Splendid Service Next Year Too?! Seasonal employees job satisfaction, intention to return and do more than expected. Ellen Alverén and Karin Eriksson

Transcription

1 Splendid Service Next Year Too?! Seasonal employees job satisfaction, intention to return and do more than expected Ellen Alverén and Karin Eriksson Graduate School Master of Science in Tourism and Hospitality Management Master Degree Project No.2010:86 Supervisor: Tommy Andersson

2 Excellent service next year too?! ABSTRACT The tourism industry is forecasted to grow and as seasonal employment is common in this industry it is likely to increase concurrently. Having motivated and satisfied employees are fundamental in all organizations and especially in the service industry where front-line employees play a key role for the customers perceived service quality. Seasonal work differs from permanent employment in many aspects; hence the human resource management applied should be adjusted accordingly. If seasonal employees are managed properly, this could be a competitive advantage and contribute to the success of an organization. The study focuses on the relationships between certain motivational factors and job satisfaction and the relationship between job satisfaction and seasonal employees intention to return and doing more than expected at work. This study had a quantitative approach and a questionnaire was carried out at four ski resorts with 476 respondents. Correlation and regression analyses were made and it was found that certain motivational factors are related to job satisfaction. Job satisfaction influences the intention to return but did not have a strong influence on organizational citizenship behavior (i.e., doing more than expected at work). The result provides further understanding as regards seasonal workers motivation and behavior. The study also presents recommendations for managerial use. i

3 Excellent service next year too?! ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Foremost, we would like to express a special thanks to our supervisor Tommy Andersson who has inspired us and given generous help and provided good advice. We have enjoyed and learnt a great deal from the discussions with him. We would also like to thank Wajda Irfaeya for her extra support with statistics and SPSS. Furthermore, we are grateful to the opponents of the seminars: Patrycja Ekner and Ksenia Dinaburgskaya. This study could not have been accomplished without the kindness, time and consideration given by the managers at SkiStar and the seasonal employees. A special thanks to our families for their love, joy and support that have always been present even during periods of intense work. ii

4 Excellent service next year too?! TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION Problem discussion Research questions Objectives Limitations Outline... 5 CHAPTER 2: PREVIOUS RESEARCH Job satisfaction Motivation Feedback and responsibility Work context Camaraderie and community Meaningfulness Support Management attitude Payment and benefits Organizational citizenship behavior Intention to return Summary of theory...18 CHAPTER 3: MODEL Proposed model Hypotheses formation Variables definition...22 iii

5 Excellent service next year too?! CHAPTER 4: METHOD Research design Data collection Sample Measures Statistical methods Validity and reliability...29 CHAPTER 5: RESULTS Bivariate correlation Regression analysis T-Test Summary of findings...36 CHAPTER 6: ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION Motivational factors and job satisfaction Relationship job satisfaction OCB-I What influences OCB-I Relationship job satisfaction intention to return What influences intention to return What could have been done differently?...43 CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSIONS Conclusion Suggestions for further research...45 REFERENCES APPENDICES iv

6 Excellent service next year too?! LIST OF FIGURE AND TABLES Figure 1. Influencing Factors on Job Satisfaction, OCB-I and ITR...19 Table 1. Comparison between Sample and Population...26 Table 2. Means, Standard Deviations and Correlations between the Measured Concepts...32 Table 3. Standard Multiple Regression Analysis for the Impact on Job Satisfaction Table 4. Hierarchical Regression Analysis for the Impact on OCB-I...34 Table 5. Hierarchical Regression Analysis for the Impact on ITR...35 Table 6. Differencies in OCB-I and ITR between Permanent and Seasonal Residents...36 Table 7. Result for Hypotheses...37 v

7 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION The tourism industry in Europe is forecasted to grow (e.g., European Commission, 2010; UNWTO, 2010), and as seasonal work is a common way for employment in this industry it is likely to increase concurrently. Knowledge in this area could be of great importance for practitioners and managers in the tourism industry in order to better understand and gain awareness about seasonal employees motivation for work and job satisfaction. With this knowledge, management of various tourism and hospitality organizations could develop and broaden the ground on which they base their managerial decisions which would influence the employees satisfaction. These managerial decisions may entail what incentives management should consider giving to the seasonal workers and how the different work positions for the seasonal workers are designed in order to improve their job satisfaction. Seasonal employees in the tourism industry is also an interesting area for scholars and researchers. This type of employees have often been described as being less motivated and less reliable than permanent employees however research has not been able to confirm these differences between temporary and permanent workers (de Gilder, 2003). Nevertheless there is a complex range of issues for human resource management regarding seasonal employees, for example commitment, employment relationships and loyalty (Ainsworth & Purss, 2009). Seasonal work differs from permanent employment in many aspects, although the human resource management applied in seasonal work is often based on long-term permanent employment principles. There is therefore a need to reconsider and develop the human resource management to better suit the seasonal work conditions (Ainsworth & Purss, 2009). One important aspect of human resource management concerns job satisfaction. Having motivated and satisfied employees is a fundamental element in all organizations and especially in service industries such as tourism and hospitality businesses where the front-line employees play a large role in the customers perceived quality of the service (Lee-Ross, 2003). A manager s ability to motivate the employees is therefore essential for the overall work performance of the employees and hence the overall performance of the organization. If managed right, this ability could therefore be a competitive advantage (Dickson & Huyton, 2008). Hence knowledge relating to work motivation is a very important feature in the tourism and hospitality industry as it may contribute to the success of an organization. 1

8 One big challenge for employers who depend on seasonal workers is to maintain a high level of service quality, in order for the customers to be satisfied and come back. The service quality is a direct outcome of the front-line employees behavior and ability to provide high quality service. The service industry also involves many critical service encounters why the employees willingness to carry out the work tasks in a way that exceeds their requirements is a great asset for the organizations. In addition, it is also beneficial to have returning employees that have experience and knowledge about the work itself and about the organization. The effectiveness of the work increases since returning employees know the drill and as expensive processes of attracting, recruiting, training and introducing newcomers could be reduced. Unfortunately, the tourism and hospitality industry is characterized by a turnover culture where high turnover rates are accepted and seen as a norm (Iverson & Deery, 1997). The turnover culture could hence be a threat for maintaining a high level of service quality. If the organizations could reduce the turnover among seasonal employees, and influence their decision to come back they could increase the organizations bottom-line. Therefore, understanding what motivates employees to come back and what influences them to do more than expected at work could be vital for employers in the service industry. 1.1 Problem discussion Seasonal work is often low skilled which could entail a preconception that employees are easy to replace. However, high turnover rates among these employees involve both direct costs for example recruiting and training new employees, and indirect costs such as a loss of staff expertise and reduced service quality (Hinkin & Tracey, 2000; Tracey & Hinkin, 2008; Lashley, 2002). Mobley (1982) recognizes another considerable negative effect of turnover that is the disruption of social and communication structures among the employees. This is of special interest in a work setting marked by its seasonality as social network and camaraderie have shown to influence retention among seasonal workers (Ismert & Petrick, 2004; Lee-Ross, 1995). (Because turnover and retention are terms for the positive and negative poles of the same concept they are used interchangeably throughout this study.) On the other hand, there might be positive effects of turnover as well such as increased internal mobility opportunities and increased changes in policy and practice (Mobley, 1982). However, these positive effects are perhaps not as related to turnover among seasonal employees as to permanent employees, in particular regarding turnover among management positions. 2

9 Because of the discontinuation between the work periods a risk arises that employees find other occupations during the off season which they then continue with. Since many of the employees are young and have a desire to gain new experiences there is a possibility that they will find another job or start studying. This threat may be bigger for organizations with seasonal employees compared to permanent employment because of the seasonal character of the job that causes discontinuation between the work periods. Another problem could be that seasonal work often entails a special way of living with a fusion between work and leisure and sense of a community among employees. In line with this, Shamir (1981) suggests that if an employee would like to see a change in their lives or in their work environment, the change would have to come out as a need to move and hence quit their job. This of course have a negative effect on the turnover. Studies made in sectors with permanent employees recognize that employees who are more satisfied with their jobs are also more likely to stay with an organization (e.g., Mueller, Boyer, Price, & Iverson, 1994); hence, the relationship between job satisfaction and intention to stay appears as strong. Another issue in the service industry is the lack of control concerning the quality of what is offered, in the sense of service and how the employees respond to requests. In many industries jobs can be clearly defined and exact instructions of what to do can be given. There is little these workers can do that goes beyond their job description that will increase the effectiveness of the organization. However in the tourism and hospitality industry, characterized by a very dynamic nature, it is almost impossible to outline all the tasks and duties that may be occurring. This allows the employees to recognize opportunities where they can go beyond their formal work description and for example act in a way that increases the service towards the customer. Performance by employees beyond what is required or expected which does not lead to any formal rewards is referred to as organizational citizenship behavior (Smith, Organ, and Near, 1983). This type of behavior could be very valuable to organizations in the service sector highly dependent on good service quality as it increases the organizations efficiency and effectiveness (Organ & Ryan, 1995). Therefore it is desirable to have employees that engage in this type of behavior (e.g., Koys, 2001; Turnipseed, 2003). For that reason it is essential to know what might influence this behavior and further what management can do to encourage the behavior among the front-line employees. 3

10 To understand what motivates the employees to perform well and stay with an organization can hence differentiate profitable organizations from others. The aim of this study is partly to contribute with new empirical data that add to the existing knowledge of job satisfaction, organizational citizenship behavior and intention to return among seasonal employees. This knowledge would in addition be important for managers and other practitioners in the industry in order to put effort in enabling a high level of service quality and profitability. 1.2 Research questions From the discussion above, five research questions have been formulated: What influences seasonal employees intention to return? What influences seasonal employees to do more than expected? What is the relationship between certain motivational factors and job satisfaction among seasonal employees? What is the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behavior among seasonal employees? What is the relationship between job satisfaction and intention to return among seasonal employees? 1.3 Objectives The aims of the study are to: Explore the relationship between certain motivational factors and seasonal employees job satisfaction. Analyze the relationship between job satisfaction and intention to return and the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behavior. Recommend management in hospitality organizations with seasonal characteristics how retention and organizational citizenship behavior could be improved. 4

11 1.4 Limitations This study is based on a specific industry and one specific organizational context. The research is conducted at ski resorts which may not be representative for other seasonal settings. The sampling procedure is further a limitation as the sample is a convenience sample and not simple random sample, meaning that the result may be biased. 1.5 Outline This chapter has introduced the subject of seasonal employees and related managerial issues which are the focus of this study. In chapter two we present a literature review on motivation theories of relevance and job behavior focusing on performance and retention. Chapter three introduces our proposed model with corresponding hypotheses. In chapter four, we explain the method used and details about the procedure and characteristics of the sample. In chapter five the results are presented followed by an analysis and discussion of the main findings in chapter six. Finally, in chapter seven, conclusion, managerial implications and suggestions for further research are given. 5

12 CHAPTER 2: PREVIOUS RESEARCH The following discussion presents theories considering motivational factors having a direct effect on job satisfaction, theories that purport job satisfaction as having a direct effect on organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) and intention to return. Theories suggesting an indirect influence on intention to return and OCB with job satisfaction as a middle step are also considered. Some theories also have a direct relationship between motivational factors and intention to return or OCB. 2.1 Job satisfaction Job satisfaction can simply be described as the extent to which employees like their work (Agho, Price, & Mueller, 1992:185). Locke defines job satisfaction as a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one s job or job experience. (Locke, 1976:1300). Job satisfaction is important because it can bring about both positive and negative behaviors. A number of variables have been suggested to have an effect on job satisfaction. These different factors can be divided into three separate categories namely: organizational policies and procedures, specific aspects of the job and personal characteristics. Organizational policies and procedures concern for example supervision, decision making practices and reward systems that can all affect job satisfaction. Specific aspects of the job such as skill, variety, autonomy and feedback also have an important influence. In addition, personality characteristics help determine job satisfaction (Furnham, 2005). Employees with some specific personality characteristics e.g. neuroticism, self-efficacy and self-esteem are more likely to be satisfied with their job and will possibly also perform better at work (Judge & Bono, 2001; Organ, 1994). Many studies have been made that establish antecedents in the work environment influencing job satisfaction. Well-known theories on work motivation acknowledge certain motivational factors that affect job satisfaction (e.g., Herzberg, Mausner, & Snyderman, 1959; Hackman & Oldham, 1980). Other research suggests the social aspect camaraderie as such antecedent (Ismert & Petrick, 2004; Price & Mueller, 1981). In line with this, Peiró, Agut, and Grau (2010) clearly point out that social aspects need to be considered when studying the antecedents of job satisfaction. Research has also shown that management attitude and payment are some of the 6

13 significant influencing variables impacting on seasonal employees job satisfaction (Ismert & Petrick, 2004). Employees overall job satisfaction is often argued in the literature to predict outcomes such as productivity and organizational effectiveness (e.g., Patterson, Warr & West, 2004). Job satisfaction has shown to affect the employees behavior to perform more than expected at work. Hence, job satisfaction has a connection with OCB and several independent studies have found a statistical relationship between job satisfaction and OCB (Organ & Ryan, 1995). Organizational citizenship behavior such as helping co-workers and responding to customer requests that go beyond their formal job description, (Smith et al., 1983) may result in employees providing high quality service to customers. This could enhance the customers experience and would benefit the organization. Schneider, Hanges, Smith, and Salvaggio (2003) also propose in their study that organizational citizenship behavior affects organizational effectiveness which in turn have an effect on organizational financial and market performance. Job satisfaction has also been shown to have a significant impact on turnover (Hackman & Suttle 1977; Iverson & Deery, 1997). Job satisfaction affects the overall experience the seasonal employees obtain from working in the organization and have a considerable effect on the employees decision to come back and work for forthcoming seasons (Iverson & Deery, 1997). In contrast, some research does not support this widespread and accepted idea that job satisfaction would be a predictor of work outcomes. Schneider et al. (2003) suggest a reciprocal relationship between job satisfaction and outcomes such as return on assets and market performance. In their longitudinal study they found that organizational performance is a significant predictor of the overall job satisfaction among employees. Financial and market performance would influence the attractiveness of the organization that would have an impact on turnover in an organization, which would then influence the overall job satisfaction among the employees. Their study supports the idea that performance precedes job satisfaction and in the theory by Porter and Lawler (1968), this relationship is acknowledged; individual performance is suggested to impact employees satisfaction, which according to them would be mediated by rewards. 7

14 2.2 Motivation One way of addressing job satisfaction and its antecedents is to investigate motivational factors. In the field of motivation theories there are many different ways of approaching the topic. One common way is to divide the different theories into the fields of process theories and need theories (Steers & Porter, 1975). Classical need theories are for example Herzberg s two-factor theory and Hackman and Oldham s job characteristics model. Both Herzberg s two-factor theory and Hackman and Oldham s job characteristics model focus on the identification of specific features if the individual or in the work environment which determine the employee s behavior. Herzberg s two-factor theory suggests that people have two basic sets of needs and that different elements of the work experience can fulfill either of them. The first sets of needs are referred to as basic survival needs, which Herzberg called hygiene factors. The second types of needs are called motivator factors, which are growth needs. The hygiene factors are described as being extrinsic such as salary, supervisor style or relations to colleagues. When these factors are unfavorable, this results in job dissatisfaction. On the other hand, if motivator factors such as achievement, recognition, responsibility and advancement are fulfilled this leads to job satisfaction. The factors leading to job satisfaction are separate and distinct from those that lead to job dissatisfaction. (Pinder, 2008) Minimum levels of these hygiene factors are necessary to fulfill the basic survival needs, but when they are met, they do not cause feelings of job satisfaction, they only prevent feelings of job dissatisfaction. To motivate employees, the work must provide opportunities for the employee to achieve and these achievements must be recognized. The work should be interesting, make it possible for advancement and require responsibility. A job that includes these elements will lead to motivation and produce positive job attitudes. However, when these factors are missing this does not result in job dissatisfaction but rather an absence of job satisfaction. (Pinder, 2008) The two-factor theory has been criticized because of the distinction between hygiene and growth factors, the method used and for not taking into consideration on how individual differences in needs and values affect work motivation (Steers & Porter, 1975). However, in a recent study conducted at a Swedish ski resort, Herzberg s two factor theory was tested empirically on seasonal employees in the service sector and the findings support that Herzberg s theory has validity. Different growth factors were measured in the study and among those it was found that 8

15 feedback and responsibility had the greatest effect on work motivation for the seasonal employees (Lundberg, Gudmundson, & Andersson, 2009). 2.3 Feedback and responsibility Another theory similar to Herzberg s theory which also includes a set of features that should be built into the work in order for it to be satisfying and motivating is Hackman and Oldham s job characteristics model. The model gives an understanding of motivational factors at work. Hackman and Oldham provide evidence that job characteristics such as complex or enriched jobs would increase the work motivation and enhance employees job satisfaction. Job characteristics are features in the job design and can be planned by management when designing the various positions for employment. Hackman and Oldham propose that an employee will experience internal motivation if the job is designed so that it generates experiences for the employee in terms of meaningfulness, responsibility and knowledge of the result of one s efforts. The latter is achieved by getting feedback from both the job itself and from colleagues or management, together with the level of interacting with others such as customers. Responsibility is a direct effect of the level of autonomy and experienced meaningfulness is a result from the core job dimensions: skill variety, task identity and task significance. The meaningfulness is in this sense a measure of how meaningful the employee finds the job and if the job has a significantly positive effect on the quality of life for someone else (Hackman & Oldham, 1980). Both Hackman and Oldham in their job characteristic model, and Lundberg et al. (2009) in their study of seasonal workers, indicate that feedback and responsibility are two important factors of work motivation that can lead to job satisfaction. Feedback is important as it lets the employees know how they are doing, and feedback is likely to motivate people towards performing at a higher level (Furnham 2005). Leadership behavior, including feedback has shown to influence employees well- being. The well-being is in turn associated with performance, absenteeism and turnover (van Dierendonck, Haynes, Borrill, & Stride, 2004). In a study made by Anseel and Lievens (2007), employees perception of the feedback given from supervisors was found to strongly relate to the quality of the relation with the supervisor, which in turn was related to job satisfaction. Providing feedback to employees is thus believed to be vital for maintaining and increasing employees motivation for and satisfaction with the job. 9

16 Price and Mueller (1981) introduce the concept participation, which refers to the degree of power that one put forth regarding the job, and this has been illustrated to influence job satisfaction. The concept of participation could be seen as comparable to responsibility as described by Hackman and Oldham (1980). Furthermore, the evidences regarding both feedback and responsibility affecting job satisfaction as put forth by Hackman and Oldham, Lundberg et al. and Price and Mueller are in line with Herzberg s two-factor theory describing satisfaction as affected by these kinds of motivational factors. 2.4 Work context People have different needs for growth and development and this affect the level of job satisfaction. Growth need strength is one measurement of individuals desire to achieve and grow and functions as a moderator for job satisfaction (Hackman & Oldham, 1980). Growth need strength has received critique as a moderator and one study among others has shown that this may not be a strong moderator for job satisfaction (Ferris & Gilmore, 1984). Ferris and Gilmore also question work complexity as a significant predictor for job satisfaction in the way that Hackman and Oldham argue. Work context has in addition been taken into account as an influential factor on work motivation. The work context has for example been thoroughly considered in a work environment perspective in Herzberg two-factor theory. According to Herzberg s two-factor theory (1959) the work context would not enhance work motivation but rather work as a hygiene factor. Hackman and Oldham (1980) acknowledge work context as a condition for job satisfaction to occur; albeit, the growth need strength and complexity of task as more influential. Ferris and Gilmore (1984) indicate, unlike Hackman and Oldham, that favorable work context had a significant positive impact on job satisfaction where the work complexity was not as important. 2.5 Camaraderie and community Considering moderators of job satisfaction in general it could be fruitful to find factors other than growth need strength that may be more predictable. Regarding the tourism and hospitality industry in particular, studies have shown that growth need strength may not be a solitary moderator efficient for seasonal workers regarding their job satisfaction (Lee-Ross, 1995). 10

17 However, a later study by Lee-Ross (1998) proves that the job characteristic model is useful for explaining job satisfaction in the hospitality industry. Price and Mueller (1981) present the variable integration, i.e., to what degree one has close friends among colleagues, as affecting job satisfaction. Lee-Ross (1995) further indicates that seasonal workers who live-in i.e., employees who reside at the resort in facilities provided by the organization and shared with other employees, appear to value non-work factors linked to their desire for relationships as motivating features. This is possibly even more important than their desire for growth. Ismert and Petrick (2004) also suggest that close friends at work, or to use the term camaraderie, affect the overall job satisfaction among seasonal employees. They further suggest that camaraderie is a good predictor of intention to return among seasonal employees. It would then seem natural to consider social relationships and camaraderie when discussing the overall job satisfaction among seasonal workers. 2.6 Meaningfulness As discussed above meaningfulness plays a key role in the job characteristic model by Hackman and Oldham (1980). In the job characteristics model, meaningfulness is directly related to the work itself. Although the concept meaningfulness has been a cornerstone in the work motivation theory for a long time, other researchers would include work situation factors in the concept. Michaelson (2005) suggests that there is more to the concept; meaningfulness could be regarded as workers desire for meaningful lives. This would thus be an extended view compared to the analysis focused on the core job dimensions in the model. In the service sector workers seem to have a social need which is strongly linked to how they value work (Lee-Ross, 1995). Lee-Ross finds that seasonal workers view their work in a total way. A strong work motivation factor among employees in the service industry seems to be the relationship to other co-workers and their work environment (Dermody, Young, & Taylor, 2004). Working in the leisure industry as the seasonal workers mainly do (working in areas and in times where other people usually have and spend their vacation or leisure time), the work place turns into a surrogate family where the workers live together and spend time together even when not working (Shamir, 1981). Surrogate family in this sense represents the multifaceted set of expectations and needs that the seasonal workers have. In the case of seasonal workers, their co- 11

18 workers and management could satisfy these needs and expectations; why they could be referred to as surrogate family. The seasonal workers not only work together but they often share accommodation and spend time together in their leisure time. The workers often hang around at the work place when not working and it appears as if there is a fusion between work and leisure for these employees. The work place becomes a community for the seasonal workers and hence, work seen in this total way, also suggested by Lee-Ross, becomes a way of life (Shamir, 1981). 2.7 Support Social support can incorporate either emotional concern or both emotional concern and more instrumental information like feedback. Karatepe (2009) uses a broad meaning of the concept support and includes both emotional concern from co-workers and supervisors and the more practical help that the employee may receive on the job. This definition harmonizes with how Ng and Sorensen (2008) conceptualize support, i.e., including both instrumental and emotional support. Consequently, the features of practical character in the concept support may be related to the concept feedback as used by Hackman and Oldham (1980). In this study, feedback is measured separately why the definition of support is here referring to emotional support. Support in general, often referred to as social support, have shown to be influencing various work outcomes such as job satisfaction, affective commitment to an organization and the employees intention to leave an organization (Ng & Sorensen, 2008). In order for a work environment to be supportive it needs to be permissive and assist the employees at work and the supportive environment will enable the employees to perform well (Karatepe, 2009). Ng and Sorensen (2008) show in their study the importance of separating the different forms of support and not group them into one concept as the different forms may well affect work attitudes and other work outcomes differently. It would then be useful to divide social support into support from supervisor and support from colleagues. In a study made on front-line employees, Singh (2000) found that support from the management reduces the employees feeling of stress and the risk to make mistakes at work, and as a result the employee s performance is increased. Another study indicates similar relationship between social support and work performance (Sargent & Terry, 2000). (Note that the latter study had a small sample which was predominantly females.) Ng and Sorensen (2008) moreover found that support from supervisors was important especially for jobs in the service sector and furthermore that there 12

19 was no difference between genders in regards to social support and work attitudes. This is congruent with an earlier study where Smith et al. (1983) suggest that support from management may influence both the job satisfaction and OCB among employees. Support from colleagues may also have the effect of lessen the feeling of stress and thus affect work outcomes and in addition increase job satisfaction (Ng & Sorensen, 2008). The authors moreover found that this was to be particularly true for the type of jobs where the employees had customer contact, e.g., in the service sector. DiPietro and Condly s (2007) findings suggest that support is a strong predictor for employee turnover in the hospitality sector. Karatepe (2009) also found that social support is important for the well-being of the front-line employees and for them to stay in the organization. Ng & Sorensen (2008) and Singh (2000) suggest that especially support obtained from management would contribute to the employees commitment to the organization which would reduce their intention to leave. This is all congruent with the research of Parasuraman, Greenhaus, and Granrose (1992). 2.8 Management attitude Ng and Sorensen (2008) further suggest a separation between support from supervisors and support from the organization. Organizational support reaches the employees in form of agents e.g., managers. Primarily, the management conveys the organizational policies and attitudes and that the organization cares about the employees well-being and their contribution to the organization (Eisenberger, Cummings, Armeli, & Lynch, 1997). Keegan (1982) emphasizes the importance of a high-quality relationship between management and employees. The managers should then respond to employees needs, especially the needs for emotional security and need to participate and this will result in more satisfied and productive workers. Another study on front-line employees confirms this idea that managerial attitude is crucial for the employees job satisfaction and their work behavior (Ashill, Rod, & Carruthers, 2008). This can partly be interpreted as consistent with Herzberg s idea that the support and recognition, as a motivational factor, will contribute to job satisfaction. Eisenberger et al. (1997) made a clear distinction between organizational support and job satisfaction and provided evidence that the two constructs are related yet separate, which is supported by later research (Ashill, et al., 2008; Ng & 13

20 Sorensen, 2008) and consistent with previous research (Keegan, 1982). Eisenberger et al. (1997) also suggest that different factors affect the organizational support and job satisfaction and that the outcomes differ. In addition, Ng & Sorensen found that organizational support influences job satisfaction. When a supervisor identifies with the organization and is a representative of the organization, support from the supervisor would then influence the organizational support perceived by the employees and ultimately has a positive effect on retention (Eisenberger et al., 2002). The study made by Ng and Sorensen (2008) partly supports this finding and suggests that organizational support has an indirect effect on turnover intention through job satisfaction. This is similar to the study made on seasonal employees at a ski resort by Ismert and Petrick (2004). They found that satisfaction with management attitude was an important indicator for seasonal employees intention to return. This was true for the employees who had already worked at the ski resort for more that one season. The returning employees found it more important to be compensated for their work, including managerial praise, money and benefits. For first year workers, management attitude was not as important for their intention to return; instead camaraderie was the more influential factor. 2.9 Payment and benefits Other incentives to work could be of monetary character and this could be an effective motivational factor important to the employees (Lee-Ross, 1995). In an exploratory qualitative research in the service sector it was found that employees paid per hour were motivated by money and it was suggested that pay incentives would be an effective method to increase the employees motivation (Dermody et al., 2004). The study is of interest as seasonal employees often are paid per working hours. Other researchers have also acknowledged the effect payment can have on employees job satisfaction (Agho, Mueller, & Price, 1993; Price & Mueller, 1981; Iverson & Deery, 1997). The result from a study made by Peiró, Agut, and Grau (2010) confirms this idea of payment having a direct effect on job satisfaction. Peiró et al. suggest that good payment is an important extrinsic factor positively influencing the overall job satisfaction among employees. Iverson and Deery (1997) further suggest that benefits can impact on employees job satisfaction. These results, showing that both payment and benefits influence job satisfaction could be viewed as opposite to Herzberg s two-factor theory that suggests that payment and benefit are hygiene 14

21 factors and would therefore not affect the level of satisfaction among employees. On the other hand, the findings by Ismert and Petrick (2004) support the idea purported by Iverson and Deery (1997). Ismert and Petrick (2004) found that both hourly wage and employee benefits have an impact on the decision to return for seasonal employees. Furthermore, employees seem to value benefits which are non-monetary and may be gained from non-work events (Lee-Ross, 1995). This is in line with Locke and Latham (1990) who found that non-contingent incentives or rewards, i.e., rewards that would not depend on one s job performance (such as pleasant surrounding and benefits) had a significant impact on job satisfaction Organizational citizenship behavior The organizational citizenship behavior implies doing more than required. The behavior is a personal choice, independent and not included in any job description or expectations from an organization. OCB can be defined as: Individual behavior that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and in the aggregate promotes the efficient and effective functioning of the organization. (Organ, Podsakoff, & MacKenzie, 2006:3) OCB may have an immediate impact on organizational effectiveness and act as a competitive advantage. Some of the positive outcomes that could be ascribed to OCB are increased worker productivity and enhanced coordination and cooperation both within and between departments and workgroups (Turnipseed, 2003). Podsakoff and MacKinzie (1997) argue that OCB enhances productivity as the learning curve among new employees is shortened due to the helpfulness and socializing behavior among colleagues. OCB may also reduce the amount of resources used for group maintenance and system maintenance intended to create a cooperative environment and improved communication. OCB among employees also brings about performance that seeks to give the customers a service as satisfactory as possible (Turnipseed, 2003). Although the concept of OCB was coined already in the early 1980 s and many articles have been written about OCB there are not many articles that have examined OCB in the hospitality sector (Ravishandran, Gilmore, & Strohbehn, 2007). 15

22 OCB can be divided into seven categories; helping, sportsmanship, loyalty, organizational compliance, individual initiative, civic virtue and self development (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, & Bachrach, 2000). For example, helping includes behavior such as altruism, cheerleading and courtesy, and treating others with respect; civic virtue implies that the employees participate actively in the issues and discussions regarding the organization: sportsmanship indicates that persons have a positive attitude and do not complain. Williams and Anderson (1991) makes another distinction and divides organizational citizenship behaviors into two categories, behaviors directed at the organization (OCB-O) and behaviors directed at specific individuals (OCB-I). An example of OCB-O behavior which benefit the organization in general could be to comply with informal rules developed to maintain order even though this might cause inconvenience for the person. OCB-I behavior benefit specific individuals and indirectly contribute to the organization, for example helping others that have been absent from work or providing superior service to customers. OCB-I could therefore be of special interest for organizations in the service industry because of the constantly occurring human interactions. Both factors that could be influenced by management as well as personality traits affect the employees job performance. For example, support from management is a critical component of OCB (Turnipseed, 2003). One assumption is that personality factors influence both OCB and job satisfaction (Organ & Ryan, 1995). Ilies, Fulmer, Spitzmuller, and Johnson (2009) put forward that the personality traits agreeableness and conscientiousness are influential factors for organizational behavior. Agreeableness entails characteristics such as altruism, caring and emotional support. This personality trait seems to have both a direct and indirect effect, through job satisfaction, on OCB according to the authors. As OCB-I contributes to a positive work environment and agreeable employees foster pleasant interpersonal relationships it would be reasonable to suggest that this could imply a desired outcome for management or organizations dependant on seasonal employees. Silva (2006) suggests that the personality trait neuroticism would be of significance when studying job satisfaction and retention. Neuroticism is either measured as a tendency to worry a great deal, feeling nervous and anxious or being emotionally stable, calm and comfortable in stressful situations. (As emotionally stable and neurotic are both terms referring to the same 16

23 concept but with opposite meanings, they are used in this study interchangeably.) Employees who are emotionally stable are more likely to be satisfied with their jobs and more likely to stay (Silva, 2006). Another study shows that persons who are more neurotic, i.e., not emotionally stable, has a negative impact on their ability to offer help and service to others. Accordingly, these kinds of persons would be low in OCB (King, George, & Hebl, 2005). Bowling and Eschleman (2010) argue that employee personality may work as a moderator for work behavior. It would then be reasonable to propose that the personality traits agreeableness and neuroticism could have an impact on both OCB-I and on employees intention to stay with an organization Intention to return Committed employees are often said to be less likely to leave an organization. To reduce staff turnover development of the team climate is likely to reduce staff turnover (Kivimäki et al., 2007). The job satisfaction among employees has been put forward as a vital factor influencing the employees commitment to an organization (Locke & Latham, 1990). Gustafson (2002) also found in her study that holding social events for employees in the service sector would ameliorate the work place community and would add to the employees commitment to the organization (Gustafson, 2002). Commitment in general, as a prerequisite or consequence for job satisfaction, is beyond the scope of this study. However, one relevant dimension of commitment to an organization is the employees intention to stay and intention to stay is in turn strongly linked to the turnover in an organization (Price & Mueller, 1981). Voluntary turnover and its antecedents have been subject for researchers in many industries. Research have proven that job satisfaction has a direct effect on front-line employees intention to leave the job (e.g., Ashill et al., 2008; Tett & Meyer, 1993). A study also shows that job satisfaction has a strong influence on both retention and OCB (Organ, 1987). Mobley (1977) focuses on the impact job satisfaction has on retention; albeit, Mobley describe a sequential relationship between job satisfaction and turnover with some steps in between. Mobley provide evidence that job satisfaction influences both intention to stay and turnover consecutively (see also Mueller et al., 1994; Price & Mueller, 1981); hence providing evidence that intention to stay and turnover are strongly interlinked with each other. A study made on nurses regarding retention strategies suggests that management attitude and personal relationships together with switching costs directly affect an employee s intention to leave (Nuwak, Holmes, & Murrow, 2010). In their study, personal relationships included social life with co-workers such as how much the 17

24 nurses liked to talk to colleagues and how much they would miss the relationship if they quit their employment. This would be a variable close to camaraderie and it which support the relationship between camaraderie and intention to return Summary of theory Job satisfaction has a focal position in the area of work performance and motivation theories. There are several interesting variables suggested to predict job satisfaction and research have proven that these relationships between certain variables and job satisfaction are significant. Job satisfaction has also proven to be an important variable when studying performance and other work outcomes. Although many studies agree on job satisfaction influencing work outcomes such as organizational performance and effectiveness, other studies suggest a more critical approach towards what comes first and hence suggesting that job satisfaction and outcomes would have a more reciprocal relationship influencing each other or perhaps even that organizational performance influences employees job satisfaction. Job satisfaction, together with personality traits and other job characteristics such as payment and benefits are put forward by research as variables that have a significant impact on the turnover rate in an organization. In the area of retention theories, intention to stay with an organization is said to precede turnover and that the correlation between the two is strong. The organizational citizenship behavior is furthermore proven to be influenced by for example both personality traits and job satisfaction. 18

25 CHAPTER 3: MODEL This study proposes a model combining variables researched in the area but not yet measured simultaneously. The study further measures organizational citizenship behavior directed at individuals (OCB-I), providing new evidence in the area since OCB has not previously been studied among seasonal employees in Sweden. We used a theory based approach and created a model grounded in previous research. Further, through theory formation, hypotheses were formed that correspond to the model. 3.1 Proposed model Employees who are satisfied with their situation at work are more likely to perform well and stay with an organization. There are several aspects of a work situation that management could develop and focus on with the purpose of augmenting the job satisfaction among their employees. Such motivational features of job satisfaction could be both job characteristics for instance feedback and responsibility and work environment characteristics such as support, camaraderie and payment. Furthermore personality characteristics have been proposed to impact job satisfaction. In figure 1, the motivational factors are said to influence job satisfaction, which in turn influence OCB-I and intention to return. Feedback Responsibility Camaraderie Support Supervisor Support Colleagues Payment and Benefits Job Satisfaction Organizational Citizenship Behavior Individual Intention to Return Management Attitude Agreeableness Neuroticism Figure 1. Influencing Factors on Job Satisfaction, OCB-I and ITR 19

26 3.2 Hypotheses formation Many studies and theories have pointed out that both feedback (Hackman & Oldham, 1980; Herzberg et al., 1959; Lundberg et al., 2009) and responsibility (Hackman & Oldham, 1980; Herzberg et al., 1959; Lundberg et al., 2009, Price & Mueller, 1981) affect job satisfaction. From this, two hypotheses were formed. H1: There is a significant relationship between feedback and job satisfaction. H2: There is a significant relationship between responsibility and job satisfaction. Another factor influencing job satisfaction in the service industry has shown to be camaraderie (Ismert & Petrick, 2004; Lee-Ross, 1995; Dermody et al., 2004; Shamir 1981), why the following hypothesis was formed. H3: There is a significant relationship between camaraderie and job satisfaction. In the field of support and how this influences job satisfaction studies show that a distinction can be made regarding support from supervisor or management and support from colleagues. Several studies indicate that support from management influences job satisfaction and also that support from colleagues impacts the environment and the job satisfaction among the employees (Smith et al., 1983). H4: There is a significant relationship between support from supervisor and job satisfaction. H5: There is a significant relationship between support from colleagues and job satisfaction. Previous research has identified both payment (Iverson & Deery, 1997; Price & Mueller, 1981) and benefits (Iverson & Deery, 1997) as influential factors on job satisfaction. These relationships are illustrated in the subsequent hypothesis. H6: There is a significant relationship between payment and benefits and job satisfaction. The relationship between management and employees has moreover shown to be important factors affecting job satisfaction (Keegan, 1982). The managerial attitude towards service quality moreover impacts on the level of job satisfaction among the employees (Ashill et al., 2008). Hence, the following hypothesis was created. H7: There is a significant relationship between management attitude and job satisfaction. 20

27 Research has also recognized the importance of not only looking at the work environment, management attitude, colleagues etc. when studying job satisfaction but also looking at the role that personality traits can play for job satisfaction (Silva, 2006). Personality characteristics identified as influential factors on job satisfaction are agreeableness (Ilies et al., 2009) and neuroticism (Silva, 2006). This resulted in two hypotheses. H8: There is a significant relationship between agreeableness and job satisfaction. H9: There is a significant relationship between neuroticism and job satisfaction. Several authors acknowledge the influence job satisfaction has on OCB in general (Organ & Ryan, 1995) and Williams and Anderson (1991) point out the relationship job satisfaction has to OCB-I in particular. From this, a hypothesis was drawn. H10: There is a significant relationship between job satisfaction and OCB-I. Regarding turnover, job satisfaction has proven to play a key role as an influential factor (Ashill et al., 2008; Tett & Meyer, 1993). Job satisfaction is also identified as a factor influencing the specific concept of intention to return (Ismert & Petrick, 2004). Consequently, a hypothesis was formulated. H11: There is a significant relationship between job satisfaction and intention to return. 21

28 3.3 Variables definition Presented here are the variables used in this study and an explanation of how they are interpreted throughout the study. Independent variables: Agreeableness Neuroticism Payment and Benefits Feedback Autonomy Camaraderie Support Supervisor Support Colleagues Management attitude Dependent variables: Job satisfaction Intention to Return OCB-I A personal characteristic referring to for example how sympathetic, caring and cooperative a person tends to be. A personal characteristic referring to for example how calm and emotionally stable a person tends to be and how well the person master stressful situations. Compensation in terms of money given to the employees for their work and various activities and other offerings subsidized by the employer. Refers to two kinds of feedback: the immediate feedback from the actual work (i.e., the result from the work provides information about how well the job is done) and feedback from supervisor and colleagues about how the work is carried out. To what extent the possibility exists to decide how to carry out the work. Social environment and relationships with colleagues. A sense of a community among the seasonal employees. A trustful and helpful supervisor. Consideration expressed by supervisor. Consideration expressed by co-workers creating a trustful and helpful climate at work. Organizational concerns for employees and acknowledging their importance. Carried out by managers in the organization. To what extent the employees are happy with their overall job conditions. Likelihood to return next season. Do more than expected at work that affects social relations. 22

29 CHAPTER 4: METHOD 4.1 Research design The aim was to distinguish the relationships among different variables regarding attitude and behavior. In order to test the attitude and behavior among employees a quantitative approach and a design of a survey based on self assessment was chosen. Self completion questionnaires are known to be good for measuring attitudes (Blumberg, Cooper, & Schindler, 2008). As the seasonal employees attitude and behavior towards their work situation was in focus the approach was to measure the concepts from an employee perspective, albeit with the intention to give recommendations to management. Employees attitudes towards their job are as important as the actual situation at work, hence the study pointed at describing the situation from the employees point of view. Self administered questionnaires are often perceived as more anonymous compared to for example telephone interviews. It also allows the respondents to think about the questions and they can fill out the questionnaire at their own pace, whenever they want. However, a disadvantage is that the environment cannot be controlled (Blumberg et al., 2008). The process continued by forming a model grounded in previous research. Hypotheses were then formulated to correspond to the model. The study was a cross-sectional study. Explorative interviews and a pilot test of the questionnaire preceded the actual questionnaire. 4.2 Data collection In Sweden, SkiStar AB is the biggest operator running ski resorts offering several services. SkiStar was a natural choice because of its size and the seasonality of the business. The data was collected from SkiStar s four major ski resorts in Sweden, namely Tandådalen/Hundfjället, Lindvallen/Högfjället, Vemdalen and Åre. The first two resorts both belong to Sälen, although separate resorts. SkiStar also owns a fifth ski facility, located in Stockholm. This is extremely small, with only one slope and few employees. Seasonal employees at this facility are included in the whole population of SkiStar, but not in our sample. 23

30 We both (the authors of this study) have a pre-understanding of the area studied as we have had seasonal employments in the tourism sector, out of which some were at ski resorts. But, to further explore the issues regarding seasonal employment and to gain a deeper understanding of the attitudes and behaviors, three interviews were conducted with seasonal employees working at Tandådalen/Hundfjället who have worked more than one season. The motive for the interviews was also to investigate the relevance of the planned questionnaire and if any new aspects should have been considered and included in the study. A complementary interview was made with an employee working at the human resource department at one of the resorts with the same intention as with the other interviews. The interviews did not result in any new information that had implications for the objectives and design of the study. A pilot test of the questionnaire was sent out to detect any misinterpretations or confusions regarding the questions and their formulations. The interpretations of the questionnaire seemed to be correct and without technical problems regarding the online questionnaire and therefore no changes were made. The destination managers at each resort at Åre, Vemdalen and Sälen were contacted in order to inform about the aim and purpose of this study. They in turn directed us to contact suitable persons and we also had the consent to carry out the study from the managers at each resort. All the participants in the survey were seasonal employees working within various areas at the resorts, e.g., ski instructors, ski lift attendants, ski rental and shop assistants, hotel receptionists. The intention from the beginning was to send out the survey via to all seasonal employees in SkiStar. In two of the resorts addresses were not available and therefore the questionnaire was printed on paper at one resort and handed out at the different departments instead. In one resort the survey was posted at a portal available for the employees, to which the employees had access. In yet another resort we personally gathered addresses and informed about the survey at each department. The survey was then sent out via together with a cover letter, explaining the benefits of the study, and the participants were asked to complete the survey with a link to the questionnaire. After about one week a reminder by was sent out to those who had not responded and after yet another week a second reminder was ed. In all resorts the participation was voluntary and the answers were anonymous. This was done both to consider the ethical part of the study and also to allow for the participants to answer as truly as possible. All the respondents answered the questionnaire during their last month of employment for the season. 24

31 4.3 Sample Our intention was to include the whole population of seasonal employees, covering all the relevant departments at SkiStar Sweden and thought this would be feasible due to the online questionnaire design using the employee s own . The whole population of seasonal employees at SkiStar Sweden includes 996 persons. In view of the fact that addresses were not available to all seasonal employees we instead looked for reaching out to as many as possible in the population. The sample was thus determined by the access to the employees and consequently resulted in a convenience sample. We then used three methods to access the employees, although one kind of method for was used per resort: to personal accounts, survey posted at a portal accessed by the employees and paper and pen. The total sample included about 700 participants. It is difficult to know the exact sample size as the sample in Vemdalen and Åre were unknown to both managers and us. The survey was e- mailed to 462 employees at the two resorts in Sälen, with a total response rate of 59.5%. The survey in Åre made on paper received 188 responses, out of which 181 responses were usable; the other 7 responses were interpreted as unreliable. The survey posted at a portal at Vemdalen had 20 respondents, all usable. This means that we had a total of 476 respondents with usable answers. Notable from the respondents who used paper and pen to complete the questionnaire was the larger amount of missing values. These questionnaires were still retained in the data set and used in the analysis where applicable. The percentage of employees in the sample working their first season was 40%, 60% were working their second season or more. In the sample, 76% were living at the resort during the season and 24 % were permanent residents. A total of 68% lived together with other seasonal employees. Our sample included 111 ski instructors, 183 ski lift attendants and other employees working in the ski area such as ski patrol or with snow grooming, 61 employees worked in ski shop and ski rental, 106 with lodging or reception and guest service and finally 13 persons had other duties. This corresponds well to the estimated distribution of the departments for the population in SkiStar (distribution was not available for Vemdalen) (see table 1). The mean age of the sample was 24.5 years old, ranging from 18 to 65 or older, the median age was 22 years and mode 21. This is comparable with the mean age of the total population being 21 years old. The difference could be addressed to a few respondents being much older. However, 25

32 looking at the median age of the sample which is close to the mean of the whole population, the sample could be interpreted as representative. In the sample 53 % are females and 47 % males compared to the total population were 56% males and 44% females (see table 1). Table 1. Comparison between Sample and Population Skistarshop Lift Ski instructors Lodging/ Reception Others Mean Age Gender Population 13% 38% 20% 25% 3% 21 years females 44%, males 56% Sample 13% 38% 23% 22% 3% 24,5 years females 53%, males 47% 4.4 Measures All the measures used for the different variables in the survey have been used in previous research. All questions were translated from English into Swedish and we also reformulated some of the items used in previous research with formulations that were negations to avoid misinterpretations. Instead we put the same statement in a neutral way. A few items were also reformulated to better suit the Swedish way of expressing the statements. For all the concepts in the questionnaire we used a five-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree (see appendix A). To control for the internal consistency we assessed each concept using Cronbach s alpha. A value of Cronbach s alpha (α) 0.70 can be used as a reasonable test for scale reliability to assure that the items measured the same concept (Gaur & Gaur, 2009). Three concepts had α < 0.7, why some items were deleted to achieve this critical level. Computed means were then calculated for each concept which were then used in the analyses. Feedback and Responsibility For measuring the concept feedback six items were used and for the concept responsibility three items were used. They all were developed by Hackman and Oldham and revised by Idaszak and Drasgow (in Fields, 2002). Moreover, the scale was changed into a five-point Likert scale for all the questions to better suit our questionnaire. The Cronbach s alpha was not at a satisfactory level for either of the concepts and consequently one item was deleted from feedback (item 2) resulting in Cronbach s alpha of 0.75 and one item was also deleted from responsibility (item 1) resulting in α =

33 Camaraderie The concept camaraderie was measured using the same questions as Price and Mueller (1992). Price and Mueller also used a five-point Likert scale. Cronbach s alpha for this concept was α = Support and Management Attitude To measure support three items were used to capture the support given by supervisor and three items for support from colleagues. Regarding the concept management attitude four items were used. All questions originated from Deery and Shaw (1997). To avoid arbitrary interpretation for some items, the word very was deleted, e.g., My co-workers are (very) concerned about the welfare of other co-workers. Furthermore, negations were deleted to avoid misinterpretations. Cronbach s alpha for support from supervisor was α = 0.92 and support from colleagues α = Cronbach s alpha for management attitude was α = Payment and Benefits Four of the items measuring payment and benefit come from Spector (in Fields, 2002). Two items, one for each feature, originates from Lundberg et al. (2009). Three of these items (item 3, 5 and 6) were later removed from the analysis to reach a satisfactory level of Cronbach s alpha. For the four items α = Agreeableness and Neuroticism For agreeableness, the ten items stem from Buchanan, Johnson, and Goldberg (2005) and the seven items measuring neuroticism are found in John, Naumann, and Soto (2008). Cronbach s alpha for agreeableness was α = 0.80 and for neuroticism α = Both agreeableness and neuroticism were measured with items corresponding to the dichotomies of the both concepts, consequently some questions were reversed. For example, a respondent with a high score for agreeableness e.g., 4.2 means that the respondent tends to be more caring and cooperative. The same interpretation regards neuroticism, i.e., a respondent with a score of e.g., 3.8 means that the respondent has more of a calm and stable personality. Job Satisfaction Three items for measuring job satisfaction stem from Cammann, Fichman, Jenkins, and Klesh (in Fields, 2002) and to increase the validity of the measure we added four more questions developed 27

34 by Brayfield and Rothe (in Fields, 2002), items that we thought were suitable for this study. Cronbach s alpha for job satisfaction was α = OCB-I To measure the organizational citizenship behavior directed at individuals, OCB-I, seven items were used, stemming from Williams and Anderson (in Fields, 2002). Cronbach s alpha was Controlling variables used when examining the relationship between job satisfaction and OCB-I as suggested by previous research were support (Smith et al., 1983; Turnipseed, 2003), agreeableness (Ilies et al., 2009) and neuroticism (King et al., 2005). Intention to Return One item used for measuring intention to return, ITR, was developed by Ismert and Petrick (2004). The second item stem from Price and Mueller (1981), however revised by us to better suit this study. Cronbach s alpha was Controlling variables used when examining the relationship between job satisfaction and ITR, as suggested by previous research, were support (Singh, 2000), camaraderie (Ismert & Petrick, 2004; Nowak et al., 2010), management attitude (Ismert & Petrick, 2004; Nowak et al., 2010), neuroticism (Silva, 2006) and payment and benefits (Ismert & Petrick, 2004). Background variables Some of the background variables were inspired by prior research as certain background information of the respondents have shown to be of special interest regarding seasonal employees, e.g., form of residency and permanent or migrant residents. Other variables were age, gender and first season or returning employee at the resort. 4.5 Statistical methods The analysis techniques used in this study were primarily correlation analysis and regression analysis; albeit, t-tests and principal component analysis were also used. Correlation and regression estimates were used to establish discriminant validity. The correlation coefficient gives a value for measuring the strength of a linear relationship between two variables (Gaur & Gaur, 2009). Multiple regression analysis is used to determine the relationship between one dependent variable and several independent variables (Gaur & Gaur, 2009). We used two-tailed standard multiple regression to examine how strongly each concept relates to job satisfaction. When testing 28

35 the relationships between job satisfaction and OCB-I and intention to return respectively, hierarchical multiple regressions were employed. This method was used to control for certain variables that previous research have claimed to influence OCB or ITR, in order to distinguish how the variable job satisfaction relates to OCB-I and ITR. We were also interested in detecting if there were any differences between groups and their outcomes. T-tests were carried out as it is used when making comparisons between means of two samples (Gaur & Gaur, 2009). To examine if some of the variables were measuring a common underlying factor, principal component analysis was employed (Gaur & Gaur, 2009). Varimax was used as rotation method to facilitate the interpretation of the loadings on each factor (Adams, Khan, & Raeside, 2007). As this is not an analysis relevant to the objectives of this study, yet an interesting note, the result and analysis from the principal component analysis is displayed in appendix B. 4.6 Validity and reliability Validity Three important aspects of validity are content validity, construct validity and internal validity. Content validity refers to the extent to which a measurement covers the intended domain of the concept (Gaur & Gaur, 2009). To establish content validity we clearly defined each concept. All the questions for each concept were taken from previous academic research and have already been tested by other researchers. For the concept job satisfaction we added more questions to the original measurement to make sure that we covered all aspects. Regarding the concept OCB, which can be divided into two categories, we have deliberately chosen to measure OCB-I alone. Construct validity aims at establishing an agreement between the measuring instrument and the theoretical concept (Gaur & Gaur, 2009). When operationalizing the concepts we used measures that already have been tested by other researchers for each concept. However, some variables raised concerns for conceptual overlap. These variables were support supervisor, management attitude and to a certain extent feedback for being related to one construct and support colleagues and camaraderie for being related to another construct. High correlations of separate concepts may raise concerns of conceptual overlap. Correlation analysis was employed to detect any possible substantial overlap of concepts, i.e., two scales measuring the same concept. As the result from the correlation analysis did not reveal any excessive multi-collinearity, all the measures were used in the analyses. 29

36 Internal validity regards the degree to which conclusions about causal relationships can be made, i.e., if the supposed variables in a research really account for the variation of the outcome or if there are other factors that better explain the effects of the outcome (Pinder, 2008). The model used in this study is grounded in theory. All the factors influencing job satisfaction are based on previous research and have a proven relationship. There is also previous research which states that job satisfaction influences OCB and ITR. Reliability The sample was a convenience sample and therefore induces a risk that the result is biased. The total population was 996 persons and our sample included around 700 persons. There is a possibility that the persons not included in the sample differs from the sample, and that those not included would have answered differently. However, in comparison to the total population our sample is relatively representative. There is also a possibility for non-response bias and that the persons who responded to the questionnaire differ compared to the non-respondents in the sample. Often respondents returning surveys represent extremes of the population which lead to skewed responses (Blumberg et al., 2008). Another concern might be that respondents replied in a manner that is viewed favorably by others. This might be especially significant regarding the personality concepts agreeableness and neuroticism and also OCB-I. We decided to have an anonymous questionnaire to allow for the respondents to answer as truly as possible and hence reduce the risk for social desirability bias. A common method for assessing internal reliability is Cronbach s alpha (Gaur & Gaur, 2009). To ensure this type of consistency we used this technique. All concepts used in the analyses had a Cronbach s alpha above The study was only carried out once and therefore the stability of the measure could not be assured. In order to improve the quality of the study we had a control question in the survey to make sure not to include any permanent employees in this study. The language in the questionnaire was adapted to suit the jargon of seasonal workers and the questionnaire was pre-tested to see if there were any misinterpretations that should be corrected. Since most of the respondents answered the questionnaire online the data could be transferred automatically and thus the risk of human error when typing in the data was reduced. 30

37 CHAPTER 5: RESULTS 5.1 Bivariate correlation To examine the correlations between all the variables used in the study, bivariate correlation analysis was employed. Table 2 displays the correlations, means and standard deviations of the variables used. Four correlations had p-value > 0.05 and therefore no significant correlations; neuroticism had no significant correlations with camaraderie and payment and benefits, there was no significant correlations between responsibility and payment and benefits, nor between ITR and OCB-I. The results from the correlations display high correlation between support supervisor and management attitude r =.682 (p < 0.01) as well as high correlation between support colleagues and camaraderie r =.692 (p < 0.01). Table 2. Means, Standard Deviations and Correlations Between the Measured Concepts Mean SD Feedback Responsibility ** 1 3. Camaraderie **.211** 1 4. Support Supervisor **.207**.445** 1 5. Support Colleageues **.194**.692**.445** 1 6. Management Attitude **.209**.404**.682**.399** 1 7. Payment Benefits ** **.419**.276**.506** 1 8. Agreeableness **.190**.381**.394**.384**.402**.266** 1 9. Neuroticism **.115* **.143**.176** ** Job Satisfaction **.480**.383**.356**.320**.405**.187**.360**.161** OCB-I **.157**.473**.270**.397**.339**.137**.469**.242**.325** ITR **.199**.127**.240**.191**.260**.187**.111*.152**.456** OCB-I = Organizational Citizenship Behavior - Individual, ITR = Intention to Return. * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). (N ranging from ) 31

38 5.2 Regression analysis Job Satisfaction To determine how well the independent variables predict the overall job satisfaction among the seasonal employees a standard multiple regression was employed. Table 3 displays the result of the regression analysis. The overall model was significant F (9, 102) = p <.001, while explaining 39.8% of the variance in overall job satisfaction. The variables of feedback (p <.001), responsibility (p <.001), camaraderie (p =.001), management attitude (p =.044) and agreeableness (p =.002) were all found to be predictors of the employees overall job satisfaction. The independent variables of support supervisor, support colleagues, payment and benefits and neuroticism were not significantly related to the dependent variable job satisfaction (p = >.05). Consequently, H1, H2, H3, H7, H8 are not rejected while H4, H5, H6 and H9 are rejected (see table 7 for a summary of rejected and not rejected hypotheses). Table 3. Standard Multiple Regression Analysis for the Impact on Job Satisfaction Independent Variables Standardized Coefficients, Beta t Sig. Feedback Responsibility Camaraderie Support Supervisor Support Colleagues Management Attitude Payment Benefits Agreeableness Neuroticism Model: R Square = 0.398, p <.001. OCB-I To examine to what extent the variable job satisfaction affects OCB-I a hierarchical regression analysis was used. In order to clarify the relationship between job satisfaction and OCB-I we controlled for the variables support supervisor, support colleagues, agreeableness and neuroticism. The result from the analysis is displayed in table 4. Model 1 in the table displays the 32

39 analysis when only using the variables controlled for and model 2 includes job satisfaction (p =.003) in the analysis. Three of the variables controlled for: agreeableness (p <.001), neuroticism (p =.012), support colleagues (p <.001), showed to be significantly related to OCB I, whereas support from supervisor (p =.806) had no significant relationship to the dependent variable. Model 1 explains 28.7% of the variance in OCB-I. Model 2 explained 30.0% of the variance, i.e., only 1.3% more of the variance in OCB-I yet significant. Therefore, the hypothesis H10 cannot be rejected. Table 4. Hierarchical Regression Analysis for the Impact on OCB-I Model Variables Standardized Coefficients, Beta t Sig. 1 Support Supervisor Support Colleagues Agreeableness Neuroticism Support Supervisor Support Colleagues Agreeableness Neuroticism Job Satisfaction Model 1: R Square = 0.287, Model 2: R Square = 0.300, Overall Model: p <.001. OCB-I = Organizational Citizenship Behavior - Individuals Intention to return A final hierarchical regression analysis was employed to determine to what extent job satisfaction affects intention to return. Table 5 displays the results of the regression analysis. When controlling for other variables to clear the relationship between job satisfaction (see model 1 in table 5) the result shows that only the variable neuroticism (p =.017) is a significant predictor of ITR. When inserting job satisfaction, neuroticism becomes insignificant (p =.098); thus job satisfaction appears to be a effective moderator in the relationship between neuroticism and ITR. Model 1 explains 9.7% of the variance in ITR. When including the variable job satisfaction (p <.001) the variance in ITR can be explained with another 14.3%. Consequently, the hypothesis H11 cannot be rejected. When including job satisfaction, camaraderie becomes a significant predictor of the dependent variable (p =.006), albeit with a negative value. The t-value for job satisfaction is

40 Table 5. Hierarchical Regression Analysis for the Impact on ITR Model Variables Standardized Coefficients, Beta t Sig. 1 Camaraderie , Support Supervisor Support Colleagues Management Attitude Payment Benefits Neuroticism Camaraderie Support Supervisor Support Colleagues Management Attitude Payment Benefits Neuroticism Job Satisfaction Model 1: R Square = 0.097, Model 2: R Square = 0.240, Overall Model: p <.001. ITR = Intention to Return OCB-I and intention to return Job satisfaction (r=.456) was the strongest correlate of intention to return while agreeableness (r=.469) and camaraderie (r=.473) were the strongest correlates of OCB-I. Following the regression analysis it is interesting to note that job satisfaction seems to have a bigger influence on ITR compared to its effect on OCB-I. Even though job satisfaction is a significant predictor of OCB-I, other factors particularly agreeableness and camaraderie are deemed to be more important. 5.3 T-Test To observe if there is any difference between seasonal and permanent residents pertaining OCB-I and ITR, t-test was used. The result of the two-tailed t-test is displayed in table 6. For OCB-I, the result shows that Levene s test for equality of variances is significant (p =.002), why equal variances not assumed of two groups is interpreted. When the assumption of equal variance in compared groups for t-test is significantly violated the equal variances not assumed are used for reading the results (Gaur & Gaur, 2009; Morgan, Leech, Gloeckner, & Barrett, 2004). The t-test 34

41 for equality of means is significant (p <.001, 2-tailed) and the null hypothesis is therefore rejected, i.e., there is a difference between the two groups regarding OCB-I. The same test was employed to determine if there is a difference between the two groups i.e., permanent and seasonal residents, concerning ITR. Levene s test was not significant (p =.989) and therefore equal variance of the two groups is assumed. The t-test is significant (p <.001, 2- tailed) and the null hypothesis is therefore rejected, i.e., there is a difference between the two groups regarding ITR. The permanent residents are more likely to return than seasonal residents. To examine any differences in importance of social relationships with colleagues between those who live-in and those who have other types of housing, a t-test was employed. The data shows a diminutive difference between the groups. Table 6. Differences in OCB-I and ITR between Permanent and Seasonal Residents Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means Mean SD F Sig. t Sig. (2-tailed) OCB-I Permanent OCB-I Equal variances residents assumed Seasonal Equal variances residents not assumed ITR Permanent ITR Equal variances residents assumed Seasonal Equal variances residents not assumed Permanent residents N = 113, Seasonal residents N = 358 OCB-I = Organizational Citizenship Behavior - Individuals, ITR = Intention to Return 35

42 5.4 Summary of findings The eleven hypotheses, proposed in chapter three, were tested and the result is summarized in table 7. The result of the proposed model are displayed in appendix C, figure A1. Table 7. Results of Hypotheses Testing Hypotheses H1: There is a significant relationship between feedback and job satisfaction. H2: There is a significant relationship between responsibility and job satisfaction. H3: There is a significant relationship between camaraderie and job satisfaction. H4: There is a significant relationship between support from supervisor and job satisfaction. H5: There is a significant relationship between support from colleagues and job satisfaction. H6: There is a significant relationship between payment and benefits and job satisfaction. H7: There is a significant relationship between management attitude and job satisfaction. H8: There is a significant relationship between agreeableness and job satisfaction. H9: There is a significant relationship between neuroticism and job satisfaction. H10: There is a significant relationship between job satisfaction and OCB-I. H11: There is a significant relationship between job satisfaction and intention to return. Rejected/ Not rejected not rejected not rejected not rejected rejected rejected rejected not rejected not rejected rejected not rejected not rejected 36

43 CHAPTER 6: ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION The purpose with this study was to examine what influences seasonal employees to return to their seasonal work for another season and do more that expected at work. This was examined by investigating the relationship between certain motivational factors and seasonal employees job satisfaction and by studying the relationship between job satisfaction and intention to return and job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behavior. When examining previous research within the scope of this study the concepts of support, management attitude, camaraderie and to certain extent feedback seemed to address similar notions and therefore perhaps include comparable connotations. For that reason, the risk of having overlapping constructs was conceivable. The result from the correlations (table 2) present, as expected, high correlation between support supervisor and management attitude (r =.682, p < 0.01) and high correlation between support colleagues and camaraderie (r =.692, p < 0.01). For feedback the correlation with support supervisor was r =.531 (p < 0.01) and with management attitude r =.539 (p < 0.01). However, none of the correlations is above.70, a level that is conventionally used as an indicator of excessive multi-collinearity (Patterson et al., 2004). Because the result of the correlations for these concepts indicates no substantial overlap of constructs, all the concepts were used as separate variables in the ensuing analyses. 6.1 Motivational factors and job satisfaction Based on the empirical results it is apparent that some of the motivational factors in the proposed model influence job satisfaction. Feedback, responsibility, camaraderie, management attitude and agreeableness were all found to predict employees overall job satisfaction. Together they explain 39.8 percent of the variation. This can be considered a high value since R Square values of are acceptable as minimum levels in social science research (Gaur & Gaur, 2009). Support from both supervisor and colleagues, payment and benefits and neuroticism did not have any significant relationship with job satisfaction in the regression model. The result supports Hackman and Oldham s job characteristics model as both feedback and responsibility is said to influence job satisfaction. The result also supports Herzberg s two-factor theory and is similar to Lundberg et al. (2009) who found that feedback and responsibility had an 37

44 effect on work motivation for seasonal employees at a ski resort. Responsibility was also deemed important and is an effect of the level of autonomy in the work. It had a distinctly higher Beta value compared to any other motivational factor and therefore could be deemed important. This is interesting to note and it seems like the employees appreciate to be given responsibility and independence in the work. It would therefore be fruitful to empower the employees and to enable them to make own decisions about their work and take responsibility for the results. Many of the jobs in this industry are characterized by empowerment and few supervisors are close to the employees during the work days. This might also be an explanation to why support from supervisor did not have a significant relationship with job satisfaction in our study. The result contradicts the findings of Ng and Sorensen (2008) and Smith et al. (1983). However, these studies were carried out on permanent employees and it may be that support is not as important for seasonal employees. On the other hand, management attitude proved to have an effect on job satisfaction. This could be a result due to engagement from the organization in terms of arranging various activities and events for the employees during the season, as in line with Gustafson (2002). An inspiring and caring organization that facilitates and makes an effort to achieve good relationships between managers and employees would also be important for the employees job satisfaction. Feedback from both supervisors and colleagues is essential as to let the employees know how they are doing. In order for the feedback to be useful it is important that the feedback given is accepted and trusted by the person receiving it. For feedback to be accepted by the employee it is necessary that it is perceived as fair (Sparr & Sonnentag, 2008). Also camaraderie proved to have a significant relationship with job satisfaction. This too is in line with previous studies (e.g., Ismert & Petrick, 2004). Lee-Ross (1995) put forward that the social relations and the community are influencing the job satisfaction for employees who live together with other colleagues. Our result points to camaraderie as influencing job satisfaction for employees who live alone, with family or friends (who are not seasonally employed) (see appendix D, table A2). Once again, it is important for managers to put emphasis on the social relationships and encourage social activities. 38

45 The personality trait agreeableness influences job satisfaction in the regression analysis. Research suggests that life satisfaction affects job satisfaction and vice versa (Furnham, 2005). Certain persons are more satisfied with life in general and hence also satisfied with their work. Thus, job satisfaction is not only a function of the job, it also reflects more broadly individual differences in personality. On the other hand neuroticism i.e. being emotionally stable, did not have a significant relationship with job satisfaction in our study. This is contradictory to many other findings. For example, Judge, Heller, and Mount (2002) compared over 150 studies looking at the relationship between the big five personality traits and job satisfaction and they found that neuroticism was the strongest correlate of job satisfaction i.e., emotionally stable persons are more satisfied with their jobs. A possible reason for our opposing result, which indicates that neuroticism was the weakest correlate to job satisfaction and did not have a significant influence on job satisfaction, could be that the results are biased. The assessment of the personality characteristics is done by the employees themselves. The respondents would perhaps not report that they view themselves as neurotic as it is more socially desirable to be emotionally stable and calm. In addition, they may answer more truly to the questions measuring job satisfaction as it is more socially acceptable not to be satisfied with ones job. It is also interesting to note that payment and benefits did not seem to be a significant predictor of job satisfaction. This finding is in line with Herzberg s two factor theory, where payment, as a hygiene factor, does not lead to job satisfaction, but instead prevent job dissatisfaction. However, our result does not support other studies that have provided evidence for the impact of payment and benefits on job satisfaction such as Iverson & Deery (1997) and Price & Mueller (1981). One explanation that payment and benefits do not seem to predict job satisfaction in our study might be that the wage level for seasonal employees in this industry are often at minimum levels and many employees may not be satisfied with their payment. Albeit, hourly paid employees reported in an explorative study that payment was one of the main motivational factors for work (Dermody et al., 2004), our result does not support this finding even though the seasonal employees in this study are paid per hour. These studies were made on permanent employees and it seems as other motivational factors are more important for seasonal employees. Factors such as camaraderie, responsibility and management attitude seem to make up 39

46 for this weakness of low level of payment and benefits. These motivational factors seem to favor the job satisfaction among the seasonal employees. Another interesting result is that ski instructors seems to be more satisfied with their jobs compared to the seasonal employees working at other departments (see appendix D, table A3). There is no indication of any motivational factor in this study that explains this difference. A speculation on what this is caused by is that the work itself contributes to the difference in job satisfaction, as factors intrinsic to the job are known to influence job satisfaction (e.g., Hackman & Oldham, 1980; Herzberg et al., 1959). 6.2 Relationship job satisfaction OCB-I When introducing control variables in the analaysis, the result shows that the explanaotry power of the variable job satsifaction was not that strong as this concept only explains 1.3% of the variance in OCB-I. This is surprisingly low and contradictory to many other findings which clearly states that job satisfaction influences OCB (e.g., Ilies et al., 2009; Organ & Ryan, 1995). When analysing the data further and splitting the data into work departments (i.e., lift, shop/rental, lodging/reception, ski instructor, and others) and then running the same regression analysis with control variables included, the result is again showing that job satisfaction has little influence on OCB-I. The relationship between job satisfaction and OCB-I is only significant for employees working as ski instructors but not for employees at any other department (see appendix D, table A4). For ski instructors, job satisfaction explained 3,7% of the variation in OCB-I. This is still lower than excpeted; however, the difference between ski instructors and seasonal employees at other departments regarding job satisfaction is apparent. All in all, it seems that OCB-I is more related to other factors. 6.3 What influences OCB-I The data from the standardized coefficient Beta found agreeableness to be the best indicator of OCB-I which is similar to the findings by both Ilies et al. (2009) as well as Organ and Ryan (1995), studies suggesting that agreeableness is an influential factor to OCB. Moreover, the other personality trait neuroticism was found to significantly influence OCB-I, which is in line with King et al. (2005). This offers credence to look at personality traits when recruiting new 40

47 employees to find desirable persons suitable in a seasonal employment setting, if aiming at helpful and service-minded persons. Smith et al. (1983) suggest that support is influencing OCB and the result from this study partly confirms this implication. However, the empirical results also points out the difference in support from supervisor and support from colleagues as the latter is the only variable of the two which is significant in the relationship to OCB-I. This finding does not correspond to the findings of Turnipseed (2003), who put forward that support from management is one important factor influencing OCB. One explanation to the result showing that support from colleagues was one of the stronger indicators of OCB-I can be that OCB-I concerns an employees behavior towards other individuals. Thus, the relationship to colleagues could play a role in the employees behavior towards other individuals (e.g., colleagues and guests). As OCB-I indirectly benefit the orgnization, the ski resort management may find success in offering an environment where support from collegues is encouraged. Ng and Sorensen (2008) point out that support from supervisor and support from colleagues are inter-linked and impact each other. A supportive environment from supervisor would then most probably foster a supportive environment among colleagues as well, which then in turn would influence OCB-I. 6.4 Relationship job satisfaction intention to return The results from the empirical findings point to a strong relationship between job satisfaction and intention to return. When controlling for certain variables to clear the relationship, by first measuring only those concepts and then adding job satisfaction, the result suggests that job satisfaction explains 17.8% of the variance in ITR. This is along the lines with previous research, for example Ashill et al. (2008), Mueller et al. (1994), and Price and Mueller (1981), and clearly indicates a link between job satisfaction and retention. Likewise, the data from the standardized coefficient Beta indicates that job satisfaction is a strong indicator of intention to return. When comparing the different departments by using split file analysis the Beta coefficient is strongest for job satisfaction among all the departments. This implies that managers really should consider the importance of having satisfied employees and facilitate for this to occur both in terms of work characteristics and in considering what type of employees to employ. 41

48 6.3 What influences intention to return It is evident that job satisfaction has the strongest relation to intention to return. This is also the case for both permanent and seasonal residents. When comparing the intention to return for employees that work their first season and employees who work their second season or more the result shows that camaraderie influence the intention to return positively for first year employees but has a negative relation with intention to return for employees who work their second season or more (see appendix D, table A5). This is consistent with Ismert and Petrick s (2004) study that found that satisfaction with camaraderie was the best indicator for intention to return for first year employees. Thus, the social aspect of the job and relationship to co-workers are important features for first year employees. It may be advisable for management of seasonal service organizations to emphasize on team building activities and encourage socialization between the employees. Ismert and Petrick (2004) also found that satisfaction with payment and benefits to be the best indicator for returning employees. However, our result does not indicate that payment and benefits are important for the intention to return. A possible explanation why camaraderie had a negative influence on the intention to return could be that this type of work are for many seasonal employees a fun experience that one would do for a year or two. Seasonal work is popular among people in their twenties and there is a socially accepted norm in our society to experience something new for a couple of years. If the friends of an employee at the ski resort do not intend to return for another season then it might be more likely that this employee decide not to come back either, however this is only a speculation. It is obvious that other factors and circumstances may play a role for the intention to return. Our result shows that permanent residents are more likely to return to work the following season compared to those employees who move to the resort to live there during the season. It is not surprising that permanent residents are more likely to return since they live nearby the resort. The availability of other jobs may also matter for the intention to return. When there is a recession in the economy and consequently the supply of jobs is scarce the intention to return may be stronger. The sample in this study includes seasonal employees working for one organization in four different ski resorts. Our result is based on certain types of seasonal employment and is not representative for all types of employees, neither in all organizations with a seasonal character nor in all organizations at ski resorts. 42

49 All together, management who spend resources on recruiting the right kind of persons and put resources on increasing job satisfaction would be closer to experience returning employees and employees who do more than expected. It might then be possible to realize splendid service towards customers during next season. 6.4 What could have been done differently? This study was conducted at the end of the season which could infer that the seasonal employees are tired of their work after a long season and this might affect their answers. Then again, it might imply that the employees have had the time to create an opinion especially whether they have an intention to come back or not. Regarding the measurement of the concept management attitude we realize that we could have added some more questions to obtain a deeper understanding of the concept. It would also have been interesting to have included a variable measuring the work itself, i.e., variety of work tasks, job assignments and skills needed to perform the job. 43

50 CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSIONS 7.1 Conclusion Motivated and satisfied employees are vital, especially in the service sector. Previous research show that employees job satisfaction is associated to job characteristics and work environment as well as to certain personality traits. Job satisfaction is important since it can have an effect on work performance and retention in an organization. Seasonal employees are interesting from the point of view that it seems as they are motivated by factors that differs somewhat from permanent employees. This study was conducted at four ski resorts in Sweden, all belonging to the same company and should not be generalized to incorporate all types of seasonal employees. Out of the motivational factors tested in our study we could see that feedback, responsibility, management attitude and camaraderie all influence job satisfaction. It could be concluded then that the traditional concepts of feedback and responsibility also in this study are important for the job satisfaction. Likewise, management attitude e.g., the organization s concern for the employees, is related to job satisfaction. Seasonal employees also seem to value the social aspects of the work since camaraderie and the relations to colleagues was deemed important. Payment and benefits was however not influencing the seasonal employees job satisfaction. This differs from many studies regarding permanent employees. The concepts of support from both supervisor and colleagues did not influence job satisfaction; this too differs from permanent employees. The personality characteristic agreeableness showed to be important for job satisfaction but this was not the case for neuroticism. We can also conclude that for the seasonal employees job satisfaction is the best indicator for intention to return in our study. It was however not as strong for the effect on organizational citizenship behavior. The personality trait agreeableness and support from colleagues are more influential on organizational citizenship behavior than the overall job satisfaction. Managers will benefit from understanding the value of having satisfied employees and facilitate for this to occur. This would include both putting effort on job characteristics and to ensure that the right type of persons are hired. It is important to give the employees responsibility and 44

51 feedback and management should acknowledge the employees importance and show consideration towards the employees. The sociable aspect of both work and to some extent the employees spare time would further be beneficial to consider. The managers could arrange for example team building events and other activities for the employees to achieve a feeling of camaraderie. By having a continuous process of working with increasing the job satisfaction among the seasonal employees this will result in a positive effect on the intention to return, according to our study. For organizational citizenship behavior it is advisable to have employees with personalities characterized by agreeableness i.e., sympathetic, caring and cooperative persons. These types of persons are more likely to go beyond their formal job descriptions and do more than expected. 7.2 Suggestions for further research The model used in this study is put together based on previous research that has proven to impact job satisfaction. It would also be interesting to investigate other, additional variables, predicting OCB and intention to return as well as job satisfaction. Some of the concepts used in our model are closely associated such as management attitude and support from supervisor; however, they have shown to have different significance in predicting job satisfaction. In future research more focus could be put on distinguishing the different concepts. Albeit, it may well be meaningful to include the various types of social aspects, namely support from supervisor, colleagues, and organization, camaraderie and the social part of the job characteristic feedback, to obtain a comprehensive view of this notion. This study includes seasonal workers in ski resorts in Sweden but it would also be worthwhile to conduct research in other types of seasonal work settings. Another suggestion that could further increase the knowledge within this area is to triangulate the results by studying the judgment of supervisors and guests regarding personality traits to determine the variation in organizational citizenship behavior and intention to return. Moreover, although previous research state that intention to stay and retention within an organization is strongly interlinked, it would be interesting to do a longitudinal study and see how the intention to return correlates with actually coming back regarding seasonal employees. 45

52 REFERENCES Adams, J., Khan, H. T. A., & Raeside, R. (2007). Research Methods for Graduate Business and Social Science Students. New Delhi: Sage India. Retrieved April 10, 2010 from Agho, A. O., Mueller, C. W., & Price, J. L. (1993). Determinants of Employee Job Satisfaction: An Empirical Test of a Causal Model. Human Relations, 46(8), Ainsworth, S., & Purss, A. (2009). Same time, next year? Human resource management and seasonal workers. Personnel Review, 38, Anseel, F., & Lievens, F. (2007). The Long-Term Impact of the Feedback Environment on Job Satisfaction: A Field Study in a Belgian Context. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 56(2), Ashill, N. J., Rod, M., & Carruthers, J. (2008). The Effect of Management Commitment to Service Quality on Frontline Employees' Job Attitudes, Turnover Intentions and Service Recovery Performance in a New Public Management Context. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 16(5), Blumberg, B., Cooper, D. R., & Schindler, P. S. (2008). Business research methods (2nd European ed.). London: McGraw-Hill Higher Education. de Gilder, D. (2003). Commitment, trust and work behaviour: The case of contingent workers. Personnel Review, 32(5), Dermody, M. B., Young, M., & Taylor, S. L. (2004). Identifying Job Motivation Factors of Restaurant Servers: Insight for the Development of effective Recruitment and Retention Strategies. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration, 5(3), Dickson, T. J., & Huyton, J. (2008). Customer service, employee welfare and snowsports tourism in Australia. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 20(2), DiPietro, R. B., & Condly, S. J. (2007). Employee Turnover in the Hospitality Industry: An Analysis Based on the CANE Model of Motivation. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & Tourism, 6(1), Eisenberger, R., Cummings, J., Armeli, S., & Lynch, P. (1997). Perceived Organizational Support, Discretionary Treatment, and Job Satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(5),

53 European Commission. (2010, February 17). Discussion document: A new framework for the tourism policy in the EU. Retrieved February 18, 2010 from userservice_id=1&request.id=0. Ferris, G. R., & Gilmore, D. C. (1984). The Moderating Role of Work Context in Job Design Research: A Test of Competing Models. Academy of Management Journal, 27(4), Fields, D. L. (2002). Taking the measure of work : a guide to validated scales for organizational research and diagnosis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Gaur, A. S., & Gaur, S. S. (2009). Statistical Methods for Practice and Research : A Guide to Data Analysis Using SPSS (2nd ed.). New Delhi: Sage India. Retrieved April 10, 2010 from Gustafson, C. M. (2002). Employee turnover: a study of private clubs in the USA. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 14(3), Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Hackman, J. R., & Suttle, J. L. (1977). Improving life at work : behavioral science approaches to organizational change. Santa Monica: Goodyear. Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. B. (1959). The motivation to work (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley. Hinkin, T. R., & Tracey, J. B. (2000). The Cost of Turnover. Cornell Hotel & Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 41(3), 14. Ilies, R., Spitzmuller, M., Fulmer, I. S., & Johnson, M. D. (2009). Personality and Citizenship Behavior: The Mediating Role of Job Satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(4), Ismert, M., & Petrick, J. F. (2004). Indicators and Standards of Quality Related to Seasonal Employment in the Ski Industry. Journal of Travel Research, 43(1), Iverson, R. D., & Deery, M. (1997). Turnover culture in the hospitality industry. Human Resource Management Journal, 7(4), John, O. P., Naumann, L. P., & Soto, C. J. (2008). Paradigm Shift to the Integrative Big Five Trait Taxonomy. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of Personality : Theory and Research (3rd ed.). Retrieved March 8, 2010 from Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2001). Relationship of Core Self-Evaluations Traits-Self Esteem, Generalized Self-Efficacy, Locus of Control, and Emotional Stability Job Satisfaction and Job Performance: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1),

54 Judge, T. A., Heller, D., & Mount, M. K. (2002). Five-Factor Model of Personality and Job Satisfaction: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), Karatepe, O. M. (2009). The Effects of Involvement and Social Support on Frontline Employee Outcomes: Evidence from the Albanian Hotel Industry. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration, 10(4), Keegan, B. M. (1982). Managerial Leadership: The Hospitality Industry's Response to the New Work Aesthetic. Journal of Travel Research, 21(2), Kivimäki, M., Vanhala, A., Pentti, J., Länsisalmi, H., Virtanen, M., Elovainio, M., et al. (2007). Team climate, intention to leave and turnover among hospital employees: Prospective cohort study. BMC Health Services Research, 7(1), 170. Koys, D. J. (2001). The Effects of Employee Satisfaction, Organizational Citizenship Behavior, and Turnover on Organizational Effectiveness: A Unit-Level, Longitudinal Study. Personnel Psychology, 54(1), Lashley, C. (2001). Costing Staff Turnover in Hospitality Service Organizations. Journal of Services Research, 1(2), 3. Lee-Ross, D. (1995). Attitudes and Work Motivation of Subgroups of Seasonal Hotel Workers. Service Industries Journal, 15(3), Lee-Ross, D. (1998). A practical theory of motivation applied to hotels. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 10(2), 68. Lee-Ross, D. (2003). The Quintessential Relationship: Service Predispositions and Quality Assurance. In S. Kusluvan (Ed.), Managing employee attitudes and behaviors in the tourism and hospitality industry (pp ). New York: Nova Science Publishers. Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). Work Motivation and Satisfaction: Light at the End of the Tunnel. Psychological Science, 1(4), Locke, E. A. (1976). The Nature and Causes of Job Satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Repr. ed., pp ). New York: Wiley. Lundberg, C., Gudmundson, A., & Andersson, T. D. (2009). Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory of work motivation tested empirically on seasonal workers in hospitality and tourism. Tourism Management, 30(6), Michaelson, C. (2005). Meaningful Motivation for Work Motivation Theory. Academy of Management Review, 30(2), Mobley, W. H. (1977). Intermediate Linkages in the Relationship Between Job Satisfaction and Employee Turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62(2),

55 Mobley, W. H. (1982). Some Unanswered Questions in Turnover and Withdrawal Research. Academy of Management Review, 7(1), Morgan, G. A., Leech, N. L., Gloeckner, G. W., & Barrett, K. C. (2004). SPSS for introductory statistics: use and interpretation (2nd ed.). Retrieved April 20, 2010 from Mueller, C. W., Boyer, E. M., Price, J. L., & Iverson, R. D. (1994). Employee Attachment and Noncoercive Conditions of Work. Work & Occupations, 21(2), Ng, T. W. H., & Sorensen, K. L. (2008). Toward a Further Understanding of the Relationships Between Perceptions of Support and Work Attitudes: A Meta-Analysis. Group & Organization Management, 33(3), Nowak, P., Holmes, G., & Murrow, J. (2010). A Model for Reducing Health Care Employee Turnover. Journal of Hospital Marketing & Public Relations, 20(1), Organ, D. W. (1994). Personality and Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Journal of Management, 20(2), 465. Organ, D. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (2006). Organizational citizenship behavior: its nature, antecedents, and consequences. Thousand Oaks: CA: Sage Publications. Organ, D. W., & Ryan, K. (1995). A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 48(4), Parasuraman, S., Greenhaus, J. H., & Granrose, C. S. (1992). Role stressors, social support, and well-being among two-career couples. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13(4), Patterson, M., Warr, P., & West, M. (2004). Organizational climate and company productivity: The role of employee affect and employee level. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 77(2), Peiró, J. M., Agut, S., & Grau, R. (2010). The Relationship Between Overeducation and Job Satisfaction Among Young Spanish Workers: The Role of Salary, Contract of Employment, and Work Experience. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40(3), Pinder, C. C. (2008). Work motivation in organizational behavior (2nd ed.). New York: Psychology Press. Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (1997). Impact of Organizational Citizenship Behavior on Organizational Performance: A Review and Suggestion for Future Research. Human Performance, 10(2), 133.

56 Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000). Organizational Citizenship Behaviors: A Critical Review of the Theoretical and Empirical Literature and Suggestions for Future Research. Journal of Management, 26(3), Price, J. L., & Mueller, C. W. (1981). A Causal Model of Turnover for Nurses. Academy of Management Journal, 24(3), Ravichandran, S., Gilmore, S. A., & Strohbehn, C. (2007). Organizational Citizenship Behavior Research in Hospitality: Current Status and Future Research Directions. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & Tourism, 6(2), Sargent, L. D., & Terry, D. J. (2000). The moderating role of social support in Karasek's job strain model. Work & Stress, 14(3), Schneider, B., Hanges, P. J., Smith, D. B., & Salvaggio, A. N. (2003). Which Comes First: Employee Attitudes or Organizational Financial and Market Performance? Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 836. Shamir, B. (1981). The workplace as a community: the case of British hotels. Industrial Relations Journal, 12(6). Silva, P. (2006). Effects of disposition on hospitality employee job satisfaction and commitment. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 18(4), Singh, J. (2000). Performance Productivity and Quality of Frontline Employees in Service Organizations. Journal of Marketing, 64(2), Smith, C. A., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Its Nature and Antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4), Sparr, J. L., & Sonnentag, S. (2008). Fairness perceptions of supervisor feedback, LMX, and employee well-being at work. European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology, 17(2), Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1975). Motivation and work behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill. Tett, R. P., & Meyer, J. P. (1993). Job Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment, Turnover Intention, and Turnover Path Analysis Based on Meta-Analytic Findings. Personnel Psychology, 46(2), Tracey, J. B., & Hinkin, T. R. (2008). Contextual Factors and Cost Profiles Associated with Employee Turnover. Cornell Hotel & Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 49(1), Turnipseed, D. L. (2003). Organizational Citizenship Behavior in the Hospitality and Tourism Industry. In S. Kusluvan (Ed.), Managing employee attitudes and behaviors in the tourism and hospitality industry (pp ). New York: Nova Science Publishers.

57 UNWTO. Facts & Figures: Information, analysis and know-how. Retrieved April 22, 2010 from Van Dierendonck, D., Haynes, C., Borrill, C., & Stride, C. (2004). Leadership Behavior and Subordinate Well-Being. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 9(2), Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment as Predictors of Organizational Citizenship and In-Role Behaviors. Journal of Management, 17(3), 601.

58 APPENDICES Appendix A: Questionnaire