|
2007 Annual International CHRIE Conference & Exposition
367
INSTRUMENT DESIGN
Job satisfaction and its underlying motivators is the subject of previous research for the hospitality
workforce. A number of job satisfaction instruments (e.g. Job Descriptive Index, Job Diagnostic Survey &
Minnesota Satisfaction Survey) have been utilised in a plethora of contexts. Many assume
a priori
that a poor job
satisfaction score will decrease organisational commitment and, hence, increase the probability of turnover
(Feinstein & Vondrasek, 2001).
Several trends, pertinent to this study, are apparent. Much research focuses on
hospitality managers, employees of hotels, or a combination of both and many of the instruments used are often
generic designs. Although most incorporate intrinsic as well as extrinsic job motivators several studies across
various populations in hospitality have not found intrinsic dimensions to be significant (Hancer & George, 2003).
Some of these instruments, for example the Job Diagnostic Survey, have been used to measure the job satisfaction of
chefs and cooks (Lee-Ross, 1999), and recent applications of the Minnesota Satisfaction Survey have aimed to test
the relationship between job satisfaction and organisational commitment (Feinstein & Vondrasek, 2001). Yet these
generic instruments often do not account for specific intrinsic motivators – for instance dimensions of creativity –
characteristic of occupational communities and cultures.
It was determined to test for occupational and organisational attitudes across four phases that approximate
those of a career. The first phase probed motivations for occupational selection, the second for attitudes during
occupational socialisation and the third and fourth phases for dimensions of job (organisational) satisfaction and
occupational respectively. It is apparent from discussion to this point that occupational as well as organisational
perspectives on various attitudinal measures might be worthwhile exploring. However, the choice of including
occupational selection and socialisation requires brief justification. Candidates select occupation based on their
education level, socioeconomic status, but also psychological predisposition (Holland, 1976). An underlying
assumption in the occupational selection literature is that perceived occupational intrinsic rewards are formed early
in life, before or during education (Mortimer & Lorimer, 1979). Overall, there is support to suggest that individuals,
at a developmental stage, select occupations to match their ‘personality’. As has been established, creativity might
be such a dimension of personality. Creativity might equally be an occupationally socialised trait. There is a
reciprocal relationship between individual and occupational experience, and an element of negotiation, meaning the
job is shaped by the individual’s expectations and experiences, and
vice versa
(Mortimer & Lorimer, 1979).
Workplaces signpost cues to link acceptable ways of thinking with actual behaviour, and assist individuals to
complete the cycle by allowing them to ‘enact’, through a process of cognitive dissonance, values and beliefs and,
hence, demonstrate views about a range of occupationally specific and organisational matters (Gomez-Mejia, 1984).
This, then, becomes a behavioural mechanism for the expression of occupationally socialised core values, beliefs,
and ideals.
Each phase contained both repeated items, but also questions specific to the phase. The phase items were
informed by a number of sources including previous occupationally chef-specific surveys (e.g. Chivers, 1971),
established findings from ethnographic work on the occupation of cookery (e.g. Fine, 1996) and the researcher’s
previous industry experience as a chef, a factor which Botterill (2000) laments is often not given enough credence.
The intrinsic constructs of creativity, artistry, technical skill, and service were complemented with extrinsic
constructs including satisfaction with working conditions and pay. These constructs were worded according to the
dictates of each phase. While a full explanation of the scale development is not achievable here, examples of other,
phase-specific, items are shown in Figure 1.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
