Abstract
Purpose
The primary purpose of this study is to examine hospitality and tourism undergraduate students' attitudes to work and career expectations as they prepare to enter the workforce in the hospitality industry in both the United States and South Korea.
Design/methodology/approach
The measurement instrument was developed from previous studies (Chen and Shen, 2012; Kong, 2013) and included questions related to job attitudes, job satisfaction, job motivations, job involvement, and career expectations and aspirations upon graduation. T-tests were conducted first for the mean values of the constructs between the United States and South Korea to ensure the comparison of two different cultural groups.
Findings
First, students from the United States (US) have more and better work attitude than those students from South Korea. Second, students from South Korea appear to be less motivated to work and less satisfied with their current jobs and earnings than students from the US. Third, the results also have managerial implications for both countries. It is very important to know that higher grade point average is not an answer to find the right person but more likely, positive attitudes to work and higher levels of job involvement are more likely to have higher job expectations and aspirations for employment in the industry.
Originality/value
This study adds to the hospitality literature by examining the different perspectives of hospitality and tourism undergraduate students from the US and South Korea, specifically examining their attitudes toward work, job satisfaction, work involvement and job expectations as they prepare for careers in the industry. The results of this study help stakeholders (i.e. students, educators and practitioners) in the hospitality and tourism industry gain a better understanding of their undergraduate students as they prepare for careers in the industry. In addition, the study contributed to understanding cultural differences present among hospitality and tourism students from individualist and collectivist cultures.
Keywords
Citation
Kim, Y.H. and Spears, D. (2022), "Differing career expectations in the hospitality industry: a cross-cultural study", International Hospitality Review, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 304-321. https://doi.org/10.1108/IHR-08-2020-0033
Publisher
:Emerald Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2021, Young Hoon Kim and Daniel Spears
License
Published in International Hospitality Review. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
Introduction
The hospitality and tourism industry is one of the fastest-growing industries in the world. The increasing number of students majoring in hospitality and tourism management and its related areas is strong evidence of this phenomenon (Rauch, 2011). A wide variety of career opportunities are emerging in the meeting and convention, hotel, event and festival, travel, transportation, recreation, club, and food and beverage fields. According to Teng (2007), undergraduate students' career aspirations are a direct result of their attitudes to work in the hospitality and tourism industry as well as their past work experiences. As more students enter the hospitality industry, employers need to have a better understanding of the students who will become the leaders and employees in the hospitality and tourism industry.
Various studies have been conducted to examine the individual constructs of job satisfaction, job attitudes, motivations and job expectations (Chang and Teng, 2017; Currivan, 1999; González et al., 2016; Kanungo, 1982; Klonoski, 2011; Kong et al., 2015; Knippenberg, 2003; Marshall et al., 2004; Phuong and Tran, 2020; Sessa and Bowling, 2020). There are only a few studies that have examined students' attitudes to work, motivations, job involvement and career aspirations in the hospitality and tourism industry (Cassado, 1992; Goh and Lee, 2018; Josiam et al., 2008; Kong et al., 2015; Nachmias and Walmsley, 2015; Robinson et al., 2016; Teng, 2007; Waryszak, 1999; Zopiatis and Kyprianou, 2006). Even when previous studies addressed the specific issues of attitudes to work, job satisfaction and job involvement of employees in the hospitality and tourism industry, few have examined the different perspectives in job attitudes between students in different countries, especially comparing countries with individualist and collectivist cultures. Given that the hospitality industry is highly internationalized (e.g. hotel chains, restaurant chains, fast food chains), such comparisons would be beneficial to understanding the cultural differences of future hospitality and tourism employees from countries with individualist and collectivist cultures. Also, it has been well-documented that the hospitality and tourism industry employs large numbers of ethnic minorities, women, disabled and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBTQ +) workers. Thus, it is important that practitioners and educators alike understand culture as well as diversity in organizational outcomes and individual and group performances (Kalargyrou and Costen, 2017). The culture of the United States is one of the most individualistic in the world, while South Korea is considered a collectivist society (Geert-Hofstede.com, 2016). Thus, the primary purpose of this study is to examine hospitality and tourism undergraduate students' attitudes to work and career expectations as they prepare to enter the workforce in the hospitality industry in both the United States and South Korea. More specifically, the objectives of this study are:
To determine if there are any differences in socio-demographics of hospitality and tourism students between countries with individualist and collectivist cultures.
To identify if there are any differences in work attitude, job involvement, job motivation, job satisfaction and work expectation between countries with individualist and collectivist cultures.
According to Hsu and Powers (2002), “Culture is a distinctive way of living shared by a group of people. It is socially shared, it is learned, and it is gradually changing. Cultural values are learned through socialization as individuals grow up” (p. 52). Culture is the formation of human behaviors, beliefs, practices and values that are symbolized by a particular group of people. Hofstede (1984) emphasized that different mental programming governs activities, motivations and values that can be implied by different cultures. Thus, an understanding of cultural differences in business is critically important and merits a cross-cultural study.
Literature review
Socio-demographic profiles and differences in cross-cultural studies
Society shapes individuals' basic values, which affect their behavior and determines how they respond to various situations (Kong and Jogaratnam, 2007). A major emphasis is placed on individual activity and initiative in the United States due to prevailing cultural values, whereas many Asian societies stress cooperation and conformity to the group (Belch and Belch, 2012). The individualistic/collectivistic dichotomy has been commonly employed to conduct cross-cultural research (Hofstede, 1980, 1991; Hofverberg and Winberg, 2020; Laroche et al., 2005). People of individualist cultures emphasize “I” more than “we” in defining their self-images. However, people of collectivist cultures are likely integrated into their groups (Triandis, 1995). National culture has a strong influence on business managers' ethical attitudes (Christie et al., 2003) ethical sensitivity (Blodgett et al., 2001) interdependence in organizations (Gelfand et al., 2007), and personal relationships between employees and managers (Pheng and Leong, 2000).
In studies conducted with project managers, results showed that Asians tend to first develop personal relationships with their business partners before business dealings, while Americans prefer to take a straight-to-the-point approach in business dealings (Pheng and Leong, 2000). Thus, it is expected that there will be identifiable differences between undergraduate students from individualist versus collectivist cultural backgrounds concerning their perception of working in the hospitality and tourism industry. According to Hofstede and Bond (1984), more emphasis on if job-related achievements are recognized by others in collectivist society while personal goal and job well-done in an individualistic society are stressed. Utilizing a cross-cultural approach, this study will address the cultural differences present among hospitality and tourism students, giving researchers a better understanding of their attitudes toward work, job involvement levels and career expectations/aspirations upon graduation. Also, previous studies indicated that work satisfaction significantly reduces employees' work–family conflict and strengthens their work behavior (Tsaur et al., 2019; Xu et al., 2020).
Job attitudes
Hospitality and tourism have consistently been referred to as a “people industry” reliant on organizational employees serving consumers. Therefore, employees represent the organization in the eyes of service consumers (Solnet et al., 2012). Employee commitment and job attitude are considered one of the most important issues in human resource management where employee commitment is attributed mostly to work values, work motivation and work involvement (Lee and Chen, 2013). The turnover rate of employees in hospitality and tourism is commonly higher than in other sectors, ranging from 60 to 120% annually (Agovino, 2019), the cost of losing employees and training new ones represents significant cost factors. Employee turnover rates are usually attributed to employee dissatisfaction with the overall work environment, working conditions and wages (Tracey and Hinkin, 2008). Turnover rates are high in the hospitality and tourism industry, even among highly motivated individuals (Brien, 2004). Work attitude was defined as one's attitude and commitment toward his or her profession or occupation (Brien, 2004). Thus, employee attitudes are indicative of an organization's success or failure. Individual behavior will be different in reacting in a certain way according to their attitude and previous experiences (Cohen, 2009; Cooper and Croyle, 1984; Sukhu et al., 2019). Usually, Americans bring a “business/market orientation” to their interpersonal relationships (Devoe and Iyengar, 2004). Thus, we propose:
Differences in positive job attitudes exist between countries with individualist and collectivist cultures (i.e. US and South Korean students).
Differences in negative job attitudes exist between countries with individualist and collectivist cultures (i.e. US and South Korean students).
Involvement with working in the hospitality industry
Marshall et al. (2004) defined job involvement as the psychological identification with one's job. Diefendorff et al. (2002) consider job involvement to be a primary determinant in organizational effectiveness and individual motivation. Job involvement is an important element during the developmental process in one's career. According to Lodahl and Kejner (1965), job involvement is one of the most important factors influencing work attitude. Job involvement signifies a positive attachment to work and is distinct from work values (Hallberg and Schaufeli, 2006). Job involvement has a significant impact on organizational outcomes (Singh and Gupta, 2015) and is positively associated with organizational commitment (Ho et al., 2012). As a key for personal growth, satisfaction, motivation and goal-directed behavior within the workplace, improving job involvement boosts productivity and organizational effectiveness (Brown, 1996). Also, other studies show a strong correlation between job involvement and job self-efficacy (Singh and Sarkar, 2012; Yang et al., 2000). It was also found that when younger generations were highly confident in their skills and abilities, they had a higher level of job involvement (Lorence, 1987). Research has demonstrated that the effect of participation will be the same in low power distance/high individualist cultures, such as the American culture, and there will be a difference in the participation in cultures with a low individualist culture (Hofstede, 1980). Further research has compared students' attitudes toward work (Josiam et al., 2008). However, this study was limited to two countries with individualist cultures, the USA and UK. Thus, we propose:
Differences in students' involvement with work exist between countries with individualist and collectivist cultures (i.e. US and South Korean students).
Job motivations
The hospitality and tourism industry operates 24 h a day, seven days a week. The nature of work is based upon both intangible and tangible product characteristics with a high degree of interaction between line employees and consumer markets. Therefore, job characteristics may be the key to determining the outcomes of employees (Wan and Chan, 2013). Over the last decade, research in human resources has been focused on employee engagement and productivity (Bakker and Bal, 2010). Additional research has emphasized reducing costs through employee retention (Schaufeli and Salanova, 2008), improving employee job satisfaction (Kong et al., 2018) and work performance (Kloutsiniotis and Mihail, 2020). Some studies have analyzed work motivation from an economic perspective to determine which economic factors influence work motivation. The level of work motivation is strongly correlated with aspects of economic development (Klonoski, 2011). Employees are primarily motivated by economic incentives and select the option that is of most worth to them financially (Bénabou and Tirole, 2003). Interesting work and good pay play key roles in higher employee motivation as well (Lindner, 1998). Francois (2003) also explains that many individuals prefer working to being unemployed and/or living on welfare. Social needs involve interaction with other people, the need for friends and the need for belonging (Huitt, 2004). In everyday life, people are constantly pursuing goals and trying to satisfy their desires and wants.
Herman and Chiu (2014) have argued that there is a positive relationship between social identity, work motivation and job performance. Robbins and Judge (2009) indicated that managers in every workplace must establish an environment of acceptance and belongingness. It can be seen that motivations, psychological setups and personality traits may have different significances as the cultures vary (Migliore, 2011). Taking into consideration cross-cultural differences, whereas individuals who demonstrate assertive behavior are seen as more competent and motivated in American culture, this same behavior may be viewed unfavorably in other cultures (Hofstede and Fink, 2007). In short, social identities and needs can be different, leading to a differential impact on a person's motivation. Thus, we propose:
Differences in students' job motivations exist between countries with individualist and collectivist cultures (i.e. US and South Korean students).
Job satisfaction
Overall, the literature suggests that there is a relationship between job characteristics and job satisfaction (Kong et al., 2018). Job satisfaction is a central concept in organizational psychology, and research on its determinants and outcomes has strong practical relevance for human resources management. Job satisfaction has been defined as an individual's positive emotional reaction that arises from one's workplace (Silva, 2006). Job satisfaction over the last several decades is perhaps the most widely studied field of organizational research (Kong et al., 2018). When looking for employment, individuals seek an environment in which they may utilize their abilities and satisfy their basic needs. Kong et al. (2018) identified that effective management activities and policies from the organization perspective contributed positively to job satisfaction. It was also identified that from the social perspective, family–work supportive policies should be implemented. Furthermore, the authors identified that psychological issues were closely related to job satisfaction, especially as it relates to employee enthusiasm. The authors also identified that job satisfaction is positively related to organizational commitment and intention to stay. Managers should provide supportive activities to enhance job satisfaction (Kong et al., 2018). Job satisfaction is the result of being satisfied with one's job, payment, promotion, motivation and colleagues. When individuals recognize potential to satisfy their needs, they tend to be highly involved in an activity or organization (Kanungo, 1982), which in turn leads to an increase in job performance and a decrease in workplace turnover (Silva, 2006).
Thus, we propose:
Differences in students' satisfaction with their current jobs exist between countries with individualist and collectivist cultures (i.e. US and South Korean students).
Differences in students' satisfaction with their current earnings exist between countries with individualist and collectivist cultures (i.e. US and South Korean students).
Job expectations
University hospitality programs help provide students with a realistic view of the hospitality industry and improve their professional ability within the industry (Jenkins, 2001). Previous studies suggest that work expectations are important concerning employees' job attitudes (Graham and Mckenzie, 1995; Kong et al., 2018; Richardson and Thomas, 2012; Wickramasinghe and Perera, 2010). Cassado (1992) examined students' work expectations concerning salary, work hours, and their positions and found that the work expectations of current students are different than those of older generations. Finally, he concluded that each generation has different work expectations. Another study suggested that students' work expectations are related to their life experiences (Cleveland et al., 2007). Thus, to recruit and retain personnel in today's competitive labor market, employers need to understand the needs and demands of the workforce. Career goals and expectations of students provide the industry with a clear picture of the preferences and demands that future employees will hold. Through discovering the interests, abilities, career values and needs of the recruitment pool, employers will be able to gain competitive advantages and develop successful human resource strategies (Baum, 2007). Thus, we also propose:
Differences in students' job expectations exist between countries with individualist and collectivist cultures (i.e. US and South Korean students).
Methodology
Data collection and sample
Data were collected utilizing a paper-based survey administered to college students in South Korea. The data were collected from June to December 2018. Two universities were selected, and the survey was conducted at the end of the class using a hard copy of the survey. Participation was voluntary and anonymous. Respondents were asked a series of questions, including work attitude, involvement, motivation and job satisfaction. Additionally, basic demographic questions were included in the survey. A similar process has been conducted among the US participants in both countries where the respondents were asked if they are a citizen and have lived longer than ten years in the current country. Among the 600 responses from US students, 57 (8.83%) were excluded because of incomplete data. Also, 20 (3.3%) were not valid. Among the 316 responses from South Korean students, 110 (18.3%) were not valid and excluded because of incomplete or insincere data. From the United States, 527 useable surveys were collected, while 216 useable surveys were collected from South Korea.
Instrument development and data collection
The survey instrument consisted of four sections. The first section contained 25 statements that gauged respondents' attitudes toward working in the hospitality industry. For each statement, respondents were asked to rate how strongly they agreed or disagreed along a six-point Likert scale. Using ten semantic differential scales, the second section measured involvement with working in the hospitality industry. The third section collected demographic information including age, gender, ethnicity, academic standing, work experience and career plans. The final section of the survey instrument consisted of 12 items, each measured along a six-point Likert scale, regarding perceptions of “good” jobs in the hospitality industry.
The measurement instrument was developed from previous studies (Chen and Shen, 2012; Kong, 2013), and included questions related to job attitudes, job satisfaction, job motivations, job involvement, and career expectations and aspirations upon graduation (Table 1). Furthermore, the questionnaire included the purpose of the study with a brief set of instructions.
Data analysis
A confirmatory factor analysis was used to examine whether our factors could represent the data. Data analysis was conducted with SPSS 21.0. T-tests were conducted first for the mean values of the constructs between the US and South Korea to ensure the comparison of two different cultural groups. One-way analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were also used to evaluate the differences of respondents' views between countries with individualist and collectivist cultures (i.e. US and South Korea) on specific variables.
Results and discussion
Socio-demographic profile of sample
Using crosstabs with chi-square, Table 2 reports the comparison of the socio-demographic characteristics between the two countries. With the acceptance of Hypothesis 1, significant differences were identified concerning gender, age, race, class and grade point average (GPA) between the two countries.
Approximately, 68% of respondents from the US were female, and 32% were male. The majority of the US respondents are upperclassmen with junior or senior standing (69.6%) and are 25 years old or younger (91.7%). The majority of the students from the US reported a GPA between 2.51 and 3.50 (61.5%). Additionally, the majority of respondents in the US are of Caucasian descent (63.6%) while others (i.e. Asian) were dominant in South Korea (75.2%). There is a significant difference in gender between the respondents of the US and South Korea. Korean students were split almost evenly between genders (50.9% male and 49.1% female) and class status (50.8% underclassmen and 49.2% upperclassmen). South Korean students are also significantly older than students in the US, with 41% reporting that they are 26 years of age or older. Most Korean students reported their GPA to be between 2.51 and 3.50. However, a large percentage also indicated that their GPA was above 3.51 (38.7%). This distribution is significantly different than students in the US. While nearly 40% of South Korean students maintain a GPA of above 3.51, only 20.0% of students in the US report their GPA within this range. Furthermore, the racial profile of respondents varied across demographics, as would be expected. Students in Korea were much more likely to be of Asian descent than students in the US, as Korea is a homogeneous society. However, the same demographic questions were asked because the university does have some international students. Additionally, as the survey asked South Korean students to indicate race among choices such as “African American,” “Hispanic American,” and “White American,” it is not surprising to find that a strong majority (75.2%) indicated “Other (Asian)” as their race. Demographic profiles of each country are illustrated in Table 1.
A t-test was employed to compare the socio-demographics between the two countries (Table 3). Respondents were asked to indicate their academic standing, from freshman to senior. Respondents were also asked to indicate their current GPA on a 4.0 scale, which was then broken into 3 categories: 1.50–2.50, 2.51–3.50 and 3.51–4.0. Again, it is shown that GPA, age and class level vary significantly between the two countries. The average reported GPA is higher in South Korea, while class status is significantly lower. These differences are likely because freshman and sophomore level courses are generally easier than junior and senior-level courses. Thus, students who are earlier in their academic careers should report higher GPAs. Additionally, the average age is significantly different between the two student samples, with South Korean students reporting an average age of nearly 26, while students in the US average 22 years of age.
Students were also asked about their current work status–if they were working full-time, part-time or not working. In both countries, about 23% of students were not working. The differences in work patterns were seen as more US students were in part-time jobs compared to Korean students (54.9%–13.4%), while a lower proportion of US students were in full-time jobs compared to Korean students (22.0%–61.9%). Overall, in both countries about 75% of the students were working.
Before further analysis was conducted, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was employed to test reliability and validity. Cronbach's alpha was measured to analyze the internal consistency of the construct and its reliability. The reliability test was satisfied as the reliability varied from 0.86 (involvement) to 0.94 (motivation) wherein the recommended minimum Cronbach's alpha coefficient reliability is 0.70 (Nunnally, 1978). The results of CFA was indicated with an excellent level (χ2 = 84.232, df = 24, p-value = 0.000). For the evidence of convergent validity (Bollen, 1989), the standardized loadings and the squared multiple correlations (SMC) were examined. The SMC was greater than 0.5 that exceeds the recommended convergent validity. The results of CCR (0.92 for positive work attitude, 0.91 for negative work attitude, 0.96 for involvement, 0.94 for motivation and 0.91 for job expectation) and AVE (0.70 for positive work attitude, 0.78 for negative work attitude, 0.72 for involvement, 0.88 for motivation and 0.79 for job expectation) of all constructs were satisfied with the required level.
Attitudes to work in the hospitality and tourism industry
All respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement regarding attitudes to work in the hospitality and tourism industry for each of 16 items on a six-point scale, in which (1) indicated strongly disagree and (6) indicated strongly agree. The means and standard deviations for each of the 16 items regarding students' attitudes to work are presented in Table 4, along with the results of an ANOVA.
Two factors were labeled as “Negative Job Attitudes” (Factor 1) and “Positive Job Attitudes” (Factor 2). Factor 1 included nine items which all represented negative views on work. Variables within Factor 1 included items such as, “Given the chance, I'd never work,” “Workers are entitled to call in sick,” and “work is nothing more than making a living.” Factor 2 included seven items representing positive viewpoints toward work. These variables included items such as, “I should have pride in my work,” “work passes more quickly when busy,” and “I should work hard to earn a promotion.”
The average of each factor by country type was then compared (Table 3). With the acceptance of Hypotheses 2a and 2b, negative attitudes toward work of the US sample were significantly lower than those of the South Korean sample, whereas the mean values of positive job attitudes of the South Korean sample were lower than those of the US sample. Thus, results indicate that South Korean students have a higher likelihood of having a negative attitude toward work and careers in the hospitality and tourism industry. American students, on the other hand, have a more positive attitude toward jobs and careers in the hospitality and tourism industry. Perhaps, South Korean students have a more negative attitude because hospitality and tourism are viewed as a vocational discipline/occupation with low wages and high turnover, while American students view hospitality and tourism as a discipline/occupation with a more flexible degree pathway that could lead into broader service industry occupations. These findings are consistent with previous research that identified employee commitment is mostly attributed to work values, work motivation and work involvement (Lee and Chen, 2013).
Involvement with working in the hospitality industry
All respondents were asked to indicate their level of involvement with working in the hospitality and tourism industries for each of ten items. A six-point bipolar scale was used in which (1) indicated low involvement and (6) indicated high involvement. The mean involvement score of the entire sample including both US students and South Korean students was found to be 5.03 (SD = 1.014) on a 6.0 scale. The work involvement average was compared using a t-test to determine the mean values of each country. The mean value (5.28) of work involvement of the US sample is significantly higher than that (4.44) of the South Korean sample (Table 5). Results indicate that South Korean students have a higher likelihood of having a lower or negative attitude toward work involvement. This finding is consistent with Hofstede's (1980) research that suggested that “the effect of participation will be the same in low power distance/high individualist cultures.” Additionally, this finding is consistent with Hallberg and Schaufeli (2006) who suggested high job involvement signifies a positive attachment to work, and Singh and Gupta’s (2015) findings that the level of job involvement indicates a positive attachment. Furthermore, Ho et al. (2012) identified that job involvement is positively associated with organizational commitment. While these findings do not expressly validate the reason why there is a difference between the two student groups regarding work involvement, it may further add to the individualist and collectivist cultures dichotomy illustrated in the literature (see Hofstede, 1980; 1991).
Job motivations
All respondents were asked to indicate their level of job motivation for each of the five items on a six-point scale, in which one indicated strong disagreement and six indicated strong agreement. Items assessed included, “Long-term Stability,” “Personal Liking,” “Health Benefit,” “Long-term Opportunity” and “Higher Wages.” The means and standard deviations for all job motivation criteria are presented in Table 6. With the acceptance of Hypothesis 4, the mean values of job motivations of the US sample are higher than those of the South Korean sample in all variables (see Table 7).
Results indicate that South Korean students have a higher likelihood of having a lower attitude toward work motivation. American students, on the other hand, have a more positive attitude toward job motivation in the hospitality and tourism industry. Perhaps, South Korean students have a more negative attitude because hospitality and tourism are viewed as a vocational discipline/occupation with low wages and high turnover, while American students view hospitality and tourism as a discipline/occupation with a more flexible degree pathway that could lead into broader service industry occupations. It should be noted that Americans typically bring a “business/market orientation” to their interpersonal relationships. However, in cultures where self-interest is less emphasized, it is seen that the managers from such cultures will be more attentive to the intrinsic factors that motivate their employees (Devoe and Iyengar, 2004). Also, research has continually identified the correlation between work motivation and the economic perspective in improving job satisfaction (Kong et al., 2018) and work performance (Kloutsiniotis and Mihail, 2020). Also, American culture rewards assertive behavior as it is viewed as being more competent and motivated; when the same behavior may be viewed unfavorably in other cultures (Hofstede and Fink, 2007). Thus, social identities and needs can be different, leading to a differential impact on a person's motivation.
Job satisfaction
Students indicated their satisfaction levels with their current job and current earnings on two different questions. Both were based upon a five-point scale ranging from (1) “very dissatisfied” to (5) “very satisfied”. Items assessed included “Job Satisfaction” and “Satisfaction with Job Earnings.” The mean values of students' satisfaction with their current job and earnings were calculated and results are presented in Table 6. With the acceptance of Hypothesis 5a and 5b, the mean values of students' current job satisfaction and current earnings of the US sample are significantly higher than those of the South Korean sample. Results indicate that South Korean students have a higher likelihood of having a lower or negative attitude toward job satisfaction and earnings satisfaction. American students, on the other hand, have a more positive attitude toward job satisfaction and earnings satisfaction in the hospitality and tourism industry. Again, this may be conceivably due to the job characteristics of the hospitality and tourism industry is viewed as a vocational discipline/occupation with low wages and high turnover. Previous research suggests that there is a relationship between job characteristics and job satisfaction (Kong et al., 2018). Furthermore, Kanungo (1982) identified that when individuals recognize potential to satisfy their needs, they tend to be highly involved in an activity or organization and leads to increased job performance (Silva, 2006).
Job expectations
All respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement with job expectations upon graduation for ten variables, each presented on a six-point scale, in which (1) indicated strong disagreement and (6) indicated strong agreement. The results are presented in Table 8. Three factors were labeled as “Good job means endless possibilities” (Factor 1), “Good job means management” (Factor 2), and “Good job means proper training” (Factor 3). Factor 1 included four items related to job possibilities, such as, “My bosses will ask me for ideas” and “I will have freedom and autonomy.” Factor 2 included three items related to the type of career, including items such as “I will work in hotel/restaurant management” and “I will manage an independent operation.” Factor 3 also included three items related to guidance within a position. Factor 3 included, “I will work in a corporate office,” “My boss will provide me with clear directions,” and “I will start in a good management training program.” With the acceptance of Hypothesis 6, the mean values of all three factors were higher among students in the US sample than the South Korean sample. Results indicate that South Korean students have a higher likelihood of having a lower or negative attitude toward job expectations. Again, South Korean students may have a more negative job expectation because the hospitality and tourism industry is viewed as a vocational discipline/occupation with a rigid curriculum that is characterized by low wages and high turnover, while American students view hospitality and tourism as a discipline/occupation with a more flexible degree pathway that could lead into broader service industry occupations.
Conclusions and implications
This study adds to the hospitality literature by examining the different perspectives of hospitality and tourism undergraduate students from the US and South Korea, specifically examining their attitudes toward work, job satisfaction, work involvement and job expectations as they prepare for careers in the industry. The results of this study help stakeholders (i.e. students, educators and practitioners) in the hospitality and tourism industry gain a better understanding of their undergraduate students as they prepare for careers in the industry. Also, the study contributed to understanding cultural differences present among hospitality and tourism students from individualist and collectivist cultures.
Findings indicate that students from the US have more favorable and better work attitudes than those students from South Korea. Essentially, the negative attitudes toward working in the hospitality and tourism industry of students from South Korea can explain why South Korean students' desire to seek employment in this industry is lower than that of American students (Teng, 2007). Students from the US also appeared to be more involved in working in the hospitality and tourism industry. As indicated in the previous studies (Lodahl and Kejner, 1965; Zopiatis et al., 2016) job involvement is one of the most important factors influencing job attitudes. The results strongly recommend that educational programs and job experience, such as internship programs should emphasize personal achievement and recognition through high job involvement as independence and personal identity are highly stressed in individualistic cultures.
Findings indicate that students from South Korea appear to be less motivated to work and less satisfied with their current jobs and earnings than students from the US. Silva (2006) defined job satisfaction as an individual's positive emotional reaction to one's current workplace, while Oshagbemi (2000) believes that an individual's motivation to work is a direct outcome of one's job satisfaction. It was also found that students from the US have higher job satisfaction than students from South Korea, and Korean students express more negative attitudes to work than their US counterparts. Results from bot samples imply that significant changes in motivation should be examined and planned for next generations or students' expectations should be leveraged by their academic status and expectation. Also, it is strongly recommended to innovate program curriculum for a student to plan their future careers. Recent graduates may provide additional insight for this discussion because they may more easily relate to the transition between student and industry professional, they recently experienced. These findings should be useful for educators as they develop and design curriculum and course objectives to mitigate negative perceptions of careers in hospitality and tourism. For example, human resource courses may add modules that address both positive and negative attitudes toward work, job satisfaction, work involvement and job expectations in the context of a global work environment. Mitigation strategies and tools can be developed and deployed in program curriculums to reduce negative perceptions and strengthen positive perceptions of hospitality and tourism global work environments.
The results also have managerial implications for both countries, especially as the industry continues to change and improve the perception of a career in hospitality and tourism. This can be realized if more organizations in hospitality and tourism work collaboratively toward improving their image. Another area that must be addressed by industry is issues of low pay and unusual hours among high-skilled positions. Other issues that must be addressed and assessed in more depth are work/life issues among Generation Y. This generation of workers are looking to careers where they are appreciated and not undervalued.
It is very important to know that a higher GPA is not an answer to find the right person but more likely, positive attitudes to work and higher levels of job involvement are more likely to have higher job expectations and aspirations for employment in the industry. This allows managers to have a better understanding of the students' aspirations and attitudes to work as they are preparing to enter the industry. Additionally, the industry can place higher value and emphasis on academic qualifications. Emphasis should also be placed upon remuneration and additional training that fits the qualifications of the job position, especially among highly skilled positions in the industry. For whatever reason, the hospitality and tourism industry does not do this.
Limitations and areas of future research
Even though many of the findings within this study are significant, there are a few limitations that may affect the current study. The results and implication may be limited because samples were collected from only one university in US and two from South Korea. Additionally, the sample size from Korea was considerably smaller than the sample size from the US. Future studies should seek to draw a larger sample from more countries with both individualist and collectivist cultures to increase the generalization. More and better-advanced data collection and statistical comparison for the other groups can be presented (e.g. gender). For example, rather than national origin, academic standing may better explain significant differences in other items and questions. Also, although this study cannot provide empirical evidence of why students in South Korea have a more negative attitude toward working in the industry than their American peers, it may be a result of South Koreans’ work culture, such as dominant work environment–the longest hours among citizens of developed countries (OECD, 2015). Future studies may include open-ended questions to collect more qualitative data to explain the findings in detail. Educators must acknowledge these cultural differences and adjust the content of hospitality programs to meet the expectations of both students and hospitality employers.
Instrument development
| Constructs | References |
|---|---|
| Work attitude | Chuang and Dellmann-Jenkins (2010). Career decision making and intention: A study of hospitality undergraduate students. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 34(4), 512–530 |
| Involvement | Kong (2013). Relationships among work-family supportive supervisors, career competencies, and job involvement. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 33, 304–309 Josiam et al. (2008). Involvement and the tourist shopper: Using the involvement construct to segment the American tourist shopper at the mall. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 11(2), 135–154 |
| Motivation | Chuang and Dellmann-Jenkins (2010). Career decision making and intention: A study of hospitality undergraduate students. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 34(4), 512–530 Chuang et al. (2007). Hospitality undergraduate students' career choices and factors influencing commitment to the profession. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education, 19(4), 28–37 |
| Job Expectation | Lu and Adler (2009). Career goals and expectations of hospitality and tourism students in China. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 9(1–2), 63–80 |
Comparison of socio-demographic profile
| USA | South Korea | Chi- square | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | % | N | % | ||
| Gender | 23.109** | ||||
| Male | 169 | 32.1 | 109 | 50.9 | |
| Female | 358 | 67.9 | 105 | 49.1 | |
| Age | 148.422** | ||||
| 18–20 years old | 179 | 34.8 | 7 | 3.3 | |
| 21–25 years old | 293 | 56.9 | 118 | 55.7 | |
| 26–30 years old | 29 | 5.6 | 53 | 25.0 | |
| 31 years old and over | 14 | 2.7 | 34 | 16.0 | |
| Race | 459.438** | ||||
| African American | 35 | 6.7 | 3 | 1.4 | |
| Asian American | 39 | 7.4 | 38 | 18.1 | |
| Hispanic American | 89 | 17.0 | 7 | 3.3 | |
| White American | 334 | 63.6 | 4 | 1.9 | |
| Other | 28 | 5.3 | 158 | 75.2 | |
| Class | 25.914** | ||||
| Underclassmen | 160 | 30.4 | 101 | 50.8 | |
| Upperclassmen | 566 | 69.6 | 98 | 49.2 | |
| GPA | 19.651** | ||||
| 2.50 and under | 88 | 18.5 | 12 | 10.1 | |
| 2.51–3.50 | 292 | 61.5 | 61 | 51.3 | |
| 3.51–4.00 | 95 | 20.0 | 46 | 38.7 | |
| Work status | 145.161** | ||||
| Part-time job | 290 | 54.9 | 31 | 13.4 | |
| Full-time job | 116 | 22.0 | 143 | 61.9 | |
| Not currently working | 122 | 23.1 | 55 | 23.8 | |
Age, class and GPA
| United States | South Korea | Country differences | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | Sd | Mean | Sd | Mean difference | p values | |
| Age | 22.01 | 3.172 | 25.97 | 4.774 | −3.96 | p = 0.000** |
| Class | 3.00 | 0.970 | 2.60 | 1.068 | 0.40 | p = 0.000** |
| GPA | 3.07 | 0.532 | 3.36 | 0.545 | −0.29 | p = 0.000** |
Note(s): **Significant at p < 0.01
Work attitude
| Factor | United States | South Korea | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Loading | Mean | Sd | Mean | Sd | F-values | |
| Factor 1: negative work attitude | 2.55 | 0.784 | 3.76 | 0.739 | 519.190** | |
| Workers are entitled to call in sick | 0.706 | 2.06 | 1.056 | 3.85 | 1.093 | 310.882** |
| Work is nothing more than making a living | 0.703 | 2.54 | 1.263 | 3.47 | 1.223 | 83.678** |
| Promotions mean more worries | 0.703 | 2.10 | 1.195 | 3.72 | 1.160 | 285.496** |
| Hard work does not get you much | 0.699 | 1.84 | 1.243 | 3.87 | 1.148 | 425.554** |
| Best job is to do almost nothing | 0.684 | 1.72 | 1.023 | 3.38 | 1.259 | 348.689** |
| People taking work home are boring | 0.666 | 2.75 | 1.331 | 3.69 | 1.161 | 82.663** |
| Given the chance, I would never work | 0.563 | 2.93 | 1.570 | 3.63 | 1.330 | 32.801** |
| Not concerned about being promoted | 0.558 | 2.95 | 1.394 | 3.83 | 1.239 | 65.134** |
| Most people are stuck in dead end jobs | 0.533 | 3.21 | 1.264 | 4.04 | 1.099 | 69.736** |
| Factor 2: positive work attitude | 5.34 | 0.521 | 4.30 | 0.659 | 377.639** | |
| Work gives me a feeling of self-respect | 0.794 | 5.36 | 0.775 | 4.40 | 0.996 | 195.403** |
| Work passes more quickly when busy | 0.741 | 5.65 | 0.666 | 4.55 | 1.062 | 282.483** |
| I should feel pride in my work | 0.731 | 5.70 | 0.592 | 4.52 | 1.133 | 337.964** |
| I should feel responsible to do a good job | 0.717 | 5.75 | 0.613 | 4.09 | 1.356 | 525.894** |
| I should work hard to earn a promotion | 0.691 | 5.30 | 0.886 | 4.25 | 0.935 | 208.637** |
| Doing the best job possible is satisfying | 0.665 | 5.18 | 1.056 | 4.18 | 0.964 | 141.346** |
| Doing a good job as important as good paycheck | 0.650 | 5.10 | 1.071 | 4.25 | 0.914 | 105.647** |
Note(s): **Significant at p < 0.01
Work involvement
| USA | South Korea | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | Sd | Mean | Sd | Mean Difference | p-value | |
| Work involvement | 5.28 | 0.976 | 4.44 | 0.846 | 0.84 | 0.000** |
Note(s): **Significant at p < 0.01
Work motivation
| USA | South Korea | USA and South Korea | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | Sd | Mean | Sd | Mean difference | p-value | |
| Long-term stability | 4.31 | 1.156 | 4.09 | 0.991 | 0.22 | 0.015** |
| Personal liking | 4.96 | 0.920 | 4.18 | 1.016 | 0.78 | 0.000** |
| Health benefits | 4.14 | 1.117 | 4.05 | 1.049 | 0.09 | 0.303 (NS) |
| Long-term opportunity | 4.99 | 0.856 | 4.41 | 0.984 | 0.58 | 0.000** |
| Higher wages | 4.55 | 1.013 | 4.35 | 0.991 | 0.20 | 0.017** |
| Job motivation average | 4.59 | 0.693 | 4.22 | 0.702 | 0.37 | 0.000** |
Note(s): **Significant at p < 0.01; NS = Not significant
Job satisfaction and earnings satisfaction
| USA | South Korea | USA and South Korea | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | Sd | Mean | Sd | Mean difference | p-value | |
| Job Satisfaction | 4.13 | 1.349 | 3.64 | 1.433 | −0.49 | 0.009** |
| Satisfaction with job earnings | 3.81 | 1.448 | 3.46 | 1.532 | −0.35 | 0.000** |
Note(s): **Significant at p < 0.01
Job expectation
| Factor | USA | South Korea | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Loading | Mean | Sd | Mean | Sd | F-values | |
| Factor 1: good job means endless possibilities | 5.17 | 0.628 | 4.42 | 0.764 | 194.766** | |
| Boss will ask for my ideas | 0.819 | 5.48 | 0.697 | 4.53 | 1.011 | 0.000** |
| I will have freedom and autonomy | 0.769 | 4.99 | 0.928 | 4.33 | 0.970 | 0.000** |
| I will have continual growth opportunities | 0.740 | 5.45 | 0.733 | 4.46 | 0.948 | 0.000** |
| I will be my own boss | 0.552 | 4.77 | 1.373 | 4.18 | 1.115 | 0.000** |
| Factor 2: good job means management | 4.34 | 1.107 | 3.99 | 0.829 | 17.505** | |
| I will work in hotel/restaurant management | 0.818 | 4.42 | 1.434 | 4.25 | 1.041 | 0.104 (NS) |
| I will manage an independent operation | 0.728 | 4.09 | 1.426 | 3.61 | 1.028 | 0.000** |
| I will manage a major corporation's hotel/restaurant | 0.577 | 4.51 | 1.435 | 4.11 | 1.259 | 0.000** |
| Factor 3: good job means proper training | 4.48 | 0.922 | 4.19 | 0.710 | 16.606** | |
| I will work in a corporate office | 0.629 | 4.16 | 1.578 | 4.22 | 0.986 | 0.000** |
| My boss will provide me with clear directions | 0.615 | 4.33 | 1.272 | 4.02 | 1.065 | 0.635 (NS) |
| I will start in a good management training program | 0.558 | 4.92 | 1.118 | 4.34 | 0.970 | 0.000** |
Note(s): **Significant at p < 0.01; NS = Not significant
References
Agovino, T. (2019), “To have and to hold [Online]”, The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), available at: https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/news/all-things-work/pages/to-have-and-to-hold.aspx (accessed 18 November 2020).
Bakker, A.B. and Bal, P.M. (2010), “Weekly work engagement and performance: a study among starting teachers”, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 83 No. 1, pp. 189-206.
Baum, T. (2007), “Human resources in tourism: still waiting for change”, Tourism Management, Vol. 28 No. 6, pp. 1383-1399.
Belch, G.E. and Belch, M.A. (2012), Advertising and Promotion, 9th ed., McGraw-Hill/Irwin, New York, NY.
Benabou, R. and Tirole, J. (2003), “Incentives and prosocial behavior”, The American Economic Review, Vol. 96 No. 5, pp. 1652-1675.
Blodgett, J.G., Lu, L.C., Rose, G.M. and Vitell, S.J. (2001), “Ethical sensitivity to stakeholder interests: a cross-cultural comparison”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 190-202.
Bollen, K.A. (1989), Structural Equations with Latent Variables, Wiley, New York.
Brien, A. (2004), “Do I want a job in hospitality? Only till I get a real job!”, New Zealand Tourism and Hospitality Research Conference, pp. 35-42.
Brown, S.P. (1996), “A meta-analysis and review of organizational research on job involvement”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 120 No. 2, pp. 235-255.
Cassado, M.A. (1992), “Student expectations of hospitality jobs”, Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 80-82.
Chang, J.H. and Teng, C.C. (2017), “Intrinsic or extrinsic motivations for hospitality employees' creativity: the moderating role of organization-level regulatory focus”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 60, pp. 133-141.
Chen, T.L. and Shen, C.C. (2012), “Today's intern, tomorrow's practitioner? — the influence of internship programmes on students' career development in the Hospitality Industry”, Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 29-40.
Christie, P.M.J., Kwon, I.W.G., Stoeberl, P.A. and Baumhart, R. (2003), “A cross-cultural comparison of ethical attitudes of business managers: India Korea and the United States”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 263-287.
Chuang, N.K. and Dellmann-Jenkins, M. (2010), “Career decision making and intention: a study of hospitality undergraduate students”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 512-530.
Chuang, N.K., Goh, B.K., Stout, B.L. and Dellmann-Jenkins, M. (2007), “Hospitality undergraduate students' career choices and factors influencing commitment to the profession”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Education, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 28-37.
Cleveland, J.N., O'Neill, J.W., Himelright, J.L., Harrison, M.M., Crouter, A.C. and Drago, R. (2007), “Work and family issues in the hospitality industry: perspectives of entrants, managers, and spouses”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, Vol. 31, pp. 275-298.
Cohen, A.B. (2009), “Many forms of culture”, American Psychologist, Vol. 64 No. 3, p. 194.
Cooper, J. and Croyle, R.T. (1984), “Attitudes and attitude change”, Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 395-426.
Currivan, D.B. (1999), “The casual order of job satisfaction and organizational commitment in models of employee turnover”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 495-524.
DeVoe, S.E. and Iyengar, S.S. (2004), “Managers’ theories of subordinates: a cross-cultural examination of manager perceptions of motivation and appraisal of performance”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 93 No. 1, pp. 47-61.
Diefendorff, J.M., Brown, D.J., Kamin, A.M. and Lord, R.G. (2002), “Examining the roles of job involvement and work centrality in predicting organizational behaviors and job performance”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 23, pp. 93-108.
Francois, P. (2003), “Not-for-profit provision of public services”, The Economic Journal, Vol. 113 No. 486, pp. C53-C61.
Geert-Hofstede.com (2016), Country Culture Comparison, available at: https://geert-hofstede.com/south-korea.html.
Gelfand, M.J., Erez, M. and Aycan, Z. (2007), “Cross-cultural organizational behavior”, Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 58, pp. 479-514.
Goh, E. and Lee, C. (2018), “A workforce to be reckoned with: the emerging pivotal generation Z hospitality workforce”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 73, pp. 20-28.
González, F., Sánchez, S.M. and López-Guzmán, T. (2016), “The effect of educational level on job satisfaction and organizational commitment: a case study in hospitality”, International Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Administration, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 243-259.
Graham, C. and Mckenzie, A. (1995), “Delivering the promise: developing new graduates”, Education + Training, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 33-40.
Hallberg, U.E. and Schaufeli, W.B. (2006), “Same same but different? Can work engagement be discriminated from job involvement and organizational commitment?”, European Psychologist, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 119-127.
Herman, H.M. and Chiu, W.C. (2014), “Transformational leadership and job performance: a social identity perspective”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 67 No. 1, pp. 2827-2835.
Ho, C.C., Oldenburg, B., Day, G. and Sun, J. (2012), “Work values, job involvement, and organizational commitment in Taiwanese nurses”, International Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 64-70.
Hofstede, G. (1980), Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values, Sage, Beverly Hills, California, CA.
Hofstede, G. (1984), Culture's Consequences, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, California, CA.
Hofstede, G. (1991), Cultures and Organization: Software of the Mind, McGraw-Hill, London.
Hofstede, G. and Bond, M.H. (1984), “Hofstede's culture dimensions: an independent validation using Rokeach's value survey”, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 417-433.
Hofstede, G. and Fink, G. (2007), “Culture: organisations, personalities and nations. Gerhard Fink interviews Geert Hofstede”, European Journal of International Management, Vol. 1 Nos 1-2, pp. 14-22.
Hofverberg, A. and Winberg, M. (2020), “Challenging the universality of achievement goal models: a comparison of two culturally distinct countries”, Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 64 No. 3, pp. 333-354.
Hsu, C. and Powers, T. (2002), Marketing Hospitality, 3rd ed., John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.
Huitt, W. (2004), “Maslow’s hierarchy of needs [Internet]”, Educational Psychology Interactive, available at: http://ways-ahead.net/meditation/037-2-Maslow.pdf (http://ways-ahead.net/meditation/037-2-Maslow.pdf).
Jenkins, A.K. (2001), “Making a career of it? Hospitality students' future perspectives: an Anglo-Dutch study”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 13-20.
Josiam, B.M., Reynolds, J.S., Thozhur, S., Crustinger, C., Baum, T. and Devine, F.G. (2008), “Attitudes to work of generation Y students in hospitality management: a comparative analysis of students in the United States and the United Kingdom”, Foodservice Business Research, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 295-313.
Kalargyrou, V. and Costen, W. (2017), “Diversity management research in hospitality and tourism past, present and future”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 68-114.
Kanungo, R.N. (1982), “Measurement of job and work involvement”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 67 No. 3, pp. 341-349.
Klonoski, R. (2011), “Work motivation, culture, and economic development: is work motivation shaped by its socio-economic context?”, International Journal of Management and Information Systems, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 91-100.
Kloutsiniotis, P.V. and Mihail, D.M. (2020), “High performance work systems in the tourism and hospitality industry: a critical review”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 32 No. 7, pp. 2365-2395.
Knippenberg, D.V. (2003), “Work motivation and performance: a social identity perspective”, Applied Psychology, Vol. 49 No. 3, pp. 357-371.
Kong, H. (2013), “Relationships among work-family supportive supervisors, career competencies, and job involvement”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 33, pp. 304-309.
Kong, M. and Jogaratnam, G. (2007), “The influence of culture on perceptions of service employee behavior”, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 275-280.
Kong, H., Wang, S. and Fu, X. (2015), “Meeting career expectation: can it enhance job satisfaction of Generation Y?”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 147-168.
Kong, H., Jiang, X., Chan, W. and Zhou, X. (2018), “Job satisfaction research in the field of hospitality and tourism”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 30 No. 5, pp. 2178-2194.
Laroche, M., Kalamas, M. and Cleveland, M. (2005), “‘I’ versus ‘we’: how individualists and collectivists use information sources to formulate their service expectations”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 279-308.
Lee, C.C. and Chen, C.J. (2013), The Relationship between Employee Commitment and Job Attitude and its Effect on Service Quality in the Tourism Industry, Vol. 3, pp. 196-208.
Lindner, J.R. (1998), “Understanding employee motivation”, Journal of Extension, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 1-8.
Lodahl, T.M. and Kejner, M. (1965), “The definition and measurement of job involvement”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 49, pp. 24-33.
Lorence, J. (1987), “A test of ‘Gender’ and ‘Job’ models of sex differences in job involvement”, Social Forces, Vol. 66 No. 1, pp. 121-142.
Lu, T. and Adler, H. (2009), “Career goals and expectations of hospitality and tourism students in China”, Journal of Teaching in Travel and Tourism, Vol. 9 Nos 1-2, pp. 63-80.
Marshall, G.W., Lassk, F.G. and Moncrief, W.C. (2004), “Salesperson job involvement: do demographic, job situational, and market variables matter?”, Business and Industrial Marketing, Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 337-343.
Migliore, L. (2011), “Relation between big five personality traits and Hofstede’s cultural dimensions: samples from the USA and India”, Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 38-54.
Nachmias, S. and Walmsley, A. (2015), “Making career decisions in a changing graduate labour market: a hospitality perspective”, Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education, Vol. 17, pp. 50-58.
Nunnally, J.C. (1978), Psychometric Theory , 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, Hillsdale, NJ, p. 416.
OECD (2015), OECD Data-Employment-Hours Worked, available at: https://data.oecd.org/emp/hours-worked.htm.
Oshagbemi, T. (2000), “Is length of service related to the level of job satisfaction?”, International Journal of Social Economics, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 213-226.
Pheng, L.S. and Leong, C.H. (2000), “Cross-cultural project management for international construction in China”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 18 No. 5, pp. 307-316.
Phuong, T.T.K. and Tran, T.V. (2020), “Job satisfaction, employee loyalty and job performance in the hospitality industry: a moderated model”, Asian Economic and Financial Review, Vol. 10 No. 6, p. 698.
Rauch, R. (2011), “Top 10 hospitality industry Trends for 2012”, Hotel Marketing, available at: https://www.hospitalitynet.org/opinion/4054228.html" \ohttps://www.hospitalitynet.org/opinion/4054228.htmlhttps://www.hospitalitynet.org/opinion/4054228.html (accessed 12 November 2012).
Richardson, S. and Thomas, N.J. (2012), “Utilising generation Y: United States hospitality and tourism students' perceptions of careers in the industry”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Vol. 19, pp. 102-114.
Robbins, S.P. and Judge, T.A. (2009), Organizational Behavior, Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jerssey, NJ.
Robinson, R.N., Ruhanen, L. and Breakey, N.M. (2016), “Tourism and hospitality internships: influences on student career aspirations”, Current Issues in Tourism, Vol. 19 No. 6, pp. 513-527.
Schaufeli, W.B. and Salanova, M. (2008), “Enhancing work engagement though the management of human resources”, in Näswall, K., Sverke, M. and Hellgren, J. (Eds), The Individual in the Changing Working Life, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 380-404.
(2020), in Sessa, V.I. and Bowling, N.A. (Eds), Essentials of Job Attitudes and Other Workplace Psychological Constructs, Routledge.
Silva, P. (2006), “Effects of disposition on hospitality employee job satisfaction and commitment”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 317-328.
Singh, A. and Gupta, B. (2015), “Job involvement, organizational commitment, professional commitment, and team commitment: a study of generational diversity”, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 1192-1211.
Singh, M. and Sarkar, A. (2012), “The relationship between psychological empowerment and innovative behavior: a dimensional analysis with job involvement as mediator”, Journal of Personnel Psychology, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 127-137.
Solnet, D., Kralj, A. and Kandampully, J. (2012), “Generation Y employees: an examination of work attitude differences”, Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 17 No. 3, p. 36.
Sukhu, A., Choi, H., Bujisic, M. and Bilgihan, A. (2019), “Satisfaction and positive emotions: a comparison of the influence of hotel guests' beliefs and attitudes on their satisfaction and emotions”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 77, pp. 51-63.
Teng, C. (2007), “The effects of personality traits and attitudes on student uptake in hospitality employment”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 27, pp. 76-86.
Tracey, B. and Hinkin, T. (2008), “Contextual factors and cost profiles associated with employee turnover”, Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 12-27.
Triandis, H.C. (1995), Individualism and Collectivism, Westview Press, Boulder.
Tsaur, S.H., Hsu, F.S. and Lin, H. (2019), “Workplace fun and work engagement in tourism and hospitality: the role of psychological capital”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 81, pp. 131-140.
Wan, Y.K.P. and Chan, S.H.J. (2013), “Casino employees' perceptions of their quality of work life”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 34, pp. 348-358.
Waryszak, R.Z. (1999), “Students' expectations from their cooperative education placements in the hospitality industry: an international perspective”, Education + Training, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 33-40.
Wickramasinghe, V. and Perera, L. (2010), “Graduates', university lecturers' and employers' perceptions towards employability skills”, Education + Training, Vol. 52 No. 3, pp. 226-244.
Xu, S., Wang, Y.C., Ma, E. and Wang, R. (2020), “Hotel employees' fun climate at work: effects on work-family conflict and employee deep acting through a collectivistic perspective”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 91, 102666.
Yang, N., Chen, C.C., Choi, J. and Zou, Y. (2000), “Sources of work-family conflict: a Sino-U.S. comparison of the effects of work and family demands”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 43, pp. 113-123.
Zopiatis, A. and Kyprianou, G. (2006), “Perceptions and attitudes towards the hospitality professions in Cyprus”, Tourism Today, Vol. 6, pp. 33-46.
Zopiatis, A., Theocharous, A.L. and Constanti, P. (2016), “Adult vocational decision, career satisfaction and future intention”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 28 No. 12, pp. 2696-2720.
Further reading
Chen, P. and Choi, Y. (2008), “Generational differences in work values: a study of hospitality management”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 596-615, doi: 10.1108/09596110810892182.
Hauff, S., Richter, N.F. and Tressin, T. (2015), “Situational job characteristics and job satisfaction: the moderating role of national culture”, International Business Review, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 710-723.
O'Neill, J.W. and Xiao, Q. (2010), “Effects of organizational/occupational characteristics and personality traits on hotel manager emotional exhaustion”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 652-658.
Salanova, M., Agut, S. and Peiró, J.M. (2005), “Linking organizational resources and work engagement to employee performance and customer loyalty: the mediation of service climate”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 90 No. 6, p. 1217.
Stone, J.R., III and Josiam, B. (2000), “The impact of school supervision of work and job quality on adolescent job attitudes and job behaviors”, Journal of Vocational Education Research, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 532-574.
Swanberg, J.E., McKechnie, S.P., Ojha, M.U. and James, J.B. (2011), “Schedule control, supervisor support and work engagement: a winning combination for workers in hourly jobs?”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 79 No. 3, pp. 613-624.
White, C. (2006), “Towards an understanding of the relationship between work values and cultural orientation”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 25, pp. 699-715.