What factors influence customer-oriented

prosocial behavior of customer-contact

employees?
Yong-Ki Lee
College of Business Administration, Sejong University, Gwangjin-gu, Seoul, South Korea
Jung-Heon Nam
Department of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Changshin College, Masan-si, Gyunsangnam-do, South Korea
Dae-Hwan Park
Department of Hotel Management, Youngsan University, Haeundae-gu, Busan, South Korea, and
Kyung Ah Lee
Food Service and Distribution Division, Samsung Everland Co., Kusung-eup, Yongin-si, Gyunggi-do, South Korea

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this study is to analyze the structural relationship between empowerment, service training, service reward, job attitudes
such as job satisfaction and organizational commitment, and customer-oriented prosocial behavior of employees.
Design/methodology/approach – The research question is examined using a sample of Korean hotel employees. Structural equation analysis is used
to test various research hypotheses and examine the extent to which job satisfaction and organizational commitment mediate the effect of
empowerment, service training, and service reward on customer-oriented prosocial behavior.
Findings – First, the greater the job satisfaction, the greater is the role-prescribed customer service of employees. Second, the greater the job
satisfaction, the greater is the organizational commitment. Third, empowerment has a significant effect on organizational commitment and extra-role
customer service. Fourth, service training has a significant effect on job satisfaction, but it has a negatively direct effect on organizational commitment.
Fifth, service reward has a significant influence on job satisfaction and organizational commitment.
Practical implications – Based on these empirical findings, employee management should be shifted from a transactional to a relationship-building
orientation – the former being short-term goal-oriented and the latter long-term. Additionally, service organizations should evaluate employee lifetime
value (ELV) as well as customer lifetime value (CLV).
Research limitations/implications – There is a need to extend the results to a diverse range of service industries.
Originality/value – This research explains that empowerment, service training, and service reward contribute to the evaluation of organizational
commitment through the medium of job satisfaction.

Keywords Employee behaviour, Empowerment, Training, Job satisfaction, Customer service management, Hotel and catering industry, South Korea

Paper type Research paper

An executive summary for managers and executive
readers can be found at the end of this article.
Introduction
The delivery of service occurs in the interaction between
service providers and customers (the service encounter).
During the service encounter, customers estimate the service
quality provided by service providers, and compare their
perceived service qualities with their estimated ones. If
customers’ perceptions of the service are beyond what is
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0887-6045.htm
expected, they are satisfied, and often delighted. In contrast, if
not, customers may consider it to be a dissatisfactory service
encounter. The service encounter can also result in service
providers’ (dis-) satisfaction, and this may affect the
customers’ perceptions of service quality.
From the customer’s perspective, service providers’
prosocial behavior can be viewed as customer-oriented
service in the service industry. Thus, prosocial behavior can
be a critical issue for service marketers and practicing
administrators, because prosocial behavior representing
contact employees’ attitudes and behavior toward customers
has a significant effect on the customers’ evaluations of service
quality and subsequent customer satisfaction. Besides, service
providers’ behavior has both short-term (e.g. likeability and

The authors thank Tom J. Brown, Professor of Marketing, College of

Business Administration, Tom Underwood, Research Staff, Biosystems
Journal of Services Marketing
20/4 (2006) 251– 264 Engineering, and Steve A. Morris, Adjunct Professor, School of Electrical
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0887-6045] and Computer Engineering at Oklahoma State University for contributing
[DOI 10.1108/08876040610674599] to insightful comments on this research paper.

251
 What factors influence customer-oriented prosocial behavior?
Yong-Ki Lee, Jung-Heon Nam, Dae-Hwan Park and Kyung Ah Lee
perceived quality) and long-term (e.g. trust and loyalty)
effects on customer perceptions (Lemmink and Mattsson,
2002). Hence, service providers play a critical role in
customer experiences by summarizing, describing, and
defining services to customers (Bitner et al., 1994).
Because customers’ evaluations of service encounters are
often influenced by the interpersonal interactions with service
providers, service firms must find ways to effectively manage
their service providers to help ensure that their attitudes and
behavior are conducive to the delivery of quality service
(Hartline and Ferrell, 1996). A number of leading hotels in
Korea (see Shilla Hotel and Westin Chosun Hotel) have made
all efforts to establish service providers’ behavior so as to draw
customers’ favorable responses (Lee et al., 1997).
Recently, the antecedents and consequences of service
providers’ prosocial behavior have been extensively discussed
in the services marketing literature. The research findings
consistently show that job satisfaction (MacKenzie et al.,
1998; Netemeyer et al., 1997) and organizational
commitment (Munene, 1995) are significant contributors to
prosocial behavior. In other words, business executives have
come to emphasize how to increase the level of job satisfaction
and organizational commitment. In addition, job satisfaction
is known as the essential antecedent of organizational
commitment (e.g. Williams and Hazer, 1986).
In this study, based on service related literature, the authors
indicate that empowerment, service training, and service
reward are positively related to job satisfaction (Lee et al.,
1999) and organizational commitment (Lee et al., 1997, 1999).
Empowerment is a key factor to enhance job satisfaction and
organizational commitment of contact employees, because
thereby they obtain the flexibility to make on-the-spot decisions
(Lee et al., 1999). An effective training program also affects
service providers’ jobs and job environment satisfaction and
also increases their organizational commitment (Harel and
Tzafrir, 1999). Moreover, a specific reward system influences
service providers’ behavior, and eventually their job satisfaction
and organizational commitment (Hartline and Ferrell, 1996).
It is therefore reasonable to expect that these three factors
(empowerment, service training, and service reward) can be
applied to change the service climate linked to customer
satisfaction in a specific organization (Johnson, 1996; Lynn
et al., 2000).
However, a structural relationship among empowerment,
service training, service reward, job satisfaction, organizational
commitment, and prosocial behavior has not been empirically
investigated. Based on previous research, the authors establish
a structural model examining empowerment, service training,
and service reward influence the prosocial behavior of service
providers through their job attitudes including job satisfaction
and organizational commitment (see Figure 1) and examine
the structural relationships among them using structural
equation modeling analysis. Such research is important for
service managers interested in which factors of service
environment impact positively or negatively on customer-
contact employees’ job satisfaction, organizational
commitment, and prosocial behavior.
Literature review
Prosocial behavior
Prosocial behavior refers to the helpful behavior of service
providers directed toward an organization or other individuals
252
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 20 · Number 4 · 2006 · 251 –264
(Bettencourt and Brown, 1997, p. 41). This behavior is part
of service providers’ organizational roles and are intended to
promote the welfare of the individual or organization at which
they are directed (Brief and Motowidlo, 1986; Organ, 1988).
Brief and Motowidlo (1986) state that prosocial behavior
varies according to whether they are functional or
dysfunctional for organizational effectiveness, prescribed or
not prescribed as part of one’s organizational role, and
directed toward an individual or an organizational target.
Bettencourt and Brown (1997) present the finding that from
the service provider’s point of view, prosocial behavior is
referred to as role-prescribed customer service, extra-role
customer service, and cooperation. In this study, based on
Bettencourt and Brown (1997) findings, the authors put
emphasis on role-prescribed customer service and extra-role
customer service to define prosocial behavior and represent
the aspect of the customer orientation of service providers.
First, role-prescribed customer service is a service
provider’s expected behavior derived from implicit norms in
the workplace or from explicit obligations as specified in
organizational documents such as job description and
performance evaluation forms (Brief and Motowidlo, 1986).
These expected customer services include exhibiting common
courtesy, demonstrating accurate knowledge of policies and
products, addressing customers by name, and greeting and
saying “thank you” to customers (Bettencourt and Brown,
1997). This behavior also improves customer satisfaction,
service quality perception, loyalty, and sales performance
(Bitner et al., 1990; George, 1991; Keaveney, 1995).
Second, extra-role customer service refers to discretionary
behavior of contact employees that extends beyond formal
role requirements. This means that contact employees
“delight” customers by providing “extra attention,”
“spontaneous exceptional services,” and “little extras”
during the service encounter for customer satisfaction and
positive emotional responses (Bitner et al., 1990). This
includes specific service encounters in which employees go
“out of the way” or “beyond the call” for customers
(Bettencourt and Brown, 1997). Extra-role customer service
can be functional by providing customers with advantages,
but often dysfunctional by inhibiting organizational efficiency
(Brief and Motowidlo, 1986).
Antecedents of prosocial behavior
Job satisfaction
Locke (1976) defined job satisfaction as “a general
pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the
appraisal of one’s job or job experiences” (Locke, 1976,
p. 1300). Job satisfaction is also defined as the general
emotional evaluations of service providers for their job
situation and job experiences (Brown and Peterson, 1993).
Because service providers’ behavior plays a key role in
recognizing service quality, job satisfaction is important in the
service industry as well as the manufacturing industry
(Hartline and Ferrell, 1996).
Organ (1988) and Smith et al. (1983) report that service
providers’ job satisfaction is a factor that enhances their
citizenship behavior (e.g. helping co-workers, volunteering for
things that are not required) needed to achieve organizational
performance. Moreover, Rogers et al. (1994) state that
increasing job satisfaction among service providers has the
potential of generating a higher level of customer satisfaction.
Beyond this, Hoffman and Ingram (1992) argue that the
 What factors influence customer-oriented prosocial behavior?
Yong-Ki Lee, Jung-Heon Nam, Dae-Hwan Park and Kyung Ah Lee
Figure 1 Research model
business must first satisfy the needs of its employees in order
to satisfy the needs of customers. Maister (2001) also suggests
that employee satisfaction increases the employee’s rating of
work quality and client relationships, and in turn, the
company’s financial performance.
Therefore, it is necessary to develop and retain long-term
service providers to maintain a close bond with customers
through the job satisfaction of service providers. Such can be
the foundation to enhance a positive interaction between
service providers and customers (Reichheld and Sasser, 1990).
Organizational commitment
Organizational commitment can be defined as a relative
strength of a service provider’s identification, involvement,
and loyalty in a particular organization (Mowday et al., 1979,
p. 226).
According to Harvey and Brown (1992), organizational
commitment has been noticed as a key element of
organizational goal achievement, innovation, and stability.
Furthermore, organizational commitment improves trust
among service providers, business owners, organizational
units, and interest-related others in an organization (Harvey
and Brown, 1992). As a result, organizational commitment
promotes relationships between superiors and subordinates,
and improves an organizational climate. As organizational
commitment increases, organizational development, growth,
and survival are enhanced.
Organizational commitment is also defined as an
antecedent which affects the prosocial behavior of service
providers (Munene, 1995). MacKenzie et al. (1998) also
provide empirical evidence that organizational commitment
can be the antecedent of prosocial behavior.
Empowerment
Empowerment refers to a situation in which managers give
service providers the discretion to make day-to-day decisions
about job-related activities (Bowen and Lawler, 1992, p. 31).
Conger and Kanungo (1988, p. 476) suggested that
empowerment affects the initiation and persistence of
employee’s task behavior. Empowered service providers can
253
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 20 · Number 4 · 2006 · 251 –264
respond to customers’ needs as quickly and effectively as
possible. Bateson (1995) suggests that empowerment makes
employees more customer-focused, responsive, and responsible
and improves morale and self-image. Several researchers also
contend that an organization should empower its employees
with information and rewards based on company performance,
and give them the authority to make independent decisions
that can advance the organization’s mission (Bowen and
Lawler, 1992; Kelley, 1993). Consequently, empowerment is
thought to be vital because contact employees need the
flexibility to make on-the-spot decisions to completely satisfy
customers (Hartline and Ferrell, 1996).
Lashley (1995) suggests that empowerment has several
benefits such as: more responsive service; customer
complaints dealt with quickly; well-motivated staff; and
higher service quality. Similarly, allowing service providers to
use their discretion in serving customers has many positive
influences on the satisfaction of basic human desires, loyalty,
and self-esteem as well as on more responsive customer
service (Hellriegel et al., 1999).
Service training
Service training is considered as one of general management
strategies to cope with the high volume of customer requests
and market needs (Harel and Tzafrir, 1999). Service training
provides a medium for the communication of new
organizational strategies, new values, new tools, and new
ways of performing work (Kassicieh and Yourstone, 1998).
Therefore, an effective training program has a significant
effect on customer satisfaction (Gonzales et al., 1999).
Schlesinger and Heskett (1991) assert that leading service
firms should invest in people as much as in machines,
especially providing for service skill training in order to
enhance service providers’ abilities which meet complex
customers’ service requests. According to Benoy (1996), a
well-trained and dedicated staff can enhance a customer’s
service experience and contribute significantly to an
organization’s reputation for responsive service. But high
employee turnover, inexperienced new employees, and low
 What factors influence customer-oriented prosocial behavior?
Yong-Ki Lee, Jung-Heon Nam, Dae-Hwan Park and Kyung Ah Lee
morale among members of professional staff can harm an
organization’s performance during each service encounter.
In total quality management (TQM)-related literature,
training is linked to organizational quality management
strategy and therefore to business performance (e.g. Agus
et al., 2000; Powell, 1995). In other words, training has a
positive effect on organizational performance (Schonberger,
1992). Furthermore, training is referred to as a key factor to
improve service quality (Pfeffer, 1995).
In general, there are at least two ways through which
training activities influence organizational performance. First,
they improve the skills and abilities relevant to service
providers’ tasks and development. Second, they increase
employees’ satisfaction with their jobs and workplaces (Harel
and Tzafrir, 1999). Indeed, Bartel (1994) found that an
investment in training increased productivity.
Service reward
Connecting service providers’ rewards with service
performance is a key component of service quality (Berry
et al., 1994). Hartline and Ferrell (1996) argue that the
service-oriented behavior of service providers is influenced by
clear, specific reward programs (e.g. promotion and bonus).
Rewarding and recognizing excellent service are highly related
to customer satisfaction with service quality (Johnson, 1996),
and were also associated with customer satisfaction and
service passion (Schneider and Bowen, 1993).
In addition, Lawler (2000) highlighted the importance of
reward in that reward strategy plays a key role in gaining
competition and winning in markets. Similarly, Gomez-Mejia
and Wellbourne (1988) state that an advanced reward system
can be a potential source of obtaining competition in markets,
and retaining excellent employees. Rewards associated with
excellence increase service providers’ productivity and reduce
absenteeism (Kaufman, 1992).
Research hypotheses
Relationship between job satisfaction and prosocial behavior
Job satisfaction has a positive effect on the customer orientation
of service providers (Hoffman and Ingram, 1992). Dienhart
et al. (1992) suggest that increasing the employees’ job
satisfaction can assist in improving their overall service
orientation. In addition, service oriented employees are
described as attentive, pleasant, and responsive to customers’
needs, which leads to better customer service. Several
researchers also found that job satisfaction affects these
service providers’ prosocial behavior (MacKenzie et al., 1998;
Netemeyer et al., 1997; Smith et al., 1983).
Therefore, we propose the following hypotheses:
H1. Service providers’ job satisfaction is positively
associated with their role-prescribed customer service.
H2. Service providers’ job satisfaction is positively
associated with their extra-role customer service.
Relationship between organizational commitment and prosocial
behavior
Organizational commitment is defined as an antecedent
influencing service providers’ prosocial behavior (Brief and
Motowidlo, 1986; MacKenzie et al., 1998; Munene, 1995).
In general, service providers who possess strong
organizational commitment also have the will to work
beyond required duties. This positively affects excellent
service quality (Zeithaml et al., 1990). Similarly, Kim and
Han (2000), based on their empirical research, suggest that
254
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 20 · Number 4 · 2006 · 251 –264
service providers who take into account the relationship with
their organizations will perform prosocial behavior toward
their customers with an interest in organizational profits.
Thus, based on previous research, we propose the following
hypotheses:
H3. Service providers’ organizational commitment is
positively associated with their role-prescribed
customer service.
H4. Service providers’ organizational commitment is
positively associated with their extra-role customer
service.
Relationship between job satisfaction and organizational
commitment
Job satisfaction is widely studied as an antecedent to promote
organizational commitment (Brown and Peterson, 1993;
Reichers, 1985; Williams and Hazer, 1986). Although both
job satisfaction and organizational commitment are regarded
as job attitudes, job satisfaction is also considered to cause
organizational commitment because it is more specific, less
stable, and more rapidly formed (Williams and Hazer, 1986).
This direction of causality has been supported by many other
researchers as well (MacKenzie et al., 1998; Steers, 1977;
Udo et al., 1997).
In fact, empirical research indicates that in service-based
organizations, employees’ perceptions of job satisfaction have
a significant effect on organizational commitment (Davy et al.,
1991; Smith et al., 1996).
On the basis of these findings, we propose the following
hypothesis:
H5. Service providers’ job satisfaction is positively
associated with their organizational commitment.
Relationship among empowerment, job satisfaction, and
organizational commitment
Empowerment enhances service providers’ self-esteem and
loyalty toward the oganization by allowing them to make on-
the-spot decisions (Iris, 1991), and causes high levels of job
satisfaction (Lee et al., 1997, 1999; Maister, 2001). More
empowered service providers have higher levels of job
satisfaction and lower levels of job-related strain (Spreitzer
et al., 1997). Similarly, empowered customer-contact
employees have higher levels of job satisfaction (Kirkman and
Rosen, 1999). Lee (2001) also reached a similar conclusion.
Thus, based on prior research, we propose the following
hypothesis:
H6. Empowerment is positively associated with service
providers’ job satisfaction.
Steers (1977) suggests that a customer-contact employee’s
experience of empowerment might account for more variance
in his or her commitment level rather than the more objective
duties or organizational characteristics. More empowered
service providers have higher levels of organizational
commitment (Kirkman and Rosen, 1999). Similarly,
Thomas and Velthouse (1990), and Kanter (1993) found
that more empowered service providers have higher levels of
organizational commitment, and an increased tendency of
identification with the organization. Lee et al. (1999) suggest
that an increase in the managers’ use of empowerment, a
component of organizational service orientation, leads to
higher levels of customer-contact employees’ organizational
commitment in the context of the Korean hotel industry.
 What factors influence customer-oriented prosocial behavior?
Yong-Ki Lee, Jung-Heon Nam, Dae-Hwan Park and Kyung Ah Lee
Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:
H7. Empowerment is positively associated with service
providers’ organizational commitment.
Relationship among service training, job satisfaction, and
organizational commitment
Human relation skills are essential for customer-contact
employees (Benoy, 1996; Johnson, 1996). Training plays a
role in gaining these skills. It is therefore reasonable to expect
that service providers who acquire more training
opportunities are more likely to show higher levels of job
satisfaction and organizational commitment (Lee et al., 1999).
According to Harel and Tzafrir (1999), training not only
improves skills and abilities relevant to employees’ tasks and
development, but it also increases employees’ satisfaction with
their jobs and workplaces. In addition, McEvoy (1997) found
that training affects organizational commitment, participant
knowledge, and organization-related self-esteem.
Hence, we propose the following hypotheses:
H8. Service training is positively associated with service
providers’ job satisfaction.
H9. Service training is positively associated with service
provider’s organizational commitment.
Relationship among service reward, job satisfaction, and
organizational commitment
Service-related service providers’ behavior is influenced by
clear, specific reward programs (Hartline and Ferrell, 1996).
This means that rewarding and recognizing excellent service
highly affects service providers’ job satisfaction (Johnson,
1996). Service providers who gain rewards resulting from
excellent job performance are more likely to possess high
levels of job satisfaction and organizational commitment than
those who do not (Lee et al., 1999; MacKeizie et al., 1998).
Accordingly, we propose the following hypotheses:
H10. Service reward is positively associated with service
providers’ job satisfaction.
H11. Service reward is positively associated with service
providers’ organizational commitment.
Methodology
Samples and data collection
The sample of the study consisted of tourism hotels located in
South Korea. We contacted chief executive officers of 301
hotels (43 for five-star hotels; 63 for four-star hotels; 195 for
three-star hotels) to introduce the purpose of the study and
encourage participation. A total of 265 hotels agreed to
participate in the study. To collect the data from customer
contact employees, we selected food and beverage and
housekeeping departments as a sampling frame. We
distributed two copies of the questionnaire to each of 265
contacted hotels (a total of 530). A total of 219 of 530 employee
questionnaires distributed (41.3 percent response rate) were
returned. However, due to incomplete answers, two
questionnaires were eliminated, providing a final sample of 217.
According to the hotel grade, the five-star deluxe hotel was
55 (25.3 percent), the four-star deluxe hotel was 56 (25.8
percent), and the three-star hotel was 106 (48.9 percent). The
demographic characteristics of the samples indicated that 113
respondents were male (52.1 percent) and 104 were female
(47.9 percent). With regard to departments, Food and
Beverage was 101 (46.5 percent) and Housekeeping was 116
255
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 20 · Number 4 · 2006 · 251 –264
(53.5 percent). According to year’s tenure, 90 were less than
three years (41.5 percent), 48 were four to five years (22.1
percent), 77 were six years (35.5 percent), and two gave no
response (0.9 percent).
Measures
A seven-point scoring format ranging from “strongly disagree”
to “strongly agree” was used to measure all variables.
To measure customer-contact employees’ customer-oriented
prosocial behavior for customers’ needs, the items were
adopted from the Bettencourt and Brown’s (1997) study.
Ten items assessed the perceptions of employees for role-
prescribed customer service and extra-role customer service.
Job satisfaction was measured by using the five items developed
by Brayfield and Rothe (1951). Organizational commitment
was measured with the five-item scale used by Jaworski and
Kohli (1993). The empowerment scale consisted of two items
drawn from the Lytle et al.’s (1998) study. The service training
scale consisted of three items drawn from the Lytle et al.’s
(1998) study that assessed the extent of the education and
training of service providers designed to improve customer
services. The service reward scale consisted of two items drawn
from the Lytle et al.’s (1998) study (see Table I).
Results
Reliability assessment
To purify the measurement scale for each construct, the
reliability test was used. Overall, one item from the extra-role
customer service construct was eliminated. The reliabilities of
the final measures were then assessed.
The coefficient alphas of seven constructs are above 0.6,
which was considered to be acceptable for the study (see
Table I).
Measurement results
The overall measurement quality was assessed using
confirmatory factor analysis (Anderson and Gerbing, 1992).
Although measurement quality is sometimes assessed factor
by factor, each multiple-item indicator was considered
simultaneously to provide for the fullest test of convergent
and discriminant validity. Initial analyses suggested that eight
items with low factor loadings (below 0.50) should be
dropped from further analyses (see Table II).
All loadings exceed 0.5, and each indicator t-value exceeds
4.8 (p , 0:001). The x2 fit statistics shows 184.23 with 114
degrees of freedom (p , 0:001). The root mean squared error
for approximation (RMSEA) is 0.05, the comparative fit
index (CFI) is 0.97, the adjusted goodness-of-fit index
(AGFI) is 0.87, and the parsimony normed fit index (PNFI)
is 0.69. The x2/df ratio is 1.62. All statistics support the
overall measurement quality given a large sample and the
number of indicators (Anderson and Gerbing, 1992).
Furthermore, the evidence of discriminant validity exists
when the proportion of variance extracted in each construct
exceeds the square of the F coefficients representing its
correlation with other factors (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). As
shown in Table III, one pair of scales with the highest
correlation between them is service training and service
reward (F ¼ 0:75, F2 ¼ 0:56). The variance extracted
estimates are 0.70 and 0.78, respectively, indicating
adequate discriminant validity. Although one may also be
concerned about the discriminant validity of the job
 What factors influence customer-oriented prosocial behavior?
Yong-Ki Lee, Jung-Heon Nam, Dae-Hwan Park and Kyung Ah Lee
Table I Reliability coefficients of measures
Measures and items
Empowerment 0.83
EMP1 Our hotel service providers can make important customer
decision without seeking management approval
EMP2 Our hotel service providers have responsibility and authority to
act independently in order to provide excellent service
Training 0.86
TRA1 Every employee in our hotel receives personal skills training
that enhances his/her ability to deliver high quality service
TRA2 We spend much time and effort in simulated training activities
that help us provide higher levels of service when actually
encountering the customer
TRA3 During training sessions, our hotel works through exercises to
identify and improve attitudes toward customers
Reward
REW1 Our hotel management provides excellent incentives and
rewards at all levels for service quality, not just productivity
REW2 Our hotel noticeably celebrates that excellent service are used
to measure the extent to which organization and management
provide reward for service quality of service providers
Job satisfaction
JS1 There are some conditions concerning my job that could be
improved
JS2 My job is like a hobby to me
JS3 My job is usually interesting enough to keep me from getting
bored
JS4 It seems that service providers are more interested in their jobs
JS5 I consider my job rather unpleasant
Organizational commitment 0.90
OC1 I feel as though my future is intimately linked to that of the
hotel
OC2 I would be happy to make personal sacrifices if it were
important for the hotel’s well-being
OC3 The bonds between the hotel and its employees are strong
OC4 I am proud to work for the hotel
OC5 I often go above and beyond the call of duty to ensure the
hotel’s well-being
Role-prescribed customer service
RPCS1 I perform all those tasks for customers that are required of him/
her
RPCS2 I meet formal performance requirements when serving
customers
RPCS3 I fulfill responsibilities to customers as specified in the job
description
RPCS4 I adequately complete all expected customer-service behaviors
RPCS5 I help customers with those things which are required of him/
her
Extra-role customer service
ERCS1 I voluntarily assist customers even if it means going beyond job
requirement
ERCS2 I help customers with problems beyond what is expected or
required
ERCS3 I often go above and beyond the call of duty when serving
customers
ERCS4 I willingly go out of his/her way to make a customer satisfied
ERCS5 I frequently go out the way to help a customer
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 20 · Number 4 · 2006 · 251 –264
satisfaction and organizational commitment constructs, the
correlation between job satisfaction and organizational
a commitment is 0.63 (F2 ¼ 0:40). The variance extracted
estimates for these scales are 0.56 and 0.55, respectively.
Finally, the correlation between service training and
organizational commitment is 0.56 (F2 ¼ 0:31). The
variance extracted estimates for each of these scales are 0.70
and 0.55, respectively. Thus, according to this assessment, the
measures appear to have acceptable levels and validity.
Structural model results
Overall model results
The hypothesized model was tested using LISREL 8.5. The
resulting x2 is 207.00 with 121 degrees of freedom
(p ¼ 0:000; GFI ¼ 0:90; AGFI ¼ 0:86; RMSEA ¼ 0:057;
NFI ¼ 0:91; CFI ¼ 0:96), which suggests that the
hypothesized model fits the data (see Figure 2). In Table IV,
we present the resulting standardized parameter estimates.
0.80 Within the overall model, the estimates of the structural
coefficients provide the basic tests of the proposed theory.
Following the conceptual model, we first address the effects of
job satisfaction and organizational commitment on the
consequences variables, and then discuss the links between
empowerment, training, reward, job satisfaction, and
0.81 organizational commitment.
Job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and prosocial
behavior
The set of hypotheses (H1-H5) address the relationship
between job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and two
prosocial behavior variables (role-prescribed customer service
and extra-role customer service). The expected relationship
between job satisfaction and role-prescribed customer service
(H1) is supported by the positive path coefficient
(b31 ¼ 0:61), statistically significant at the p , 0:01 level.
However, job satisfaction does not affect extra-role customer
service (b41 ¼ 0:18, n.s.), thus not supporting H2.
H3 and H4 posit that an increase in organizational
commitment improves role-prescribed and extra-role
customer service. The empirical results suggest that
organizational commitment does not increase significantly
role-prescribed customer service (b32 ¼ 0:07, n.s.) and extra-
role customer service (b42 ¼ 0:18, n.s.).
0.76 Further, we hypothesize that job satisfaction is positively
associated with service providers’ organizational commitment
(H5). The path coefficient estimate is positive (b21 ¼ 0:51),
and statistically significant at the p , 0:01 level, thus
providing the support for H5.
Empowerment and job satisfaction, organizational commitment
H6 and H7 state that empowerment is positively associated
with service providers’ job satisfaction and organizational
commitment. Service providers’ empowerment does not have
a significant positive effect on job satisfaction (g11 ¼ 0:05,
0.62 n.s.), thus not supporting H6. In contrast, empowerment
influences organizational commitment in the expected
direction (g21 ¼ 0:19, p , 0:01), thus supporting H7.
Training and job satisfaction, organizational commitment
H8 and H9 state that training is positively associated with
service providers’ job satisfaction and organizational
commitment. As theorized, training for service providers has
a significant positive effect on both job satisfaction
(g13 ¼ 0:30, p , 0:10), and organizational commitment
(g23 ¼ 0:57, p , 0:01). Thus, H8 and H9 are supported.
256
 What factors influence customer-oriented prosocial behavior? Journal of Services Marketing
Yong-Ki Lee, Jung-Heon Nam, Dae-Hwan Park and Kyung Ah Lee Volume 20 · Number 4 · 2006 · 251 –264

Table II Standardized measurement coefficients and t-values resulting from confirmatory factor analysis
Service Job Organizational Role-
Empowerment training Service reward satisfaction commitment prescribed Extra-role
EMP1 0.78 (12.62)
EMP2 0.96 (16.40)
TRA1 0.83 (14.83)
TRA2 0.90 (16.78)
TRA3 0.92 (16.84)
REW1 0.81 (13.90)
REW2 0.87 (15.06)
JS3 0.70 (11.06)
JS4 0.81 (13.23)
JS5 0.72 (11.35)
OC1 0.62 (9.84)
OC3 0.75 (12.59)
OC4 0.93 (17.68)
OC5 0.83 (14.67)
RPCS1 0.90 (14.40)
RPCS2 0.81 (12.76)
ERCS2 0.74 (6.31)
ERCS3 0.53 (4.81)
Variance
Extracted 0.77 0.70 0.78 0.56 0.55 0.73 0.49
2
Notes: x ¼ 184:23, df ¼ 114 (p , 0:001), CFI ¼ 0:97, PNFI ¼ 0:69, RMSEA ¼ 0:05

Table III Correlation estimates (F) and construct means

EMP TRA REW JS OC RPCS Mean (S.D.)
Empowerment (EMP) 1.00 4.57 (1.12)
Training (TRA) 0.52 1.00 4.95 (1.09)
Reward (REW) 0.58 0.75 1.00 4.88 (1.11)
Job satisfaction (JS) 0.36 0.51 0.50 1.00 5.14 (0.98)
Organizational commitment (OC) 0.48 0.56 0.56 0.63 1.00 5.08 (1.05)
Role-prescribed customer service (RPCS) 0.35 0.43 0.43 0.56 0.45 1.00 5.41 (1.02)
Extra-role customer service (ERCS) 0.30 0.27 0.27 0.18 0.21 0.19 4.37 (1.16)

Reward and job satisfaction, organizational commitment
H10 and H11 state that reward is positively associated with
service providers’ job satisfaction and organizational
commitment. The empirical results afford mixed support for
these hypotheses. Rewards for service providers predict the
improvement of job satisfaction (g12 ¼ 0:37, p , 0:10). In
contrast, rewards for service providers predict negatively the
improvement of organizational commitment (g22 ¼ 20:30,
p , 0:10).
Indirect effects
Empowerment does not have a significantly indirect effect on
both role-prescribed customer service (0.05, n.s.) and extra-
role customer service (0.05, n.s.). Furthermore, training does
not have a significantly indirect effect on both role-prescribed
customer service (0.22, n.s.) and extra-role customer service
(0.05, n.s.). In contrast, reward has an indirect, positive effect
on both role-prescribed customer service (0.24, p , 0:05) and
extra-role customer service (0.19, p , 0:05).
Testing the rival model
A rival model was built on the basis of theoretical argument,
although to date there are not empirical studies.
Empowerment enables employees to practice discretion in
detecting and delivering customer service needs. In addition,
it allows them to practice service delivery in “the best way.”
(Lashley, 1999). This means that empowerment might
influence role-prescribed and extra-role prosocial behavior
of customer-contact employees directly.
The attitudes and behavior of customer-contact employees
can be critical in influencing customer satisfaction (Bitner et al.,
1990) and evaluation of service delivered (Hartline and Ferrell,
1996). Training programs provide customer-contact employees
with the specialized skills and sensitivity to customer needs
(Ruekert, 1992). Grönroos (1990) suggest that training can
assist employees in developing a holistic view of a service
strategy by providing them with an understanding of the role of
each individual in relation to other individuals, the various
functions with firm and customers. This means that the trained
customer-contact employees can use the skills and knowledge
which will be most effective in service encounters with customer

257
 What factors influence customer-oriented prosocial behavior?
Yong-Ki Lee, Jung-Heon Nam, Dae-Hwan Park and Kyung Ah Lee
Figure 2 Proposed model
which, in turn, increases customer satisfaction. Therefore,
service training will be positively associated with customer-
oriented prosocial behavior of customer-contact employees.
Many researchers have been focused on what type of
rewards is most appropriate for maximizing the productivity
of employees. Some researchers suggest that recognition is
better than financial incentives, because financial incentives
are likely to risk demeaning employees, by attaching a price
tag to their efforts (see Crosby, 1980). In contrast, Hart and
Schlesinger (1991) suggest that performance reviews,
compensation, and rewards should all be restructured to
support quality improvement. Brief and Motowidlo (1986)
asserted that organizational reward systems have a strong
effect on prosocial behavior. Positive reinforcement promotes
prosocial behavior (Moss and Page, 1972). Thus, we can infer
that prosocial behavior of customer-contact employees will be
influenced by organizational service rewards.
Accordingly, we compare the proposed model with its rival
in which empowerment, service training, and service reward
influence prosocial behavior directly using x2 statistics
difference (Venkatraman, 1989).
The test of the rival model is to determine whether the
proposed model, regardless of overall fit (within reasonable
limits), is acceptable, because no other similarly formulated
model can achieve a higher level of fit (Hair et al., 1998). Two
structural models are hierarchically related if one of the models
includes all of the structural relationships present in the other
model plus at least one unique relationship. In other words, one
model is completely “nested” in the other model. For example,
the proposed model is nested in the rival model (see Figure 3).
As shown in Table IV, we compared x2 statistics between the
proposed and rival models using the proposed model as a
reference point. The x2 statistic difference between the proposed
and rival models is significant (x2 ¼ 23:51, df ¼ 6, p , 0:01).
258
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 20 · Number 4 · 2006 · 251 –264
And, the CFI for the rival model (0.97) is slightly superior to the
proposed model (0.96). Also, the GFI and AGFI of the rival
model (0.91 and 0.87, respectively) are slightly higher than
those of the proposed rival model (0.90 and 0.86, respectively).
This finding indicates that adding a path from empowerment,
service training, and service reward to prosocial behavior does
improve its fit significantly. Therefore, we can conclude that the
rival model is the best of the two models.
Discussion and conclusion
We have attempted to make several contributions to the
knowledge and study of the customer-oriented prosocial
behavior relationship phenomena. We have also provided a
more testable model of service firms. Consequently, although
the research findings must be viewed as tentative because a
number of constructs must be included, they provide a rich
basis for further theory development in this area. That is, for
practitioners, in order to improve service quality, this study
provides a useful platform from which future service
encounter research may build.
We found that empowerment was associated with
organizational commitment and extra-role customer service
directly. This means that empowered employees will stay with
their current hotels and contribute to their service-oriented
attitudes and behavior. Employees can be empowered
through the underlying formal structures: having access to
information, receiving support, having access to resources
necessary to carry out their duties, and having an opportunity
to learn and grow (Kanter, 1993). Thus, service managers
should concentrate on building organizational empowerment
structures. Also, employees can obtain empowerment through
informal job characteristics such as alliances with superiors,
peers, and subordinates within the organization (Laschinger
 What factors influence customer-oriented prosocial behavior? Journal of Services Marketing
Yong-Ki Lee, Jung-Heon Nam, Dae-Hwan Park and Kyung Ah Lee Volume 20 · Number 4 · 2006 · 251 –264

Table IV Standardized structural path estimates and t-values

Path Proposed model Rival model
Direct effects
Empowerment ! Job satisfaction 0.05 (0.54) 0.03 (0.31)
Empowerment ! Organizational commitment 0.19 (2.66)* 0.20 (2.77)*
Empowerment ! Role-prescribed customer service – 0.07 (0.69)
Empowerment ! Extra-role customer service – 0.30 (2.34)*
Service training ! Job satisfaction 0.30 (1.82)*** 0.34 (1.71)***
Service training ! Organizational commitment 0.57 (4.43)* 2 0.28 (21.81)***
Service training ! Role-prescribed customer service – 0.18 (0.84)
Service training ! Extra-role customer service – 2 0.16 (20.61)
Service reward ! Job satisfaction 0.37 (1.90)*** 0.33 (1.96)***
Service reward ! Organizational commitment 2 0.30 (2 1.88)*** 0.55 (4.29)*
Service reward ! Role-prescribed customer service – 2 0.14 (20.72)
Service reward ! Extra-role customer service – 0.52 (2.12)**
Job satisfaction ! Organizational commitment 0.51 (5.92)* 0.52 (6.09)*
Job satisfaction ! Role-prescribed customer service 0.61 (4.39)* 0.56 (3.63)*
Job satisfaction ! Extra-role customer service 0.18 (1.13) 0.18 (1.02)
Organizational commitment ! Role-prescribed customer service 0.07 (0.58) 0.07 (0.40)
Organizational commitment ! Extra-role customer service 0.18 (1.18) 2 0.31 (21.53)
Indirect effects
Empowerment ! Organizational commitment – 0.02 (0.31)
Empowerment ! Role-prescribed customer service 0.05 (0.75) 0.03 (0.48)
Empowerment ! Extra-role customer service 0.05 (1.30) 2 0.06 (21.30)
Service training ! Organizational commitment – 0.18 (1.57)
Service training ! Role-prescribed customer service 0.22 (1.62) 0.18 (1.39)
Service training ! Extra-role customer service 0.05 (0.53) 0.10 (0.99)
Service reward ! Organizational commitment – 0.17 (2.00)**
Service reward ! Role-prescribed customer service 0.24 (2.02)** 0.24 (1.72)***
Service reward ! Extra-role customer service 0.19 (2.13)** 2 0.17 (21.35)
Job satisfaction ! Extra-role customer service 0.28 (1.16) 2 0.16 (21.46)
2
x 207.00 183.49
d.f. 121 115
P 0.000 0.000
2
R
JS 0.47 0.45
OC 0.75 0.75
RPCS 0.45 0.46
ERCS 0.12 0.25
Notes: * p , 0:01; ** p , 0:05; *** p , 0:10

et al., 2001). In addition, a service organization can facilitate
self-managing teams, assign duties, plan and schedule work,
make production or service-oriented decisions, and take
action on problems (Wellins et al., 1990). According to some
researchers, self-managing teams are associated with high
productivity, quality, customer service, job satisfaction, and
organizational commitment (Kirkman and Rosen, 1999).
We also indicated that training is necessary for employees to
possess appropriate customer-oriented behavioral
characteristics. There are numerous factors influencing service
quality, for instance: adaptability, assurance, civility, customer
orientation, recovery, spontaneity, teamwork, empathy,
reliability, responsiveness, and other tangibles of service
employees (e.g. Farrell et al., 2001). Accordingly, when
managers train everyone, not just newcomers prior to service
encounters, they can emphasize what factors influence the
implementation of service quality initiatives (e.g. job satisfaction
and organizational commitment). This means that successful
service organizations value investment in people (Lynn et al.,
2000). Training budgets should be driven by strategic goals and
organizational realities, not on what is affordable or what is left
over after basic expenses have been covered (Benoy, 1996).
Additionally, this study found that service reward increases
job satisfaction, in turn, influencing organizational
commitment. Although service reward did not influence
employees’ prosocial behavior directly, this finding is likely to
be consistent with the claim that the linkage between
compensation and service performance increases service
quality (Schlesinger and Heskett, 1991) and organizational
performance (Lytle et al., 1998). According to social exchange
theory, reward-produced satisfaction generates reciprocity or
equity-striving behavior by recipients (Organ, 1977).
Employees are motivated when their performances are
carefully assessed and recognized. Thus, a performance

259
 What factors influence customer-oriented prosocial behavior?
Yong-Ki Lee, Jung-Heon Nam, Dae-Hwan Park and Kyung Ah Lee
Figure 3 Rival model
appraisal mechanism should be built based on assessing and
recognizing service performance. The absence of economic
rewards, such as pay and benefits, will lead to discontent, but
their presence will not add to long-term satisfaction. Thus,
managers can drive job enrichment factors, such as
recognizing contributions, employee involvement in decision
making, and management’s keeping the lines of
communication open to improve employee satisfaction
(Spinelli and Canvas, 2000). Also, managers can provide
employees with incentives as a result of excellent evaluation,
customer appraisal awards, promotion according to monthly
and annual sales performance, and overseas training
programs. Not surprisingly, it is our proposition that all
other things being equal, service providers will choose the
service organization that will maximize their service rewards
including psychological rewards and economic rewards.
Lastly, this study showed that job satisfaction had a direct
effect on role-prescribed customer service behavior of
employees. This result is consistent with the findings from
previous research (Netemeyer et al., 1997; Williams and Hazer,
1986). This means the greater the job satisfaction, the greater is
the customer-oriented service behavior of customer-contact
employees. Therefore, the development of employee-motivation
programs is very crucial to improve employees’ job satisfaction.
For instance, hotel managers can enhance service providers’ job
satisfaction by investing in service training programs such as
service quality-related team training, problem solving training,
human relation skill training, etc. However, there exist various
service training programs. Thus, the hotel management should
select appropriate programs depending on their situations. For
example, P hotel in Korea has lately operated a program
generating the simultaneous effects of both reward and training
(e.g. overseas training programs).
260
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 20 · Number 4 · 2006 · 251 –264
In contrast, service providers’ organizational commitment
did not affect their role-prescribed customer service behavior.
This finding reflects the current Korean trend for
organizational loyalty (i.e. low organizational loyalty).
Recently, Korean firms have reported failure in driving
employees’ organizational loyalty. In 2003, 66.2 percent of
the employees have experienced changing their jobs as a result
of low annual salary (31.8 percent), insecure status of their
current position (30.2 percent), overload and overtime (14.3
percent), problems in human relations (13.7 percent) and
employment unrelated to employees’ individual aptitudes (6.8
percent) (Seoul Economic Daily, 2003). Conversely,
organizational commitment had a direct influence on service
providers’ extra-role customer service behavior. The extra-role
customer service can often delight customers by providing
“little extras,” “extra attention,” and “spontaneous exceptional
service” (see Bettencourt and Brown, 1997; Bitner et al.,
1990). However, this behavior of contact employees often
inhibits organizational efficiency, because they provide
spontaneous additional services to enhance the relationships
with customers for their own individual intentions. That is,
extra-role customer services benefit customers personally but
are costly for the organization (Brief and Motowidlo, 1986).
Furthermore, Bendapudi and Leone (2001) demonstrate that
numerous managers know that when key contact employees
leave, many customers do as well. Therefore, we conclude that
contact employees in Korea might put more emphasis on
individual goal attainment rather than on organizational goal
attainment. Accordingly, hotel managers should attempt to
promote employees’ motivation through empowerment, service
training, and service reward in order to convert dysfunctional
extra-role customer service into functional one.
 What factors influence customer-oriented prosocial behavior?
Yong-Ki Lee, Jung-Heon Nam, Dae-Hwan Park and Kyung Ah Lee
In sum, based on these findings, the authors suggest as
follows: service organizations should regard their employees
as internal customers while they view customers as external
customers. This means that employee management should be
shifted from a transactional to a relationship-building
orientation – the former being short-term goal-oriented and
the latter long-term. Additionally, service organizations
should evaluate employee lifetime value (ELV) as well as
customer lifetime value (CLV). Although benefits that
employees receive are important, they may not recognize
such benefits. Furthermore, even if they are aware of the
benefits, they may not have quantified their value. Service
organizations might strategically promote these benefits as
reasons to maintain good relationships with their employees.
The service organizations could help their employees
understand and quantify the value of these benefits that
they regularly receive from being within the service
organizations and the related costs (dollars, time,
psychological costs) of switching or turnover. If employees
understand better the actual economic, time, psychological,
and energy-saving value of staying with a particular service
organization, they might be less likely to switch or leave.
Calculating this “lifetime value of the relationship with service
organizations” from the employee’s perspective is similar to
the calculation by service organizations when they assess the
“lifetime value” of their customers. Satisfied employees are
likely to cost less to serve their customers, lead to low
customer turnover, and often generate new business for
service organizations via favorable word-of-mouth
communications or references. The features mentioned
above require highly ethical and authentic managerial
policies and procedures which seek the success of the
employees as well as the success of the service organization.
Limitations and future research
Future work in customer-oriented prosocial behavior might
advance in various complementary ways. First, greater
knowledge of the antecedents of prosocial behavior,
including individual and contextual antecedents (Brief and
Motowidlo, 1986) and organizational service orientation, can
be included. For example, we can apply a research method
that enables more comprehensive assessment of models
composed of organizational service orientation, which is
suggested by Lytle et al. (1998). Future research also needs to
include some consequences of prosocial behavior. For
example, prosocial behavior is likely to influence service-
oriented evaluations of employees and be related to
organizational performance: market performance (customer
satisfaction and customer retention) and quality performance
(customer perception of product, service, image/reputation).
Second, longitudinal research would make great
contributions to our understanding of antecedents and
consequences of prosocial behavior variables. Longitudinal
research could be directed at sets of “core” constructs,
making possible better inferences about both their
development over time and their causal sequence.
Third, our samples provide services in the hotel industry.
However, a comparison of the results presented here with
those from other marketing contexts would be worthwhile.
For example, this study can be done in the context of family
restaurants, hospitals, public sectors, etc.
261
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 20 · Number 4 · 2006 · 251 –264
Fourth, we were only able to measure empowerment, service
training, and service reward using the Lytle et al.’s (1998) study
as the antecedents of prosocial behavior. Future studies should
use more refined measures or multiple items for the judgment
of the customer-contact employees of these variables. For
example, empowerment is conceptualized as the gestalt of four
cognitions: a sense of meaning, competence, self-
determination, and impact (Thomas and Velthouse, 1990).
Finally, our sample can further be analyzed by the
respondents’ demographic characteristics, such as gender,
position, department, etc. For example, Babin and Boles
(1998) examined the difference of employee behavior in a
service environment contrasting men and women.
References
Agus, A., Krishman, S.K. and Kadir, S.L.S.A. (2000), “The
structural impact of total quality management on financial
performance relative to competitors through customer
satisfaction: a study of Malaysian manufacturing
companies”, Total Quality Management, Vol. 11 Nos 4-6,
pp. 808-19.
Anderson, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W. (1992), “Assumptions and
comparative strengths of the two-step approach”,
Sociological Methods and Research, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 321-33.
Babin, B.J. and Boles, J.S. (1998), “Employee behavior in a
service environment: a model and test of potential
differences between men and women”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 62 No. 2, pp. 77-91.
Bartel, A.P. (1994), “Productivity gains from the
implementation of employee training programs”, Industrial
Relations, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 411-25.
Bateson, J.E.G. (1995), Managing Services Marketing, Dryden
Press, Fort Worth, TX.
Bendapudi, N. and Leone, R.P. (2001), “How to lose your
star performer without losing customers, too”, Harvard
Business Review, Vol. 79 No. 10, pp. 104-10.
Benoy, J.W. (1996), “Internal marketing builds service
quality”, Journal of Health Care Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 1,
pp. 54-9.
Berry, L.L., Parasuraman, A. and Zeithaml, V.A. (1994),
“Improving service quality in America: lessons learned”,
Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 32-52.
Bettencourt, L.A. and Brown, S.W. (1997), “Contact
employees: relationships among workplace fairness, job
satisfaction and prosocial service behaviors”, Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 73 No. 1, pp. 39-61.
Bitner, M.J., Booms, B.H. and Mohr, L.A. (1994), “Critical
service encounters: the employee’s viewpoint”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 58 No. 4, pp. 95-106.
Bitner, M.J., Booms, B.H. and Tetreault, M.S. (1990), “The
service encounter: diagnosing favorable and unfavorable
incidents”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54 No. 1, pp. 71-84.
Bowen, D.E. and Lawler, E.E. III (1992), “The
empowerment of service workers: what, why, how, and
when”, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 31-9.
Brayfield, A.H. and Rothe, H.F. (1951), “An index of job
satisfaction”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 35,
October, pp. 307-11.
Brief, A.P. and Motowidlo, S.J. (1986), “Prosocial
organizational behaviors”, Academy of Management Review,
Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 710-25.
 What factors influence customer-oriented prosocial behavior?
Yong-Ki Lee, Jung-Heon Nam, Dae-Hwan Park and Kyung Ah Lee
Brown, S.P. and Peterson, R.A. (1993), “Antecedents and
consequences of salesperson job satisfaction: meta-analysis
and assessment of causal effects”, Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 63-77.
Conger, J.A. and Kanungo, R.N. (1988), “The empowerment
process: integrating theory and practice”, Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 471-82.
Crosby, M.A. (1980), “Implications of prior probability
elicitation on auditor sample size decisions”, Journal of
Accounting Research, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 585-93.
Davy, J.A., Kinicki, A.J. and Scheck, C.L. (1991),
“Developing and testing a model of survivor response to
layoffs”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 38, pp. 302-17.
Dienhart, J.R., Gregoire, M.B., Downey, R.G. and Knight,
P.K. (1992), “Service orientation of restaurant employees”,
International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 11
No. 4, pp. 331-46.
Farrell, A.M., Souchon, A.L. and Durden, G.R. (2001),
“Service encounter conceptualization: employees’ service
behaviors and customers’ service quality perceptions”,
Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 17 Nos 5/6, pp. 577-93.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural
equation models with unobservable variables and
measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18
No. 1, pp. 39-50.
George, J.M. (1991), “State or trait: effects of positive mood
on prosocial behavior at work”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 76, April, pp. 199-207.
Gomez-Mejia, L.R. and Wellbourne, V.M. (1988),
“Compensation strategy: an overview and future steps”,
Human Resource Planning, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 173-89.
Gonzales, B., Ellis, Y.M., Riffel, P.J. and Yager, D. (1999),
“Training at IBM’s human resource service center: linking
people, technology, and HR processes”, Human Resource
Management, Vol. 38, summer, pp. 135-42.
Grönroos, C. (1990), Service Management and Marketing,
Lexington Books, Lexington, MA.
Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C.
(1998), Multivariate Data Analysis, 5th ed., Prentice Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Harel, G.H. and Tzafrir, S.S. (1999), “The effect of human
resource management practices on the perceptions of
organizational and market performance of the firm”,
Human Resource Management, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 185-99.
Hart, C. and Schlesinger, L. (1991), “Total quality
management and the human resource professional:
applying the Baldrige framework to human resources”,
Human Resource Management, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 433-54.
Hartline, M.D. and Ferrell, O.C. (1996), “The management
of customer-contact service employees: an empirical
investigation”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60 No. 4,
pp. 52-70.
Harvey, D.F. and Brown, D.R. (1992), An Experiential
Approach to Organization Development, 4th ed., Prentice-
Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Hellriegel, D., Jacson, S.E. and Slocum, J.W. Jr (1999),
Management, South Western College Publishing, Mason, OH.
Hoffman, K.D. and Ingram, T.N. (1992), “Service provider
job satisfaction and customer-oriented performance”,
The Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 68-78.
Iris, M.J. (1991), “Broadening the market orientation:
an added focus on internal customers”, Human Resource
Management, Vol. 30, winter, pp. 455-67.
262
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 20 · Number 4 · 2006 · 251 –264
Jaworski, B.J. and Kohli, A.K. (1993), “Market orientation:
antecedents and consequences”, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 57 No. 3, pp. 53-70.
Johnson, J.W. (1996), “Linking employee perceptions of
service climate to customer satisfaction”, Personnel
Psychology, Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 831-51.
Kanter, R.M. (1993), Men and Women of the Corporation,
2nd ed., Basic Books, New York, NY.
Kassicieh, S.K. and Yourstone, S.A. (1998), “Training,
performance evaluation, rewards, and TQM
implementation success”, Journal of Quality Management,
Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 25-38.
Kaufman, R.T. (1992), “The effects of improshare on
productivity”, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 45
No. 2, pp. 311-22.
Keaveney, S.M. (1995), “Customer switching behavior in
service industries: an exploratory study”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 59 No. 2, pp. 71-82.
Kelley, S.W. (1993), “Discretion and the service employee”,
Journal of Retailing, Vol. 69 No. 1, pp. 104-26.
Kim, J.Y. and Han, D.C. (2000), “Determinants of hotel
employees pro-social behaviors: focusing on the effect of
corporate social performance, corporate economic
performance, involvement, distributive justice”, Korean
Marketing Review, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 103-24.
Kirkman, B.L. and Rosen, B. (1999), “Beyond self-
management: antecedents and consequences of team
empowerment”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 42
No. 1, pp. 58-74.
Laschinger, H.K.S., Finegan, J. and Shamian, J. (2001), “The
impact of workplace empowerment organizational trust on
staff nurses’ work satisfaction and organizational
commitment”, Health Care Management Review, Vol. 26
No. 3, pp. 7-23.
Lashley, C. (1995), “Towards an understanding of employee
empowerment in hospitality services”, International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 27-32.
Lashley, C. (1999), “Employee empowerment in services: a
framework for analysis”, Personnel Review, Vol. 28 No. 3,
pp. 169-91.
Lawler, E.E. (2000), Rewarding Excellence: Pay Strategies for
the New Economy, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Lee, Y.K. (2001), “The impact of customers’ perceived
prosocial behavior of customer-contact employees on the
evaluation of service quality, customer satisfaction, and
customer voluntary performance”, Korean Marketing
Review, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 105-25.
Lee, Y.K., Park, D.H. and Park, Y.K. (1997), “Perceived
service orientation of customer-contact service employees
in hotel firms: the structural relationship between
organizational values and employees’ attitudes”, Daehan
Journal of Business, Vol. 16, pp. 693-721.
Lee, Y.K., Park, D.H. and Yoo, D. (1999), “The structural
relationships between service orientation, mediators, and
business performance in Korea hotel firms”, Asia Pacific
Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 59-70.
Lemmink, J. and Mattsson, J. (2002), “Employee behavior,
feelings of warmth and customer perception in service
encounters”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution
Management, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 18-33.
Locke, E.A. (1976), “The nature and causes of job
satisfaction”, in Dunnette, M. (Ed.), Handbook of
 What factors influence customer-oriented prosocial behavior?
Yong-Ki Lee, Jung-Heon Nam, Dae-Hwan Park and Kyung Ah Lee
Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Rand McNally,
Chicago, IL, pp. 1297-350.
Lynn, M.L., Lytle, R.S. and Bobek, S. (2000), “Service
orientation in transitional markets: Does it matter?”,
European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 34 Nos 3/4, pp. 279-98.
Lytle, R.S., Hom, P.W. and Mokwa, M.P. (1998),
“SERV *OR: a managerial measure of organizational
service-orientation”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 74 No. 4,
pp. 455-89.
MacKenzie, S.B., Podsakoff, P.M. and Ahearne, M. (1998),
“Some possible antecedents and consequences of in-role
and extra-role salesperson performance”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 62 No. 3, pp. 87-98.
McEvoy, G.M. (1997), “Organizational change & outdoor
management education”, Human Resource Management,
Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 235-50.
Maister, D.H. (2001), “What managers must do to create a
high-achievement culture”, The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant
Administration Quarterly, Vol. 42 No. 6, pp. 90-6.
Moss, M.K. and Page, R.A. (1972), “Reinforcement and
helping behavior”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology,
Vol. 2, pp. 360-71.
Mowday, R.T., Steers, R.W. and Porter, L.W. (1979), “The
measurement of organizational commitment”, Journal of
Vocational Behavior, Vol. 14, pp. 224-47.
Munene, J.C. (1995), “‘Not-on-seat’: an investigation of
some correlates of organizational citizenship behavior of
Nigeria”, Applied Psychology: An International Review, Vol. 44
No. 2, pp. 111-22.
Netemeyer, R.G., Boles, J.S., McKee, D.O. and McMurrian,
R. (1997), “An investigation into the antecedents of
organizational citizenship behaviors in a personal selling
context”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 61 No. 3, pp. 85-98.
Organ, D.W. (1977), “A reappraisal & reinterpretation of the
satisfaction-causes-performance hypothesis”, Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 46-53.
Organ, D.W. (1988), Organizational Citizenship Behavior:
The Good Soldier Syndrome, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA.
Pfeffer, J. (1995), “Producing sustainable competitive
advantage through the effective management of people”,
Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 55-69.
Powell, T.C. (1995), “Total quality management as
competitive advantage: a review and empirical study”,
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 15-38.
Reichers, A.E. (1985), “A review and reconceptualization of
organizational commitment”, Academy of Management
Review, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 465-76.
Reichheld, F.F. and Sasser, W.E. Jr (1990), “Zero defections:
quality comes to services”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 68
No. 5, pp. 105-11.
Rogers, J.D., Clow, K.E. and Kash, T.J. (1994), “Increasing
job satisfaction of service personnel”, Journal of Services
Marketing, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 14-26.
Ruekert, R.W. (1992), “Developing a market orientation: an
organizational strategy perspective”, Internal Journal of
Research in Marketing, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 225-45.
Schlesinger, L.A. and Heskett, J.L. (1991), “The service-
driven service company”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 69
No. 5, pp. 71-81.
Schneider, B. and Bowen, D.E. (1993), “The service
organization: human resources management is crucial”,
Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 39-52.
263
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 20 · Number 4 · 2006 · 251 –264
Schonberger, R.J. (1992), “Total quality management cuts a
broad swath through manufacturing and beyond”,
Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 16-28.
Seoul Economic Daily (2003), “66% of employees have
experienced changing their jobs this year”, Seoul Economic
Daily (Online), 2 April, available at: www.sed.co.kr
Smith, C.A., Organ, D.W. and Near, J.P. (1983),
“Organizational citizenship behavior: its nature and
antecedents”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 68 No. 4,
pp. 653-63.
Smith, K., Gregory, S.R. and Cannon, D. (1996), “Becoming
an employer of choice: assessing commitment in the
hospitality workplace”, International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 8 No. 6, pp. 3-9.
Spinelli, M.A. and Canvas, G.C. (2000), “Investigating the
relationship between employee satisfaction and guest
satisfaction”, The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant
Administration Quarterly, Vol. 41 No. 6, pp. 29-33.
Spreitzer, G.M., Kizilos, M.A. and Nason, S.W. (1997),
“A dimensional analysis of the relationship between
psychological empowerment and effectiveness,
satisfaction, and strain”, Journal of Management, Vol. 23
No. 5, pp. 679-704.
Steers, R.M. (1977), “Antecedents and outcomes of
organizational commitment”, Administrative Science
Quarterly, Vol. 22, pp. 46-56.
Thomas, K.W. and Velthouse, B.A. (1990), “Cognitive
elements of empowerment: an ‘interpretive’ model of
intrinsic task motivation”, Academy of Management Review,
Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 666-81.
Udo, G.J., Guimaraes, T. and Igbaria, M. (1997), “An
investigation of the antecedents of turnover intention for
manufacturing plant managers”, International Journal of
Operations & Production Management, Vol. 17 No. 9,
pp. 912-30.
Venkatraman, N. (1989), “The concept of fit in strategy
research: toward verbal and statistical correspondence”,
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 423-44.
Wellins, R.S., Wilson, R., Katz, A.J., Laughlin, P., Day, C.R.
Jr and Price, D. (1990), Self-Directed Teams: A Study of
Current Practice, DDI, Pittsburgh, PA.
Williams, L.J. and Hazer, J.T. (1986), “Antecedents and
consequences of satisfaction and commitment in turnover
models: a reanalysis using latent variable structural
equation methods”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 71
No. 2, pp. 219-31.
Zeithaml, V.A., Parasuraman, A. and Berry, L.L. (1990),
Delivering Service Quality: Balancing Perceptions and
Expectations, The Free Press, New York, NY.
Further reading
Kenny, D.A. (1979), Correlation and Causality, John Wiley &
Sons, New York, NY.
Lawler, E.E. and Jenkins, G.D. (1992), “Strategic reward
systems”, in Dunnette, D.M. and Hough, M.L. (Eds),
Handbook of Industrial Organizational Psychology, Vol. 3,
Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA, pp. 1009-55.
Corresponding author
Yong-Ki Lee can be contacted at: yongki2@sejong.ac.kr
 What factors influence customer-oriented prosocial behavior?
Yong-Ki Lee, Jung-Heon Nam, Dae-Hwan Park and Kyung Ah Lee
Executive summary and implications for
managers and executives
This summary has been provided to allow managers and executives
a rapid appreciation of the content of this article. Those with a
particular interest in the topic covered may then read the article
in toto to take advantage of the more comprehensive description of
the research undertaken and its results to get the full benefits of the
material present.
What factors influence customer-oriented prosocial
behavior of customer-contact employees?
When a UK engineering company decided it would be a good
idea to begin and end the working day with employees giving
each other a hug, it was claimed that profits and productivity
tripled.
But when a web site asked whether other people wanted a
similar policy introduced where they work, or to give
suggestions for a happy workplace, hugging was definitely out
and much more mundane suggestions in – such as keeping
staff happy by ensuring they were well-informed, allowed to
contribute to the company, to feel involved and to have their
opinions and concerns listened to by the management.
One response was “forget hugs, reward excellence, invest in
employee careers, fair salaries and regular effective
unambiguous communication”. Another said: “Give people
appropriate training, so they can do the job effectively without
struggling. Make sure the workload is realistic. If you just load
more and more onto people the best people will eventually
become stressed and ineffective.”
So hugs may be out, and good communication and effective
training in. Also preferable to a hug is “empowerment” –
giving people involved in customer contact roles the
knowledge, authority and support to respond effectively
when on-the-spot decisions are called for.
Whether managements achieve better job satisfaction
among their people – hopefully leading to more satisfied
customers – by commonsense or by gimmicky approaches,
the fact is that highly ethical and authentic managerial policies
and procedures are required to ensure that the success of
having satisfied employees is reflected in the success of the
organization.
Using hotel employees in Korea for their research, Yong-Ki
Lee et al. analyze the structural relationship between
empowerment, service training, service reward, job attitudes
such as job satisfaction and organizational commitment, and
customer-oriented prosocial behavior of employees – a
relationship they believe has not previously been empirically
investigated. Such research is important for service managers
interested in which factors of service environment impact
positively on customer-contact employees’ job satisfaction,
organizational commitment, and prosocial behaviour.
It may seem obvious to say that a high employee turnover,
inexperienced new employees, and low morale can harm an
organization’s performance during each service encounter,
and that a well-trained and committed staff can enhance those
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
264
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 20 · Number 4 · 2006 · 251 –264
encounters. Not all companies, however, appear convinced
that they should invest as much in people as in equipment.
Some, mistakenly, decide the size of their training budget, not
on what they need to achieve, but on what is left after other
priorities have been costed. Finding the right “mix” of
investment – training courses, wages, rewards, promotion
etc. – is important in retaining good staff and reducing
absenteeism.
There are, however, dangers in not adopting a strategic
approach – notably in the encouragement of contact
employees to go beyond their “role-prescribed customer
service” (the normal behaviour expected of them) to “extra-
role customer service” (discretionary behavior extending
beyond their formal role requirements). Yong-Ki Lee et al. say
this can inhibit organizational efficiency if employees provide
spontaneous additional services to enhance relationships with
customers for their own individual intentions, noting that
customers often follow when key employees leave to join
another organization. Some contact employees might put
more emphasis on individual, rather than organizational, goal
attainment.
The authors suggest that service organizations should
regard their employees as “internal customers”, shifting
employee management from a transactional to a relationship-
building orientation – the former being short-term goal-
oriented and the latter long-term. Additionally, service
organizations should evaluate employee lifetime value (ELV)
as well as customer lifetime value (CLV).
Employees are motivated when their performances are
carefully assessed and recognized by mechanisms such as
appraisal. The absence of economic rewards, such as pay and
benefits, will lead to discontent, but their presence will not
add to long-term satisfaction. Managers can provide
employees with incentives as a result of excellent evaluation,
customer appraisal awards, promotion according to monthly
and annual sales performance, and overseas training
programs. Not surprisingly, all other things being equal, it is
likely that service providers will choose the service
organization that will maximize their service rewards
including psychological and economic rewards.
The greater the job satisfaction, the greater is the customer-
oriented service behavior of customer-contact employees.
Therefore, the development of employee-motivation
programs is crucial to improve job satisfaction. For instance,
hotel managers can enhance service providers’ job satisfaction
by investing in-service training programs, such as service
quality-related team training, problem-solving training,
human relation skill training etc, being careful to select
appropriate programs depending on the situation.
A hug might be fun – but a strategy for valuing and keeping
well-trained staff is also worth embracing.
(A précis of the article “What factors influence customer-oriented
prosocial behavior of customer-contact employees?”. Supplied by
Marketing Consultants for Emerald.)