Gender differences in the relationship between justice perceptions and job insecurity in hotel outsourcing

International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Hospitality Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijhm

Gender differences in the relationship between justice perceptions and job insecurity in hotel outsourcing Pablo Ruiz-Palominoa,b, Pablo Zoghbi-Manrique-de-Larac,d,*, Jyh‐Ming Ting-Dingc,e a

Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha, Desk 3.7, Spain Faculty of Social Sciences of Cuenca, 42 Los Alfares Avenue, 16071 Cuenca, Spain c Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain d Campus de Tafira Edicicio, Departamental de CC económicas y Empresariales, Desk C.2.18, 5014 Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Gran Canaria, Spain e Campus de Tafira Edicicio, Departamental de CC económicas y Empresariales, Desk C.2.13, 35014 Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Gran Canaria, Spain b

ARTICLE INFO

ABSTRACT

Keywords: Hotel outsourcing Gender Organizational justice Job insecurity External staff Internal staff

Discrimination against women, injustices, and job insecurity are three issues in hotel outsourcing that have not been examined together. This study uses conservation of resource (COR) theory to investigate whether male and female internal staff have lower job insecurity when they perceive external peers’ fair treatment by management or when they perceive such treatment for themselves. Using a pen-and-paper survey, data were collected from 215 internal staff who worked side by side with external peers in 14 Spanish hotels. Results indicate that female internal staff reduce their job insecurity when observing acts of interpersonal justice towards external peers, and male internal staff reduce their job insecurity when perceiving themselves as recipients of acts of procedural justice. No results were found for internal staff who observed acts of distributive justice towards external peers. Findings suggest that job insecurity threatens outsourcing’s success unless different kinds of justice are managed according to gender.

1. Introduction Previous hospitality and management literature indicates that, particularly in hotels (Soltani and Wilkinson, 2010), labor outsourcing is a beneficial strategy that may help them to stay ahead in the current competitive hospitality industry (Domberger, 1998; Guillén and GarcíaCanal, 2009; Quinn, 1999). Labor outsourcing allows hotels to make use of qualified workers without having to augment their fixed and structural costs because they do not have to hire them directly; the employers of the external staff are external entities. Studies also suggest that labor outsourcing is not free of risks that threaten its success and that of the hotel itself. For instance, some outsourcing services put trust and cooperation at risk (Langfield-Smith and Smith, 2003), and because internal staff work side by side with external peers who are underpaid (Clott, 2004) and targets of occupational hazards (Mayhew et al., 1997), they usually have to cope with the perception of working in a precarious and insecure workplace (Amiti and Wei, 2005; Clott, 2004; Geishecker, 2008; Goldschmidt and Schmieder, 2014). Internal and external employees can also have dis-

⁎

similar ways of viewing outsourcing decisions (Svensson et al., 2015; Yap and Webber, 2015). Therefore, clashes or mixed attitudes towards outsourcing are relatively frequent (Langfield-Smith and Smith, 2003) and undermine employees’ morale (e.g., Brooks, 2006; Gonzalez et al., 2011). One endemic issue in labor outsourcing that can put its success at risk is feelings of job insecurity (FJI) (Geishecker, 2008). Defined as “a perceived threat to the continuity and stability of employment as it is currently experienced” (Shoss, 2017, p.4), feelings of job insecurity (FJI) are associated with decreased citizenship behaviors (OCB) and performance at work (Cheng and Chan, 2008), as well as more counterproductive behaviors (Chirumbolo, 2015; van den Broeck et al., 2014; Feather and Rauter, 2004; Reisel et al., 2010). Unfortunately, although with rare exceptions (Zoghbi-Manrique-de-Lara et al., 2017), individual-level feelings of job insecurity (hereinafter, FJI) involving the specificities of hotel outsourcing and the strategies for mitigating these feelings are currently under-examined issues in hotel outsourcing empirical research. Conventional management literature suggests that fairness may mitigate FJI (see Blau et al., 2004; Loi et al., 2012). However, little is

Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (P. Ruiz-Palomino), [email protected] (P. Zoghbi-Manrique-de-Lara), [email protected] (J. Ting-Ding).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.102412 Received 22 May 2019; Received in revised form 19 September 2019; Accepted 30 October 2019 0278-4319/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: Pablo Ruiz-Palomino, Pablo Zoghbi-Manrique-de-Lara and Jyh‐Ming Ting-Ding, International Journal of Hospitality Management, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.102412

International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

P. Ruiz-Palomino, et al.

known about the role that individual-level perceptions of justice involving specificities of hotel outsourcing can play in mitigating FJI (Zoghbi-Manrique-de-Lara et al., 2017). Given the collective nature of much of employees’ work in delivering top quality service to guests (Bavik, 2016; Kim et al., 2013), third party perceptions of justice are particularly important in hotel outsourcing. Because working side-byside in outsourcing leads staff to witness many more justice events than they experience personally, the staff not only seem to react individually to the way they are treated by hotel management, but they also make fairness judgments and react to the way external peers are treated (Skarlicki et al., 2015; Zoghbi-Manrique-de-Lara and Ting-Ding, 2017). Therefore, to jointly model FJI and justice perceptions in hotel outsourcing, not only should the self be considered, but also other-centered approaches involving third-party interventions (Skarlicki et al., 2015). Because external workers, compared to internal workers, commonly project an image of greater pay inequities, precariousness, and weakness (Amiti and Wei, 2005; Clott, 2004; Geishecker, 2008; Goldschmidt and Schmieder, 2014), the paper proposes that external peers are the main recipients of acts of distributive (DJ) and interpersonal justice (IJ). Therefore, acts of distributive (hereinafter, DJ) and interpersonal justice (hereinafter, IJ) occurring in hotel outsourcing should arguably be observed by external peers, and mirroring such treatment, decrease their FJI. By contrast, due to their higher participation in the right to appeal or decision-making, internal workers themselves may be the main recipients of procedural justice (hereinafter, PJ). Hence, due to perceiving PJ toward themselves, they may reduce their FJI. Third-party and self-experiences of justice may not uniformly affect FJI. Given the broad implications of being a woman in the hotel outsourcing context, gender may affect the magnitude of PJ, DJ, and IJ outcomes. Women are historical victims of wage discrimination and numerous grievances in hotel outsourcing. Compared to men, they have suffered higher rates of pay inequities and precarious jobs (CamposSoria et al., 2009), mostly in temporary, outsourced, and part-time positions (Santero-Sánchez et al., 2015). Along with injustices and FJI, therefore, the female condition seems to complete a critical “dark triangle” in studying the hotel outsourcing context. The theory of resource conservation (COR) (Hobfoll, 1989; Hobfoll et al., 2018) applied in this paper assimilates justice perceptions as a psychosocial resource that employees try to preserve. This seems especially relevant in hotel outsourcing because this context is volatile, and, hence, staff resources can be permanently threatened with loss. Based on the COR theory, this article postulates that women in hotel outsourcing demand higher levels of justice and security than men do. This could be the case because they place more value on justice issues (Lee et al., 2000; Ramamoorthy and Flood, 2004; Sweeney and McFarlin, 1997; Tata, 2000) and FJI (Giunchi et al., 2016; Rosenblatt et al., 1999) than men, but hold less influential positions than men for successfully maintaining justicebased resources. In fact, a meta-analysis conducted by Schulz et al. (2019: 1) concluded that “fairness in the workplace has a particular relevance for women as compared to men.” However, although empirical research posits gender as a moderator that may make (un)fair treatment or FJI more or less salient, whether or not gender extends the boundary effects of fairness-related information on FJI in the hotel outsourcing industry has yet to be determined. Studying gender as a contingent condition that can influence the FJI-justice link is relevant because it may help hotels to better understand how and when FJI is less likely. In sum, the study aims are to test: 1a) whether internal staff not only decrease FJI as direct recipients of fair procedural treatment (PJ), but also 1b) when acting as third parties who make judgments and react to the way external peers experience DJ and IJ treatment. Finally, this study aims to examine 2) the justice-FJI link in contingent conditions of gender.

2. Theoretical framework and hypotheses Labor outsourcing is recurrently used in hotel operations, where the nature of the demand is volatile and a large array of diverse work activities and employees usually converge (Espino-Rodríguez and GilPadilla, 2015; Lamminmaki, 2011; Promsivapallop et al., 2015). In labor outsourcing, external staff are relocated from external entities and frequently work side by side with internal staff (e.g, Domberger, 1998; Kakabadse and Kakabadse, 2000). Permanent and temporary conditions do not necessarily distinguish between internal and external staff because they are related to the period of the contract, regardless of whether the employer is the hotel or a firm outside the hotel. Based on the different kinds of organizational justice stemming from Adams’ equity theory (Adams, 1963), this study suggests that PJ, DJ, and IJ lead internal employees to FJI in the labor outsourcing setting. Given that internal rather than external staff may be easier recipients of PJ (i.e., they view the operations strategy governing the outsourcing as being open to their opinions about implementation and decisions), this paper argues that PJ only performs when perceived by internal staff toward themselves. However, acts of DJ and IJ will be studied in this paper as observed in external peers by internal staff from a third-party perspective (for a review, Skarlicki et al., 2015). As such, internal staff would judge whether external peers’ rewards are equitable and fair, based on their effort and job responsibilities (DJ), or whether the treatment they receive from supervisors is kind, honest, open, and shows concern for their rights (IJ). 2.1. COR theory, procedural justice (PJ), and feelings of job insecurity (FJI) The proposed model in this paper builds on the conservation of resources (COR) theory by Hobfoll (1989). The paper argues that employees perceive the social situations and job conditions within hotel outsourcing as psychosocial resources (e.g., fair treatment, gender privileges, contract type, union presence, social bonds, the quality or power of positions, and so on) that may become scarce, threatened with loss, or even lost. Drawing on this theory’s statement that employees’ loss of centrally valued resources leads them to feel worried and stressed, because fair treatment is a central or key resource at work, we first predict that favorable PJ perceptions may lead internal staff to experience lower FJI. Prior management research suggests that PJ leads to FJI (see Blau et al., 2004; Loi et al., 2012). As such, internal hotel staff who are facing favorable PJ may decrease FJI for several reasons. First, uncertainty and justice are related (Van den Bos and Lind, 2002). From an individual perspective, in the rules and procedures of hotel outsourcing, employees can find enough fair information to experience low levels of uncertainty about the way the hotel will manage the future they are facing (Lind, 2001; Piccoli and De Witte, 2015). Second, drawing on COR theory, internal staff can perceive PJ resources as abundant and, hence, not likely to be lost, thus increasing the chance that other resources related to staff continuity in the future of the hotel remain predictable, such as type of contract, union presence, permanent position, tenure tracking position, and so on. Third, from an inter-individual level of analysis, internal staff can perceive the lack of PJ in the transfer of resources from one staff member to another, and this can cause the uncertainty due to threatened PJ to be exacerbated (Bolger et al., 1989). For example, if an employee has been unfairly obligated to leave a satisfactory task to a peer who wanted it, not only does that employee perceive uncertainty and insecurity in the loss of PJ itself, but also in the unfair way interindividual transmissions of resources are handled (Bolger et al., 1989). By contrast, favorable PJ would shape more controllable and predictable ways for psychological resources to be lost or gained in hotel outsourcing (Thau et al., 2009) and, hence, more

2

International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

P. Ruiz-Palomino, et al.

foreseeable exchanges between hotel managers and internal staff related to future continuity in the hotel. Therefore,

2.3. The moderating role of gender Although the influences of justice on FJI in contingent conditions of gender have been under-examined (e.g., Poria, 2008), some rationales may offer cues about how and why this moderation may occur. COR theory supports the idea that the stressful impact on staff when their resources are threatened can remain in individuals for a long time. As such, the work by Airila et al. (2014) on firefighters’ skills shows that dealing with resources at work can shape behavioral patterns that remain for long periods of time. Dawson’s theory of gender socialization (Dawson, 1997) coincides, suggesting that men and women learn roles, values, and concerns from infancy, making them display cognitive and psychological differences that they maintain throughout life. However, whereas men learn to be achievement-oriented, women are more prone to developing interpersonal relationships (Carlson, 1972), making it more likely for women to have ethical sensitivity (Owhoso, 2002; Cumming et al., 2016). This suggests that women’s more ethical-based reactions to acts of justice directed at themselves or peers – as well as the salience of these acts – may be somewhat stable across time, which would make it more feasible to predict that this pattern holds in the link between justice perceptions and FJI in current hotel outsourcing. Reasons that men and women show different attitudes, values, and behavioral patterns that remain over time are varied. For instance, prior work provided results demonstrating that women are more concerned with FJI than men (Giunchi et al., 2016; Kausto et al., 2005; Rosenblatt et al., 1999). Regarding justice perceptions, a meta-analysis performed by Schulz et al. (2019) finds justice perceptions in the workplace to be more relevant for women than for men. Fortunately, these results offer cues that women may be more sensitive than men to perceiving justice and FJI, so that they may play a moderating role that strengths the justice-FJI link. In addition, some research studies (see Tepper, 2007 for a review) have suggested that a clearer theoretical foundation is needed in order to study how and when gender extends the boundary conditions of justice reactions. In this regard, Schulz et al. (2019: p. 1 [emphasis added]) stated that to understand “gendered reactions to organizational justice […] we must [first] understand the specific features of injustice women and men value and react to the most strongly.” Drawing on COR theory, therefore, this study assumes that attempts to maintain, defend, or recover resources in hotel outsourcing are traditionally less successful in women than in men because women usually hold less influential positions (Stamarski and Son Hing, 2015). Moreover, because women have traditionally faced more gender discrimination than men in the policies and rules governing hotels, this study hypothesizes that – compared to men – the PJ-FJI link is stronger in women than in men. Therefore,

H1a. Perceptions of procedural justice (PJ) in the context of hotel outsourcing are negatively related to FJI in the internal staff.

2.2. Third-party distributive (DJ) and interpersonal justice (IJ) and feelings of job insecurity (FJI) Based on the COR theory, the paper also suggests that justice perceptions and FJI may be subject to the exchange of resources within caravans of resources (that is, resources do not exist separately but travel in packages). As such, the COR theory suggests that psychological states and experiences can be transmitted interpersonally, particularly with hotel workers, who – as external peers – maintain a general similarity in their education and in the work activities they perform in the hotel, as well as in their dependent task orientation. In this regard, Neff et al. (2012) showed that self-efficacy and self-esteem can be transferred through crossover from one employee to another. They based this idea on self-expansion theory (Aron et al., 1991) and on the assumption that in a close relationship (e.g., internal staff who work side by side with external peers), “the evaluative and affective responses to another’s acquisition and loss of resources […] are to some extent the same as if the acquisition or loss was with regard to one’s own resources” (Aron et al., 2005: 210). Consequently, the external staff’s acquisition or loss of psychosocial resources in hotel outsourcing may be a result of crossover processes that are able to transfer fair treatment and FJI from internal to external staff. Westman (2001) distinguishes three ways these crossover processes may occur and apply to fair treatment and FJI transfer. First, through direct crossover, external staff would empathize with internal staff and, hence, internal staff would mirror external peers’ fair treatment and job security. Second, through indirect crossover, external staff would express their fair treatment and FJI by undermining their internal peers, who would become insecure in their jobs because of being undermined. Finally, resource losses are shared (e.g., unfair treatment) and may lead to common effects (e.g., FJI) in both peers through spurious crossover (Hobfoll et al., 2018). Therefore, H1b. Perceptions of external workers receiving distributive justice (DJ) in the context of hotel outsourcing are negatively related to FJI in the internal staff. H1c. Perceptions of external workers receiving interpersonal justice (IJ) in the context of hotel outsourcing are negatively related to FJI in the internal staff.

H2a. FJI among internal workers, due to a higher perception of procedural justice (PJ) in the context of hotel outsourcing, will be lower in women than in men.

Fig. 1. Hypothesized model. 3

International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

P. Ruiz-Palomino, et al.

COR theory assumes that psychological states and experiences may be transferred via crossover from one employee to another (Bolger et al., 1989), and we argue here that women will mirror external peers’ fair treatment and low FJI more than men. As Ryan et al. (2007: 182 [emphasis added]) suggested, “women are more likely than men to be placed in precarious leadership positions, and hence they are more apt [than men] to recognize the existence, prevalence, and risk of discrimination.” Specificities of outsourcing in hotels can favor these (compared to men) more expected interindividual transmissions of resources between female internal staff and external staff. Women and external peers traditionally share weakness in hotel outsourcing, to such an extent that many women in internal staff positions may share similar mistreatment. Prior justice research on third-party interventions suggests that the magnitude of FJI, and DJ and IJ outcomes in internal staff may be importantly amplified in external staff by whether they also perceive themselves this mistreatment (e.g., Skarlicki et al., 2015). Hence, through direct crossover, because female internal staff can feel closer to peers than men, women may exacerbate their own feelings of DJ and IJ more than men because they may be more empathically concerned with the setbacks and misfortunes of internal staff (Ibrahim and Angelidis, 1994; Smith et al., 2001). Finally, via indirect crossover, female internal staff may mirror the external peers’ FJI to a higher extent than men because this assumed sharing of the same fate may lead them to common affects and FJI at work. They may become more concerned than men about the way peers are treated by management within outsourcing and, hence, mirror acts of DJ and IJ directed at external peers more than men, thus amplifying the DJ and IJ effects on FJI. Therefore,

Table 1 Sample demographics.

Age < 25 years old 25–34 years old 35–44 years old 45–54 years old 55–65 years old > 65 years old Gender Male Female Level of Education Primary studies Secondary studies Intermediate vocational training Advanced vocational training Bachelor degree Master degree Department Kitchen Restaurant Room service Maintenance Reception Entertainment Bar Tenure Tenure in hotel (years) Sampled Hotel Data Four 3-star (28.6%) Eight 4-star (57.1%) Two 5-star (14.3%)

H2b. FJI among internal workers, due to a higher perception of distributive justice (DJ) in the context of hotel outsourcing, will be lower in women than in men.

No. employees

% of Total

19 67 60 52 15 2

8.84% 31.16% 27.91% 24.19% 6.98% .93%

97 118

45.11% 54.89%

37 29 37 49 40 23

17.21% 13.49% 17.21% 22.79% 18.60% 10.70%

17 40 48 16 80 3 11

7.91% 18.60% 22.33% 7.44% 37.21% 1.40% 5.12%

8.01

SD = 7.99

79 102 34

36.74% 47.44% 15.81%

N = 215.

relatively young (less than 45), and only 7.91% were older than 55. Respondents were mostly female (54.9%), had an average tenure of 8.1 years, and had a higher level of education (29.3%).

H2c. FJI among internal workers, due to a higher perception of interpersonal justice (IJ) in the context of hotel outsourcing, will be lower in women than in men.

3.2. Measures

3. Methodology

Organizational Justice. We assessed PJ, DJ, and IJ by slightly adapting the 19-item scale developed by Moorman (1991). PJ, DJ, and IJ items were set in a hotel context, and DJ and IJ items were attributed to external peers. In adapting these items, we followed Schriesheim et al.’s (1993) statements about item scaling and the number of items per scale (4–7). Observing Hinkin’s (1998) recommendations, we also tested that interitem associations in the factors were greater than .4, factor loadings were not less than .4, and the variance was greater than 60 percent. In the end, the PJ scale consisted of seven items (e.g., “How fairly are the hotel’s procedures designed to ensure that all the parties affected by a decision are included in the decision-making process”), which evaluated the extent to which the outsourcing procedures were fair. Five items were used to measure DJ (e.g., “How fairly has the hotel been rewarding your external peers for the amount of effort they have put in?”), assessing the extent to which the external peers were fairly paid. Finally, the IJ scale included five items (e.g., “I have witnessed that my hotel treats the external workers who work here with kindness and consideration”) to evaluate whether the supervisors show respect and justice towards the external peers. FJI. Lee et al.’s (2008) four-item scale was used to gauge this variable. A sample item was: “My department or division’s future is uncertain”. We also decided to include an additional item (i.e., “I feel that I may be pressured to accept an agreement to resign”) to better match the reality of the Canary Islands’ labor market. Control Variables. Based on prior literature, age (1 = up to 25 years old; 2 = between 25 and 34 years old; 3 = between 35 and 44 years old; 4 = between 45 and 54 years old; 5 = between 55 and 65 years old; 6 = over 65 years old) and tenure (years with the same hotel) can

3.1. Procedure and sample characteristics Data were gathered from workers in four three-star (28.6%), eight four-star (57.1%), and two five-star (14.3%) hotels located in a sun and beach international tourist destination during 2015–2016. We rejected 1-star and 2-star hotels because they did not guarantee clear limits between their internal and external staff positions. Data suggest a similarity of the aforementioned sample hotel structure (28.6%, 57.1%, and 14.3%) to the structure of the 215 employees at each hotel level (3star, 36.74%, 4-star, 47.44%, and 5-star, 15.81%; see Table 1), and to the descriptive structure of the 75 hotels (41%; 44.3%; and 14.7%) in the whole hotel sector in Gran Canaria. General managers of 36 hotels were emailed to ask for their collaboration. No specific random sampling method was used. Those hotels that provided the managers’ approval were selected. In all, 310 questionnaires were personally distributed in fourteen hotels in Gran Canaria (the Canary Islands, Spain), and once inside the hotel, internal staff who had undergone a period of socialization of at least six months were randomly chosen. The survey was not previously tested, and this may be the main reason that only two-thirds of the responses were usable for further analyses. They were asked to fill out the questionnaires during their work time in unbiased places and situations within the hotel. The usable 215 valid questionnaires in this study (67% response rate) span a variety of departments (i.e., room service, kitchen, restaurant, entertainment, reception, maintenance, and bar; see Table 1). As Table 1 shows, 67.91% of the respondents were 4

International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

P. Ruiz-Palomino, et al.

Table 2 Results of confirmatory factor analysis. Factor loadings (F1) Procedural Justice (PJ) towards internal staff perceived by themselves (Conbrach Alpha = .970) How fairly are the hotel’s procedures designed to… X01 … provide useful feedback regarding an outsourcing decision and its implementation? X02… hear the concerns of everyone affected by an outsourcing decision? X03… allow for requests for clarifications or additional information about an outsourcing decision? X04… have all parties affected by a decision included in the decision-making process? X05… help to collect accurate information for outsourcing decision-making? X06… agree on general criteria before making decisions about outsourcing? X07… provide opportunities to appeal or challenge an outsourcing decision? (F2) Distributive justice (DJ) perceived by internal toward external employees (Cronbach alpha = .914) How fairly has the hotel been rewarding your external peers… X08… for the responsibilities they have? X09… for the amount of effort they have put in? X10… for the work that they have done well? X11… for the stresses and strains of their jobs? X12… for the amount of education and training they bring to the hotel?

SMC

Composite Reliability

AVE

–

.970

.812

–

.936

.748

–

.945

.776

.007

.862

.521

– –

– –

– –

– –

– –

– –

– –

– –

.820 .862 .909 .933 .939 .936 .938

.885 .880 .945 .890 .704

(F3) Interpersonal justice (IJ) perceived by internal toward external employees (Cronbach alpha = .953) I have witnessed that my hotel treats the external workers who work here … X13… with kindness and consideration X14… with honesty X15… in a truthful and open manner X16… taking their opinions into account X17… showing concern for their rights as employees

.936 .958 .927 .723 .838

(F4) Perceptions of JI (Cronbach Alpha = .970) I feel that… Y01 … I may be fired Y02… My department or division’s future is uncertain Y03… I may be laid off for a short while Y04… I may be laid off permanently Y05… I may be pressured to accept early retirement Y06… I may be pressured to accept an agreement to resign

.674 .524 .649 .552 .920 .909

Moderator M01…Gender Control variables C01…Agea C02…Tenurea

χ2 [448. 215] = 937.545. df = 448. CFI = .909; TLI = .900; RMSEA = .071. Note. AVE refers to Average Variance Extracted. and SMC to Squared Multiple Correlation. a Tenure and Age were incorporated as ‘stand-alone’ control variables in the research model.

4. Results

covary with our independent and dependent constructs. Except gender (1 = male, 2 = female), all the variables used 7-point Likert response formats, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The items and Cronbach alphas appear in Table 2.

Table 2 shows that the fit for the four-factor solution is marginally acceptable (χ2 = [448, 215] = 937.545, df = 448, CFI = .909; TLI = .900; RMSEA = .071). CFI and TLI values are above the .90 cutoff recommendation, but RMSEA was not below .05 (Hair et al., 2006). However, because RMSEAs below.08 are still considered to be marginally acceptable (Byrne, 1998), our results support the uniqueness of the four variables tested in the CFA (Table 2). Table 2 also shows that the composite reliability ranged from .970 to .862, which is higher than the standard of .60 (Hair et al., 2006). Cronbach’s alphas ranged from .970 to .914, above the suggested .70 cut-off (Nunnally, 1978). We also used average variance extracted (AVE), along with a number of customary procedures, to test our scales’ discriminant and convergent validity. The AVEs for each variable were between .812 and .521, either equal to or above .50 (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988; Fornell and Larcker, 1981), thus supporting convergent validity. As Table 3 shows, discriminant validity was assessed by calculating the square roots of the AVE values (from .901 to .721, on the main

3.3. Statistical analysis Using SPSS, the data will be analyzed to provide descriptive statistics. Structural equation modelling (SEM), via AMOS 22, is used to test the hypothesized relationships and evaluate the validity of the measures. Observing Hinkin’s (1998) suggestions, we plan to use orthogonal rotation for item reduction through exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and then confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to test the construct validity of the adapted PJ, DJ, and IJ scales along with the measure of feelings of JI. Fit indices include comparative-fit (CFI), Tucker-Lewis (TLI), and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA). As described above, we plan to include age and tenure as structural control variables, i.e., without assigning them indicators over the study variables (Hancock and Mueller, 2006). 5

International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

P. Ruiz-Palomino, et al.

Table 3 Means. Standard Deviations. Correlations. and Reliabilities. Variables

M

SD

1

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

– – – 3.41 5.48 4.85 2.78

– – – 1.64 1.42 1.52 1.52

–

Age Tenure Gender Procedural justice (PJ) Distributive justice (DJ) Interpersonal justice (IJ) Feelings of job insecurity (FJI)

.582*** −.053 −.017 .038 −.057 .088

2

3

– −.047 .066 .059 −.050 .092

–

.034 .096 .078 −.109

4

5

6

7

(.901) .450*** .371*** −.168*

(.880) .679*** −.280**

(.865) −.365***

(.721)

Note. The numbers in parentheses on the main diagonal are the square roots of the AVE values. AVE = Average Variance Extracted; N = 215. * p < .5. ** p < .01. *** p < .001.

Fig. 2. Two-way interactions of gender on the relationship between justice perceptions in labor outsourcing and job insecurity. Note: Tenure and age were incorporated in the model as control variables. N = 215. * p < .01; ** p < .001. χ2 [17. 215] = 88.962. df = 17. CFI = .959; TLI = .867; RMSEA = .068.

diagonal) and examining whether they were coherently higher than all the corresponding correlations (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). The results support discriminant validity because all the variables in the model share more variance with their respective measures than with other variables in the model. After the items were averaged, their means and standard deviations were calculated. Table 3 shows the reliabilities, means, and standard deviations. It also shows that the correlations are in the expected directions (Fig. 1). A SEM model is presented in Fig. 2 to test the hypothesized relationships. This model includes the gender interaction in the relationship between PJ, DJ and IJ, and FJI, with the items in each variable averaged into a single mean-centered variable. This model makes it possible to inspect H1 and H2 by finding out whether PJ, DJ, and IJ are negatively related to FJI (H1), and whether gender interacts in these relationships (H2). Age and tenure were selected as control variables and included as stand-alone variables (Hancock and Mueller, 2006). The different fit indices used reveal that the model fit is acceptable (χ2 [17, 215] = 88.962, df = 17, CFI = .959; TLI = .867; RMSEA = .068) (see Fig. 2). Moreover, data provided empirical support for H1a because, as predicted, PJ was negatively related to FJI (β = −.583; p < .001). With regard to H1b and H1c, that is, the relationships between DJ and FJI (β = −.069; p ns), and IJ and FJI (β = .111; p ns), the results showed no significant relationships, and so H1b and H1c were not supported.

Regarding the interactive effects of gender (Fig. 2), the results showed that a) gender demonstrates a positive interactive effect on the link between PJ and FJI (β = .569; p < .001). Because this interactive effect was positive instead of negative (β = .569; p < .001), the results in Fig. 2 suggest that, contrary to our predictions, men decreased their FJI more than women when they perceived themselves to be recipients of PJ. Second, b) no significant interaction effects of gender were found on the DJ-FJI link (β = .037; p ns). Third, c) although the results in Fig. 2 did not show that IJ is significantly related to FJI (β = .111; p ns.), they did support interactive effects of gender on this link (β = −.435; p < .01). Because this moderating effect was negative instead of positive (β = −.435; p < .01), − as predicted – women decreased their FJI more than men when they perceived external peers as recipients of IJ. In sum, these results only provide empirical support for H2c because, for H2a, the results failed to support the hypothesis’ direction; H2b was not supported either because no gender differences were found in the DJ-FJI relationship. Finally, in Fig. 3, the nature of the interactive effects of gender on PJ, DJ, and FJI shown above were examined by using between-group SEM analysis (Qureshi and Compeau, 2009). First, a SEM model (N = 215) was constructed with direct paths between PJ, DJ, IJ, and FJI. As Fig. 3 shows, fit indices reveal that the SEM model fit (N = 215) is marginally acceptable (χ2 [448, 215] = 937.545, df = 448, CFI = .909; TLI = .900; RMSEA = .071). The corresponding path 6

International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

P. Ruiz-Palomino, et al.

Fig. 3. Tested model of perceived justice in labor outsourcing and job insecurity grouped by gender (male/female). Note: Tenure and Age were incorporated in the model as stand-alone control variables (with structural paths to all the endogenous and exogenous variables in the model). N = 215 (male = 97/female = 118). *** p < .001; ns: non-significant. χ2 [448. 215] = 937.545. df = 448. CFI = .909; TLI = .900; RMSEA = .071.

concerned than women about unjust PJ governing hotel outsourcing. Instead, although men should basically fear the same things as women in labor outsourcing, they may fear low PJ more than women because low PJ de-legitimizes the hotel’s status quo, which favors them. Regarding the DJ-Hypothesis, the results reveal that - unlike IJ and PJ - it did not make either male or female internal staff fear losing their job to a lesser extent. One explanation for these unexpected results could involve the fact that pay inequities (DJ) also depend on external entities, and so it is difficult for internal staff to witness them. This is not the case of the IJ-Hypothesis because the external workers’ unfair treatment by supervisors is easy to visualize ((e.g., verbal respect, considerate treatment, kind gestures, etc.) and observe in the hotel’s open spaces. Concerning theoretical implications, given the little individual-level research conducted on hotel outsourcing, the findings make a significant contribution to the literature by demonstrating that, in the outsourcing context, internal employees develop individual FJI reactions to organizational justice, but gender plays a critical role. Because FJI is linked to lower work performance (Cheng and Chan, 2008; Chirumbolo, 2015; Van den Broeck et al., 2014; Feather and Rauter, 2004; Reisel et al., 2010), this result implies that outsourcing’s success can be threatened by operations that are not procedurally (PJ) implemented fairly, or that external peers’ IJ treatment by the hotel is not irrelevant. As such, although our results match Geishecker’s work (2008) indicating that outsourcing increases FJI, that study did not address how the specificities of labor outsourcing matter. Moreover, Ito and Brotheridge’s (2007) findings showed that fairness may mitigate individual FJI, but this finding is limited to the fairness experienced by the staff in the way organizational changes (perhaps in outsourcing as well) were implemented in the past. However, prior findings seem to be merely a sort of bric-à-brac and do not easily match our findings because they did not model these three critical variables our paper refers to as a “dark triangle” (being a woman, injustices, and FJI). As such, research outcomes from prior studies on these variables seem contradictory and sporadic (Feather and Rauter, 2004; Rosenblatt et al., 1999), and they serve mainly to emphasize the tensions and paradoxes associated with hotel outsourcing (Amiti and Wei, 2005; Clott, 2004; Geishecker, 2008; Goldschmidt and Schmieder, 2014). Supporting COR theory as able to shed light on how the hotel outsourcing performs, the results make an important contribution by theorizing justice and job security as psychosocial resources that can be threatened in hotel outsourcing. Finally, conventional management literature has suggested

coefficients were then calculated for the two gender groups specified in the sample (N = 97 men, N = 118 women) and compared to test how they differ. Results in the Fig. 3-model indicate that the path coefficients of the PJ-FJI link for each of the two specified groups (N = 97 men, N = 118 women) are only significant and negative in the men’s group (β = −.340; p < .001), but not for women (β = −.003; p ns.). These results in the Fig. 3-model expand the Fig. 2 results because, whereas the Fig. 2-model showed that men decreased their FJI in reaction to PJ more than women, the Fig. 3-model, in addition, shows that, unlike women, only men experienced decreased FJI in reaction to PJ. Furthermore, the Fig. 3-model results also expand the Fig. 2-model results for IJ. Whereas the Fig. 2-model only indicates that women decreased FJI in reaction to IJ more than men (Fig. 2), Fig. 3 in addition indicates that, unlike men, women are the only ones who decreased FJI in reaction to IJ. This is the case because the paths for each of the two gender groups (N = 97 men, N = 118 women) in the IJ-FJI link (see Fig. 3) are negative and significant for women (β = −.537; p < .001), but not for men (β = −.106; p ns). Finally, the Fig. 3-model also reveals no significant paths in the DJ-FJI link. 5. Discussion 5.1. Discussion and implications This study is one of the first to focus on gender when testing justice perceptions as a factor that influences FJI in hotel outsourcing. The results indicate that gender lessens FJI feelings in internal workers of a hotel when they perceive themselves or external employees as being fairly treated in outsourcing. The findings open up new avenues of action for hotel outsourcing managers. The PJ results of this paper contrast with our predictions because, unlike women, only men reacted to being recipients of PJ with decreased FJI. Our basic argument suggested, however, that women hold less influential positions than men and, hence, should be less successful than men in managing justice resources (Stamarski and Son Hing, 2015) and avoiding FJI. However, this prediction was unsupported. One explanation for this unexpected finding may result from the various possible interpretations of the fact that men have experienced less precariousness than women in the past. Arguably, because rules and procedures (PJ) have somehow supported their relatively more favorable status quo, men - as the paper proposed - may not be less 7

International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

P. Ruiz-Palomino, et al.

that only PJ can mitigate FJI, hence leaving the FJI-IJ relationship unsupported (see Blau et al., 2004; Loi et al., 2012). However, this study makes an important contribution by uncovering women’s IJ effects on FJI in the Fig. 2-model that were hidden behind the non-significant IJ-FJI relationship when both genders were included (β = .111; p ns).Thus, challenging the works of Blau et al. (2004) and Loi et al. (2012), the Fig. 3-model revealed a relationship between IJ and FJI, but only among women (β = −.537; p < .001). This extreme is consistent with Shultz et al.’s (2019) work indicating that IJ is more strongly related to relational outcomes in women than in men. Regarding the practical implications, this paper opens up new courses of action for hotel managers. First, just fueling PJ and IJ perceptions among employees to mitigate FJI may not be sufficient. Thirdparty and self-experiences of justice are needed to design PJ and IJ strategies that successfully decrease FJI. For instance, the existence of assumptions that (un)fair treatment is more relevant in internal employees than in external employees due to the transient nature of external staff in the hotel cannot be discounted. In fact, the findings suggest that FJI is involved in (and is mirrored between) both collectives. Therefore, hotel managers should be aware that any recipient of (un)fair treatment in hotel outsourcing matters. This is important because the (un)fair treatment and FJI of external peers were not measured in this study, and because they were mirrored in internal staff, this source of negative feelings should receive managerial attention. In this aim, superiors should frequently keep an eye on the mutual interactions between internal and external staff and even intermediate favorably because, through crossover processes (Bolger et al., 1989), external staff may lead internal staff to lose justice and high FJI resources. Moreover, as mentioned earlier, hotel managers should note that – unlike PJ and DJ – acts of IJ are especially “visible” in this context. Results also show that gender plays a critical role in hotel outsourcing. Thus, in all its members, the hotel must eradicate the understandable but dangerous belief that (un)fair treatment of staff affects both genders similarly. In fact, depending on whether women or men perceive PJ or IJ by the hotel, or whether it takes place toward themselves or toward external peers, internal staff experienced FJI differently. Thus, men who felt procedurally mistreated in outsourcing (PJ) experienced greater FJI, but women experienced greater FJI when perceiving that external peers were mistreated interpersonally (IJ). The salience of the third-party justice perspective in this context, therefore, gives women an exclusive role in the hotel outsourcing performance. Perhaps the similarity between the victim (external peers) and the third party (women) favored bystander reactions to mistreatment, which would lead us to suggest the application of social identity theories (Skarlicki et al., 2015) in future research. In any event, handling diversity in outsourcing teams (Madera et al., 2018), managers must be aware that women may be the only gender capable of empathizing with (and perhaps receiving empathy from) external peers in hotel outsourcing. Finally, it is advisable to foster a broad “agreement” between men and women in terms of discussing rules and procedures in hotels according to the PJ principles. This could be particularly important in reducing the probability of biased uses of the PJ governing outsourcing in their own interest. Such an agreement could also allow more control of the FJI, given that the link from justice to FJI, and these two feelings themselves, may be more controllable and predictable. This could help to overcome obsolete relational patterns, sometimes ungrounded beliefs, which harm hotel outsourcing and prevent men and women from perceiving the hotel as a fair place to work, irrespective of questions such as gender.

outsourcing performs. The collective nature in this context where hotel workers interact with each other in a very different manner than in most businesses (e.g., the fate of one employee may have an strong effect on the others on the team) suggests that gendered reactions to organizational justice from both the employee-victim’s perspective and the third-party justice perspective should be considered in order to offer a clear understanding of how labor outsourcing performs in the hotel industry. Linking organizational justice to FJI and gender, this study concludes that men and women have very distinct perceptions of the justice episodes that lead them to diminish their FJI, and that proposing organizational justice as a psychosocial resource in the workplace that can be witnessed and self-experienced provides a new way to explain further issues in hotel settings. 5.3. Limitations of the article As would be expected, this study has limitations. First, it uses a cross-sectional approach, which increases the possibility of the study suffering from single-source bias. Likewise, this study only surveyed internal employees, which means that the perspective of external employees has not been considered. References Adams, J.S., 1963. Towards an understanding of inequity. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 67 (5), 422–436. Airila, A., Hakanen, J.J., Schaufeli, W.B., Luukkonen, R., Punakallio, A., Lusa, S., 2014. Are job and personal resources associated with work ability 10 years later? The mediating role of work engagement. Work Stress 28 (1), 87–105. Amiti, M., Wei, S.J., 2005. Fear of service outsourcing: is it justified? Econ. Policy 20 (42), 308–347. Aron, A., Aron, E.N., Tudor, M., Nelson, G., 1991. Close relationships as including other in the self. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 60 (2), 241. Aron, A., Mashek, D., McLaughlin-Volpe, T., Wright, S., Lewandowski, G., Aron, E.N., 2005. Including close others in the cognitive structure of the self. In: Baldwin, M.W. (Ed.), Interpersonal Cognition. Guilford Press, New York, pp. 206–332. Bagozzi, R.P., Yi, Y., 1988. On the evaluation of structural equation models. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 16 (1), 76–94. Bavik, A., 2016. Developing a new hospitality industry organizational culture scale. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 58, 44–55. Blau, G., Tatum, D.S., McCoy, K., Dobria, L., Ward-Cook, K., 2004. Job loss, human capital job feature, and work condition job feature as distinct FJI constructs. J. Allied Health 33 (1), 31–41. Bolger, N., DeLongis, A., Kessler, R.C., Wethington, E., 1989. The contagion of stress across multiple roles. J. Marriage Fam. 175–183. Brooks, N., 2006. Understanding IT outsourcing and its potential effects on IT workers and their environment. J. Comput. Inf. Syst. 46 (4), 46–53. Byrne, B.M., 1998. Structural Equation Modeling: Basic Concepts, Application, and Programming. Lawrence Earlbaum Associated, Mahwah, New York. Campos-Soria, J.A., Ortega-Aguaza, B., Ropero-Garcia, M.A., 2009. Gender segregation and wage difference in the hospitality industry. Tour. Econ. 15 (4), 847–866. Carlson, R., 1972. Understanding women: implications for personality theory and research. J. Soc. Issues 28 (2), 17–32. Cheng, G.H.L., Chan, D.K.S., 2008. Who suffers more from job insecurity? A meta-analytic review. Appl. Psychol. 57 (2), 272–303. Chirumbolo, A., 2015. The impact of job insecurity on counterproductive work behaviors: the moderating role of honesty–humility personality trait. J. Psychol. Interdiscip. Appl. 149 (6), 554–569. Clott, C.B., 2004. Perspectives on global outsourcing and the changing nature of work. Bus. Soc. Rev. 109 (2), 153–170. Cumming, D., Leung, T.Y., Rui, O., 2016. Gender diversity and securities fraud. Acad. Manag. J. 58 (5), 1572–1593. Dawson, L.M., 1997. Ethical differences between men and women in the sales profession. J. Bus. Ethics 16 (11), 1143–1152. Domberger, S., 1998. The Contracting Organization: A Strategic Guide to Outsourcing. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Espino-Rodríguez, T.F., Gil-Padilla, A.M., 2015. The structural and infrastructural decisions of operations management in the hotel sector and their impact on organizational performance. Tour. Hosp. Res. 15 (1), 3–18. Feather, N.T., Rauter, K.A., 2004. Organizational citizenship behaviours in relation to job status, job insecurity, organizational commitment and identification, job satisfaction and work values. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 77, 81–94. Fornell, C., Larcker, D., 1981. Evaluating structure equations models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 18 (1), 39–50. Geishecker, I., 2008. The impact of international outsourcing on individual employment security: a micro-level analysis. Labour Econ. 15 (3), 291–314. Giunchi, M., Emanuel, F., Chambel, M.J., Ghislieri, C., 2016. Job insecurity, workload and job exhaustion in temporary agency workers (TAWs) Gender differences. Career

5.2. Conclusions These study results seem to warn of the need to expand justice perspectives in order to offer a better understanding of how hotel 8

International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

P. Ruiz-Palomino, et al.

Reisel, W.D., Probst, T.M., Chia, S.L., Maloles, C.M., König, C.J., 2010. The effects of job insecurity on job satisfaction, organizational citizenship behavior, deviant behavior, and negative emotions of employees. Int. Stud. Manag. Organ. 40 (1), 74–91. Rosenblatt, Z., Talmud, I., Ruvio, A., 1999. A gender-based framework of the experience of job insecurity and its effects on work attitudes. Eur. J. Work. Organ. Psychol. 8 (2), 197–217. Ryan, M.K., Alexander Haslam, S., Postmes, T., 2007. Reactions to the glass cliff: gender differences in the explanations for the precariousness of women’s leadership positions. J. Organ. Chang. Manag. 20 (2), 182–197. Santero-Sánchez, R., Segovia-Perez, M., Castro-Nuñez, B., Figueroa-Domecq, C., TalónBallestero, P., 2015. Gender differences in the hospitality industry: a job quality index. Tour. Manag. 51, 234–246. Schriesheim, C.A., Powers, K.J., Scandura, T.A., Gardiner, C.C., Lankau, M.J., 1993. Improving construct measurement in management research: comments and a quantitative approach for assessing the theoretical content adequacy of paper-and-pencil survey-type instruments. J. Manage. 19 (2), 385–417. Schulz, N., Rupp, D.E., Shao, R., Skarlicki, D., 2019. Gendered reactions to organizational justice: a meta-analysis. Academy of Management Proceedings, vol. 2019. Academy of Management, Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510, pp. 16173 July (1). Shoss, M.K., 2017. Job insecurity: an integrative review and agenda for future research. J. Manag. 43 (6), 1911–1939. Skarlicki, D.P., O’Reilly, J., Kulik, C.T., 2015. The third-party perspective of (In) justice. The Oxford Handbook of Justice in the Workplace. 235. Smith, W.J., Wokutch, R.E., Harrington, K.V., Dennis, B.S., 2001. An examination of the influence of diversity and stakeholder role on corporate social orientation. Bus. Soc. 40 (3), 266–294. Soltani, E., Wilkinson, A., 2010. What is happening to flexible workers in the supply chain partnerships between hotel housekeeping departments and their partner employment agencies? Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 29 (1), 108–119. Stamarski, C.S., Son Hing, L.S., 2015. Gender inequalities in the workplace: the effects of organizational structures, processes, practices, and decision makers’ sexism. Front. Psychol. 6, 1400. Svensson, S., Vinberg, S., Larsson, J., 2015. External workers’ perception of leadership behavior—a study of Swedish temporary agency workers and contractors. Hum. Resour. Manag. J. 25 (2), 250–266. Sweeney, P.D., McFarlin, D.B., 1997. Process and outcome: gender differences in the assessment of justice. J. Organ. Behav. 83–98. Tata, J., 2000. Influence of role and gender on the use of distributive versus procedural justice principles. J. Psychol. 134 (3), 261–268. Tepper, B.J., 2007. Abusive supervision in work organizations: review, synthesis, and research agenda. J. Manag. 33 (3), 261–289. Thau, S., Bennett, R.J., Mitchell, M.S., Marrs, M.B., 2009. How management style moderates the relationship between abusive supervision and workplace deviance: an uncertainty management theory perspective. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 108 (1), 79–92. Van den Bos, K., Lind, E.A., 2002. Uncertainty management by means of fairness judgments. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 34. Academic Press, pp. 1–60. Van den Broeck, A., Sulea, C., Vander Elst, T., Fischmann, G., Iliescu, D., De Witte, H., 2014. The mediating role of psychological needs in the relation between qualitative job insecurity and counterproductive work behaviour. Career Dev. Int. 19 (5), 526–547. Westman, M., 2001. Stress and strain crossover. Hum. Relat. 54 (6), 717–751. Yap, Q.S., Webber, J.K., 2015. Developing corporate culture in a training department: a qualitative case study of internal and outsourced staff. Rev. Bus. Finance Stud. 6 (1), 43–56. Zoghbi-Manrique-de-Lara, P., Ting-Ding, J.M., 2017. Task and contextual performance as reactions of hotel staff to labor outsourcing: the role of procedural justice. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 33, 51–61. Zoghbi-Manrique-de-Lara, P., Ting-Ding, J.M., Guerra-Báez, R., 2017. Indispensable, expendable, or irrelevant? Effects of job insecurity on the employee reactions to perceived outsourcing in the hotel industry. Cornell Hosp. Q. 58 (1), 69–80.

Dev. Int. 21 (1), 3–18. Goldschmidt, D., Schmieder, J.F., 2014. You’re In Then You’re Out—The Incidence and Effects of Being Outsourced. Boston University, Mimeo. Gonzalez, R., Llopis, J., Gasco, J., 2011. What do we know about outsourcing in hotels? Serv. Ind. J. 31 (10), 1669–1682. Guillén, M.F., García-Canal, E., 2009. The American model of the multinational firm and the “new” multinationals from emerging economies. Acad. Manag. Perspect. 23 (2), 23–35. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., 2006. Multivariate Data Analysis, 6th ed. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Hancock, G.R., Mueller, R.O., 2006. Structural Equation Modeling: A Second Course. Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, CT. Hinkin, T.R., 1998. A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires. Organ. Res. Methods 1 (1), 104–121. Hobfoll, S.E., 1989. Conservation of resources: a new attempt at conceptualizing stress. Am. Psychol. 44 (3), 513. Hobfoll, S.E., Halbesleben, J., Neveu, J.P., Westman, M., 2018. Conservation of resources in the organizational context: the reality of resources and their consequences. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav. 5, 103–128. Ibrahim, N.A., Angelidis, J.P., 1994. Effect of board members’ gender on corporate social responsiveness orientation. J. Appl. Bus. Res. 10, 35. Ito, J.K., Brotheridge, C.M., 2007. Exploring the predictors and consequences of job insecurity’s components. J. Manag. Psychol. 22 (1), 40–64. Kakabadse, N., Kakabadse, A., 2000. Critical review – outsourcing: a paradigm shift. J. Manag. Dev. 19 (8), 670–728. Kausto, J., Elo, A.L., Lipponen, J., Elovainio, M., 2005. Moderating effects of job insecurity in the relationships between procedural justice and employee well-being: gender differences. Eur. J. Work. Organ. Psychol. 14 (4), 431–452. Kim, T., Lee, G., Paek, S., Lee, S., 2013. Social capital, knowledge sharing and organizational performance: what structural relationship do they have in hotels? Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manage. 25 (5), 683–704. Lamminmaki, D., 2011. An examination of factors motivating hotel outsourcing. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 30 (4), 963–973. Langfield-Smith, K., Smith, D., 2003. Management control systems and trust in outsourcing relationships. Manag. Account. Res. 14 (3), 281–307. Lee, C., Bobko, P., Ashford, S., Xiong, Z., Ren, X., 2008. Cross-cultural development of an abridged job insecurity measure. J. Organ. Behav. 29, 373–390. Lee, C., Pillutla, M., Law, K.S., 2000. Power-distance, gender and organizational justice. J. Manage. 26 (4), 685–704. Lind, E.A., 2001. Fairness heuristic theory: justice judgments as pivotal cognitions in organizational relations. In: Greenberg, J., Cropanzano, R. (Eds.), Advances in Organizational Justice. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA, pp. 56–88. Loi, R., Lam, L.W., Chan, K.W., 2012. Coping with job insecurity: the role of procedural justice, ethical leadership and power distance orientation. J. Bus. Ethics 108 (3), 361–372. Madera, J.M., Dawson, M., Neal, J.A., 2018. Why investing in diversity management matters: organizational attraction and person–organization fit. J. Hosp. Tour. Res. 42 (6), 931–959. Moorman, R.H., 1991. Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors: do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship? J. Appl. Psychol. 76 (6), 845–855. Neff, A., Sonnentag, S., Niessen, C., Unger, D., 2012. What’s mine is yours: the crossover of day-specific self-esteem. J. Vocat. Behav. 81 (3), 385–394. Nunnally, J.C., 1978. Psychometric Theory, 2ª edition. McGraw-Hill, New York. Owhoso, V., 2002. Mitigating gender-specific superior ethical sensitivity when assessing likelihood of fraud risk. J. Manage. Issues 54 (3), 360–374. Piccoli, B., De Witte, H., 2015. Job insecurity and emotional exhaustion: testing psychological contract breach versus distributive injustice as indicators of lack of reciprocity. Work Stress 29, 246–263. Poria, Y., 2008. Gender—a crucial neglected element in the service encounter: an exploratory study of the choice of hotel masseur or masseuse. J. Hosp. Tour. Res. 32 (2), 151–168. Promsivapallop, P., Jones, P., Roper, A., 2015. Factors influencing hotel outsourcing decisions in Thailand: modifications to the transaction cost economics approach. J. Hosp. Tour. Res. 39 (1), 32–56. Quinn, J.B., 1999. Strategic outsourcing: leveraging knowledge capabilities. Sloan Manage. Rev. 40 (4), 9. Mayhew, C., Quintan, M., Ferris, R., 1997. The effects of subcontracting/outsourcing on occupational health and safety: survey evidence from four Australian industries. Saf. Sci. 25 (1), 163–178. Qureshi, I., Compeau, D., 2009. Assessing between-group differences in information systems research: a comparison of covariance-and component-based SEM. Mis Q. 197–214. Ramamoorthy, N., Flood, P.C., 2004. Gender and employee attitudes: the role of organizational justice perceptions. Br. J. Manag. 15 (3), 247–258.

Pablo Ruiz-Palomino Associate Professor in the Business Management Department at University of Castilla-La Mancha. Pablo Zoghbi-Manrique-de-Lara Ph.D. in Business Administration at Las Palmas de Gran Canaria university, Spain, and he is an Associate Professor in HR Management and Organizational Behavior of Department of Economics and Management. Jyh‐Ming Ting-Ding Ph.D. in Business Administration at Las Palmas de Gran Canaria University, Spain, and she is an Associate Professor in Human Resouce Management of Department of Economics and Management.

9