Workplace Spirituality and Employee Attitudes within the Lodging Environment

This article was downloaded by: [Aston University]On: 08 January 2014, At: 17:12Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Human Resources inHospitality & TourismPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/whrh20

Workplace Spirituality and EmployeeAttitudes within the LodgingEnvironmentAlleah Crawford a , Susan S. Hubbard b , Steven R. Lonis-Shumate c &Martin O'Neill ba Hospitality Management , East Carolina University , Greenville, NCb Nutrition and Food Science , Auburn University , Auburn, Alabamac Hospitality Management , Tuskegee University , Tuskegee, ALPublished online: 02 Jan 2009.

To cite this article: Alleah Crawford , Susan S. Hubbard , Steven R. Lonis-Shumate & Martin O'Neill(2008) Workplace Spirituality and Employee Attitudes within the Lodging Environment, Journal ofHuman Resources in Hospitality & Tourism, 8:1, 64-81

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15332840802274445

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 our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/whrh20

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15332840802274445

Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

17:

12 0

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

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

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

Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & Tourism, 8:64–81, 2009Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 1533-2845 print / 1533-2853 onlineDOI: 10.1080/15332840802274445

Workplace Spirituality and Employee Attitudeswithin the Lodging Environment

ALLEAH CRAWFORDHospitality Management, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC

SUSAN S. HUBBARDNutrition and Food Science, Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama

STEVEN R. LONIS-SHUMATEHospitality Management, Tuskegee University, Tuskegee, AL

MARTIN O’NEILLNutrition and Food Science, Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama

This research examined the workplace spirituality concept and itsrelationship with employee variables, including intrinsic work sat-isfaction, job involvement, intention to quit, organizational basedself-esteem, and organizational commitment, within the lodgingsetting. Workplace spirituality is a growing trend not only in theresearch community, but also in the corporate environment. Re-searchers sampled employees from two hotel management groups,one that actively promoted workplace spirituality within its orga-nization and one that did not. The results of this study found asignificant relationship between the presence of workplace spiritu-ality and the employee variables being examined. There was also asignificant difference examined between the two organizations asrelated to the presence of workplace spirituality.

KEYWORDS Workplace spirituality, hospitality, employee satisfac-tion

Address correspondence to Alleah Crawford, Hospitality Management, East Carolina Uni-versity, 311 RW Rivers Building, Greenville, NC 27858. E-mail: [email protected]

64

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

17:

12 0

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Workplace Spirituality and Employee Attitudes 65

INTRODUCTION

The demand for quality and service among today’s consumers has providedhuman resource management with a challenge in creating and fostering aworking environment that enhances employee commitment not only to theorganization, but also to the guest. Several service quality initiatives havebeen introduced through literature and in practice, however, one consistentfinding remains, internal service quality is directly linked to external servicequality (Heskett, Jones, Loveman, Sasser, & Schlesinger, 1994).

A growing number of organizations are creating employee programs asa means to foster a high level of internal service quality. One such prac-tice is workplace spirituality (WPS). Tyson Foods, a Fortune 500 company(Hoovers, 2006) promotes WPS through a chaplaincy program for all of itsemployees at several of its 300 offices and plants (Hall, 2006). These chap-laincy are leading the faith centered employee programs in growth (Hall,2006). Not only are corporations offering faith-based programs, but popularpublications are also beginning to report on the trend.

In July 2001, the cover story of Fortune magazine was entitled “Godand Business” (Gunther, 2001). This article focused on leaders and organiza-tions that support WPS. Gunther describes WPS as creating a moral and fairenvironment where believers and non-believers can work together (2001).Not only is WPS present in current scholarly journals, it is also present inFortune 500 companies, as well as popular publications. Both interest in andthe practice of WPS are growing.

Spirituality in the workplace has become a growing trend not only inpractice, but also in current research. The Journal of Organizational ChangeManagement (1999, 2003) has devoted three separate issues to spirituality.This alone indicates interest in the idea of WPS as well as understandingits potential relationship with employee attitudes and a potential resultinghigher level of internal service quality. WPS could be an important factor inthe human resource challenge.

Spirituality was described as being connected to all, unstructured, indi-vidualistic, the belief there is a higher power, nondenominational, timeless,and the provider of the reason for our existence by Mitroff and Denton(1999) and is based on research they conducted on the presence of spiritual-ity in corporate America. The researchers interviewed CEOs, managers, andhuman resource professionals. Kinjerski and Skrypnek (2004) interviewedspirituality professionals, those that lecture on WPS and/or teach WPS. Indoing so, Kinjerski and Skrypnek (2004) created the following definition ofspirituality:

Spirit at work is a distinct state that is characterized by physical, affec-tive, cognitive, interpersonal, spiritual, and mystical dimensions. Mostindividuals describe the experience as including: a physical sensation

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

17:

12 0

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

66 A. Crawford et al.

characterized by a positive state of arousal or energy; positive affectcharacterized by a profound feeling of well-being and joy; cognitive fea-tures involving a sense of being authentic, and awareness of alignmentbetween one’s values and beliefs and one’s work, and a belief that one isengaged in meaningful work that has a higher purpose; an interpersonaldimension characterized by a sense of connection to others and commonpurpose; a spiritual presence characterized by a sense of connection tosomething larger than self, such as a higher power, the Universe, natureor humanity; and a mystical dimension characterized by a sense of per-fection, transcendence, living in the moment, and experiences that wereawe-inspiring, mysterious, or sacred. (p. 37)

While the two definitions are somewhat different, they both share the cog-nitive feature, having a meaning for our existence and being aware of thismeaning in order to utilize it. Both definitions share the interpersonal featureof feeling a common connection to all, and they share the presence feature,a sense of a greater power.

Milliman, Czaplewski, and Ferguson (2003) defined WPS through theresearch conducted by Ashmos and Duchon (2000). Ashmos and Duchon(2000) define WPS as “the recognition that employees have an inner lifethat nourishes and is nourished by meaningful work that takes place inthe context of community” (p. 137). The researchers also found that sevendifferent levels of WPS exist (Ashmos & Duchon, 2000). Milliman et al. (2003)used three of these levels to define WPS: the individual level, the group level,and the organizational level of WPS. These levels will each be discussed laterin the article.

The definition constructed for this project uses shared portions of defini-tions discussed above. For the purpose of this research, spirituality is definedas having meaning for our existence, having a connection to everything thateveryone shares, and knowing a greater power that can be defined in manyways, which are unstructured and unique to each individual. WPS is alsothought to exist on several levels, three of which are used in this study: theindividual level, group level, and organizational level.

What purpose does spirituality, specifically WPS, serve? How can itbe utilized in a work setting? Are there benefits to WPS? These are ques-tions that many may be considering, however, few are answering. WhileWPS is a growing trend and research exists on this phenomenon, much ofit is has been developmental in nature. Development of construct, defini-tions, and models (Burack, 1999; Dean, Fornaciari, & McGee, 2003; Heaton,Schmidt-Wild, & Travis, 2004; Kinjerski & Skrypnek, 2004) has been theprimary type of research conducted. Empirical research has also been con-ducted on WPS (Mitroff & Denton, 1999; Milliman et al., 2003). There is asmall body of research that supports and/or opposes WPS and its poten-tial benefits. The purpose of this research is to utilize the previous research

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

17:

12 0

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14


conducted with WPS and examine the presence of WPS in the lodging settingwhile examining the relationship between WPS and employee satisfactionvariables in order to provide human resource professionals with an under-standing of the potential benefits/drawbacks of fostering WPS within theirorganization.

The hospitality industry is largely based on service and providing theguest with a great experience. According to Smith, Gregory, & Cannon (1996)“satisfied and committed employees contribute to the success of any hospital-ity company. These same employees also contribute to this success throughproviding positive guest satisfaction” (p. 8). Providing guest satisfaction canbe a difficult task, and increasing the difficulty of this task is the require-ment that employees must keep a positive demeanor at all times, includinginstances that bring about negative emotions. This is known as emotional la-bor and can be very challenging for all employees (Pizam, 2004). Emotionallabor has also been linked to increased job stress, turnover, and decreasedsatisfaction (Pizam, 2004). Due to this linkage, it is imperative to investigateWPS in the hospitality setting for possible effects on employee satisfactionvariables, including those of turnover and job satisfaction, because it giveshuman resource professionals another tool that may be utilized.

The manifestation of WPS, for the purpose of this research, exists onthree levels: individual, group, and organizational. According to Milliman etal. (2003), these levels are defined as meaningful work, sense of community,and alignment with organization values. These three levels are based on astudy conducted by Ashmos and Duchon (2000) in which they identifiedseven levels of WPS. In order to maintain a design similar to Milliman et al.(2003), the same three levels were selected for this study. These three levelswere considered important because of their use in prior studies and becausethey focus on workplace related aspects of spirituality (Milliman et al., 2003).

Individual Level of Workplace Spirituality

The first level of WPS is that of meaningful work for the individual; in-volvement in work that gives a purpose to one’s life (Ashmos & Duchon,2000). This level has also been described as the way employees relate totheir day-to-day work (Milliman et al., 2003), as a source of spiritual devel-opment (Mirvis, 1997), and as having a passion for work (Laabs, 1995). Keycomponents used to measure this level of WPS in previous research haveincluded items that measure what is important, invigorating, and enjoyableabout work (Ashmos & Duchon, 2000).

Group Level of Workplace Spirituality

The group level of WPS is defined by employees as feeling a constantconnection to coworkers and feeling that they contribute to the workplace

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

17:

12 0

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14


community (Ashmos & Duchon, 2000). The term community is vital to thislevel of WPS. It has consistently been used in research and reflects one’s feel-ing of closeness with others, being connected to others by sharing and/orunderstanding, and experiencing one’s life with and through others (Mirvis,1997). The community environment has a spiritual characteristic in that it“is a place in which people can experience personal growth, be valuedfor themselves as individuals, and have a sense of working together [for acommon purpose]” (Ashmos & Duchon, 2000, p. 139).

Organization Level of Workplace Spirituality

At the organizational level of WPS exists the alliance of an employee’s prin-ciples with that of the organization he or she works for. According to Laabs(1995), the most effective means to have employees align with the corpo-rate mission is to use a spiritual development approach based on values.The organization level of WPS evaluates the values of an organization, howmuch the organization cares about its employees, the connection of the em-ployee with the organization’s goals, and the conscience of the organization(Ashmos & Duchon, 2000).

An organization’s values, mission, and goals are set for the companyas a whole. The alignment of an employee’s principles with the company’svalues, mission, and goals is an indicator of WPS at the third level, theorganizational level.

EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION VARIABLES

Milliman et al. (2003) researched the effects of WPS on employee variablesin MBA students that were working full time. The researchers measuredthe effect of WPS on five employee satisfaction variables and found that“the spirituality dimensions were significantly related to the five job attitudedimensions” (Milliman et al., 2003, p. 441). The five factors measured inthis study were organizational commitment, intention to quit, intrinsic worksatisfaction, job involvement, and organizational-based self-esteem (OBSE).Past research has shown that WPS does have an effect on employee attitudesand potentially their emotional labor. Knowledge of the benefits and/ordrawbacks WPS might have on employee attitudes is crucial in the hospitalityindustry. The five variables to be examined in this study are discussed below.

Organizational Commitment

To date, there has been a great deal of research conducted on organizationalcommitment in the hospitality sector (Worsfold, 1999; Maxwell & Steele,2003). Due to the high levels of turnover, extreme load of emotional labor,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

17:

12 0

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14


and constant requirement to please others, there is a great quest to findfactors that increase commitment in this demanding industry.

Firth, Mellor, Moore, & Loquet (2004) found that the more job satisfac-tion an employee experiences, the more committed to the organization heor she is. Maxwell and Steele (2003) stated that the most important attributesin creating organizational commitment may be the job attributes, the roleattributes, and the work experiences one has. Other research has shown thatthere is a connection between how committed a hotel employee is and thelevel of service quality he or she extends to his or her guests (Worsfold, 1999).

From the knowledge afforded to industry stakeholders by previous re-search, one is able to understand the importance of organizational commit-ment. Hotel companies and other hospitality organizations must strive to findfactors that contribute to employee satisfaction, commitment, and the posi-tive contributions made by the employee to a guest as a result of their overallsatisfaction with the job and organization alike. These positive contributionscan manifest into guest satisfaction, loyalty, and bottom line success.

Intention to Quit

Examining the motivations behind quitting a job and/or measuring turnovercan be a difficult task. In order to gain a complete picture of this phe-nomenon, past employees of an organization would have to be contactedand willing to participate in a study. Due to this and other challenges as-sociated with studying turnover, this project examined current employees’intentions to quit.

Why do employees consider leaving their current employer? Researchhas shown that monotony of a job, poor supervision, lack of autonomy,job dissatisfaction, and extreme interactions with guests are all reasons forleaving a job in the hospitality industry (Hinkin & Tracey, 2000; Vallen, 1993).The cost associated with a lost employee has been estimated to be between$2,900 and $4,600 for line employees and between $17,000 and $20,000 formanagers (Hogan, 1992). Reduction in turnover begins with reduction incurrent employees’ intentions to quit.

According to Hogan (1992), meeting the needs of staff members is oneof the best ways to decrease turnover and intention to quit. When these needsare met, employers will see that their staff shows less interest in looking forother employment, has a better understanding of the company’s policies,is less dissatisfied with their job, and understands the company’s caringattitude toward employees (Milman et al. Since this is the first occurrence ofthis citation, please list all authors, 2004).

Intrinsic Work Satisfaction

Intrinsic work satisfaction can be defined as an employee’s level of satis-faction with the feeling of success received from the job, the enjoyment

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

17:

12 0

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14


of performing the duties of the job, and the level of autonomy associatedwith the job (Yilmaz, 2002). Intrinsic motivators have been found to be anintegral part of creating high levels of job satisfaction and preventing job dis-satisfaction for employees (Savery, 1996). The intrinsic rewards an employeereceives serve as a precursor to productivity, efficiency, absenteeism, andturnover (Lewis, Brazil, Krueger, Lohfeld, & Tjam, 2001).

In the hospitality industry, where emotional labor and emotional ex-haustion exist in an elevated state, intrinsic work satisfaction is key to pro-viding employees with higher levels of success and overall work satisfaction.Karatepe and Tekinkus (2006) found that intrinsic motivation could decreaseemotional exhaustion of frontline employees, therefore, increasing overalljob satisfaction. This point illustrates a possible linkage between intrinsicmotivators and overall job satisfaction.

Job Involvement

Previous research has defined job involvement as the degree of psycho-logical identification an employee has with his/her role in the workplace(Kanungo, 1982; Rabinowitz & Hall, 1977). Job involvement has been pos-itively related to the employee’s opinion that the workplace is meaningfuland psychologically safe (Brown & Leigh, 1996). A psychologically safe workenvironment gives an employee the ability to be one’s self without receivingnegative consequences to one’s self or career (Kahn, 1990). According toBrown and Leigh (1996), one dimension of a psychologically safe work en-vironment is the freedom employees have to express their feelings and thecore facet of their personal beliefs as related to their job. A psychologicallysafe environment encourages job involvement.

OBSE

OBSE is defined as the degree organizational associates think they can meettheir needs by participating in roles found within the organization (Pierce,Gardner, Cummings, & Dunham, 1989). OBSE is a strong indicator of anemployee’s perception of his or her value to the organization and his or herspecific role in the organization.

Previous research conducted in this area has focused on the relationshipbetween OBSE and the level of job difficulty (Tharenou & Harker, 1984);the relationship between OBSE and job characteristics (Tharenou & Harker,1982); and appropriate measures of OBSE (Pierce et al., 1989). One pointnoted from this previous research is that “experiences within an organizationwill shape OBSE, which will also affect organization-related behaviors andattitudes” (Pierce et al., 1989, p.626). This project examined the effect andnature of WPS as an experience that can shape OBSE.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

17:

12 0

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14


HYPOTHESES

The purpose of this research is to measure the potential relationships be-tween WPS and employee attitudes. The proposed hypotheses for this in-vestigation are stated below.

H1: The presence of WPS will have a positive relationship with organi-zational commitment.H2: The presence of WPS will have a negative relationship with intentionto quit.H3: The presence of WPS will have a positive relationship with intrinsicjob satisfaction.H4: The presence of WPS will have a positive relationship with jobinvolvement.H5: The presence of WPS will have a positive relationship withorganization-based self-esteemH6: Group A, which actively employs and describes their organizationthrough the WPS concept, will have a higher level of WPS than Group B,which does not actively employ or describe their organization throughthe WPS concept.

METHODS

The purpose of this research was to measure the potential relationshipsbetween WPS and employee attitudes. In order to fulfill this purpose, a de-scriptive research design was selected. In this section, the methods used inconducting the research project are described including the sample popula-tion, sample demographics, measurement instrument, reliability and validityof the measurement instrument, variables examined, data collection process,and data analysis techniques.

Sample Population

The sample consisted of 87 self-selected hotel employees from all depart-ments, with varying degrees of experience in the hospitality industry, and alllevels of responsibility, from line level employees to the general managers.All participants surveyed were 19 years of age or older. For the purpose ofthis study, there were two groups of participants, Group A and Group B. Theparticipants in Group A were managed by a company that actively promotesWPS, and they were recruited from four small full-service business class ho-tels. The participants in Group B were managed by a company that does notactively promote WPS, and they were recruited from one large upscale full

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

17:

12 0

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14


service hotel and conference center. The determination as to which grouppromotes and does not promote WPS within their organization was made byeach company’s self-description. Group A promotes the WPS concept andbelieves WPS is part of the corporate culture of the organization. Group Bdoes not state that WPS exists within the organization or in the organization’scorporate culture.

Measurement Instrument

Data for the research study was gathered from a survey-based format. Theinstrument used for this investigation was adapted from Milliman et al.(2003). The final version of the survey consisted of 42 items, using a 5-point Likert scale and seven demographic items that allowed for furtherinvestigation of trends and/or groupings.

Variables Examined

The predictors included in this study were the degree of existence of WPSand demographic items. The degree of existence of WPS was categorized us-ing three levels. These levels were individual, group, and/or organizational.The demographic items for the study included age, gender, department,length of time with current employer, employee classification, student ornonstudent, and full-time/part-time status.

The criteria examined in this research were related to employee atti-tudes, including organizational commitment, intention to quit, intrinsic worksatisfaction, job involvement, and organizational based self-esteem.

Data Collection Process

For Group A, the chief investigator traveled to the locations of the partici-pating hotel properties for data collection. Four hotels were visited for datacollection, all within the same ownership group. Prior to the chief investi-gator’s arrival, an announcement was made to all employees, via a monthlystaff meeting and a daily departmental meeting, that there would be anopportunity to participate in a research study.

For Group B, the chief investigator traveled to one location for data col-lection. Prior to the chief investigator’s arrival, an announcement was madeto all employees, via a weekly newsletter and during the daily meeting eachdepartment conducted, that there would be an opportunity to participate ina research study.

On site, the chief investigator was set up in a meeting room or theemployee break area. Employees were encouraged to come in on theirbreak or at their leisure if they chose to participate. Those that participated

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

17:

12 0

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14


came into the meeting room or break room to complete the survey. Aninformation letter further explaining the nature of the research was attachedto each survey. A survey return box was provided in the designated areafor the participant to drop his/her completed survey in order to allow forrespondent confidentiality. The management staff was included in the sampleand completed the survey in the same manner as all other participants.

All participants were informed that individual responses would be keptconfidential and the results would be disseminated in written and oral for-mats. The survey was offered in paper format.

Data Analysis Techniques

To measure the difference between the means of WPS for Group A andGroup B the researcher used an independent samples t test. The relationshipbetween each of the employee variables and the presence of WPS wasdetermined using Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

Sample Demographics

The sample for this research was self-selected and participated on a volunteerbasis. The sample for Group A consisted of 57 participants and the sample forGroup B consisted of 30 participants, which was a total of 87 participants.A breakdown of the demographic makeup of the sample is provided inTable 1.

TABLE 1 Demographic Makeup of theSample

Variable Frequency Percentage

GenderFemale 60 69.0Male 27 31.0

Age18–20 3 3.421–25 11 12.626–34 24 27.635–45 22 25.346–55 22 25.356–65 4 4.666+ 1 1.1

EmployedFull time 75 86.2Part time 12 13.8

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

17:

12 0

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14


TABLE 2 Reliability of Each Construct

Construct Alpha Coefficient

Individual level of workplace spirituality 0.83Group level of workplace spirituality 0.85Organizational level of workplace spirituality 0.89Organizational commitment 0.87Intention to quit 0.76Intrinsic work satisfaction 0.81Job involvement 0.70Organization-based self-esteem 0.90

The sample population was comprised of 69% females and 31% males.The average age of the participants was 26 to 34 years, which represented27% of the sample population. Eighty-six percent of the sample populationreported their employment status as full time. This is beneficial to the inves-tigation in that full-time employees are present 40 or more hours per weekand have a better understanding as to the presence of the WPS conceptwithin their working environment.

Reliability and Validity of Measurement Instrument

Content and face validity were determined by a panel of academic and in-dustry professionals. The panel was made up of three Auburn Universityprofessors and one general manager. The instrument was reviewed for read-ability, layout, and content.

Reliability of the instrument had been obtained by Milliman et al. (1992)originally. The same survey was used for this study with minor adaptationsfor readability and clarity. Reliability of each multi-item scale was assessedusing Cronbach’s alpha. The coefficient alphas obtained are listed belowwith each at or above the .70 cutoff (Nunnally & Berstein, 1994; Sapp &Jensen, 1997), assessing the instrument as reliable. Table 2 illustrates thealpha coefficient for each construct of the instrument.

Hypotheses Testing

Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient was used in order to in-vestigate the relationship between the presence of WPS and five employeevariables, including organizational commitment, intention to quit, intrinsicwork satisfaction, job involvement, and organization-based self-esteem. Thelast hypothesis tested utilized a t test to compare the means of Group A andGroup B on the degree WPS is present within their organization. WPS wasdetermined by finding the mean score for all three levels of WPS (individual,group, and organizational). Table 3 highlights the correlation coefficients foreach of the five employee variables in relation to WPS.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

17:

12 0

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14


H1: The presence of WPS will have a positive relationship with organi-zational commitment.

The relationship between the overall presence of WPS and organi-zational commitment is a strong, positive relationship (r = .765, n = 87,p < .01). As the presence of WPS increases within an organization, em-ployees exhibit stronger organizational commitment; therefore, we accepthypothesis 1.

H2: The presence of WPS will have a negative relationship with intentionto quit.

The relationship between the overall presence of WPS and intention to quit isa strong, negative relationship (r = −.548, n = 87, p < .01). As the presenceof WPS increases within an organization, the employees exhibit less of anintention to quit; therefore, we accept hypothesis 2.

H3: The presence of WPS will have a positive relationship with intrinsicjob satisfaction.

The relationship between the overall presence of WPS and intrinsicwork satisfaction is a strong, positive relationship (r = .732, n = 87, p <

.01). As the presence of WPS increases within an organization, the employees

TABLE 3 Correlation Coefficients for Five Employee Variables and Workplace Spirituality

Workplace Organizational Intention Intrinsic Work JobSpirituality Commitment Quit Satisfaction Involvement

Organizationalcommit-ment

Pearson 0.765**

Sig (2-tailed) 0.000N 87

Intention toquit

Pearson −0.548** 0.520**Sig (2-tailed) 0.000 0.000N 87 87

Intrinsicworksatisfaction

Pearson 0.732** 0.722** −0.525**

Sig (2-tailed) 0.000 0.000 0.000N 87 87 87

Job involve-ment

Pearson 0.699** 0.622** −0.303** 0.597**Sig (2-tailed) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000N 87 87 87 87

Organization-basedself-esteem

Pearson 0.704** 0.696** −0.354** 0.501** 0.699**Sig (2-tailed) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000N 87 87 87 87 87

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

17:

12 0

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14


TABLE 4 Independent Samples T Test Results

Equal Variances Assumed T df Sig (2-tailed)

Workplace spirituality −2.722 85 0.008

experience a higher level of intrinsic job satisfaction; therefore, we accepthypothesis 3.

H4: The presence of WPS will have a positive relationship with jobinvolvement.

The relationship between the overall presence of WPS and job involvementis a strong, positive relationship (r = .699, n = 87, p < .01). As the presenceof WPS increases within an organization, a greater level of job involvementis reflected; therefore, we accept hypothesis 4.

H5: The presence of WPS will have a positive relationship withorganization-based self-esteem.

The relationship between the overall presence of WPS and organization-based self-esteem is a strong, positive relationship (r = .704, n = 87, p <

.01). As the presence of WPS increases within an organization, the employ-ees exhibit stronger organization-based self-esteem; therefore, we accepthypothesis 5.

H6: Group A, which actively employs and describes their organizationthrough the WPS concept, will have a higher level of WPS than Group B,which does not actively employ or describe their organization throughthe WPS concept.

An independent samples t test was utilized to compare the presence of WPSfor Group A and Group B.

There was a significant difference in the presence of WPS for Group A(M = 3.70, SD = .67) and Group B [M = 4.11, SD = .62; t(85) = −2.722,p =.008]. To determine the strength of the effect size, eta squared was cal-culated. According to Cohen (1988), an eta squared of .01 is small, .06 ismoderate, and .14 is large. The magnitude of the differences in the meanswas moderate (eta squared = .08). Table 4 illustrates the t test results. Table5 illustrates the difference in the mean scores for Group A and Group B forWPS.

DISCUSSION

The purpose of the study was to better understand what effects, if any, WPShas on employee variables in the lodging environment. Through Pearson

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

17:

12 0

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14


TABLE 5 Mean Scores for Group A and Group B

Variable N Mean Std. Deviation

Workplace spirituality Group A 57 3.70 0.67Group B 30 4.11 0.62

product-moment correlation coefficients, these relationships were assessed.Hypotheses 1 through 5 were accepted. The presence of WPS was found tobe positively correlated to organizational commitment, intrinsic work satis-faction, job involvement, and organization-based self-esteem. Also, the pres-ence of WPS is negatively correlated with intention to quit. Milliman andcolleagues (2003) examined each of the three levels of WPS separately,whereas these researchers came up with a comprehensive score of WPS.This allowed the researchers to better understand WPS as a whole as wellas the relationships between employee attitudes and the presence of WPS.These differences, however, did not allow for a direct comparison of results.

Group A described themselves as employing WPS, while Group B didnot describe themselves as employing WPS. Group B had a statistically sig-nificant higher mean score for the presence of WPS, therefore rejecting Hy-pothesis 6. Although Group B does not actively employ the WPS conceptnor do they describe their organization in terms of WPS, it is present in theirenvironment and experienced by the employees.

The results found by this investigation provide support for the conceptof WPS and its effects on employee satisfaction variables within a lodgingsetting. These results also reveal that although an organization does notactively strive for WPS to be present within the environment, it may still bean active part of the company culture among employees of the organization.

Implications

The demand for quality among consumers has forced the service industryto differentiate based upon their service quality. With the relationship es-tablished by the service profit chain (Heskett et al., 1994), practitioners areincreasingly interested in means to foster the culture that decreases turnover,increases commitment and job involvement, and creates a higher percep-tion of work satisfaction and self-esteem as related to the organization. Thisstudy has provided practitioners with a component piece that may assist infostering this type of corporate culture.

Human resource professionals are in need of tools to help build aworking environment where employees are satisfied and provide fellow em-ployees with a high level of internal service. This has been found to bedirectly linked to external service quality (Heskett et al., 1994), what serviceproviders pride their reputation and hang their survival on. WPS, through

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

17:

12 0

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14


faith-based programs and initiatives, may just create the working environ-ment that allows for employee commitment, job involvement, and resultingsatisfaction and decreased intention to quit. The demand for quality andservice among today’s consumer has provided human resource managementwith a challenge in creating and fostering a working environment that en-hances employee commitment not only to the organization, but also to theguest, and by gaining a better understanding of the relationship betweenWPS and employee attitudes, human resource professionals have a betteridea of what is linked to employee satisfaction and involvement.

For academia, the findings of this research support the previous findingsof Milliman et al. (2003). WPS has a relationship with several important em-ployee variables. The findings also support the reliability of the measurementinstrument used in both studies.

Limitations

One limitation to this study was the decision of the owner/managementcompany of Group A to sell the properties to an investor. With this decisioncame a new management company and new operating philosophy. Data wasgathered after all employees were made aware of the change. The beginningstages of the change in management were occurring at the property levelwhen the investigator was on site collecting data. Concerns about the futureof the organization, stability of jobs, and pay changes could have beenextraneous variables that may have affected the data.

Another limitation of the study was the small sample size. Althoughthe sample was self-selected and only resulted in 87 participants, at threeof the four sites, all employees working on the day of collection partici-pated. The researcher could have returned to each site in an attempt toincrease the sample size; however, as data collection occurred, each hotelwould be further along in the change over to new management.

Future Research

The values-based model (Milliman et al., 1999) states that an organizationthat includes the organization’s core values in all aspects of company (plans,goals, human resource practices, etc) will see these values in the operationsand have enhanced performance. Future research may focus on this modeland its reliability within the lodging setting.

The survey instrument utilized in this study was adapted from Millimanet al. (2003). In Milliman’s research and in the current study, the reliability ofthe instrument was established. Future research may test the reliability of theinstrument in other settings, such as manufacturing or other service sector

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

17:

12 0

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14


environments. With the growing interest in WPS, there must be a reliableand valid instrument that may be used to further study this concept.

Additionally, future research may look at the impact of WPS on theconsumer. Does WPS affect the consumer in a positive or negative way? Theservice profit chain “establishes relationships between profitability, customerloyalty, and employee satisfaction, loyalty, and productivity” (Heskett et al.,1994, p.164). Does WPS have an effect on this established relationship or theperceptions of the customer?

REFERENCES

Ashmos, D. P., & Duchon D. (2000). Spirituality at work: A conceptualization andmeasure. Journal of Management Inquiry, 9(2), 134–145.

Brown, S. P., & Leigh, T. W. (1996). A new look at psychological climate and itsrelationship to job involvement, effort, and performance. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 81(4), 358–368.

Burack, E. H. (1999). Spirituality in the workplace. Journal of Organizational ChangeManagement, 12(4), 280–291.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum.

Dean, K. L., Fornaciari, C. J., & McGee, J. J. (2003). Research in spirituality, reli-gion, and work: Walking the line between relevance and legitimacy. Journal ofOrganizational Change Management, 4(16), 378–395.

Firth, L., Mellor, D. J., Moore, K. A., & Loquet, C. (2004). How can managers reduceemployee intention to quit? Journal of Managerial Psychology, 19(2), 170–187.

Gunther, M. (2001, July). God and business. Fortune, 55–80.Hall, K. (2006, January 8). In a time of change, Tyson turns to faith: Food processor

just one company that has hired chaplains to counsel workers. The CharlotteObserver.

Heaton, D. P., Schmidt-Wild, J., & Travis, F. (2004). Constructs, methods, and mea-sures for researching spirituality in organizations. Journal of OrganizationalChange Management, 17(1), 62–82.

Heskett, J. L., Jones, T. O., Loveman, G. W., Sasser, W. E., & Schlesinger, L. A. (1994).Putting the service-profit chain to work. Harvard Business Review, 72(2), 164–174.

Hinkin, T. R., & Tracey, J. B. (2000, June). The cost of turnover. Cornell Hotel &Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 41(3).

Hogan, J. J. (1992). Turnover and what to do about it: Employee turnover in thehospitality industry. Cornell Hotel & Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 33(1).

Hoover’s Fortune 500 companies. Retrieved on April 27, 2006, from http://premium.hoovers.com

Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disen-gagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692–724.

Kanungo, R. N. (1982). Measurement of job and work involvement. Journal of Ap-plied Psychology, 67, 341–349.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

17:

12 0

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14


Karatepe, O. M., & Tekinkus M. (2006). The effects of work-family conflict, emotionalexhaustion, and intrinsic motivation on job outcomes of front-line employees.International Journal of Bank Marketing, 24(3), 173–193.

Kinjerski, V. M., & Skrypnek, B. J. (2004). Defining spirit at work: Finding commonground. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 17(1), 26–42.

Laabs, J. J. (1995). Balancing spirituality and work. Personnel Journal, 74(9).Lewis, D., Brazil, K., Krueger, P., Lohfeld, L., & Tjam, E. (2001). Extrinsic and intrinsic

determinants of quality of work life. Leadership in Health Services, 14(2).Maxwell, G., & Steele, G. (2003). Organisational commitment: A study of managers in

hotels. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 15(7),362–369.

McKnight, R. (1984). Spirituality in the workplace. In Transforming work: A collectionof organizational transformation readings (pp.138–153). Alexandria, VA: MilesRiver.

Milman, A., & Ricci, P. (2004). Predicting job retention of hourly employees in thelodging industry. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 11(1).

Milliman, J. F., Czaplewski, A. J., & Ferguson, J. M. (2003). Workplace spiritualityand employee work attitudes: An exploratory empirical assessment. Journal ofOrganizational Change Management, 16(4), 426–447.

Mitroff, I., & Denton, E. (1999). A strange but formidable alliance. In A spiritualaudit of corporate America: A hard look at spirituality, religion, and values inthe workplace (pp. 15–27). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Mirvis, P. H. (1997). Soul work in organizations. Organization Science, 8(2), 193–206.Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York:

McGraw-Hill.Pierce, J. L., Gardner, D. G., Cummings, L. L., & Dunham, R. B. (1989). Organization-

based self-esteem: Construct definition, measurement, and validation. Academyof Management Journal, 32(3), 622–648.

Pizam, A. (2004). Are hospitality employees equipped to hide their feelings? Inter-national Journal of Hospitality Management, 23, 315–316.

Rabinowitz, S., & Hall, D. T. (1977). Organizational research on job involvement.Psychological Bulletin, 84, 265–288.

Sapp, S. G., & Jensen, H. H. (1997). Reliability and validity of nutrition knowledgeand diet-health awareness tests developed from 1989–1991 Diet and healthknowledge surveys. Journal of Nutrition Education, 29, 63–72.

Savery, L. K. (1996). The congruence between the importance of job satisfactionand the perceived level of achievement. Journal of Management Development,15(6), 18–27.

Smith, K., Gregory, S. R., & Cannon D. (1996). Becoming an employer of choice:Assessing commitment in the hospitality workplace. International Journal ofContemporary Hospitality Management, 8(6), 3–9.

Tharenou, P., & Harker, P. (1982). Organizational correlates of employee self-esteem.Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 797–805.

Tharenou, P., & Harker, P. (1984). Moderating influence of self-esteem on relation-ships between job complexity, performance, and satisfaction. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 69, 623–632.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

17:

12 0

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14


Valen, G. K. (1993). Organizational climate and burnout (includes related items).(Human resources). Cornell Hotel & Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 34(1).

Worsfold, P. (1999). HRM, performance, commitment, and service quality in thehotel industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,11(7), 340–348.

Yilmaz, C. (2002). Salesperson performance and job attitudes revisited: An extendedmodel and effects of potential moderators. European Journal of Marketing,36(11/12), 1389–1414.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

17:

12 0

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Documents

Workplace Spirituality and Employee Attitudes within the Lodging Environment