People Innovation Excellence
 

Leadership Style toward Employee Performance Evaluation in Hotel Industry

How to cite this article:

A Pratomo and A Zulkarnain. (2018). Leadership Style toward Employee Performance Evaluation in Hotel Industry. Presented at The International Conference on Language, Literature, Culture and Citizenship 2018 (IC2L2C 2018). 5-6 September 2018. Bina Nusantara University. To be published in IOP Conference Series- Scopus Indexed

Leadership Style toward Employee Performance Evaluation in Hotel Industry

A Pratomo and A Zulkarnain

Hotel Management Department, Faculty of Economics and Communication,

Bina Nusantara University, Jakarta,Indonesia 11480

pratomo_aditya@binus.ac.id; arief.zulkarnain@binus.edu

Abstract The purpose of this research is to determine whether there is any significant effect between job stress, conflict and leadership together or partially on the Housekeeping Department employee performance of the Gran Melia Jakarta, and to find out where the most dominant variable effect on employee performance. The population in this study are all Housekeeping Department staffs at the Gran Melia Jakarta, which amounted to 72 respondents. Meanwhile, in determining the number of samples, the author used simple random sampling method taken only from the 42 respondents due to the limited amount of research time. The methods of data analysis used multiple linear regression. Based on the results obtained: 1) Job Stress has no effect to employee performance, 2) Conflict has no effect to employee performance, 3) Leadership style is partially a significant correlation with employee performance, and  4) Job Stress, conflict and leadership style simultaneously has significant effect on employee performance. The managerial implementation of this research is providing the recommendation for Executive Housekeeper of Gran Melia Jakarta to develop the leadership style; competencies of intelligence, motivation, insight and emotion for all Supervisor.

  1. Introduction

The tourism sector is one of the leading sectors of the Indonesian economy. In supporting the activities of the sector, companies related to tourism, either directly or indirectly of course have to prepare ourselves so we can help the success of the mission of the government. Hotel business is one of the travel business operators should actively help the government’s efforts to promote an increase in the contribution of the tourism sector. Maintaining cleanliness and tidiness in the entire hotel is an absolute, because the first impression whom the guests who come to stay are related to the cleanliness of the hotel area itself.

Hotel industry image is not new; it traverses decades and all areas of the world. In any case, if the business image is a piece of the purpose behind not drawing in and holding workers, the business will conceivably battle to staff existing and new hotels. Intensifying this circumstance are the numerous other activity and vocation alternatives that exist today, which means any industry, including the hotel industry, needs to vie for suitable human capital. [1]

The employee performance of such job, it’s not impossible happen stress upon the employees themselves, and also may present a conflict among housekeeping staffs itself, and this means it can affect the performance of its employees, also decrease the quality of service to the guests who will be staying. It can be imagined what happens when the housekeeping employee performance decline due to stress and conflict in misery. The purpose of this research is; 1) To analyze the effects of job stress on employee performance, 2) to analyze the effect of conflict on employee performance, 3) to analyze the effect of leadership style on employee performance, and 4) to analyze simultaneously effect of job stress, conflict and leadership style on employee performance.

  1. Literature review

2.1. Job Stress

Job stress has been defined as a circumstance in which a laborer’s attributes connect with work components to realize changes in his or her physiological state which contrarily influence working. An investigation of restorative officers announced that the precursors of employment push were part issues, work over-burden, requesting social contacts what’s more, poor economic wellbeing while the outcomes included turnover, non-attendance, psychosomatic maladies, work disappointment and burnout [2] .

Excessive stress will cause changes in behavior, psychological, and emotional of an employee so as to interfere with the employee performances including the quality and quantity of job that will ultimately affect the implementation  or otherwise of the company’s objectives. From the theory by Ivacevich [3] , which outlines internal factors cause job stress are:

  • Political Organization. Activities politics and power struggles can create friction, improve dysfunctional competition between individuals and groups, and increased stress.
  • Organizational culture. The personality of an organization formed mainly by top executives.
  • Career development opportunities are not sufficient. Stressor career development opportunities which may act as stressors when they become a source of worry, anxiety and frustration.
  • Reduction in the numbers of employees. Reduction in the number of employees is generally associated with a reduction in human resources through dismissal, attribution, transfer or early retirement.

2.2. Conflict

In addition to the job stress, other factors that can affect the employee performances, is the existence of a condition of labor conflict in the job environment. This conflict is caused by factors of their different knowledge, organizational commitment are lower, and the power-based interests [4]. Nevertheless, the labor conflict is felt important and very influential on the employee performances in a company and must be faced and known indicator by any manager of the company. As according to Fusch [5] which states that if the conflict was managed properly can be a positive influence for the organization; and if it is not considered then a defect causes weakness and failure in the organization. “In this case, the author uses the theory of Mulki [6], which revealed that the indicators of impending conflict are as the existence of a condition of potential opposition or incompatibility. Where in this  condition the occurrence of any communication difficulties, and the existence of a condition between the two or a numbers of employees whose jobs are interdependent, who feel angry, who consider others guilty, acted with the specific ways that can affect their own performance as an indicator the occurrence of a conflict in which they job. These conditions include feelings, perception and actions in which the conflict was rooted.

2.3. Leadership

Leadership is generally understood as a pattern of behavior demonstrated leader in its leadership in interacting with subordinates in order to achieve organizational goals. The leader must be able to move and directing subordinates to actualize all forms of duties in terms of carrying significantly. In this study, the authors take a couple of theories about leadership from Buil [7], who argued that in order to become an effective leader and can perform the functions of leadership well there are several criteria, including: intelligence, ability motivate subordinates, having an extensive knowledge and authoritative, and emotional maturity. To measure the performance of the employee, Puck [8], which revealed there was some degree to which a person’s success in completing the job, which can be seen in the indicator as an indicator which records the quality and trustworthiness and the value range of performance (from unsatisfactory to the outside usual).

RESEARCH METHOD

Job Stress (X1)

–    Organizational Politic

–    Organizational Culture

–    Not Enough Opportunity of Career Development

–    Employee Number Reduction

According to Ivacevich and Matteson (2006)

Employee Performance (Y)

1. Qualities

2. Productivities

3. Knowledge on the job

4. Trust

5. Availabilities

6. Freedom

According to Puck (2014)

Conflict (X2)

–    Oposition Condition or potential appropriateness

–    Communication problem

–    Feeling (emotion)

–    Perception (thinking)

–    Action (behavior)

According to  Mulki & Wilkinson (2017)

dan Dana (2006)

Leadership Influence (X3)

–    Have an intelectual

–    Ability to motive underliners

–    Have a wide range view and respectful

–    Emotion maturity.

According to Buil et al (2018)

 

Figure 1. Conceptual frame work

  1. Partial Test (t-test)
Job Stress (X1)
Conflict (X2)
Leadership Influence (X3)
Employee Performance(Y)

  1. Simultanous Test
Job Stress (X1)
Employee Performance (Y)
Conflict (X2)
Leadership Influence (X3)

Focused on from the problems posed and research purposes as well as a review heirloom about job stress, conflicts, leadership style and performance of the employee, then the hypothesis is as follows:

  1. Allegedly job stress, conflict and leadership style job simultaneously significant effect on employee performance
  2. Allegedly job stress, conflict and leadership style are partially significant effects on employee performance
  1. RESEARCH METHODS

3.1. Research Design

The design used is the that of the survey, an inquiry held to ascertain facts – facts about the phenomenon – a phenomenon present in society and seek information more actual and systematic. In this study, limited to three factors that are considered important that job stress (X1), conflict (X2), leadership style (X3) and its relationship with employee performance (Y)

3.2. Population and Sample

The study population in the Housekeeping Department, Gran Melia Jakarta totaled 72 people, while, in determining the number of samples using the formula of Slovin, obtained results of 42 samples. Use simple random sampling technique, where the number of samples taken  only 42 due to time constraints of the study.

3.3. Source of Data Collecting

The total population were 72 with the details to 16 people supervisor levels and 26 level of rank and file. The samples were examined in this study to the Housekeeping Department staffs, Gran Melia Jakarta totaling 42 people.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

RELIABILITY TEST

To determine the reliability of a measuring instrument reliability test should be conducted by using Alpha Crobach as follows:

Reliability Test Results

Research Variables Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability Standard Notes
Job Stress 0,741 0,60 Reliable
Conflict 0,718 0,60 Reliable
Leadership 0,917 0,60 Reliable
Employee Performance 0,761 0,60 Reliable

Based on the value of Alpha Cronbach shows that the four variables based on the reliabilitylevel is very reliable that can be used for research.

VALIDITY TEST

No. Pert. rhitung X1 Ket. rhitung X2 Ket. rhitung X2 Ket. rhitung Y Ket. rtabel
1 0.347 Valid 0.413 Valid 0.535 Valid 0.414 Valid 0.304
2 0.373 Valid 0.416 Valid 0.329 Valid 0.332 Valid 0.304
3 0.378 Valid 0.366 Valid 0.498 Valid 0.401 Valid 0.304
4 0.390 Valid 0.359 Valid 0.359 Valid 0.593 Valid 0.304
5 0.319 Valid 0.388 Valid 0.521 Valid 0.358 Valid 0.304
6 0.395 Valid 0.371 Valid 0.512 Valid 0.605 Valid 0.304
7 0.342 Valid 0.443 Valid 0.364 Valid 0.611 Valid 0.304
8 0.477 Valid 0.351 Valid 0.366 Valid 0.362 Valid 0.304
9 0.354 Valid 0.508 Valid 0.432 Valid 0.434 Valid 0.304
10 0.325 Valid 0.373 Valid 0.505 Valid 0.475 Valid 0.304
11 0.420 Valid 0.511 Valid 0.468 Valid 0.389 Valid 0.304
12 0.372 Valid 0.380 Valid 0.486 Valid 0.311 Valid 0.304
13 0.432 Valid 0.396 Valid 0.508 Valid 0.443 Valid 0.304
14 0.502 Valid 0.553 Valid 0.335 Valid 0.490 Valid 0.304
15 0.406 Valid 0.471 Valid 0.519 Valid 0.393 Valid 0.304
16 0.570 Valid 0.411 Valid 0.471 Valid 0.310 Valid 0.304
17 0.552 Valid 0.350 Valid 0.556 Valid 0.384 Valid 0.304
18 0.325 Valid 0.394 Valid 0.525 Valid 0.349 Valid 0.304
19 0.420 Valid 0.315 Valid 0.489 Valid 0.503 Valid 0.304
20 0.523 Valid 0.307 Valid 0.442 Valid 0.347 Valid 0.304

CLASSIC ASSUMPTION TEST

NORMALITY TEST

Normality test data is based on the ratio of the value of skewness and kurtosis ratio, wherein if the value of the two ratios ranging between -2 up to +2, then the normal distribution of data.

Based on the result can be obtained the following scores:

Normality test

  Job Stress Conflict Leadership Employee Performance
Skewness Ratio 1,10 – 0,45 – 2,00 – 2,00
Kurtosis Ratio 0,17 2,00 2,00 2,00

Normality Test skewness ratio obtained with a value of 1.10 for the job stress, – 0.45 to conflict, – 2.00 for leadership and – 2.00 for the employee’s performance. While the value of the ratio of kurtosis obtained a value of 0.17 for the job stress, 2.00 for conflicts, 2.00 to 2.00 for leadership and employee performance. Because of the range of the ratio value of skewness and kurtosis ratio ranged from – 2 to +2, then the distribution of the data in this study normal distribution.

Multicolinearity Test

To determine whether there the multikolinearity or not, it can be seen from the VIF and Tolerance as follows:

Multicollinearity Test

Coefficientsa

Model   Collinearity Statistics
Zero-order Partial Part Tolerance VIF
1 (Constant)          
Stress .170 .110 .074 .835 1.197
Conflict .103 -.108 -.072 .823 1.215
Leadership .739 .734 .723 .951 1.052

Dependent Variable: Performance

In the table Coefficients VIF and tolerance between job stress variables, conflict and leadership has a value of VIF job stress = 1.197, VIF of conflict = 1.215 and VIF leadership = 1.052 and the tolerance of job stress = 0.835, tolerance conflict = 0.823 and tolerance leadership = 0.951. Both VIF and Tolerance approaches a value of 1, so the regression model did not detectect the multicolinearity.

Autocorrelation Test

Aoutocoreelation test is a test of the assumptions in the regression where the dependent variable is not correlated with itself. The result of the calculation as follows:

Autocorrelation Test

Summary Modelb

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate Durbin-Watson
1 .744a .553 .518 4.449 1.954
  1. Predictors: (Constant), leadership, stress, conflict
  2. Dependent variable: performance

According to the table showing the value of D-W amounted to 1,954. Where dL dU obtained by 1.34 and 1.66 For D-W> dU (1.954> 1.66), it can be concluded that there is no autocorrelation, so the regression model qualifies classical assumptions.

HETEROKEDACITY TEST

The points spread above or below the number 0 on the Y axis of the graph in attachment of the Heterokedacity Test as visible scatter diagram of the residual spread randomly and does not form a specific pattern, and spread both above and below the number 0 on the Y axis. It can be not happen Heterokedacity concluded that regression fit for use.

Top of Form

Heteroskedasticity Test

LINEARITY TEST

Results of Linearity Test Statistic

ANOVA Table
      Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
job * stress Between Groups (Combined) 1283.833 17 75.520 4.529 .000
Linearity 48.676 1 48.676 2.919 .100
Deviation from Linearity 1235.157 16 77.197 4.630 .061
Within Groups 400.167 24 16.674    
Total 1684.000 41      
job * conflict Between Groups (Combined) 1361.571 17 80.092 5.962 .000
Linearity 17.706 1 17.706 1.318 .262
Deviation from Linearity 1343.866 16 83.992 6.252 .062
Within Groups 322.429 24 13.435    
Total 1684.000 41      

Based on the above table shows the deviation from linearity shows the relationship between the performance of the job stress produces F value of 4.630 to the value ρ of 0.061. The relationship between the performance of the conflict produces F at 6.252 and ρ value of 0.062. Between the relationship with leadership yield performance of 1,042 F and ρ value of 0.458. Based on this it can be concluded that a good performance with job stress, the performance of the conflict with the leadership and performance of each has a value of ρ> 0.05. That is, that the 95% confidence level does not make deviation from linearity, so the classical assumption about the linaerity test can be proved.

MULTIPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS

Multiple regression analysis is used in order to provide answers about the effect of two or more independent variables to the varable bound. To determine the regression coefficients used to use SPSS with the following results:

Regression coefficients variables of X1, X2 and X3 to Y

Model R R Square Adjusted 

R Square

Std. Error of the Estimate
1 0,744a 0,554 0,518 4,449
  1. Predictor: (Constant), stress, conflict, leadership

From the above table, the values of R is 0.744 meaning of job stress variables, conflict and leadership variables have a strong relationship, positive and in line with the performance and R2 = 0.554 or 55.4% means that performance is affected by stress, conflicts of job and leadership and the remaining 44.6% is influenced by other factors.

Coefficient F-Test Variable of X1, X2, and X3 to Y

ANOVAb

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 931.674 3 310.558 15.686 .000a
Residual 752.326 38 19.798    
Total 1684.000 41      
  1. Predictors: (Constant), leadership, stress, conflict
  2. Dependent Variable: performance

In the table above is known F value of 15.686 with ρ value of 0,000. Because ρ <0.05 then the regression can be used to predict the performance.

Regression Equations Variables of X1, X2, and X3 to Y

Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) 45.261 12.192   3.712 .001
Stress .096 .140 .081 .681 .500
Conflict -.090 .135 -.080 -.668 .508
Leadership .442 .066 .742 6.669 .000
  1. Dependent variables: performance

In the table above obtained value B 45.261 pales constant job stress, conflict and leadership ignored the value of the performance will decrease by 45.261. The Value B of job stress of 0.096, meaning that is if every one unit increase in job stress will improve performance by 0.096. The values ​​of conflicts of -0.090, meaning each increase of one unit of conflict will degrade performance of 0.090. The leadership value of 0.442, meaning that if every one unit increase in leadership will improve performance by 0.442.

Based on the constant value B, and the job stress, and conflict and B leadership, it can be created regression equation as follows:

Y = a + b1x1 + B2X2 + B3X3

Y = 45.261 + 0,096X1 – 0,090X2 + 0,442X3

HYPOTHESIS TEST

After testing the questionnaire analysis requirements of each variable and then declared that the variable is valid and reliable then followed by hypothesis testing to determine the hypothesis that has been designated.

SIMULTANEOUS HYPOTHESES TEST

To test the first hypothesis, that is anticipated that the variables of job stress, conflict and leadership together significant effect on the employee performance in Housekeeping Department of Gran Melia Jakarta, it will be used by F-test.

Hypothesis I

H0: Suspected that the variables of job stress, conflict and leadership together no significant effect on the employee performances in the Housekeeping Department of Gran Melia Jakarta.

Ha: It was alleged that the variables of job stress, conflict and leadership together significant effect on the employee performances in Housekeeping Department of Gran Melia Jakarta.

The Coefficient of F-Test Variables of X1, X2, and X3 to Y

ANOVAb

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 931.674 3 310.558 15.686 .000a
Residual 752.326 38 19.798    
Total 1684.000 41      
  1. Predictors: (Constant), leadership, stress, conflict
  2. Dependent Variable: performance

From the results of the above table, it is known that the value of F obtained at 15.686 and ρ = 0.000. Because ρ <0.05, it can be concluded that the variables of job stress, conflict and leadership together significant effect on the employee performances in Housekeeping Department of Gran Melia Jakarta. Thus, the hypothesis H0, alleged that the job stress variables, conflict and leadership together no significant effect on the employee performances in the Housekeeping Department of Gran Melia Jakarta rejected and Ha which reads suspected that the job stress variables, conflict and leadership jointly have a significant effect on the employee performances in the Housekeeping Department of Gran Melia Jakarta received. Thus the first hypothesis proved to be true. Based on the analysis above table are the value of R square (coefficient) of 0, 554. That is a 55.4% contribution of job stress, conflict and leadership variables on the employee performances while the rest influenced by other factors not examined in this study.

The results of this study reinforce the theory advanced by Kensbock  [9]which mentions the influence caused by stress on the performance of the employee, in which excessive stress would cause the employee frustrated and degrade performance. Housekeeping Department of Gran Melia Jakarta as one department that occupies position number two with the number of employees the highest in carrying out their daily duties, often experiencing labor conflict that resulted in the emergence of industrial relations unhealthy among employees and between employees and superiors. Given this unhealthy relationship, indirectly lead to the emergence of direct job stress experienced by employees. Stress caused by employees characterized by the onset of symptoms experienced by employees, such as: irritability, feeling lost time at work, loss of confidence, and often bored with their job. Conflict of job caused more often occur due to frequent superiors wrong in interpreting job to be done by their employees. In addition, because many of the supervisors in the Housekeeping Department of Gran Melia Jakarta does not have the maturity to lead, having authoritarian nature in the lead, so the conflict and friction often arises between the  employee and employer. Their unhealthy organizational climate also affects the working atmosphere in this department. The organizational climate see only one side of fault to the employees as also a major factor in the emergence of conflict and stress of work in this  department. With the conflict, job stress and also the leadership factor, it directly affects the employee performances.

PARTIAL HYPOTHESIS TEST

To test the hypothesis to two, that is anticipated that job stress variables, labor conflict and leadership partially significant effect on the employee performances in the Housekeeping Department of Gran Melia Jakarta, then the hypothesis testing will be used t test.

Hypothesis II.

Ho: It was alleged that the variables of job stress, conflict and leadership partially no significant effect on the employee performances in Housekeeping Department of Gran Melia Jakarta.

Ha: It was alleged that the variables of job stress, conflict and leadership are partially significant effects on the employee performances in the Housekeeping Department of Gran Melia Jakarta.

Regression Equations Variables of X1, X2, and X3 to Y

Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) 45.261 12.192   3.712 .001
Stress .096 .140 .081 .681 .061
Conflict -.090 .135 -.080 -.668 .062
Leadership .442 .066 .742 6.669 .000

The T-test can be seen from the table above, where the value of job stress variables of t = 0.681 and ρ = 0.061. The value of labor conflict variable of t = -0.668 and ρ = 0.062. The leadership value variable of t = 6.669 and ρ = 0.000. Because the value of ρ is below 0.05 (ρ <0.05), then the hypothesis that Ho, alleged that the variables of job stress, conflict and leadership partially no significant effect on the employee performances in Housekeeping Department of Gran Melia Jakarta rejected, Ha, alleged that the variables of job stress, conflict and leadership are partially significant effect on the employee performances in the Housekeeping Department of Gran Melia Jakarta. Thus the second hypothesis proved to be true.

On the table in the value of B constant can also 45.261 means is if the job stress, labor conflict and leadership ignored the value of the performance will decrease by 45.261. The value B to the job stress of 0.096, meaning that is if every one unit increase in job stress will improve performance by 0.096. The values ​​of conflicts of -0.090, meaning each increase of one unit of labor conflict will degrade performance of 0.090. The leadership value of 0.442, meaning that is if every one unit increase in leadership will improve performance by 0.442. To employees should be linked to whether the stress is caused by these pressures are still in a reasonable state. The stress is too low actually causing the employee not motivated to excel.

From the point of view of organization, management may not worry if employees experiencing mild stress, because at a certain level of stress it will give a positive result.

As it is influenced by the job stress, then the employee’s performance Housekeeping of Gran Melia actually is being accelerated and likely to increase performance. Hotel job life erratic, sometimes if the increased hotel occupancy, housekeeping employee performance will be more motivated, because the number of rooms and also the task of maintaining the cleanliness of the increasingly large volumes. But if the hotel occupancy declined, consequently housekeeping employees tend to become lazy and indirectly degrade their performance. With the pressures of party bosses, then it implies that their performance will be accelerated again and the housekeeping staff was not too long complacent in their laziness. So it will come by the employees who are always ready to work, although in any condition.

The leadership style is closely related to the maturity in the field of work and maturity in the psychological field [10]. Revealed the presence of several criteria properties required of a leader, in order to perform its functions effectively, namely: the level of intelligence, ability to motivate, authority, insight, confidence, tolerance to stress, sincerity and honesty, and emotional maturity ,

As explained above, in performing daily duties in the Housekeeping Department of Gran Melia Jakarta, between the employee and his superiors, the conflicts often arise that lead to the emergence of job stress among employees, however, these two factors do not significantly affect the employee performances [11]. The onset of labor conflict and stress often results from the leadership style owned by the superiors. When the working atmosphere becomes conducive, and often create conflicts and frictions between employer and employee, which can indirectly conflict and job stress, where due to these two factors, may affect the performance of its employees. Impact and friction are often not responded wisely by superiors, but often addressed arrogant. The boss often take action to punish employees who are considered not follow the rules that have been made by management, where such penalties often lead to the dismissal of the employee.

CONCLUSION

Based on the results of testing hypotheses about the influence of Job Stress, Conflict and Leadership on Employee Performance can be summarized as follows:

  1. Job Stress, Conflict and Leadership Styles variables are simultaneously significant effect on the Employee Performance variable.
  2. Leadership style is partially significant effect on the Employee Performance variable.
  3. While the variables of Job Stress and Conflict as partial variables did not significantly affect the Employee Performance variables.
  4. There is no dominant variable, considering only one variable that affects the variable is the Employee Performance Leadership variable.

REFERENCES

[1] A. Brien, N. J. Thomas and E. A. Brown, “How hotel employee job-identity impacts the hotel industry: The uncomfortable truth,” Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, vol. 3, pp. 235-243, 2017.
[2] P. Tongchaiprasit and V. Ariyabuddhiphongs, “Creativity and turnover intention among hotel chefs: The mediating effects on job satisfaction and job stress,” International Journal of Hospitality Management, vol. 55, pp. 33-40, 2016.
[3] J. Ivancevich, R. Konopashe and M. T. Matteson, Perilaku dan Manajemen Organisasi, Jakarta, 2006.
[4] R. Jalaludin, “Role conflic toward employee performance,” International Journal of Business and Management, vol. 2, 2013.
[5] F. Patricia, “Leadership and conflic resolution on the production line,” International Journal of Applied Management and Technology, vol. 14, 2015.
[6] J. J. Mulki and J. W. Wilkinson, “Customer-directed extra-role performance and emotional understanding: Effects on customer conflict, felt stress, job performance and turnover intentions,” Australasian Marketing Journal, 2017.
[7] I. Buil, E. Martínez and J. Matute, “Transformational leadership and employee performance: The role of identification, engagement and proactive personality,” International Journal of Hospitality Management, 2018.
[8] J. Puck and U. Pregernig, “The effect of task conflict and cooperation on performance of teams: Are the results similar for different task types?,” European Management Journal, 2014.
[9] S. Kensbock, G. Jennings, J. Bailey and A. Patiar, “Performing: Hotel room attendants’ employment experiences,” Annals of Tourism Research, vol. 56, pp. 112-127, 2016.
[10] A. Brien, N. J. Thomas and E. A. Brown, “How hotel employee job-identity impacts the hotel industry: The uncomfortable truth,” Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, vol. 31, pp. 235-243, 2017.
[11] O. M. Karatepe, U. Yavas, E. Babakus and G. D. Deitz, “The effects of organizational and personal resources on stress, engagement, and job outcomes,” International Journal of Hospitality Management, 2018.
 

 


Published at :
Written By
Rachel Dyah Wiastuti
SCC Hospitality | Bina Nusantara University

Periksa Browser Anda

Check Your Browser

Situs ini tidak lagi mendukung penggunaan browser dengan teknologi tertinggal.

Apabila Anda melihat pesan ini, berarti Anda masih menggunakan browser Internet Explorer seri 8 / 7 / 6 / ...

Sebagai informasi, browser yang anda gunakan ini tidaklah aman dan tidak dapat menampilkan teknologi CSS terakhir yang dapat membuat sebuah situs tampil lebih baik. Bahkan Microsoft sebagai pembuatnya, telah merekomendasikan agar menggunakan browser yang lebih modern.

Untuk tampilan yang lebih baik, gunakan salah satu browser berikut. Download dan Install, seluruhnya gratis untuk digunakan.

We're Moving Forward.

This Site Is No Longer Supporting Out-of Date Browser.

If you are viewing this message, it means that you are currently using Internet Explorer 8 / 7 / 6 / below to access this site. FYI, it is unsafe and unable to render the latest CSS improvements. Even Microsoft, its creator, wants you to install more modern browser.

Best viewed with one of these browser instead. It is totally free.

  1. Google Chrome
  2. Mozilla Firefox
  3. Opera
  4. Internet Explorer 9
Close