Shaping the organizational citizenship behavior or workplace deviance: Key determining factors in the hospitality workforce

Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 35 (2018) 1e8

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management journal homepage: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-hospitalityand-tourism-management

Shaping the organizational citizenship behavior or workplace deviance: Key determining factors in the hospitality workforce Chi-Ting Chen a, Hsin-Hui “Sunny” Hu a, *, Brian King b a b

Department of Hospitality Management, School of Tourism, Ming Chuan University, No. 5 De Ming Rd., Gui Shan District, Taoyuan City 333, Taiwan School of Hotel & Tourism Management, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, 11 Yuk Choi Road, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 16 March 2017 Received in revised form 10 January 2018 Accepted 18 January 2018

This study explores the organizational citizenship and workplace deviance behavior of hotel employees. In particular, it examines the influence of service climate, ethical values, and individual characteristics on such behaviors. The researchers administered a survey to upscale hotels across Taiwan. Of the total of 500 that were distributed, 308 useable questionnaires were returned for a response rate of 61.6%. The results provide evidence of a link between individual characteristics both organizational citizenship and workplace deviant behaviors. Service climate and ethical value were identified as antecedents of both positive and negative employee behaviors. The study indicates that both organizational factors and individual characteristics play a critical role in shaping the organizational citizenship and workplace deviance behaviors of hospitality employees. This diagnosis offers insights for hospitality firms when determining potential actions that may enhance the job performance of employees. © 2018 The Authors.

Keywords: Organizational citizenship behaviors Workplace deviance Service climate Corporate ethical values Hotel industry

1. Introduction The success of hospitality businesses is critically dependent on the extent to which “customer-facing” employees deliver effective service. This has prompted increasing researcher interest in both the positive and the negative aspects of employee behaviors and their effects on service delivery. Organization citizenship behaviors (OCBs) exemplify the positive, whereas workplace deviance is viewed as a negative (Karatepe & Ehsani, 2012; Ma & Qu, 2011). The prevalence of such behaviors and their connection with organizational effectiveness and productivity suggests an opportunity for researchers to explore the influence of both individual and group factors. Building on the evidence that hotel customer satisfaction increases when their expectations are exceeded (Torres & Kline, 2006), researchers have pointed to the importance of employee citizenship behaviors as a means of delivering quality service (Fu, Li, & Duan, 2014). Since OCBs and their antecedents are closely associated with the service challenges that hotels encounter, it may also be anticipated that they will play an important role in achieving

* Corresponding author. Department of Hospitality Management, School of Tourism, Ming Chuan University, No 5 De Ming Rd., Gui Shan District, Taoyuan City 333, Taiwan. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (C.-T. Chen), [email protected]. tw (H.-H.“. Hu), [email protected] (B. King). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2018.01.003 1447-6770/© 2018 The Authors.

operational effectiveness. Though positive employee behaviors have been extensively researched in the hospitality context, less attention has been devoted to negative behaviors or what may be described as work related deviance (Jung & Hye, 2012; Wood, 1992). This phenomenon is pervasive amongst hospitality personnel, can jeopardize service standards and has negative financial implications for the business. Such positive and negative behaviors are potential determinants of organizational performance and the extent to which they receive implicit or explicit sanction by the organization may impact on the organization itself, on customers, and on employees. It is widely accepted that organizations welcome OCBs and that workplace deviance may jeopardize performance. This suggests that it would be instructive for researchers to develop an enhanced understanding of the variables associated with both OCBs and with deviance. Furthermore researchers are increasingly questioning whether personal characteristics are sufficient to explain employee behaviors and are also considering organization-level factors (Liang, 2012; Vardi, 2001). The present study explores both hotel employee organizational citizenship and workplace deviance behaviors. It also investigates the extent to which such behaviors are impacted by individual employee differences. Finally, the researchers examine the influence of service climate and ethical values on organizational citizenship and workplace deviance. It is the researchers' view that more insights can be gained for both

2

C.-T. Chen et al. / Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 35 (2018) 1e8

theory and practice about the relationship between wider organizational values within the hospitality sector, including ethics and the propensity for employees to make positive or negative contributions to the business. 2. Literature review 2.1. Service-oriented organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs) Organizational Citizenship Behaviors (OCBs) are intended to provide help and assistance to the organization, are outside an individual's work role, are not directly rewarded, and are conducive to effective organizational functioning (Organ, 1988). Posakoff and MacKenzie (1994) addressed OCBs are individual extra-role behaviors in the workplace that are not directly or explicitly recognized by a formal reward system. The key to the enhancement of OCBs requires employee consent and commitment to the organization (Bachrach & Jex, 2000). High levels of OCBs could lead to organizational effectiveness, and would increase the stability of organizational performance and retain employees (Burris, Detert, & Chiaburu, 2008; Yoon & Suh, 2003). The focus of OCBs is widely applied regardless of types of industries (Bettencourt, Gwinner, & Meuter, 2001); however, along with the growing development of the service industry, the serviceoriented employees' behaviors have become more and more important (Yoon & Suh, 2003). Borman and Motowidlo (1993) observed that some OCBs may be better suited to “certain types of organization than for others”. They noted that “service companies have special requirements on dimensions related to dealing with customers and representing the organization to outsiders” (Borman & Motowidlo, 1993). Due to higher levels of customer contact in the service industry than for non-service industries (Arrowsmith & McGoldrick, 1996), Bettencourt et al. (2001) defined service-oriented OCBs as customer directed and as being performed in most cases by customer contact employees. They identified three forms of service-oriented OCBs: loyalty, service delivery, and participation. The relevant staffs are firstly representing the firm to outsiders and may thus enhance or diminish its image (Schneider & Bowen, 1993). Through demonstrating loyalty via service-oriented OCBs, employees are advocates for the products and services that are offered by their organization and shape its external reputation. Second, customer contact employees provide a strategic link between the external environment and internal operations by communicating information about customer needs and by suggesting prospective service improvements (Zeithaml, Berry, & Parasuraman, 1988). Employees demonstrate individual initiatives by participating in serviceoriented OCBs, especially through communications, to improve their own service delivery and the services of their organization and co-workers. Such service-oriented OCBs are fundamental to the capacity of an organization to meet changing customer needs. Third, it is particularly important for customer contact employees to perform their roles conscientiously. Research on service quality has revealed the importance of reliable, responsive, and courteous service delivery behaviors on the part of customer-contact employees (George, 1991; Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Berry, 1988). Employees who behave conscientiously towards customers in their delivery of service may be described as demonstrating service delivery service-oriented OCBs. Employee OCBs support the effective functioning of an organization because managers cannot anticipate all prospective employee contributions, monitor their various behaviors, or coerce them into ‘going the extra mile’ for the organization. This is a challenge for management since hotel employees such as front office staff, housekeepers, and restaurant waiters are expected to go

“above and beyond” to satisfy customers and improve organizational efficiency as well as completing their assigned tasks (Chiang & Hsieh, 2012; Ma & Qu, 2011; Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, & Bachrach, 2000). An ultimate organization-wide goal is for employees to contribute towards overall goals, rather than simply fulfilling their duties. This implies the prompt and smooth completion of job tasks without the involvement of managers in resolving each and every problem. 2.2. Workplace deviance Various terms have been used to describe the most prevalent negative employee behaviors within organizations. Robinson and Bennett (1995) and Robinson and Greenberg (1998) referred to “workplace deviance behaviors”, namely voluntary behaviors that violate significant organizational norms and consequently threaten the well-being of an organization and its members, or both. Others have described such phenomena as “dysfunctional behaviors” (Griffin, O'Leary-Kelly, & Collins, 1998), “misbehaviors” (Ackroyd & Thompson, 1999), “counterproductive behaviors” (Kolz, 1999; Sykes, 1997), or “antisocial employee behaviors” (Giacalone & Greenberg, 1997). In addressing the research domain of workplace deviance, Hollinger (1991) distinguished between production and property deviance. On the basis that behaviors may have differential negative impacts on individuals or organizational wellbeing, Kelloway & Barling, 2010 proposed four classifications; production deviance (low severity, organizational target), property deviance (high in severity, organizational target), political deviance (low in severity, individual target), and personal aggression (high in severity, interpersonal target). Robinson and Bennett (1995) and Aquino, Lewis, and Bradfield (1999) proposed the terms organizational and interpersonal deviance as the applicable dimensions. The former encompasses deviant behaviors targeted at the organization (e.g., working slowly, with intent damaging company property or sharing confidential company information). On this basis it may be argued that they should be treated as a separate behavioral “family”. Interpersonal deviance encompasses behaviors that are targeted at individuals (e.g., violence, gossip and theft from coworkers). Scholars have estimated that up to 69% (Boye & Slora, 1993) of employees routinely behave in a manner that can be described as either deliberately deviant or intentionally dysfunctional. Others have referred to a proportion as high as 96% (Slora, 1991). In seeking to identify the incidence of more specific behaviors, it has been found that 33 to 75 percent of all employees have engaged in some of the following behaviors: theft, computer fraud, embezzlement, vandalism, sabotage, and absenteeism (Harper, 1990). A study on the hospitality sector by Harris and Ogbonna (2002) concluded that 85% of customer-contact employees admitted to some form of misbehavior. In the United States deviant behaviors may account for organizational losses of up to $200 billion annually (Harris & Ogbonna, 2006). Harris and Ogbonna (2002) have argued that deliberate workplace deviance behaviors that are intended to impact negatively on service are likely to be especially damaging not only to service encounters “but also to firm profitability and growth”. 2.3. Individual characteristics, organizational citizenship behaviors and workplace deviance Many researchers have agreed that personal characteristics play a role in explaining employee behaviors. It has been suggested that misconduct is influenced by individual differences, including demographic variables such as gender, age, and tenure influence (e.g. O’Fallon & Butterfield, 2005; McCabe, Ingram, & Dato-on, 2006).

C.-T. Chen et al. / Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 35 (2018) 1e8

Berry, Ones, and Sackett (2007) reported that age was negatively correlated with deviance, that being male correlated positively with deviance, and that work experience and tenure generally correlated negatively with deviance. Studies have reported that some forms of production and property deviance are more prevalent amongst employees who are young, new to their job, work part-time, and have low-paying positions (Frank, 1983; Hollinger & Clark, 1983). Hence, Hypothesis 1. Individual characteristics impact significantly on (a) service-oriented OCBs and on (b) workplace deviance.

2.4. Service climate, service-oriented OCBs and workplace deviance The common approach to measuring organizational climate is to solicit the collective perceptions and opinions of employees about workplace events, practices, procedures, and behaviors that are rewarded, supported and expected (Reichers & Schneider, 1990). Since employees commonly rely on cues from the surrounding environment to interpret events and develop attitudes, climate provides them with an indication about how to behave. This is based on how they think and feel about various aspects of their work environment (Liao & Chuang, 2004). Within the services sector, organizational climate has been defined as a set of descriptive characteristics concerning service delivery and quality that differentiates an organization from others and influences the service-related behaviors of individuals within the organization (Kelley, 1992). A service climate communicates with employees about the things that the organization values most highly and the attitudes and behaviors that are desired and will be rewarded. Schneider, White, and Paul (1998) proposed that organizations should cultivate a service climate to promote service quality and ultimately to retain customers. This conceptualization of service climate assumes that the organization prioritizes service delivery and service-related issues and that a continuing emphasis on these values builds favorable perceptions amongst members of the organization. Some scholars have suggested that firms should improve employee perceptions of the prevailing service climate since such views shape overall employee attitudes (Lux et al., 1996). Service climate is closely related to performance, effectiveness (Isaac, 1993), and employee commitment (Lux et al., 1996). Much of the research on service climate has supported the notion that employees who experience a positive service climate are disposed to providing their customers with positive customer service experiences (Liao & Chuang, 2007). Previous studies have suggested that there is a direct relationship between employee perceptions of work climate and organizational citizenship behaviors (Bell & Menguc, 2002; Dimitriades, 2007; Hopkins, 2002). Alternatively, Vardi (2001) identified a significant negative relationship between organizational climate and organizational misbehavior. In setting out to undertake the present investigation, the researchers expected that more positive perceptions of service climate would lead to a lower incidence of workplace deviance. This led to the following hypotheses:

3

individual ethical values of managers and the organization's policies on ethics, whether formal or informal (Hunt, Wood, & Chonko, 1989). Ethical values concern what is “right” and “wrong” and allow the organization to set normative employees standards (Chen, Sawyers, & Williams, 1997). An organization's ethical values combine institutionalized and unendorsed practices (Sims, 1991). These may subsequently influence individual choices and prompt actions that are organizationally desirable (Connor & Becker, 1975). An organization is more likely to be successful when its ethical values are shared widely amongst members and/or employees (Badovick & Beatty, 1987). Ethics was considered as a consistent source of corporate competitive advantage (Qin, Wen, Ling, Zhou, & Tong, 2014). In their study of excellent companies, Peters, Waterman, and Jones (1982) noted that the highest performing firms establish a well-defined set of shared values at their core, particularly in the case of ethics. The prevalence of ethical values plays an important role in achieving organizational effectiveness. The institutionalization of strong ethical values may be particularly important in strengthening positive employee attitudes and behaviors (Singhapakdi, 1999). As a major dimension of organizational culture, corporate ethical values may impact on individual behaviors within the organization. The establishment and dissemination of ethical values from the corporate level can enhance ethical behaviors by individuals and increase the prevalence of organizational citizenship behaviors that benefit the organization (Baker, Hunt, & Andrews, 2006). As reported by Turnipseed (2002), ethics may prompt additional involvement in extra-role activities. Valentine, Godkin, and Lucero (2002) have suggested that most employees prefer ethical environments where they do not feel pressured to do things that are inconsistent with their own morals. In ethical contexts, individuals are more likely to internalize the organization's ethical values and develop greater organizational commitment and loyalty. It is also evident that ethical employees exhibit a strong sense of integrity in the conduct of their work and avoid deceptive and dishonest practices (Saxe & Weitz, 1982). The more positively that employees perceive the ethical values of their employer, the more likely they will be to making ethically sound decisions (i.e. avoid deviance) (Biron, 2010). Research has suggested that misconduct is shaped by the extent to which codes of ethics are applied (Beu & Buckley, 2004; Schwartz, 2001). There is a negative association between a perception of ethical values and organizational deviance. On the basis of what has been reported, the present investigation proposes that positive ethical values are associated with higher OCBs and with a lower incidence of workplace deviance. This leads to the following hypotheses (See Fig. 1): Hypothesis 3a. : Corporate ethical value has positive impacts on service-oriented OCBs. Hypothesis 3b. : Corporate ethical value has negative impacts on workplace deviance.

3. Method

Hypothesis 2a. : Service climate has positive impacts on serviceoriented OCBs.

3.1. Sample and data collection

Hypothesis 2b. : Service climate has negative impacts on workplace deviance.

The survey component of this study was administered in Taiwan at upscale hotels (properties in the 4- to 5-star category). This target population was selected for data gathering purposes because it may be assumed that the importance of quality in service delivery is readily accepted by management, employees and customers in such settings. Using a convenience based approach to sampling, the first step of the investigation involved making contact with the human resource departments of all upscale properties in the official

2.5. Corporate ethical values, service-oriented OCBs and workplace deviance Corporate ethical values may be viewed as combining the

4

C.-T. Chen et al. / Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 35 (2018) 1e8

Fig. 1. The conceptual model.

Taiwan Tourism Bureau (2013) hotel listing with a request for permission to conduct the research. Twenty-two hotels expressed willingness for their employees to participate in the study. Following this endorsement, self-administered questionnaires were mailed to the relevant human resource directors between April and June 2014, with a cover letter explaining the purpose of the project. The researchers wanted to give comprehensive coverage to the various business functions, services provided, and customer interactions. On this basis questionnaires were administered in the departments which account for most hotel employees, namely: food and beverage (F & B), front office, and housekeeping. Respondents were encouraged to complete the questionnaire and to return the completed forms in a pre-paid envelope. As an alternative to replying by post, respondents could send their completed questionnaires by e-mail or facsimile. Participants were assured about the confidentiality of any data that related to them. A reminder postcard was dispatched approximately one week after the initial mailing to improve the response rate. Of the 500 questionnaires that were distributed, 308 were returned in useable form, amounting to a response rate of 61.6%. In terms of respondent profile, it was found that respondents were predominantly single (76%), female (64.9%), under 30 years of age (68.2%), and earning less than NT$40,000 (85.1%) a month. Most participants (74%) had an educational attainment of at least bachelor level, with some holding advanced degrees. Considering the type and nature of employment, 44.2% of the respondents were employed part-time, 37% were full-time working in nonmanagerial positions, and 10.4% were employed in management positions. Approximately 37.7% were deployed in the food and beverage department, 16.9% were in front office, 16.9% in housekeeping, and 10.4% were executive officers. Three-quarters of the respondents (75%) has been with their employer for less than 3 years. 3.2. Measures The proposed research model drew upon various constructs from previous studies. The highly structured questionnaire consisted of five sections: respondent demographic characteristics, service climate, organizational ethical value, service-oriented citizenship behaviors, and workplace deviance. The various sociodemographic questions examined the respondent's gender, age, education, position, monthly income, department of the hotel and years of service. Schneider et al. (1998) service climate scale was used to measure respondent perceptions about the dimensions of service

climate within the employer organization of each respondent. The scale included four dimensions, namely: global service climate (e.g., employees receive recognition and rewards for the delivery of superior work and service.), customer orientation (e.g., the most important thing is to fulfill the needs and requests of the customers.), managerial practices (e.g., the manager recognizes and appreciates a job well done and excellent service), and customer feedback (e.g., customers are asked their opinions in order to evaluate the service quality). Four items were written for each dimension. A three item uni-dimensional scale of corporate ethical values (Hunt et al., 1989) was adapted to assess individual perceptions of the extent to which their employer exhibits an ethical orientation. The scale items measure whether employees view their managers as acting ethically, the extent to which their organization is concerned with ethical issues, and rewards (or punishes) ethical behaviors. The measurement of service-oriented OCBs draws upon the work of Bettencourt, Meuter, and Gwinner (2001). The scale consisted of three dimensions: loyalty (e.g., tells outsiders that this is a good place to work), service delivery (e.g., follows customer-service guidelines with extreme care), and participation (e.g., encourages co-workers to contribute ideas and suggestions for service improvement). The response categories for each item of service climate, organizational ethical value, and service-oriented citizenship behavior ranged from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). Workplace deviance was measured using 19 items drawn from Bennett and Robinson (2000). The assessment considered both interpersonally deviant behaviors (that harm people within the organization. e.g., making fun of a co-worker) and organizationally deviant behaviors including production deviance and property deviance (that harm the organization e.g., take an additional or longer break than is normally acceptable within the workplace). For each of the 19 items, participants responded on a five point Likert-type frequency scale ranging from “never” to “very often". 4. Results 4.1. Different service-oriented OCBs and workplace deviance by demographic group Respondents identified their level of service-oriented OCBs as “somewhat agree” (Mean ¼ 3.70, SD ¼ 0.54), reflecting their agreement that individuals should inform outsiders that this is a good place to work and follow customer-service guidelines carefully, as well as encourage co-workers to contribute ideas and suggestions with a view to improving service. Participants reported higher scores for service delivery (Mean ¼ 3.94) than for loyalty (Mean ¼ 3.64) and participation (Mean ¼ 3.52). Moreover, workplace deviance was slightly on the low side with a mean score of 1.93 (SD ¼ 0.71), reflective of the fact that there is minimal involvement by employees in behaviors that harm people within the organization and the organization itself. Respondents reported higher frequencies for production deviance (Mean ¼ 1.98) than for property deviance (Mean ¼ 1.92) and interpersonal deviance (Mean ¼ 1.91). The impacts of demographic characteristics on Service-Oriented OCBs and workplace deviance were examined in t-test and ANOVA. The study results show significantly different service-oriented OCBs and workplace deviance on the basis of gender, age, marital status, education, position, department, and monthly income groups (Table 1). Male respondents reported higher serviceoriented OCBs (t ¼ 2.13, p < 0.05) and deviant behaviors (t ¼ 2.60, p < 0.01) than females. Relative to their younger counterparts, older respondents reported higher service-oriented OCBs (F ¼ 19.41, p < 0.01). Employees aged under 30 engaged in deviant behaviors

C.-T. Chen et al. / Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 35 (2018) 1e8

more frequently than older employees (F ¼ 8.31, p < 0.01). Compared with their married counterparts, single employees had lower service-oriented OCBs (F ¼ 12.24, p < 0.01) but scored higher on deviant behaviors (F ¼ 2.72, p < 0.05). More educated respondents (graduate degree) reported higher service-oriented OCBs (F ¼ 8.22, p < 0.01) but lower scores for deviant behaviors (F ¼ 2.42, p < 0.05). Regarding position, part-time employees had lower service-oriented OCBs (F ¼ 34.15, p < 0.01) but higher deviant behaviors scores (F ¼ 20.63, p < 0.01) than full-time employees or employees in managerial roles. Respondents who occupied the role of executive officer reported higher service-oriented OCBs than those in other positions (F ¼ 8.16, p < 0.01). Respondents from the food & beverage and housekeeping departments engaged in deviant behaviors more frequently than those from other departments (F ¼ 3.38, p < 0.01). Employees with lower monthly incomes (less than NT$20,000) reported lower service-oriented OCBs (F ¼ 14.36, p < 0.01) but higher scores for deviant behaviors than other income groups (F ¼ 7.70, p < 0.01). Finally, shorter tenure employees (less than 1 year or on probation) had lower serviceoriented OCBs (F ¼ 17.46, p < 0.01) but higher scores for deviant behaviors (F ¼ 13.93, p < 0.01) than employees with longer tenure. The foregoing section appears to lend full support for Hypotheses

5

1a and 1b, namely that demographic characteristics impact significantly on both Service-Oriented OCBs and on workplace deviance. 4.2. Measurement model evaluation Before testing the hypothesized relationships, analyses were conducted to assess whether the applicable scales achieved satisfactory levels of reliability and whether factor loadings related significantly to the corresponding constructs. To test the proposed model, the researchers applied Anderson and Gerbing (1988) twostep model-building approach. The researchers analyzed the measurement model, including the latent constructs and their respective observed variables, and then tested the structural model with the hypothesized relationships. A confirmatory factor analysis of the full measurement model showed that all indicators loaded significantly on their corresponding latent constructs (p < 0.01). The next step involved using composite reliability (CR) to detect for convergent validity. As summarized in Table 2, all CR values fulfilled the recommended levels, ranging from 0.76 to 0.95. Nearly all of the item loadings exceeded 0.50 and meet the recommended level. Discriminant

Table 1 Respondent demographic characteristics (n ¼ 308). Variables Gender Male Female Missing Age Under20 21-30 31-40 Over 40 Missing Marital Status Single Married Other Missing Education High School Bachelor degree Graduate degree Missing Position Part-time Full-time Manager Missing Department Food & Beverage Front Office Housekeeping Executive Officer Others Missing Income (Monthly) Under NT$20,000 NT$20,001~NT$40,000 NT$40,001~NT$60,000 Above NT$60,001 Tenure Probation Under 1 year 1e3 years 3e5 years Over 5 years Missing *p < .05, **p < .01.

Number

%

96 200 12

31.2% 64.9% 3.9%

56 154 46 40 12

18.2% 50.0% 14.9% 13.0% 3.9%

234 54 8 12

76.0% 17.5% 2.6% 3.9%

62 228 6 12

20.1% 74.0% 1.9% 3.9%

136 114 32 26

44.2% 37.0% 10.4% 8.4%

116 52 52 32 30 26

37.7% 16.9% 16.9% 10.4% 9.7% 8.4%

144 118 16 30

46.8% 38.3% 5.2% 9.7%

50 100 74 32 30 22

16.2% 32.5% 24.0% 10.4% 9.7% 7.1%

Service-Oriented OCB

Workplace Deviance

t ¼ 2.13* 3.80 3.66

t ¼ 2.60** 2.06 1.84

F ¼ 19.41** 3.55 3.57 3.97 4.14

F ¼ 8.31** 2.03 2.02 1.82 1.46

F ¼ 12.24** 3.63 4.02 3.85

F ¼ 2.72* 1.98 1.63 1.92

F ¼ 8.22** 3.94 3.63 4.75

F ¼ 2.42* 1.73 1.98 1.58

F ¼ 34.15** 3.51 3.79 4.29

F ¼ 20.63** 2.10 1.60 1.81

F ¼ 8.16** 3.61 3.64 3.69 4.19 3.81

F ¼ 3.38** 2.02 1.76 1.86 1.66 1.67

F ¼ 14.36** 3.57 3.78 4.21 4.55 F ¼ 17.46** 3.52 3.50 3.79 4.12 4.14

F ¼ 7.70** 2.05 1.68 1.80 1.62 F ¼ 13.93** 2.06 2.13 1.55 1.54 1.81

6

C.-T. Chen et al. / Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 35 (2018) 1e8

both Hypothesis H3a and H3b.

Table 2 Confirmatory factor analysis and composite reliability. Constructs and Items Service Climate Global service climate Customer orientation Managerial practices Customer feedback Organizational Ethical Value Managers act ethically The hotel is concerned with ethical issues The hotel rewards (or punishes) ethical behaviors Service-Oriented OCB Loyalty Service delivery Participation Workplace Deviance Interpersonal deviance Production deviance Property deviance

Loading

T-value

0.87 0.91 0.86 0.82

19.74 22.52 20.67 18.42

Composite Reliability 0.92

5.1. Implications for theory

0.76 0.52 0.94

6.42 9.09

0.67

6.75

0.88 0.61 0.69

10.56 8.67 10.24

0.93 0.95 0.94

32.66 36.69 35.42

5. Discussion and implications for theory and practice

0.77

0.95

validity is evident when the squared root of the average variance extracted (AVE) for each construct exceeds the correlations between it and all other constructs. As is shown in Table 3, the square root of AVE for each construct is greater than the correlations between them and all other constructs. The results suggest an adequate discriminant validity for all measurements. 4.3. Structural model evaluation The overall fit of the hypothesized model was excellent, with sufficiently high values in the case of CFI (0.95), NFI (0.93) and GFI (0.90). A chi-square value of 193.74 (df ¼ 49, p < 0.01) was obtained. The RMESA value 0.08 within the suggested level of 0.08, showed an ordinary fit (MacCallum, Browne, & Sugawara, 1996). On this basis the measures indicated a good fit for the model. The results for the structural model showed that all of the three hypothesized relationships between the latent constructs were statistically significant in the expected direction (p < 0.05) (Table 4). Specifically, service climate appeared to have a significant, positive impact on service-oriented organizational citizenship behaviors (b ¼ 0.85 t ¼ 8.44). Service climate on the other hand was found to impact negatively on workplace deviance (b ¼ 0.49, t ¼ 7.11). Table 3 indicates that employees perceptions of a positive service climate may reduce deviant behaviors but increase service-oriented organizational citizenship behaviors; thus, H2a and H2b were supported. Furthermore, it was found that organizational ethical values have significant impacts on service-oriented organizational citizenship behaviors (b ¼ 0.12, t ¼ 2.00) and on workplace deviance (b ¼ 0.24, t ¼ 3.47). These results suggest that employees perceive higher organizational ethical values as being more likely to contribute to service-oriented organizational citizenship behaviors but less likely to lead to deviance. This finding provides support for

The present research has identified and then established empirical support for the proposed link between employee behaviors and individual characteristics, extending to two organizational variables. The proposed model has been developed to investigate the effects of service climate and ethical value on the organizational citizenship behaviors and workplace deviance exhibited by frontline employees in hotel settings. It has been shown that the model is viable, with all proposed hypotheses being supported, thereby yielding valuable insights and making several contributions to both knowledge and practice. The first research finding was that individual characteristics are linked to both organizational citizenship behaviors and to deviance. This provides an indication that various individual attributes influence the work related behaviors of hotel frontline staff. It was found that male employees, who are older, married, highly educated, working full-time as an executive officer, and occupying a higher paid position with longer tenure, engage more actively in service-oriented OCBs. By way of contrast, male frontline staff who are younger, single, working part-time, occupying lower-paid positions, with shorter tenure or who are still on probation in a food and beverage department are more likely to engage in workplace deviance. A second finding was that the prevalent service climate in a hotel is an antecedent of organizational citizenship behaviors and workplace deviance. It has been shown that a positive service climate offers the prospect of lowering the incidence of deviance and of enhancing employee organizational citizenship behaviors. The research findings have identified that the presence of a more formalized organizational service climate has a positive influence on employee behaviors. Third, the findings were consistent with the results that were reported by Baker et al. (2006) and Biron (2010) e namely that organizational citizenship behaviors and workplace deviance are

Table 4 Structural model results.

Service Climate / Service-Oriented OCB Service Climate / Workplace Deviance Corporate Ethical Value / Service-Oriented OCB Corporate Ethical Value / Workplace Deviance Goodness-of-fit statistics CFI NFI GFI RMSEA Chi-square

Coefficient

T-value

0.85** 0.49** 0.12* 0.24**

8.44 7.11 2.00 3.47

0.95 0.93 0.90 0.08 193.74

*p < .05, **p < .01.

Table 3 Measurement of correlations, squared correlations, and AVE. Variable

Mean

S.D.

1

2

Service Climate Ethical Value Service-Oriented OCB Workplace Deviance

3.65 3.58 3.70 1.93

.66 .57 .54 .71

1 .55a (.30) .62a(.38) -.32a(.10)

1 .34a(.11) -.19a(.03)

a b

All correlation coefficients were significant at the .05 level. All AVE exceed .50, showing construct validity.

3

1 -.33a(.10)

4

AVEb

1

.74 .53 .54 .88

C.-T. Chen et al. / Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 35 (2018) 1e8

strongly influenced by perceptions of corporate ethical values. Accordingly, the establishment of a clear set of ethical values at the corporate level can reduce the incidence of individual deviance and increase levels of officially desired organizational citizenship behaviors. The prevalence of ethical values can be a powerful force for both understanding and explaining individual behaviors within hotel organizations. This finding contributes to the hospitality literature by making a connection between organization-wide values and individual employee behaviors both positive and negative. The fourth and primary theoretical implication of this paper is that organizational factors as well as individual characteristics play a critical role in shaping OCBs and deviance. 5.2. Implications for practice It is proposed that the various behavioral characteristics that have been noted in the implications for theory section should be considered when hospitality leaders are engaged in the recruitment, training, and appraisal of staff. When undertaking recruitment, there is a need to critically evaluate the qualities of job applicants with a view to minimizing the prospect of workplace deviance. To minimize the likelihood of deviance amongst staff generally and amongst food and beverage staff in particular, organizations should devote adequate attention to the provision of orientation and training programs. In noting that the incidence of a more formalized organizational service climate impacts on employee behaviors, hotel organizations are encouraged to develop, implement, and communicate the essence of their desired service climate to employees. The prospects of success will be improved when hotels create and maintain a service climate that is widely shared by employees. An effective climate encourages service excellence and impacts favorably on employee perceptions. Senior hotel managers could devote greater attention to considering employee perceptions of service climate and give top priority to creating such conditions. The approach that has been proposed in this paper acknowledges the interconnectedness between customer satisfaction and employee attitudes and behaviors. A positive service climate has evident benefits for both employees and hotel customers and for the organization. A potential implication of the research finding that ethical values can explain individual employee behaviors is that enhancing ethical values may enable managers to engage in the active monitoring of workplace deviance issues. More specifically, senior hotel managers should define, evaluate, communicate, and thus institutionalize ethical values. Such values help to establish and maintain the standards that delineate the right things to do within the organization and the things that are worth doing. Ethical training and orientation programs provide a potential means of familiarizing employees with core values. Meanwhile hotels may institutionalize ethical values by developing and communicating a code of ethics and through related policies and procedures (e.g. instigating a rewards system). Managers could consider developing indices of corporate ethical values. It may be useful to provide employees with a periodic opportunity to respond anonymously to a series of questions measuring the perceptions of the prevailing ethical values. Such indices could be used to monitor changing employee perceptions over time and may provide an early warning of potential problems or opportunities. It also sends an important message to employees about management responsiveness. The primary contention of this paper is that organizational factors as well as individual characteristics play a critical role in shaping OCBs and deviance. This diagnosis offers a potential guide for hospitality businesses in determining potential actions to enhance employee job performance.

7

5.3. Limitations The contributions of this study to knowledge have been explained in the foregoing section. Certain limitations are however evident and suggest the need for further research. Firstly, the researchers have used self-reporting for the measurement of OCBs and deviance. This leads to prospective bias when respondents provide answers that are associated with socially desired outcomes. To address this concern, participants were advised that their responses would be treated anonymously and that individual responses would not be revealed to management at the level of individual properties or hotel chains. Nevertheless, the prospect of respondent bias cannot be eliminated. Secondly, the study was confined to frontline hotel employees, thereby limiting its capacity for generalization. Replicating the study with employees from a wider range of hospitality and service organizations as a research setting would build cross-validation and credibility. Finally, the study was conducted in Taiwan, a setting which exhibits particular Asian and Chinese characteristics. It is likely that the ethical values and service climate associated with employee performance will vary in other cultural and societal contexts. On this basis it would be useful to conduct further studies on the proposed relationships in different and possibly cross-cultural settings. Such an ongoing research agenda might progress the search for sustainable advantage through motivated workforces in the increasingly competitive global business environment that confronts hotel operations. Appendix A. Supplementary data Supplementary data related to this article can be found at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2018.01.003. References Ackroyd, S., & Thompson, P. (1999). Organizational misbehaviour. London: Sage. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411. Aquino, K., Lewis, M. U., & Bradfield, M. (1999). Justice constructs, negative affectivity, and employee deviance: A proposed model and empirical test. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20(7), 1073e1091. Arrowsmith, J., & McGoldrick, A. E. (1996). HRM service practices: Flexibility, quality and employee strategy. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 7(3), 46e62. Bachrach, D. G., & Jex, S. M. (2000). Organizational citizenship and Mood: An experimental test of perceived job breadth. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30(3), 641e663. Badovick, G. J., & Beatty, S. E. (1987). Shared organizational values: Measurement and impact upon strategic marketing implementation. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 15(1), 19e26. Baker, T. L., Hunt, T. G., & Andrews, M. C. (2006). Promoting ethical behavior and organizational citizenship behaviors: The influence of corporate ethical values. Journal of Business Research, 59(7), 849e857. Bell, S. J., & Menguc, B. (2002). The employee-organization relationship, organizational citizenship behaviors, and superior service quality. Journal of Retailing, 78(2), 131e146. Bennett, R. J., & Robinson, S. L. (2000). Development of a measure of workplace deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(3), 349. Berry, C. M., Ones, D. S., & Sackett, P. R. (2007). Interpersonal deviance, organizational deviance, and their common correlates: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(2), 410. Bettencourt, L. A., Gwinner, K. P., & Meuter, M. L. (2001). A comparison of attitude, personality, and knowledge predictors of service-oriented organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 29. Beu, D. S., & Buckley, M. R. (2004). Using accountability to create a more ethical climate. Human Resource Management Review, 14(1), 67e83. Biron, M. (2010). Negative reciprocity and the association between perceived organizational ethical values and organizational deviance. Human Relations, 63(6), 875e897. Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. M. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance. In N. Schmitt, & W. C. Borman (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations (pp. 71e98). San Francisco: JosseyBass. Boye, M. W., & Slora, K. B. (1993). The severity and prevalence of deviant employee activity within supermarkets. Journal of Business and Psychology, 8(2), 245e253.

8

C.-T. Chen et al. / Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 35 (2018) 1e8

Burris, E. R., Detert, J. R., & Chiaburu, D. S. (2008). Quitting before leaving: The mediating effects of psychological attachment and detachment on voice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(4), 912. Chen, A. Y., Sawyers, R. B., & Williams, P. F. (1997). Reinforcing ethical decision making through corporate culture. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(8), 855e865. Chiang, C.-F., & Hsieh, T.-S. (2012). The impacts of perceived organizational support and psychological empowerment on job performance: The mediating effects of organizational citizenship behavior. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(1), 180e190. Connor, P. E., & Becker, B. W. (1975). Values and the organization: Suggestions for research. Academy of Management Journal, 18(3), 550e561. Dimitriades, Z. S. (2007). The influence of service climate and job involvement on customer-oriented organizational citizenship behavior in Greek service organizations: A survey. Employee Relations, 29(5), 469e491. Frank, W. (1983). Part time farming, underemployment and double activity of farmers in the EEC. Sociologia Ruralis, 23(1), 20e27. Fu, H., Li, Y., & Duan, Y. (2014). Does employee-perceived reputation contribute to citizenship behavior? The mediating role of organizational commitment. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 26(4), 593e609. George, J. M. (1991). State or trait: Effects of positive mood on prosocial behaviors at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(2), 299. Giacalone, R. A., & Greenberg, J. (1997). Antisocial behavior in organizations (CA: Thousand Oaks). Griffin, R. W., O'Leary-Kelly, A., & Collins, J. (1998). Dysfunctional work behaviors in organizations: Introduction. In C. L. Cooper, & D. M. Rousseau (Eds.), Trends in organizational behavior (Vol. 5, pp. 65e82). New York: John Wiley. Harper, D. (1990). Spotlight abuse-save profits. Industrial Distribution, 79(3), 47e51. Harris, L. C., & Ogbonna, E. (2002). The unintended consequences of culture interventions: A study of unexpected outcomes. British Journal of Management, 13(1), 31e49. Harris, L. C., & Ogbonna, E. (2006). Service sabotage: A study of antecedents and consequences. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(4), 543e558. Hollinger, R. C. (1991). Neutralizing in the workplace: An empirical analysis of property theft and production deviance. Deviant Behavior, 12(2), 169e202. Hollinger, R. C., & Clark, J. P. (1983). Deterrence in the workplace: Perceived certainty, perceived severity, and employee theft. Social Forces, 62(2), 398e418. Hopkins, K. M. (2002). Organizational citizenship in social service agencies. Administration in Social Work, 26(2), 1e15. Hunt, S. D., Wood, V. R., & Chonko, L. B. (1989). Corporate ethical values and organizational commitment in marketing. Journal of Marketing, 53(3), 79e90. Isaac, R. (1993). Organizational culture: Some new perspectives. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc. Jung, H. S., & Hye, H. Y. (2012). The effects of emotional intelligence on counterproductive work behaviors and organizational citizen behaviors among food and beverage employees in a deluxe hotel. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(2), 369e378. Karatepe, O. M., & Ehsani, E. (2012). Work-related depression in frontline service jobs in the hospitality industry: Evidence from Iran. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & Tourism, 11(1), 16e35. Kelley, S. W. (1992). Developing customer orientation among service employees. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 20(1), 27e36. Kelloway, E. K., & Barling, J. (2010). Leadership development as an intervention in occupational health psychology. Work & Stress, 24(3), 260e279. Kolz, A. R. (1999). Personality predictors of retail employee theft and counterproductive behavior. Journal of Professional Services Marketing, 19(2), 107e114. Liang, Y. W. (2012). The relationships among work values, burnout, and organizational citizenship behaviors: A study from hotel front-line service employees in taiwan. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 24(2), 251e268. Liao, H., & Chuang, A. (2004). A multilevel investigation of factors influencing employee service performance and customer outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 47(1), 41e58. Liao, H., & Chuang, A. (2007). Transforming service employees and climate: A multilevel, multisource examination of transformational leadership in building long-term service relationships. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 1006e1019. Lux, D. J., Jex, S. M., & Hansen, C. P. (1996). Factors influencing employee perceptions of customer service climate. Journal of Market-focused Management, 1(1), 65e86. MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1(2), 130e149.

Ma, E., & Qu, H. (2011). Social exchanges as motivators of hotel employees' organizational citizenship behavior: The proposition Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling n and application of a new three-dimensional framework. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 30(3), 680e688. McCabe, A. C., Ingram, R., & Dato-on, M. C. (2006). The business of ethics and gender. Journal of Business Ethics, 64(2), 101e116. Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome: Lexington Books. Lanham, Maryland, USA: DC Heath and Company.organizations, Dysfunctional work behaviors in organizations. In C. L. Cooper and D. O'Fallon, M. J., & Butterfield, K. D. (2005). A review of the empirical ethical decisionmaking literature: 1996e2003. Journal of Business Ethics, 59(4), 375e413. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). Servqual: A multiple- item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12e40. Peters, T. J., Waterman, R. H., & Jones, I. (1982). In search of excellence: Lessons from € _ ILER, 7(24), 53e56. America's best-run companies. KITAP TANITIMI VE ONER Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26(3), 513e563. Posakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (1994). Organizational citizenship behaviors and sales unit effectiveness. Journal of Marketing Research, 31(3), 351e363. Qin, Q., Wen, B., Ling, Q., Zhou, S., & Tong, M.. (2014). How and when the effect of ethical leadership occurs? A multilevel analysis in the Chinese hospitality. Reichers, A. E., & Schneider, B. (1990). Climate and culture: An evolution of constructs. In B. Schneider (Ed.), Organizational climate and culture (pp. 5e39). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Robinson, S. L., & Bennett, R. J. (1995). A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: A multidimensional scaling study. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2), 555e572. Robinson, S. L., & Greenberg, J. (1998). Employees behaving badly: Dimensions, determinants and dilemmas in the study of workplace deviance. Journal of Organizational Behavior (1986-1998), 1. Saxe, R., & Weitz, B. A. (1982). The SOCO scale: A measure of the customer orientation of salespeople. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(3), 343e351. Schneider, B., & Bowen, D. E. (1993). The service organization: Human resources management is crucial. Organizational Dynamics, 21(4), 39e52. Schneider, B., White, S. S., & Paul, M. C. (1998). Linking service climate and customer perceptions of service quality: Tests of a causal model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(2), 150e163. Schwartz, M. (2001). The nature of the relationship between corporate codes of ethics and behaviour. Journal of Business Ethics, 32(3), 247e262. Sims, R. R. (1991). The institutionalization of organizational ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 10(7), 493e506. Singhapakdi, A. (1999). Perceived importance of ethics and ethical decisions in marketing. Journal of Business Research, 45(1), 89e99. Slora, K. B. (1991). An empirical approach to determining employee deviance base rates. Journal of Business and Psychology, 4(2), 199e219. Sykes, C. (1997). Restaurant survey links employee theft, other counterproductive behaviors. Stores, 79(5), 74e76. Torres, E. N., & Kline, S. (2006). From satisfaction to delight: A model for the hotel industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 18(4), 290e301. Turnipseed, D. L. (2002). Are good soldiers good? Exploring the link between organization citizenship behavior and personal ethics. Journal of Business Research, 55(1), 1e15. Valentine, S., Godkin, L., & Lucero, M. (2002). Ethical context, organizational commitment, and person-organization fit. Journal of Business Ethics, 41(4), 49e360. Vardi, Y. (2001). The effects of organizational and ethical climates on misconduct at work. Journal of Business Ethics, 29(4), 325e337. Wood, R. C. (1992). Deviants and misfits: Hotel and catering labour and the marginal worker thesis b. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 11(3), 179e182. Yoon, M. H., & Suh, J. (2003). Organizational citizenship behaviors and service quality as external effectiveness of contact employees. Journal of Business Research, 56(8), 597e611. Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1988). Communication and control processes in the delivery of service quality. The Journal of Marketing, 35e48.