Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
ABSTRACT
The hospitality industry in recent times have shown give enough time for the employee to given returns to
an increase in the level of attrition across all the the organization for the amount of investment the
companies, especially in the hotels. To tackle this company has made on that employee. This shows that
issue of loyalty among the employees the impact that there is a key problem
roblem with the level of loyalty that
engagement of employees which is a closely related exists among employees today.
concept with loyalty is studied in a uni unit of a
prominent south Indian hotel group. First, the various This problem is seen commonly in the hospitality
approaches to both employee engagement and industry. The hospitality and tourism industry in India
employee loyalty are studied through literature review contributes to the major portion of the country’s GDP.
and the instruments for measuring them both are In such an industry the prevalence
valence of such high levels
created by adopting it from other studies. Corre
Correlation, of attrition can affect the future growth of GDP as
regression and ANOVA were conducted. The analysis most of the efforts made by the company will be
of the information collected revealed that there is a focused on retention than improving value for the
strong positive correlation between the variables and customer. In 2013, an article written in the India
employee engagement is also seen to have a major Hospitality Review, a lot off experts from the industry
impact in predicting the level of employe
employee loyalty. It have cited figures from 20% to 50% and some have
was also found that the level of engagement differed even warned that the attrition rate can increase
based on department and job level and the level of further. This will have a drastic impact on the level of
loyalty differed based on department, level of service performance of the companies.
and age of participants. The results of the study are
also seen to be consistent with
th other studies analyzing Further, there is also the challenge of rising
ris levels of
the same. In the end a model is suggested to be used contract workers in the hotel industry. The
for further research. ASSOCHAM (The Associated Chambers of
Commerce and Industry of India) survey on contract
Keywords: employee engagement, employee loyalty,
labours found that there has been 35% increase in
employee commitment
contract labour hiring in the hospitality and travel
INTRODUCTION industry
y during the year 2013 and this trend is seen to
continue. This trend does not only exist in the
With the changing times there has been a lot of hospitality industry but also in the industries like IT
changes in how way things are done by people of each and BPO. This trend is a problem as Blake, Broschak
generation and no time in the past has seen a change and George (2003) in their study have shown that the th
so drastic as it is today. The new age employees, the existence of non-standard
standard workers can have an effect
millennials, see that the right time frame to stay in an on the loyalty levels of standard workers.
organization is between twelve months to two years.
This is a relatively short period of time and does not
@ IJTSRD | Available Online @ www.ijtsrd.com | Volume – 2 | Issue – 3 | Mar-Apr 2018 Page: 325
International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (IJTSRD) ISSN: 2456-6470
Apart from these links that have been established it is engagement with commitment. Their definition of
also seen that there is a link in the form of employee engagement is” Employee engagement is
commitment. Employee loyalty in a lot of researches the involvement with and enthusiasm for work”.
has been witnessed to be interchanged with Another prominent definition for it is given by the
commitment and employee engagement is also development dimensions internationals which
perceived to be a higher form of commitment. Hewitt explains employee engagement as “the extent to
in its definition of employee engagement has which people enjoy and believe in what they do, and
highlighted that “engagement is an emotional and feel valued for doing it”. This definition is said to be
intellectual commitment to the organisation” and closer to employee loyalty and job satisfaction. These
loyalty is also a type of commitment and Ibrahim and definitions cover almost all the types of perspectives
Falasi (2014) has found this relationship in while that exist in relation to employee engagement. The
examining the link between loyalty and employee Gallup Q12 survey, the Ultrech Work Engagement
engagement, though only affective commitment had a survey and the Aon Hewitt employee engagement
significant relationship with employee engagement. survey are the most popular instruments for
measuring employee engagement
In the same way in which loyalty is subjected to
various perspectives employee engagement also has From the literature review it is seen that employee
the same issue. Employee engagement has been found loyalty has always been measured as a form of
to be suffering from conceptual chaos. There are commitment and perspectives of shared values and
numerous studies that measure employee engagement psychological contracts have not been looked into
in different ways, but in the end, there is a lot more much. It is also seen that employee engagement has
similarity in their definitions. The approaches in not been measured with the aspects of Hewitt’s
employee engagement is found to be limited to three employee engagement scale in academic researches. It
broad schools of thought. The Role Theory approach, has been identified that while measuring the
used in Rich, Lepine and Crawford (2010) , is seen as relationship of employee engagement with loyalty
the psychological presence required to fulfil the only affective commitment is commonly used and
organisational role required to perform an normative commitment is not taken into account. The
organisational role occupied by that person. The gap is also seen when there is no clarity on tackling
burnout approach, that views engagement as the the negative impact of using non-standard workers
opposite of exhaustion or a burnout energy, can have on standard workers’ loyalty. It can also be
involvement and efficiency are the key measures to seen that the relationship studied was not conducted in
see the level of engagement. India.
@ IJTSRD | Available Online @ www.ijtsrd.com | Volume – 2 | Issue – 3 | Mar-Apr 2018 Page: 326
International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (IJTSRD) ISSN: 2456-6470
various perspectives to it like psychological contract DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
Hart and Thompson (2007) and organization
commitment Meyer and Allen (1997) and 15 other Demographic analysis of the data showed that the
approaches. In this study loyalty will be looked as “… major participation has been from the food and
(a) behavior that can be tied to an implicit promise, beverage service department (22.8%) and followed by
voluntarily made by an individual operating in a the food and beverage production (21.8%). Looking at
community of interdependent others that adhere to the length of service most respondents have been
unverbalizable moral principles in pursuit of working with GRT hotels for 1-3 years (36.6%). It is
individual and collective goals” Coughlan (2005) also seen that almost half of the respondents were at
which is a moral value-based perspective and goes the staff level (48.5%). 77.2% of the participants
beyond classifying loyalty as organizational were between the age of 20-35. 85% of the
commitment and takes into consideration the participants were male. Most participants surveyed
normative commitment, attitudinal and applied had a Diploma/ITI degree (43.6%) as their highest
loyalty. Attitudinal loyalty is the “employee's feeling level of education qualification. The overall mean
of loyalty toward co-workers and the moral principles value of the engagement scale is 4.25 which shows
of the group” and Applied loyalty is “The application that the level of engagement is high among workers
of the moral principles in cases to common workplace within the company and the standard deviation is 0.42
dilemmas”. which is not big enough to cause a major difference in
the mean value. The overall mean value for loyalty is
METHODOLOGY 3.9 which is relatively less compared to the level of
engagement. The standard deviation is at 0.45 which
The study was conducted in one unit of a well reputed again is in a comfortable level to cause a lot of
South Indian hotel chain that also has one of the difference in the mean value.
largest jewelry retail business in Southern India. A
sample of 101 employees was collected from a total The data collected was first tested for reliability. The
of 300 employees. The sampling method in this study Cronbach’s alpha was used to carry out this test. For
is convenience sampling. The questionnaire contains the employee engagement questionnaire, the value
in total 32 questions of which 14 questions are used to was α= 0.845 and the employee loyalty questionnaire
measure employee engagement and items for it were had α=0.836 both of which are high values and the
derived from Hewitt’s engagement survey, Gallup data sets are termed to be valid
Q12 survey and Pati (2012) engagement survey.
Employee loyalty is measured with 12 questions of The first hypothesis was tested with the help of
Coughlan (2005) scale. The responses were coded as correlation and linear regression. The analysis
1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Neutral, revealed a correlation value of r=0.733 which was
4=Agree and 5=Strongly agree. Descriptive statistics, also significant at 99% levels. This helped to prove
correlation, Linear regression, test of normality and that there is a strong positive relationship between the
one-way ANOVA were conducted. IBM SPSS variables.
Version 21 was used.
Employee Employee Loyalty
HYPOTHESIS Engagement
H3: there is a significant difference in employee Next a regression analysis was conducted and the
loyalty based on demography results revealed an R2 value of 0.598 which means
that 59.8% of the changes in employee loyalty is
@ IJTSRD | Available Online @ www.ijtsrd.com | Volume – 2 | Issue – 3 | Mar-Apr 2018 Page: 327
International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (IJTSRD) ISSN: 2456-6470
predicted by the changes in the employee employee engagement between those with SSLC and
engagement. This value was also found to be Post graduate degree as their highest education
significant from the ANOVA table for the regression qualification.
which showed F(1.99)= 147.4; P<0.05. As the P value
is less than 0.05 we say that the regression is The next hypothesis also uses ANOVA. The
significant. Based on the coefficients, the regression employee loyalty scores are used to analyze to find if
equation of Y=0.83X+0.45 is established for this there is a significant difference in its value between its
relationship. Thus, it can be said that the first groups. The same demographic variables were used
hypothesis H1 is accepted as it has been proved that for this too. The ANOVA results showed that
employee engagement has a significant impact on department, level of service and age have a significant
employee loyalty. It is also seen that this impact is difference in the employee loyalty scores between its
strong and positive. groups. Length of service, gender and highest
education qualifications do not have a significant
difference in employee loyalty levels between its
groups. Thus, we can partially reject the hypothesis
H3.
@ IJTSRD | Available Online @ www.ijtsrd.com | Volume – 2 | Issue – 3 | Mar-Apr 2018 Page: 328
International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (IJTSRD) ISSN: 2456-6470
more loyal than the male. But in this study, it is seen made to feel obligated to the organization. And also
that there is no significant difference in level of applying the socio-economic theory approach of
loyalty between men and women. engagement it is observed to be a two-level obligation
to stay with the company. Thus, it can be theoretically
It is observed that because of this difference in proved that improving employee engagement can
approaches the end result might have been same, but prevent standard worker’s loyalty levels and reduce
the degree or intensity of impact of the relationship the impact of the sub-standard worker’s impact on
might vary. Though the samples are totally different their intention to remain with the organization.
in every study it cannot be said for sure that the Though this is just theoretical linking of another
different approach caused the variance in the level of study’s results with this study, an empirical analysis
impact. In Vokić and Hernaus (2015) the correlation on this same is recommended to be conducted for
between employee engagement and employee loyalty further research. By investing in engagement
is seen as r=0.53. But in the analysis conducted by activities, it is observed in Rooey et al (2011) that it
this research it is seen that the correlation r=0.773 helps retain high performers during times of economic
which shows a stronger relationship compared to the depression.
other study. Thus, this study adds in more detail about
the relationship between employee engagement and LIMITATIONS
employee loyalty by taking in a different perspective
for both the constructs and at the same time improve There are a few limitations to this study too. The
the credibility of the business’s action of improving results of this study are limited in applicability to
the employee engagement to improve loyalty among employees at the surveyed hotel. It cannot be used to
employees. make an overall opinion of the organization because
of its limit in scope. It is not assured that the same
The study has revealed that the company can still relationship will exist with any group of employees as
improve on the employee engagement aspect. It is there are a number of uncontrollable factors like
seen that the hotel does not use an annual appraisal for culture, ethics, etc. that might have had an effect on
all the employees but only to a certain cadre of it. If this study. In short, the results cannot be
not an annual appraisal, regular feedback sessions on universalized. The study represents samples from only
the employee’s job performance will make a big 12 departments of the hotel property and few
difference in improving the employees engagement departments are not covered. There are also two
levels and in turn loyalty. Ensuring person-job fit, departments, namely IT and Spa that had only one
skill enhancement activities, proper appraisal systems, sample each, thus might have given a hazed picture
enhanced induction program, data driven decision during analysis. The study looks at loyalty as a form
making, etc are all the best practices in engagement of shared values, with normative commitment, applied
that can be applicable in the hotel to improve loyalty and attitudinal loyalty. The other approaches
employee engagement levels. These with a supportive to loyalty or to engagement are not represented by the
organization culture that resonates with the values, the results of this study. Words like suspected unethical
loyalty levels of the hotel will also improve. behavior and moral principals were tough to
understand for a few respondents and thus were orally
In order to answer the issue identified through Blake, translated to Tamil.
Broschak and George (2003) of the impact of non-
standard workers on employee loyalty and intent to CONCLUSION
exit, this study has shed some light on the issue and
has provided some evidence as to how improving This study has tried to analyse the relationship
employee engagement could have a better impact on between employee engagement and employee loyalty
employee loyalty of standard workers. The regression using empirical data from the hotel. The analysis has
analysis conducted in this study shows that employee found that there is a strong impact of employee
engagement can cause a substantial amount of engagement on employee loyalty. By studying this
increase in the level of employee’s loyalty and by also relationship businesses can take proactive measures
considering the normative commitment, the into tackling loyalty issues. As it has already been
employee’s feeling of obligation to remain with an established that there is existence of a crisis related to
organization, into picture the standard workers can be high levels of attrition in the hospitality industry,
@ IJTSRD | Available Online @ www.ijtsrd.com | Volume – 2 | Issue – 3 | Mar-Apr 2018 Page: 329
International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (IJTSRD) ISSN: 2456-6470
especially in the hotel industry. This study sheds light organization to identify issues in a better way and in
on how this issue of higher attrition can be controlled turn help the Human Resource department take
by improving the level of employee engagement necessary action to provide key organization results
activities, which in turn influences employee loyalty. that can be measured based on the activities
A major part of this study measures employee loyalty conducted by the Human Resources Department. It is
with normative commitment, which is the feeling of important that empirical data is used from the same
obligation to remain with an organization. Though organization for this study to declare that this model
there are authors that say loyalty is a two-way process can be practically executable.
and cannot just be expected out of an employee, by
instilling greater engagement among employees we REFERENCES
can see that such a behaviour is already a behaviour of
giving back to the organization, i.e, Socio-economic 1) Blake, A., Broschak, J., & George, E. (2003).
theory. Thus, by focusing on improving engagement Happy Together? How Using Nonstandard
the socio-economic theory might also imbibe the Workers Affects Exit, Voice, and Loyalty among
sense of loyalty among the employees. Standard Employees. The Academy Of
Management Journal, 46(4), 475-485.
Employee engagement and employee loyalty are a
2) Boroff, K., & Lewin, D. (1997). Loyalty, Voice,
part of a bigger model of how employer practices
and Intent to Exit a Union Firm: A
might affect the business outcomes. From Vance’s
Conceptual and Empirical Analysis. ILR
model we know that employer practices influence
Review, 51(1), 50-63.
employee engagement and job performance and these
two variables interact with each other. And it was also 3) Chen, Y., Chen, H., & Tsui, P. (2016).
examined based on the literature review conducted Contributing Causes Of Employee Loyalty Of
that there exists a relationship between employee Service Personnel In International Hotels. The
loyalty and job performance. We can also observe International Journal Of Organizational
from other theories explained that job satisfaction is a Innovation, 9(1), 107-118.
product of the practices undertaken by an employer. 4) Coughlan, R. (2005). Employee Loyalty as
And this job satisfaction is seen to have an influence Adherence to Shared Moral Values. Journal
over employee engagement and at times also an Of Managerial Issues, 17(1), 43-57.
antecedent for the same. Vokić and Hernaus (2015)
established that job satisfaction has an impact over 5) Ewin, R. (1993). Corporate Loyalty: Its Objects
employee loyalty with employee engagement playing and Its Grounds. Journal Of Business
a mediatory role in the relationship. Taking the Ethics, 12(5), 387-396.
Heskett’s service profit chain model, we know that 6) Fielder, J. (1992). Organizational
employee loyalty is also linked to job satisfaction, Loyalty. Business & Professional Ethics
which is seen in Silvestro (2002). Loyalty of Journal, 11(1), 71-90.
employees is also seen to influence customer
satisfaction and in turn, the customer loyalty. In the 7) GRT Hotels| Budget Hotels|Hill Resorts|Luxury
end it is seen that both the models converge together Hotels. (2017). Grthotels.com. Retrieved 30 May
again at the end result of business outcome, measured 2017, from https://grthotels.com/
using higher profitability, higher revenue generation, 8) Guillon, O., & Cezanne, C. (2014). Employee
better value created for shareholders, etc. All this loyalty and organizational performance: a critical
study focuses on is the relationship between employee survey. Journal Of Organizational Change
engagement and employee loyalty, which is a small Management, 27(5), 839-850.
connection in this large model of attaining highest
9) Hart, D., & Thompson, J. (2007). Untangling
level of business performance. Though links were
Employee Loyalty: A Psychological Contract
made between the variable theoretically, it is
Perspective. Business Ethics Quarterly, 17(2),
important that a study encompassing all these
297-323.
variables into its scope, examines the inter-relations
existing among these variables and also shed light on 10) Heskett, J.L, SasserJr, W.E. and Schlesinger, L.A.
various other hidden relationship between variables in (1997).“The service profit chain: How Leading
this model. And in the end, create a clearer plan for Companies Link Profit and Growth to Loyalty,
@ IJTSRD | Available Online @ www.ijtsrd.com | Volume – 2 | Issue – 3 | Mar-Apr 2018 Page: 330
International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (IJTSRD) ISSN: 2456-6470
Satisfaction and Value” Free press, New York, 22) Reporter, B. (2017). 'Hospitality industry needs to
NY. tackle high attrition rates'. Business-standard.com.
Retrieved 30 May 2017, from
11) HRdictionary. (2017). Evolution of Human
http://www.business-
Resource Management Retrieved 20 December
standard.com/article/economy-policy/-hospitality-
2017, from
industry-needs-to-tackle-high-attrition-rates-
https://hrdictionaryblog.com/2012/10/28/evolution
107031601078_1.html
-of-human-resource-management/comment-page-
1/ 23) Rich, B., Lepine, J., & Crawford, E. (2010). Job
Engagement: Antecedents And Effects On Job
12) Hussain, R. (2012). The Linkage Of Employee
Performance. The Academy Of Management
Satisfaction And Loyalty In Hotel Industries Of
Journal, 53(3), 617-635.
Pakistan. Asian Economic And Financial
Review, 2(8), 1098-1105. 24) Rise of contract workers by 39% in 2013:
ASSOCHAM. (2014). Assocham.org. Retrieved
13) Ibrahim, M., & Al Falasi, S. (2014). Employee
20 December 2017, from
loyalty and engagement in UAE public
http://assocham.org/newsdetail.php?id=4379
sector. Employee Relations, 36(5), 562-582.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/er-07-2013-0098 25) Rooy, D., Whitman, D., Hart, D., & Caleo, S.
(2011). Measuring Employee Engagement During
14) Ineson, E., & Berechet, G. (2011). Employee
a Financial Downturn: Business Imperative or
Loyalty in Hotels: Romanian
Nuisance. Journal Of Business And
Experiences. Journal Of Human Resources In
Psychology, 26(2), 147-152.
Hospitality & Tourism, 10(2), 129-149.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15332845.2011.536694 26) Saks, A. M. (2006), "Antecedents and
Consequences of Employee Engagement", Journal
15) James, J., Mckechnie, S., & Swanberg, J. (2011).
of Managerial Psychology, 21 (7): 600-19.
Predicting employee engagement in an age-
diverse retail workforce. Journal Of 27) Silvestro, R. (2002). Dispelling the modern
Organizational Behavior, 32(2), 173-196. myth. International Journal Of Operations &
Production Management, 22(1), 30-49.
16) Jones, J., Ni, J., & Wilson, D. (2009). Effects of
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01443570210412060
Race/Ethnicity and Employee Engagement on
Withdrawal Behavior. Journal Of Managerial 28) Unal, Z., & Turgut, T. (2015). The Buzzword:
Issues, 21(2), 195-215. Employee Engagement. Does Person-
Organization Fit Contribute to Employee
17) Joshi, R., & Sodhi, J. (2011). Drivers of Employee
Engagement?. Iranian Journal Of Management
Engagement in Indian Organizations. Indian
Studies, 8(2), 157-179.
Journal Of Industrial Relations, 47(1), 162-182.
29) Vokić, N., & Hernaus, T. (2017). The triad of job
18) Kazimoto, P. (2016). Employee Engagement and
satisfaction, work engagement and
Organizational Performance of Retails
employee loyalty – The interplay among the
Enterprises. American Journal Of Industrial And
concepts. Efzg Serija Članaka u
Business Management, 6, 516-525.
Nastajanju, 15(7).
19) Kahn, W. (1990), "Psychological Conditions of
Personal Engagement and Disengagement at
Work", Academy of Management Journal, 33 (4):
692-724
20) Merry, J. (2014). Aon Hewitt's 2013 trends in
global engagement: where do organizations need
to focus attention?. Strategic HR Review, 31(1),
24.
21) Pati, S. (2012). Development of a Measure of
Employee Engagement. Indian Journal Of
Industrial Relations, 48(1), 94-104.
@ IJTSRD | Available Online @ www.ijtsrd.com | Volume – 2 | Issue – 3 | Mar-Apr 2018 Page: 331