Microsoft Word 2007 ichrie conference Proceedings Final-Final 06-06-07. doc

 
2007 Annual International CHRIE Conference & Exposition 
240
 
METHOD 
The population for this study was all hospital hourly food service employees and hospital food service 
supervisors over the age of 18 in the United States. The sample was comprised of 229 hospital hourly food service 
employees (
n
=168) and their supervisors (
n
=61) in Southeast Texas. An hourly employee was defined as an 
individual who earned an hourly wage, was managed by a supervisor, and was literate in either English or Spanish.
A supervisor was defined as an individual who earned an hourly wage or salary, was responsible for supervising at 
least two employees, and was literate in English or Spanish. All sample subjects worked in a hospital that served at 
least sixty meals a day to patients or customers.
 
Hospitals were selected from the listings in two regional telephone directories in Southeast Texas. Hospital 
food service or human resources directors were invited to participate in the study if that hospital food service 
department served at least sixty meals a day to patients or customers. Once permission was granted, a date for 
survey administration was set. On the day of the survey administration, the researcher read instructions in English 
and in Spanish and English and Spanish consent forms were collected. Each participant completed the survey 
anonymously. The survey took approximately ten minutes to complete. Survey administration was conducted an 
equal number of times in the morning and late afternoon to accommodate employees who worked the morning and 
evening shifts.
The instrument was a one-page, two-part survey designed by the researchers that included demographic 
questions and the list of motivating factors used by Kovach (1995). Four survey versions were used: English literate 
employees/supervisors, Spanish literate employees/supervisors. Survey versions were identical with the exception 
of instructions (employees vs. supervisors) and the printed language (English or Spanish).
Part A of the survey requested age, gender; ethnicity; and job position. Part B listed Kovach’s ten 
motivating factors in the following sequence: “good working conditions”; “feeling in on things”; “tactful 
disciplining”; “full appreciation for work done”; “management loyalty to workers”; “good wages”; “promotion and 
growth with company”; “sympathetic understanding of personal problems”; “job security”; and “interesting work.”
There was a space to the left of each factor to rank the factors in order of importance (one to ten).
Initially the English survey was translated into Spanish by the researchers. To ensure the content of the 
Spanish survey was identical to the English survey, the Spanish surveys were reviewed by three native Spanish 
speakers and three non-native Spanish speakers. The reviewers were asked to translate the Spanish survey so that it 
was equivalent to the English survey. All six responses were reviewed by the researchers and modifications were 
made based on a consensus of reviewers’ feedback. Where there were discrepancies, the researchers resolved those 
discrepancies with the native Spanish speakers’ suggestions.
 
Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS Version 14.0. Frequencies were calculated for the 
demographic information and for ranking factors. A non-parametric, Kruskal-Wallis test was conducted to 
determine if there was a difference in rankings for each motivating factor between supervisors and employees. To 
determine if there was an overall difference in how supervisors and employees ranked factors of motivation, the 
original data were standardized (converted to z-scores) before a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was 
conducted using Wilks’ Lambda (
а
= 0.05).