the
demographics
• Construct variable of
Organisational commitment
• Cross tabulation and
correlation of categorical data.
• Chi-Square test
• Fisher Exact test
• Linear Regression
• Normality of ‘staff turnover’
variable
• Multiple Regression
12. Ethics
• Research proposal to Ethics
Committee
• Cover letter and consent
• Pilot study
• Effectiveness of questionnaire
• Likert Scale questions had
obtained an acceptable
Cronbach Alpha score of
0.792 in previous study
indicating reliability of the
measure (Jun, Cai & Shin,
2006)
13. Response rate
• 300 questionnaires
• 50 of these were returned
not completed
• 91 completed
• 74 useable
= 31.8%
Gender
15. What is you highest level of
education obtained?
What is your gross monthly
income
16. Variable Chi-Sq
Test
Fisher
Exact
Test
Result
Formality of induction program 0.0506
(75%)
0.0801 Significant at
10% l.o.s
Introduction to mission and goals of
company
0.0097
(50%)
0.0079 Significant at
5% l.o.s
• Attendance of induction program (N=65)
• Formal induction (N=46)
17. Variable Chi-Sq
Test
Fisher
Exact
Test
Result
Attendance of induction program 0.1035 0.0854 Significant at
10% l.o.s
Safety procedure – topic of induction 0.0686
(40%)
0.0857 Significant at
10% l.o.s
• Attendance of induction program
• Answered N=74
• Attended N=65
• Not attended N=9 (12%)
18. Variable Chi-Sq
Test
Fisher
Exact
Test
Result
Gross Monthly Income 0.0239
(80%)
0.0811 Significant at
10% l.o.s
Attendance of performance review 0.0705
(30%)
0.0708 Significant at
10% l.o.s
Frequency of the performance review 0.2961 0.0743 Significant at
10% l.o.s
Participation in the performance
review
0.4659 0.0744 Significant at
10% l.o.s
20. • H1 – Org commitment = β0+β1induction
• H2 – Org Commitment = β0+β1training
Analysis of Variance
SourceDF
Sum of
Squares
Mean
SquareF Value Pr > F
Model 10.312980.31298 0.460.5008
Analysis of Variance
Source DF
Sum of
Squares
Mean
SquareF Value Pr > F
Model 1 0.016170.01617 0.020.8785
Error 7249.518960.68776
Corrected Total 7349.53514
21. • H3, H4 and H5 – Staff
turnover
• T-test was done to determine
whether this categorical variable
followed a normal distribution or
not, the result was an significant
result indicating that it was not
normally distributed. This can
also be seen on the box and
whisker plot
Tests for Location: Mu0=0
Test Statistic p Value
Student's t t 14.34935Pr > |t| <.0001
Sign M 37Pr >= |M|<.0001
Signed RankS 1387.5Pr >= |S| <.0001
22. • Organisational Commitment = β0 + β1Induction + β2Department + β3Length
of Service + β4Income
• Organisational Commitment = β0 + β1Income
• Organisational Commitment = 1.78411 -0.18544 Income.
Analysis of Variance
Source DF
Sum of
Squares
Mean
SquareF Value Pr > F
Model 4 6.784251.69606 2.730.0361
Error 6842.265610.62155
Corrected Total 7249.04986
Root MSE 0.78839R-Square0.1383
Dependent Mean 1.70137Adj R-Sq0.0876
Coeff Var 46.33833
Parameter Estimates
Variable DF
Parameter
Estimate
Standard
Errort Value Pr > |t|
Intercept 1 1.78411 0.45704 3.900.0002
Induction 1 0.08994 0.28804 0.310.7558
Income 1 -0.18544 0.06480 -2.860.0056
Service_period 1 0.02660 0.09960 0.270.7903
Department 1 0.09340 0.05757 1.620.1093
23. • Organisational Commitment = β0 + β1Training + β2Department + β3Length of
Service + β4Income
• Organisational Commitment = β0 + β1Income
• Organisational Commitment = 1.64634 -0.19275 Income.
Analysis of Variance
Source DF
Sum of
Squares
Mean
SquareF Value Pr > F
Model 4 7.010161.75254 2.830.0309
Error 6842.039710.61823
Corrected Total 7249.04986
Root MSE 0.78628R-Square0.1429
Dependent Mean 1.70137Adj R-Sq0.0925
Coeff Var 46.21433
Parameter Estimates
Variable DF
Parameter
Estimate
Standard
Errort Value Pr > |t|
Intercept 1 1.64634 0.49342 3.340.0014
Income 1 -0.19275 0.06509 -2.960.0042
TR_Prog 1 0.17838 0.26203 0.680.4983
Service_period 1 0.03971 0.09801 0.410.6866
Department 1 0.09952 0.05735 1.740.0872
24. • Induction programs have a relationship to organisational
commitment and staff turnover (H1 & H4)
• Gross income positively influences Organisational commitment
• Further study:
• What is the glass ceiling of the relationship of gross income earned to
the organisation commitment in hospitality industry/
• How does induction and training programs influence type of termination
(voluntary or involuntary)?
• Suggested:
• Hoteliers pay attention to attitudes and manner in which managed and
rewarded
• First impressions last & initial interaction in important
• The ability to retain employees allows for the wealth of knowledge to be
retained and for the competitive advantage to be enhanced
25. • “The end of the first day and the end of the
first week is just as important as the
beginning. Let your employees feel you want
them to come back the next day and the
next…” (Brown, 2007, p. 5)
26. • Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2011). Business Research
Methods (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Johnson, K. (1981). Towards an understanding of Labour
Turnover. Service Industries Journal, 1(1), 4-17.
• Kumar, D. M., & Govindarajo, N. S. (2014). Instrument
Development "Intention to Stay Instrument" (ISI). Asian
Social Science, 10(12), 149-169.
• Zopiatis, A., Constanti, P., & Theocharous, A. L. (2014).
Job involvement, commitment, satisfaction and turnover:
Evidence from hotel employees in Cyprus. Tourism
Management, 41, 129-140.
