Effects of Employees' Uniform on Company Image and Employees' Self-perceptions and Customers' Perceptions

This article was downloaded by: [Ams/Girona*barri Lib]On: 08 October 2014, At: 06:56Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office:Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism ResearchPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscriptioninformation:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rapt20

Effects of Employees' Uniform on CompanyImage and Employees' Self-perceptions andCustomers' PerceptionsYi-Ting Tu a , Ronnie Yeh a , Ning-Kuang Chuang b , Teresa Chen c & Shih-Ming Hu da Hospitality Foodservice & Hotel Management, Department of Family andConsumer Sciences , California State University , Long Beach, USAb Hospitality Management , Kent State University , USAc Educational Psychology, Administration & Counseling , California StateUniversity , Long Beach, USAd Food Service and Restaurant Administration , State University of NewYork , Oneonta, USAPublished online: 29 Sep 2011.

To cite this article: Yi-Ting Tu , Ronnie Yeh , Ning-Kuang Chuang , Teresa Chen & Shih-Ming Hu (2011) Effectsof Employees' Uniform on Company Image and Employees' Self-perceptions and Customers' Perceptions, AsiaPacific Journal of Tourism Research, 16:6, 635-648, DOI: 10.1080/10941665.2011.610149

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2011.610149

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”)contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and ourlicensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, orsuitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publicationare the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor &Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independentlyverified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilitieswhatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantialor systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rapt20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/10941665.2011.610149

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2011.610149

distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and usecan be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

6:56

08

Oct

ober

201

4

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Effects of Employees’ Uniform on Company Imageand Employees’ Self-perceptions and Customers’

Perceptions

Yi-Ting Tu1, Ronnie Yeh1∗, Ning-Kuang Chuang2, Teresa Chen3 andShih-Ming Hu4

1Hospitality Foodservice & Hotel Management, Department of Family and Consumer

Sciences, California State University, Long Beach, USA2Hospitality Management, Kent State University, USA

3Educational Psychology, Administration & Counseling, California State University,

Long Beach, USA4Food Service and Restaurant Administration, State University of New York, Oneonta, USA

The purpose of the study is to investigate how different styles of employee uniforms affectcustomers’ perceptions of the hotel image and employees’ self-perceptions. The results ofthe study indicated a significant relationship between uniforms and employees’ jobperformance. Significance also existed between employees’ job satisfaction and styles ofuniform. A significant relationship between styles of uniform and customers’ perceptionof employee performance was found as well.

Key words: hotel employee uniform, hotel image, hotel employee and customer perceptions

Introduction

Nowadays, with so many added choices in the

hospitality industry, customers are more critical

and sensitive of what they are paying for. While

ambience and corporate image play an essential

role in achieving customer satisfaction,

employee uniforms are a significant factor in

the overall impression of an establishment.

The hospitality industry is a demanding

industry that relies on employees to complete

sales and provide services to customers.

Besides visual factors such as food and room

setting, many intangible services also depend

on employees to deliver. Guests’ satisfaction

depends on intangible services such as the

ambience and service attitude, and these

depend on employees’ performance. These

Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 16, No. 6, December 2011

∗Email: [email protected]

Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 16, No. 6, December 2011

ISSN 1094-1665 print/ISSN 1741-6507 online/11/060635–14 # 2011 Asia Pacific Tourism Association

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2011.610149

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

6:56

08

Oct

ober

201

4

intangible services make up an important part

of a guest’s experience while visiting the estab-

lishment.

Customers judge intangible experiences to

rate service quality and make a final appraisal

of the hospitality organization. The hotel

uniform is an element for customers to evalu-

ate a hospitality operation because hotel

uniforms are a part of the organization’s

image and an extension of hospitality service.

Uniforms are the shop-front of a company,

a symbol of company image, and an essential

channel for a company to express its pro-

fessional services, quality and cultural back-

ground. The purpose of the study is to

investigate how different styles of employee

uniform affect employees’ self-perceptions.

Definition of Terms

. Formal style of uniform: jacket and shirt/

blouse.. Casual style of uniform: polo shirt (Peluch-

ette & Karl, 2007).

Review of the Literature

Company Image

Hotel image includes both tangible and

intangible factors. Besides tangible products,

intangible services are an important part of a

hotel’s image. Customers use different ways

to estimate the service quality and make a

final appraisal of the hospitality organization.

Employee uniforms give one of the first

impressions that customers get when they

visit a hotel. Uniforms are not just employee

working suits, they also influence the look of

the entire hotel setting. Employee uniforms

typically constitute an important component

of a hospitality establishment’s brand identity

(Nelson & Bowen, 2000). In other words, uni-

forms are part of the organization’s image and

an extension of hospitality services. Uniforms

of today are used to brand a property and set

the tone of a guest’s expectations (O’Connor,

2007). A well-designed attractive uniform

can make a very positive statement about

your company and can completely overhaul

your image (Aubinais, 2005).

With hospitality industries emerging and

being so competitive, hospitality services

must develop new strategies to increase custo-

mers’ satisfaction and meet customers’ expec-

tations. Uniforms are not only garments that

employees wear to work, but also convey an

image to customers. Uniforms can serve

many purposes: broaden and expand on the

theme of a resort, identify employees to

patrons seeking information, and create a pro-

fessional attitude among employees (Robison,

2005).

Uniforms also clarify service by giving the

guests an idea of what type of service to

expect (Nelson & Bowen, 2000). For

example, when guests visit Disney hotel

resorts, they are expecting casual and colorful

uniforms that create a fun and friendly mood

for customers. The uniforms of the hotel

staff at a luxury hotel help confirm guests’

expectations for that type of property (“Staff

uniforms reveal a lot about an organization”,

2007). Therefore, well-designed uniforms are

not only an extension of hotel image, but

also a hint of quality services.

Being part of a hotel’s image, uniforms

identify employees for customers. Uniforms

communicate a business as professional,

reliable, consistent and detail-oriented (Barr,

2007). Uniforms speak to employees’ classifi-

cation and professionalism. The impression

you receive in your first 5 seconds sum up

the credibility of the person you are speaking

636 Yi-Ting Tu et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

6:56

08

Oct

ober

201

4

to (Robison, 2005). Uniforms make service

quick and direct for customers because uni-

forms allow customers to identify employees

easily, making it simple for them to ask a ques-

tion or ask for service (“Staff uniforms reveal a

lot about an organization”, 2007).

Employees’ Self-perceptions of theUniform

When employees are satisfied with their

appearance, they can deliver good services to

customers. Sheehan (2003, p. 49) reported

that “If you’re embarrassed to be seen in

your uniform, chances are very high that you

are not going to make an effort to be seen by

the public, nor are you apt to go out of your

way to assist a guest”. Satisfaction with the

uniform is affected by who the selector is –

the wearer or people other than the wearer

(Haise & Rucker, 2003). Hotel owners

should be willing to spend money on their

employees’ uniforms so that their employees

will feel proud to wear them. Only when

employees are satisfied with their appearance

can they deliver good service to their guests.

Career clothing in general and the uniform

in particular can serve to meet a variety of

organizational goals and objectives (Joseph

& Alex, 1972). Nelson and Bowen (2000)

claimed that inappropriate uniforms commu-

nicate to customers that the company is care-

less and inefficient. In addition, employees

tend to fail at performing jobs accurately

when they wear ill-fitting uniforms. Employees

who do not like their uniform owing to color,

style or fit can have a very negative influence

on guest satisfaction levels (Sheehan, 2003).

Moreover, Fussell (2002) mentioned that in a

hotel, uniforms must do more than identify

employees. Employees’ appearance plays a

role in maintaining morale and building self-

esteem. Employees’ self-perception about

their work attire or image can contribute to

attitudes while interacting with guests. Ado-

maitis and Johnson (2005) found that flight

attendants’ behavior shifts when wearing

different uniforms. Participants’ work behav-

ior becomes relaxed in casual uniforms

versus when they are in formal uniforms;

their behavior is cautioned. The results of the

flight attendant research indicated that types

of uniform do affect the behavior of the indi-

viduals as well as flight attendants’ perception

concerning ability to perform their job.

Artifacts such as workplace attire are visible

ways of supporting certain organizational

values (Peluchette & Karl, 2007). Peluchette

and Karl (2007) also mentioned that organiz-

ations have used uniforms to affect employees’

attitudes and behaviors, and to reflect organiz-

ational values for years. Take UPS as an

example. The brown uniform has come to rep-

resent the company’s value of ability to

provide services to almost any one in the

world. Southwest Airlines provides polo

shirts and shorts as uniforms to enhance the

casual environment feel in the workplace,

which stands out from many competitors.

Also, casual work attire encourages employees

to deliver friendly services to customers.

Workplace uniforms serve as a symbol and

provide consensus in meaning to others, influ-

encing their reactions to the wearers (Rafaeli

& Pratt, 1993). Solomon and Schopler

(1982) found that both male and female

employees express that appropriately designed

uniforms affect the quality of their perform-

ance and their mood in the workplace.

Rafaeli, Dutton, Harquial, and Mackie-Lewis

(1997) found that employees feel uncomforta-

ble with inappropriate uniforms yet feel

increased self-confidence in appropriate

attire. These studies show the influence of

employees’ uniforms on self-perception.

Effects of Employees’ Uniform on Company Image 637

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

6:56

08

Oct

ober

201

4

Customers’ Perceptions of Company’sImage

Customers are sensitive to what they are paying

for; therefore, to satisfy customers’ demands,

hospitality services must understand the

relationship between employees’ uniforms and

customers’ perceptions. Brand-loyal customers

reduce marketing costs associated with attract-

ing new customers (Kotler, Bowen, & Makens,

1998). Most customers view people in uniforms

as better trained and more knowledgeable

about their company’s products and services

(Barr, 2007). In addition, uniforms speak to

employees’ classification and professionalism

(Robison, 2005). Back (2005, p. 462) revealed

that “customer’s perception of a similar image

between his or her social self-concept and the

hotel brand image positively influences the sat-

isfaction level towards the hotel”.

Often a person’s physical appearance is all

that is available to convey information about

personal traits in a first impression situation

(Lennon & Miller, 1984). If the hotel uniforms

match the customers’ expectation of services,

motivation to stay at that hotel is strength-

ened. Hotel uniforms are an important part

of brand image. If a brand image is perceived

as similar to the customers’ self-image in

terms of personality attributes, then customers

tend to behave favorably towards the brand

when making purchasing and repurchasing

decisions (Sirgy, 1985). Satisfied customers

do not actually repurchase unless they are

brand loyal (Back & Parks, 2003). Bitner

(1990) indicated that customer satisfaction

has an indirect effect on brand loyalty, which

is mediated by perceived quality.

Guest satisfaction is a major internal factor

affecting customer behavior. According to Ford

and Heaton (2000, p. 4), “most challenges in

the hospitality industry are that the simply [sic]

reality that service quality and service value are

defined not by managers, auditors, or rating

organizations but in the mind of the guest”.

Hotel uniforms are not only attire employees

wear to work, but also serve as hotel identity.

Well-designed uniforms play an essential role

in effective communication between customers

and hotels (Burns & Lennon, 1993).

Hypotheses

H1: There is no significant relationship between

styles of uniform and employee job performance.

H2: There is no significant difference in preference

of styles of uniform among employees.


styles of uniform and employees’ satisfaction with

their jobs.


styles of uniform and customers’ perceptions of

hotel image.


styles of uniform and customers’ perceptions of

employee performance.

Methodology

Selection of Samples

This research was conducted in 2009. The par-

ticipants of this study were employees working

at the front office department and customers

visiting the hotels. Convenience sampling

was used in the study. A total of 65 employees

(30 male and 35 female) and 83 customers

(42 male and 41 female) at four hotels in

Southern California were surveyed. These

hotels have limited service provided to their

guests, and their managers wear formal uni-

forms and their employees wear casual uni-

forms. These four hotels agreed to use their


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

6:56

08

Oct

ober

201

4

employee meetings for data collection, which

both managers and employees of the front

office department attended.

Research Instruments

Two instruments were used in this research.

Six-point Likert-type scale questionnaires

were used in studying employees’ self-percep-

tions of uniforms and customers’ perceptions

of employees’ uniforms regarding hotel

image. The survey of employees’ self-percep-

tions was divided into two sections. The first

section listed statements related to employees’

perceptions of their uniforms. The second

section consisted of demographic profile ques-

tions including age, gender, employment

status, education level and work experience.

The customer survey was also divided into

two sections. The first section was designed

to measure customers’ perceptions of hotel

image regarding employees’ uniforms. The

second section of the survey was demographic

information, including age, gender, income

level and purpose of stay.

Data Collection

The researcher acknowledged and explained

to the participants the purpose and synopsis

of this study. For employees, an informed

consent and the employee self-perception

survey were distributed during a hotel

general meeting.

Employees were instructed to deposit their

answered survey in the box located at the

front of the meeting room if they chose to par-

ticipate. Those who chose not to participate

were instructed to leave at any time or

deposit the blank survey in the designated

box. The survey took approximately 10

minutes to complete.

For customers, an envelope was placed in

each guest room containing an informed

consent sheet and a customer satisfaction

survey. Customers could take the survey at

any time during their stay. Customers would

return the envelope with the answered survey

to a designated box located at the hotel’s

front desk. Customers who did not want to

participate in the study could simply not

return the envelope or disregard it.

Data Analyses

The Statistical Packages for Social Sciences

(SPSS) program for Windows Version 12.0.

(2004) was used. Standard statistical pro-

cedures, such as frequency, mean, standard

deviation, independent samples t-test, one-

way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and mul-

tiple regression were used for analysis of the

relationship among study variables. A signifi-

cance level of p ≤ 0.05 was employed.

Findings

Characteristics of Respondents –Employees

A total of 85 employee self-perception surveys

were distributed; with 65 usable surveys

obtained, there was a response rate of 77%.

The demographic characteristics of the

employee respondents are summarized in

Table 1. Table 1 provides the results of enqui-

ries regarding gender, age, employment status,

ethnicity, education level, current organiz-

ation experience, experience in the industry

and administrative position. Forty-six per

cent of respondents were male and 54%

were female. The largest share of respondents

was in the age group 31–40 years (39%); 21–

30 years old and 41–50 years old were 23%,


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

6:56

08

Oct

ober

201

4

Table 1 Demographic Characteristics of Employee Respondents

Variable Frequency %

Gender

Male 30 46.2

Female 35 53.8

Age (years)

18–21 4 6.2

21–30 15 23.1

31–40 25 38.5

41–50 15 23.1

51–60 5 7.7

Above 60 1 1.5

Employment status

Full time 43 66.2

Part time 22 33.8

Ethnicity

Caucasian 6 9.2

African American 9 13.8

Native American 4 6.2

Hispanic/Latino 27 41.5

Asian/Pacific Islander 19 23.1

Others 4 6.2

Education level

High-school degree 20 30.8

Associate’s degree 11 16.9

Bachelor’s degree 25 38.5

Master’s degree 9 13.8

Doctorate degree 0 0.0

Experience in current organization

Less than 1 year 11 16.9

1–5 years 31 47.7

5–10 years 18 27.7

More than 10 years 5 7.7

Experience in the hospitality industry

Less than 1 year 11 16.9

1–5 years 33 50.8

5–10 years 15 23.1

More than 10 years 6 9.2

Holding an administrative position

Yes 15 23.1

No 50 76.9

Note: N ¼ 65.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

6:56

08

Oct

ober

201

4

and 51–60 years old were 8%. Only 2% were

over 60 years old. Sixty-six per cent of respon-

dents worked full time and 34% worked part

time. The majority of respondents was Hispa-

nic/Latino (42%) followed by Asian/Pacific

Islander (23%). Thirty-one (48%) had 1–5

years’ experience in the current organization,

and 51% of respondents had 1–5 years’

experience in the hospitality industry. Almost

one-quarter (23%) of the respondents were

holding an administrative position and 77%

were not.

Table 2 indicates the mean and standard

deviation of eight statements in the question-

naire. The statement “I am very satisfied

with my uniform at the present time” had

the highest mean of 4.54, followed by the

statement “I think the uniform I wear affects

my overall attitude towards my job”, which

had a mean of 4.37.

Analysis of the Hypotheses

In order to test Hypothesis 1 (there is no

significant relationship between styles of

uniform and employee job performance), inde-

pendent samples t-tests and one-way ANOVA

were conducted to determine whether there

was any significant relationship between

employees’ performance and styles of

uniform. The statement “I think wearing a

Table 2 Perceptions of Employees Regarding Different Styles of Uniform

Meana SD

1. I prefer to wear a formal style uniform (e.g. jacket and shirt/blouse) more than a

casual style (e.g. polo shirt) at work

3.63 1.56

2. I think wearing a formal style uniform (e.g. jacket and shirt/blouse) helps me to

fit in the role that I play while performing my job more than wearing a casual

style (e.g. polo shirt)

4.03 1.54

3. I think wearing a formal style uniform (e.g. jacket and shirt/blouse) increases

my level of satisfaction towards my job more than wearing a casual style (e.g.

polo shirt)

4.00 1.62

4. I think wearing a formal style uniform (e.g. jacket and shirt/blouse) increases

my level of self-confidence while performing my job more than wearing a casual


3.95 1.69

5. I think wearing a formal style uniform (e.g. jacket and shirt/blouse) enhances

my professionalism with customers more than wearing a casual style (e.g. polo

shirt)

4.11 1.56

6. I think wearing a formal style uniform (e.g. jacket and shirt/blouse) enhances

my credibility with customers more than wearing a casual style (e.g. polo shirt)

4.28 1.60

7. I am very satisfied with my uniform at the present time 4.54 1.20

8. I think the uniform I wear affects my overall attitude towards my job 4.37 1.40

Grand mean: 4.11 1.52

Note: N ¼ 65. SD: Standard deviation.a1 ¼ Strongly disagree, 6 ¼ strongly agree.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

6:56

08

Oct

ober

201

4

formal style uniform (e.g. jacket and shirt/

blouse) helps me portray the role that I play

while performing my job more than wearing

a casual style uniform (e.g. polo shirt)” was

used to examine Hypothesis 1.

The mean of different demographic profiles

and the statement were calculated and tested.

Out of eight demographic variables, most vari-

ables were found not to be significant, except

for gender. The results indicated the statement

reached statistical significance in gender and

employees’ self-perception for different styles

of uniform. The statement “I think wearing a

formal style uniform (e.g. jacket and shirt/

blouse) helps me portray the role that I play

while performing my job more than wearing

a casual style uniform (e.g. polo shirt)” had a

mean of 4.50 for male employees, while it

was 3.63 for female employees. The mean

difference was significantly higher for male

employees than for female employees (t ¼

2.415, df ¼ 60.839, p ¼ 0.019). In other

words, male employees had a higher level of

agreement with the statement regarding a

hotel’s uniform and role than female employ-

ees. Therefore, Hypothesis 1 is not supported

(see Table 3).

Hypothesis 2 was “there is no significant

difference in preference of styles of uniform

among employees”. The statement “I prefer to

wear a formal style uniform (e.g. jacket and

shirt/blouse) more than a casual style (e.g. polo

shirt) at work” was used to investigate whether

there were significant differences between

employees and styles of uniform. Eight demo-

graphic variables were analyzed and conducted

to answer the hypothesis. Based on the results

of independent samples t-test and one-way

ANOVA, there was no significant difference

among employees in preference of styles of

uniform. Therefore, Hypothesis 2 is supported.

Multiple linear regression was used to

discern whether there were correlations

between the dependent variable and seven

independent variables relative to the employ-

ees’ job satisfaction of hotel uniforms.


relationship between styles of uniform and

employees’ satisfaction with their jobs”. The

statement “I am very satisfied with my

uniform at the present time” was used as

dependent variable, and the rest of the seven

statements were used as independent variables

to determine whether employees’ job satisfac-

tion is related to styles of uniform.

The results of the employees’ perceptions are

given in Table 4. The multiple correlation coef-

ficients (R) of the seven employees’ perceptions

of hotel uniform was 0.911, which indicates

there was a strong correlation between seven

independent variables and employees’ job sat-

isfaction regarding hotel uniform. The coeffi-

cient of (multiple) determination (R2) was

0.830, which may indicate that approximately

83% of the total variance of employees’ percep-

tions of job satisfaction for working attire was

explained by the seven independent variables.

The F-ratio of 39.767 with significant level of

p ¼ 0.000 indicates that the results of the

regression model were meaningful in explain-

ing the data. The coefficient b was used to

show which factors played an important role

in explaining employees’ perceptions of hotel

uniforms.

In order to determine which factors were

statistically significant, the standardized coef-

ficient, or beta, was studied. The results indi-

cated that two factors contributed to

employees’ perceptions at the significant level

of p ¼ 0.05.

1. The statement “I think wearing a formal

style uniform (e.g. jacket and shirt/

blouse) helps me portray the role that I

play while performing my job more than

wearing a casual style uniform (e.g. polo


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

6:56

08

Oct

ober

201

4

shirt)” was discovered to be significant

(b ¼ 0.375, p ¼ 0.006).

2. The statement “I think wearing a formal

style uniform (e.g. jacket and shirt/

blouse) enhances my professionalism with

customers more than wearing a casual

style (e.g. polo shirt)” was discovered to

be significant (b ¼ 0.450, p ¼ 0.001).

Therefore, Hypothesis 3 is rejected.

Characteristics of Respondents –Customers

A total of 110 customer surveys were con-

ducted, with 83 usable surveys returned. The

demographic characteristics of the customer

respondents are shown in Table 5. The response

rate by gender was 51% male and 49% female.

Twenty-seven subjects were 31–40 years old.

Approximately 28% were 21–30 years old

and 21% were 41–50 years old. Most respon-

dents were Asian/Pacific Islander (40%) fol-

lowed by Caucasian (19%). Thirty-three per

cent of customers were staying for leisure fol-

lowed by business purposes (29%). The data

also indicated that 45% of respondents stayed

in the hotel 1–2 days, 34.9% stayed 3–4

days, 15% stayed 5–6 days and only 6%

stayed more than 7 days. Forty-three respon-

dents had Bachelor’s degrees, 28% had

Master’s degrees, 8% had Associate’s degrees,

7% had Doctorate degrees and 5% had high-

school diplomas. Twenty-eight respondents

(34%) had an income of $30,000–49,999 per

year followed by 30% who had an income of

$50,000–69,999 per year.

Table 6 indicates the mean and standard

deviation of eight statements in the customers’

perceptions questionnaire. The statement “I

think a hotel uniform represents the hotel

image” had the highest mean of 4.95, followed

by 4.87 for the statement “I think an employee

uniform enhances the hotel ambience and cor-

poration image”.

Analysis of the Hypotheses

In order to examine Hypothesis 4, “there is no

significant relationship between styles of

Table 3 Employees’ Job Performance and Styles of Uniform

Male Female ta Sig.b

I think wearing a formal style

uniform (e.g. jacket and

shirt/blouse) helps me to

fit in the role that I play while

performing my job more than

wearing a casual style

(e.g. polo shirt)

Mean 4.50 3.63 2.415 0.019

SD 1.196 1.699

Note: N ¼ 65. SD: Standard deviation.aIndependent samples t-score.bSignificant at 0.05 level.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

6:56

08

Oct

ober

201

4

Table 4 Employees’ Satisfaction of Jobs and Styles of Uniform

Dependent Variable : Employees’ Job Satisfaction

Independent Variable: 7 of Employees’ Perceptions of Hotel Uniforms

Model Summary

Model R R-Square Adjusted R-Square Standard Error of the

Estimate

1 0.911 0.830 0.809 0.708

ANOVA

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Regression 139.446 7 19.921 39.767 0.000

Residual 28.554 54 0.501

Total 168.000 64

Coefficients

Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients

B Standard Error Beta t Sig.

(Constant) -0.106 0.446 -0.238 0.813


uniform helps me to fit in the role

that I play while performing my job

more than wearing a casual style

0.394 0.139 0.375 2.844 0.006


uniform enhances my

professionalism with customers

more than wearing a casual style

0.467 0.130 0.450 3.587 0.001

644

Yi-T

ing

Tu

etal.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

6:56

08

Oct

ober

201

4

Table 5 Perceptions of Customers Regarding Different Styles of Uniform

Variable Frequency %

GenderMale 42 50.6Female 41 49.4

Age (years)18–21 1 1.221–30 23 27.731–40 27 32.541–50 17 20.551–60 13 15.7Above 60 2 2.4

EthnicityCaucasian 16 19.3African American 9 10.8Native American 10 12.0Hispanic/Latino 14 16.9Asian/Pacific Islander 33 39.8Others 1 1.2

Purpose of stayBusiness 24 28.9Leisure 27 32.5Conference/exhibition 5 6.0Visiting family/friends 13 15.7Other 14 16.9

Length of stay1–2 days 37 44.63–4 days 29 34.95–6 days 12 14.5More than 7 days 5 6.0

Education levelHigh-school degree 4 4.8Associate’s degree 7 8.4Bachelor’s degree 43 51.8Master’s degree 23 27.7Doctorate degree 6 7.2

Income level ($)Less than 30,000 15 18.1

30,000–49,999 28 33.750,000–69,999 25 30.270,000–89,999 9 10.890,000 + 6 7.2

Note: N ¼ 83.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

6:56

08

Oct

ober

201

4

uniform and customers’ perceptions of hotel

image”, independent samples t-tests and one-

way ANOVA were conducted to determine

whether there were any significant differences

between styles of uniform and customers’ per-

ceptions. The statement “I think a hotel

uniform represents the hotel image” was

used to test Hypothesis 4. The mean of differ-

ent demographic profiles and the statement

were calculated and tested.

Eight demographic variables were analyzed

and conducted to answer the hypothesis.

Based on the results of independent samples

t-test and one-way ANOVA analysis, there

was no significant relationship between styles

of uniform and customers’ perceptions of

hotel image. Therefore, Hypothesis 4 is sup-

ported.


relationship between styles of uniform and

customers’ perceptions of employee perform-

ance”. Similarly, independent samples t-tests

and one-way ANOVA were conducted to

determine whether there were any significant

differences between styles of uniform and cus-

tomers’ perceptions of employee performance.

The statement “I think employees perform

better when they wear a formal style uniform

(e.g. jacket and shirt/blouse) than a casual

style (e.g. polo shirt)” was used to examine

Hypothesis 5. The mean of different demo-

graphic profiles and the statement were calcu-

lated and tested. The results indicated that it

had a mean of 3.95 for male customers,

while it was 4.75 for female customers

(Table 7). The mean difference was signifi-

Table 6 Perceptions of Customers Regarding Different Styles of Uniform

Meana SD

1. I always notice employee uniforms when I first enter the hotel 4.39 1.41

2. I think employees perform better when they wear a formal style uniform (e.g.

jacket and shirt/blouse) than a casual style (e.g. polo shirt)

4.34 1.45

3. I think a hotel uniform represents the hotel image 4.95 1.18

4. I think an employee uniform enhances the hotel ambience and corporation

image

4.87 1.18

5. I think employees wearing a formal style uniform (e.g. jacket and shirt/blouse)

have greater professionalism than wearing a casual style (e.g. polo shirt)

4.40 1.41

6. I think employees wearing a formal style uniform (e.g. jacket and shirt/blouse)

have more credibility in delivering services than wearing a casual style (e.g. polo

shirt)

4.14 1.34

7. I think when employees wear a formal style uniform (e.g. jacket and shirt/

blouse) means that the hotel has higher quality of services than wearing a casual


4.34 1.32

8. I think employees’ uniform affects my overall experience of the hotel 4.13 1.42

Grand mean: 4.44 1.21

Note: N ¼ 83. SD: Standard deviation.a1 ¼ Strongly disagree, 6 ¼ strongly agree.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

6:56

08

Oct

ober

201

4

cantly higher for female customers than for

male customers (t ¼ 22.510, df ¼ 81, p ¼

0.014). Therefore, Hypothesis 5 is rejected.

Conclusions and Recommendations

In summary, this study suggests that employ-

ees and customers perceive that employee

uniform plays an important role in enhancing

employee job satisfaction and performance as

well as customers’ perceptions of a hotel’s

image. The suggestions of this study show us

that employee uniform may affect a hotel’s

long-term business profit.

Based on our research, hospitality compa-

nies should use the research findings to investi-

gate their properties to discern whether a

change is needed for their employee uniform

to improve customer service and increase

business profit. Nevertheless, hotels in

Hawaii may find wearing casual Hawaiian

shirts is the most suitable employee uniform

for the guests and employees.

Further Research

This study has the following research limit-

ations: the respondents measured in the study

were limited to four hotels in different cities

in Southern California; therefore, the research

results may not apply directly to hotels in

other geographic areas. Furthermore, the

study focused on front desk employees and

the conclusion may not be related to other

departments of the hotel operation.

Five recommendations for further research

and/or replication of the study are:

1. Increasing the sample size and widening the

geographic areas.

2. Expanding the survey to more departments

in the hotel.

3. Investigating students majoring in hospital-

ity to see whether students have different

perspectives from employees who are

already in the industry.

4. Replicating the study in restaurants, resorts

or country clubs to examine whether differ-

ences exist among these hospitality business

segments.

5. Conducting similar research in foreign

countries and comparing them.

Acknowledgements

Special appreciation is extended to Bonnie

Rice at California State University, Long

Beach, for her professional editorial work.

Table 7 Customers’ Perceptions of Employees’ Performance and Styles of Uniform

Male Female ta Sig.b

I think employees perform better when they

wear a formal style uniform (e.g. jacket and

shirt/blouse) than a casual style (e.g. polo shirt)

Mean 3.95 4.73 -2.510 .014

SD 1.545 1.265

Note: SD: Standard deviation.aIndependent samples t-score.bSignificant at 0.05 level.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

6:56

08

Oct

ober

201

4

References

Adomaitis, A. D., & Johnson, K. K. P. (2005). Causal

versus formal uniforms: Flight attendants’ self-percep-

tions and perceived appraisals by others. Clothing and

Textiles Research Journal, 23(2), 88–101.

Aubinais, Y. (2005). You wear it well. Journal of Caterer

& Hotelkeeper, 195(4386), 40–45.

Back, K. (2005). The effects of image congruence on cus-

tomers’ brand loyalty in the upper middle-class hotel

industry. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research,

29(4), 448–467.

Back, K., & Parks, S. C. (2003). A brand loyalty model

involving cognitive, affective, and conative brand

loyalty and customer satisfaction. Journal of Hospitality

& Tourism Research, 27(4), 419–435.

Barr, J. (2007). Uniforms promote brand, inspire customer

confidence. Northeast Pennsylvania Business Journal,

22(11), 27–35.

Bitner, M. J. (1990). Evaluating service encounters: The

effect of physical surroundings and employee responses.

Journal of Marketing, 54(2), 69–82.

Burns,L.D.,& Lennon, S. J. (1993). Effectof clothingon the

use of person information categories in first impressions.

Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 12(9), 9–15.

Ford, R. & Heaton, C. (2000). Managing the guest experi-

ence in hospitality. New York: Thomson.

Fussell, P. (2002). Uniforms: Why we are what we wear.

New York: Boston New York.

Haise, C. L., & Rucker, M. (2003). The flight attendant

uniform: Effects of selected variables on flight attendant

image, uniform preference and employee satisfaction.

Social Behavior and Personality, 31(6), 565–576.

Joseph, N., & Alex, N. (1972). The uniform: A sociological

perspective. American Journal of Sociology, 77(4),

719–730.

Kotler, P., Bowen, J. & Makens, J. (1998). Marketing for hos-

pitality and tourism. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Lennon, S. L., & Miller, F. G. (1984). Attire, physical

appearance, and first impressions: More is less. Clothing

and Textiles Research Journal, 3(1), 1–8.

Nelson, K., & Bowen, J. (2000). The effect of employee

uniforms on employee satisfaction. Cornell Hotel

and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 41(2),

86–95.

O’Connor, S. C. (2007). This decade finds uniforms more

fashion forward. Hotel Business, 16(9), 46–48.

Peluchette, J. V., & Karl, K. (2007). The impact of work-

place attire on employee self-perceptions. Human

Resource Development Quarterly, 18(3), 345–360.

Rafaeli, A., Dutton, J., Harquial, C., & Mackie-Lewis, S.

(1997). Navigating by attire: The use of dress by admin-

istrative employees. Academy of Management Journal,

40, 19–45.

Rafaeli, A., & Pratt, M. (1993). Tailored meanings: On

the meaning and impact of organizational dress.

Academy of Management Review, 18, 32–55.

Robison, J. (2005). Uniform appeal. Casino Journal,

18(2), 34–36.

Sheehan, P. (2003). Dressed to impress. Lodging Hospital-

ity, 59(14), 48–50.

Sirgy, M. J. (1985). Self-image/product image congruity

and consumer decision making. International Journal

of Management, 2(4), 49–63.

Solomon, M., & Schopler, J. (1982). Self-consciousness

and clothing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulle-

tin, 8, 508–514.

SPSS Incorporated (2004), Statistical Package for the

Social Sciences, Version 16.0 [Computer software].

Chicago, IL.

Staff uniforms reveal a lot about an organization (2007,

April 18). Dominion Post, p. E4.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

6:56

08

Oct

ober

201

4

Documents

Effects of Employees' Uniform on Company Image and Employees' Self-perceptions and Customers' Perceptions